Stop Public Pornography
Mark T
obscenity that infiltrates our public streets, buildings, parks, churches,
and television & radio. If you care about protecting our children from
obscenity, please read the following carefully. I trust that you will prove
sympathetic to our crusade.
Warning: this document is meant to be read only by adults. Please
keep away from children.
It has come to our attention that one of the most blatant examples of public
obscenity occurs within the very pages of our Holy Bible. Nobody can deny
that the Bible contains material so shocking and pornographic that we would
not want our children to be exposed to it.
Consider this obscene example:
"Yet she multiplied her whoredomes, in calling to remembrance the days
of her youth, wherein, she played the harlot in the land of Egypt. For she
doted upon her paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose
issue is as the issue of horses."
-Ezekiel 23:19-20
Need I explain that "doted" represents excessive sexual love, that "flesh"
is a euphemism for penis, and "issue" means "semen"?
(As shocking as it may seem, one of our investigators actually discovered a
graffiti of Ezekiel 23 in a Boy Scout bathroom stall.)
Isaiah 36:12 speaks of "eating dung and drinking piss"; Ezekiel 4:10-17
describes a cuisine made by mixing human feces and cow dung with bread.
Malachi 2:2-3 Describes God spreading feces on people's faces. Do you want
your children to emulate such behavior?
There are many more dirty passages from the Bible, too numerous to list
here.
The Bible also contains appalling stories, including the menage a trois
between Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar, approved by God. Even the genealogy of
Jesus includes Tamar, who had children born of incest, and Bathsheba, who
had children born of adultery. Judges 19:24-25 describes the gang rape of a
daughter approved by the father.
Please realize that most incest and child abuse crimes occur within the
Christian community by Christian parents, priests, ministers, and nuns. No
doubt that the incest and porn in the Bible has influenced such behavior.
Stop Public Pornography merely asks that either all the obscene passages be
removed from the Bible, or that the Bible should be banned from public
consumption.
Please note that there is a difference between the porn sold in video &
adult book stores and the porn in the Bible. You can ignore the first kind
of porn; it is not thrust upon you, and it is sold through private
businesses. You have to choose to buy a dirty book or porno video, and there
are laws which prevent children from access to this porn.
The Bible, however, is public. The Gideons install this book in hotels.
Astronauts read it from the moon. The Bible is on the internet. Churches
allow anyone to read their Bibles from their pews. Jehovah Witnesses are
allowed to walk the streets with a Bible. Even public libraries contain
Bibles, where anyone, including children, have free access.
Stop Public Pornography has studied the problem and has submitted a
four-pronged proposal to deal with this evil:
a.. There should be a G-rated Bible for hotels, libraries, and churches.
b.. There should be a PG version for homes.
c.. The original X-rated Bible should be available only through the
Church, viewed by special permission for authorized individuals by the high
priests, and used only for research purposes.
d.. Because the Bible's synonymity with obscenity, the word "Bible" should
be stricken from the spoken language. From now on, television and radio
should refer to the Bible as the "B" word, "The Holy B," "The Big B," etc.
Any televangelist or disk-jockey who broadcasts the word "Bible" will be
fined $500,000 for every violation, just as the FCC now does with the
utterance of other obscene words.
Stop Public Pornography has written to many anti-porn crusaders and leading
Christian leaders about this urgent matter. Unfortunately, although they
have a desire to censor secular porn, not one of them has admitted to the
importance of censoring and purifying the Bible.
Therefore, Stop Public Pornography appeals to the concerned members of
public society and to our elected congressmen to help remove the Bible from
public places.
Protect our children from this filth; please help us to censor the Bible and
stop public pornography now. Warn your friends, write your state
representatives, send a copy of this page to anti-porn and censorship
organizations and the FCC.
Stop Public Pornography
Miami, Florida
Diana
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2323> wrote in message
news:4365...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
though when you desecrate my Holy Bible like this.
I never speak of how you choose to worship God and this bothers me when you
choose to do this sort of thing. I understand your reasons for leaving the
church as I and others know it , I really do.
However for you to do this, to the very things some of us still believe in
and hold very dear to our hearts really hurts me in a way I can't describe.
I too have been done wrong by the church however that is only humans that
did me wrong not the Lord.
Gosh Mark I am really hurt by this. I love Jesus my Lord and Savior, His
Father God and the Holy Spirit with all my heart , mind and soul and I know
without a doubt that the Bible is God's Holy Word because I have walked it,
talked it and lived it at one time and I just can't fathom how anyone can
say these things about it.
Just wanted you to know. Thanks for reading and may God Bless you in ways
you can not understand.
I still believe with all my heart that you are my brother in the Lord though
I don't understand some of the things you feel the need to say.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Diana" <m...@privacy.com> wrote in message
news:WGm9f.106852$tD4....@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
The bible isn't holy, therefore you can not desecrate it.
sensi
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2323> wrote in message
news:4365...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Interesting! But "darn" if people would learn to read in spirit.I could take
everyone of those verses and read them in spirit. It's so much more fun to
figure out the metaphors and *see* how they apply today then to read about
someone eating shite and drinking pissy waters of yesterday and pretend it
does not concern my own mind, heart and soul. .
Mark T
>> The Stop Public Pornography (SPP) movement aims to remove the disgusting
>> obscenity that infiltrates our public streets, buildings, parks,
>> churches,
>> and television & radio. If you care about protecting our children from
>> obscenity, please read the following carefully. I trust that you will
>> prove sympathetic to our crusade.
>> Warning: this document is meant to be read only by adults. Please
>> keep away from children.
>> It has come to our attention that one of the most blatant examples of
> public obscenity occurs within the very pages of our Holy Bible. Nobody
> can deny
>> that the Bible contains material so shocking and pornographic that we
>> would not want our children to be exposed to it.
...
> Mark I love you. I realize you have a right to say what you want. I hate
> though when you desecrate my Holy Bible like this.
It is a satire I pinched elsewhere (should have put the link ... oops!)
It is poking fun at how some Christians use the bible not the bible itself.
If the same argument for banning art that is used by some Christians was
used against the bible then the bible would have to be banned.
I visited Newcastle Art Gallery last week and was greeted by a sign on the
second floor saying "Warning: images may offend some people" ... they had
exposed breasts! The curator said that some Christians complained.
Hello!!! The nude is a central figure in artworks all over the world!!!!
Mmm ... has anyone ever seen pictures of the Sistine chapel ... where
Christians worship?????? Is the Sistine Chapel offensive????!!!!!!!!!!!!
The following extract comes from Vasari's "Lives of The Artists" (Translated
by George Bull, Penguin; Middlesex, England: 1965; p. 379)
*****************************
To return to the Last Judgement: Michelangelo had already finished more than
three~fourths of the work when Pope Paul went to see it. On this occasion
Biagio da Cesena, the master of ceremonies and a very high-minded person,
happened to be with the Pope in the chapel and was asked what he thought of
the painting. He answered that it was most disgraceful that in so sacred a
place there should have been depicted all those nude figures, exposing
themselves so shamefully, and that it was no work for a papal chapel but
rather for the public baths and taverns. Angered by this comment,
Michelangelo determined he would have his revenge; and as soon as Biagio had
left he drew his portrait frorn memory in the figure of Minos, shown with a
great serpent curled around his legs, among a heap of devils in hell; nor
for all his pleading with the Pope and Michelangelo could Biagio have the
figure removed, and it was left, to record the incident, as it is today.
*******************************
> I still believe with all my heart that you are my brother in the Lord
> though
> I don't understand some of the things you feel the need to say.
Lots of people don't understand me. All you need to do is love me. I'd
never do anything ti intentionally hurt you.
Diana
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2326> wrote in message
news:4366...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Yes and I do love you Mark. You are a most favorite of mine. You cheer me up
when I am down yet I don't even have to tell you that I am depressed you
always seem to know and that takes a touch of Jesus to do that.
Thanks for clearing that up for me. I can view your writing it in a new
light now.
Never forget that you have been engraved in my heart and also engraved in
the Palm of our Lord's hand.
Roy Mock
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2323> wrote in message
news:4365...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Um ... there was a doco last night on the Sistine Chapel. The last panel to
compete the work was the Last Judgement on the wall just behind the altar.
Masses of nude figures ......
Feather Forestwalker
The words of God are found in Scripture (the Bible). God is holy.
Therefore, whatever proceeds from His mouth is holy:
Job 6:10
Then I would still have this consolation— my joy in unrelenting pain—
that I had not denied the words of the Holy One.
If God is holy, and if we must worship Him in Spirit and in Truth, then
it follows that:
Psalm 138:2
I will bow down toward your holy temple and will praise your name for
your love and your faithfulness, for you have exalted above all things
your name and your word.
Isaiah 5:24
Therefore, as tongues of fire lick up straw and as dry grass sinks down
in the flames, so their roots will decay and their flowers blow away
like dust; for they have rejected the law of the LORD Almighty and
spurned the word of the Holy One of Israel.
Revelation 3:7
[ To the Church in Philadelphia ] "To the angel of the church in
Philadelphia write:These are the words of him who is holy and true, who
holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts
no one can open.
The words of God are found in Scripture (the Bible). They describe
themselves in several passages as being part of "God's holy word(s)"
Jeremiah 23:9
Concerning the prophets: My heart is broken within me; all my bones
tremble. I am like a drunken man, like a man overcome by wine, because
of the LORD and his *holy* words.
Jesus warned us against being ashamed of His words (HIS words are
recorded in Scripture, which is considered to be God's HOLY word to His
people):
Mark 8:38
"If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful
generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his
Father's glory with the holy angels."
Luke 9:26
If anyone is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed
of him when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of
the holy angels.
When speaking God's word to His people, Jesus' followers were to be BOLD
- what IS God's Word, except the very things that came from the mouth of
Jesus Christ while on earth. And HE quoted much of the Old Testament -
considered by the Jews of that day to be HOLY SCRIPTURE:
Acts 4:31
After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And
they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.
Romans 1:2
the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy
Scriptures
2 Timothy 3:15
and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able
to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
Truth is HOLY, is it not? If so, then what is this "Word of truth," if
not holy?
Ephesians 1:13
And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth,
the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him
with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit. . .
The church (that's US) is made holy by what process????
Ephesians 5:26
to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the
word. . .
The Bible *is* God's Holy Word. . .the Scriptures.
God bless,
Feather
Feather Forestwalker
hehe, Mark
A spiritually adulterous people puts things above God, puts people above
God, puts creation above God, puts *insert whatever idol you want here*
above God.
To be spiritually adulterous is allegorical to an unfaithful woman. (or
man).
God bless,
Feather
Feather Forestwalker
> "Diana" wrote:
>
>
>>>The Stop Public Pornography (SPP) movement aims to remove the disgusting
>>>obscenity that infiltrates our public streets, buildings, parks,
>>>churches,
>>>and television & radio. If you care about protecting our children from
>>>obscenity, please read the following carefully. I trust that you will
>>>prove sympathetic to our crusade.
>>>Warning: this document is meant to be read only by adults. Please
>>>keep away from children.
>>>It has come to our attention that one of the most blatant examples of
>>
>>public obscenity occurs within the very pages of our Holy Bible. Nobody
>>can deny
>>
>>>that the Bible contains material so shocking and pornographic that we
>>>would not want our children to be exposed to it.
>
> ....
Hehe, well, I guess some people would be offended by the entire allegory
of the Song of Solomon, eh? Or how about Proverbs? *Let her breasts
satisfy you all your days*
*ROTFL*
God bless,
Feather
Mark T
> The words of God are found in Scripture (the Bible).
Some of them.
> Jesus warned us against being ashamed of His words
... but not against being ashamed of the Bible.
> Acts 4:31
> After they prayed, the place where they were meeting was shaken. And they
> were all filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke the word of God boldly.
Does not include the New Testament as it had not been written yet.
> Romans 1:2
> the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy
> Scriptures
Refers to the Old Testament not the New Testament which had not been written
yet.
> 2 Timothy 3:15
> and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to
> make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.
Refers only to the Old Testament.
> Ephesians 5:26
> to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the
> word. . .
Word here also means reason / mind.
> The Bible *is* God's Holy Word. . .the Scriptures.
Er ... no. The Bible never refers to itself (OT & NT) as God's word. The
bible was put together as we have it in 400 CE. All the Christians
beforehand never had a full bible as we know it.
Diana
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
news:hMD9f.4454$yX2....@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
done. You are absolutely CORRECT and thank you so much for helping me on
this. All I could have said is well I know that I know that I know. What
else can I say except I know.
Diana
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
My hubby only wishes, Feather LOL.
HeLovesYou
*snicker* Di - YOU are the one that gets me rolling on the floor
laughing...always have, always will.
I Love God's Word--to read it, to ask Him to interpret/reveal it to me - the
deep treasures/nuggets hidden within.
You guys ALL are pretty special too!
:o)
:o)
Diana
"HeLovesYou" <menothome@myhouse> wrote in message
news:l5mdnYw0Aes...@midco.net...
your response in the other group and you may write me at the same address. I
would love hearing from you as often as you are led and have time. I love
you so much and miss you and Jean and our friendship we shared. I really do.
Please forgive me for all I have done to upset you or that you did not agree
with. I wish I could take all of it back but I can't and only can ask you to
forgive me and love me anyway. Please?
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
The bible is NOT a recording of words that proceeded out the "mouth" of God.
Feather Forestwalker
>
>
> The bible is NOT a recording of words that proceeded out the "mouth" of God.
>
>
Uh, yes it is. In several places, in fact.
Diana
"Jude Alexander" <Jude @thesouth.usa> wrote in message
news:bQL9f.42079$Pp1....@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
No some of it was the words of Jesus and the rest is by the Inspiration of
God.
sensi
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
sensi:
The bible is a book....a material item easily manipulated by man.
Add a word here, take a word there.
We are to worship God in spirit.
Spirit cannot be manipulated no matter how many words are changed, taken
away or added.
In early America the Indians didn't read a bible, they didn't need one but
*somehow* they *knew* the laws of life from the actual experience of living.
Why would the laws of life be any different today? Why add a bible to the
law when the laws are about actual living, experiencing and learning from
life's experiences.
I always wondered if the Christians in those days thought all the Indians
went to hell cause they didn't read a bible. Hmm
Feather Forestwalker
For the sake of clarification -
"This is what the LORD Almighty (GOD) says" references:
1 Samuel 15:2
This is what the LORD Almighty says:
Jeremiah 5:14
Therefore this is what the LORD God Almighty says:
2 Samuel 7:8
"Now then, tell my servant David, 'This is what the LORD Almighty says:
I took you from the pasture and from following the flock to be ruler
over my people Israel.
1 Chronicles 17:7
"Now then, tell my servant David, 'This is what the LORD Almighty says:
I took you from the pasture and from following the flock, to be ruler
over my people Israel.
# Isaiah 10:24
Therefore, this is what the Lord, the LORD Almighty, says: "O my people
who live in Zion, do not be afraid of the Assyrians, who beat you with a
rod and lift up a club against you, as Egypt did.
# Isaiah 22:15
This is what the Lord, the LORD Almighty, says: "Go, say to this
steward, to Shebna, who is in charge of the palace:
Isaiah 31:4
This is what the LORD says to me:
***************Isaiah 44:6
"This is what the LORD says— Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD
Almighty: I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is no
God.**********************
Jeremiah 5:14
Therefore this is what the LORD God Almighty says:
# Jeremiah 6:6
This is what the LORD Almighty says:
# Jeremiah 6:9
This is what the LORD Almighty says:
# Jeremiah 7:3
This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says:
# Jeremiah 7:21
" 'This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says:
Jeremiah 9:7
Therefore this is what the LORD Almighty says:
Jeremiah 9:15
Therefore, this is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says:
# Jeremiah 9:17
This is what the LORD Almighty says:
Jeremiah 11:22
therefore this is what the LORD Almighty says:
Jeremiah 16:9
For this is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says:
# Jeremiah 19:3
and say, 'Hear the word of the LORD, O kings of Judah and people of
Jerusalem. This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says:
Listen! I am going to bring a disaster on this place that will make the
ears of everyone who hears of it tingle.
Jeremiah 19:11
and say to them, 'This is what the LORD Almighty says:
# Jeremiah 19:15
"This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says:
Jeremiah 23:15
Therefore, this is what the LORD Almighty says concerning the prophets:
# Jeremiah 23:16
This is what the LORD Almighty says:
# Jeremiah 25:27
"Then tell them, 'This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says:
Jeremiah 25:28
But if they refuse to take the cup from your hand and drink, tell them,
'This is what the LORD Almighty says:
# Jeremiah 25:32
This is what the LORD Almighty says:
(There are THIRTY-SEVEN MORE references to "This is what GOD says,"
found ONLY in Jeremiah)
To continue without them:
# Amos 5:16
Therefore this is what the Lord, the LORD God Almighty, says:
# Haggai 1:2
This is what the LORD Almighty says:
(Haggai has FOUR more references)
# Zechariah 1:3
Therefore tell the people: This is what the LORD Almighty says:
(Zechariah has 18 more references)
# Malachi 1:4
Edom may say, "Though we have been crushed, we will rebuild the ruins."
But this is what the LORD Almighty says:
Regarding what JESUS said about GOD's WORDS:
Matthew 4:4
Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone, but
on every word that comes from the mouth of God.' "
With regards to the WORD OF THE LORD (hey, where else is GOD'S WORD
recorded, but in SCRIPTURE?), see the following references from SCRIPTURE:
Genesis 15:1
[ God's Covenant With Abram ] After this, the word of the LORD came to
Abram in a vision: "Do not be afraid, Abram. I am your shield, your very
great reward. "
# Genesis 15:4
Then the word of the LORD came to him: "This man will not be your heir,
but a son coming from your own body will be your heir."
# Exodus 9:20
Those officials of Pharaoh who feared the word of the LORD hurried to
bring their slaves and their livestock inside.
# Exodus 9:21
But those who ignored the word of the LORD left their slaves and
livestock in the field.
Exodus 19:7
So Moses went back and summoned the elders of the people and set before
them all the words the LORD had commanded him to speak.
Exodus 24:3
When Moses went and told the people all the LORD's words and laws, they
responded with one voice, "Everything the LORD has said we will do."
# Exodus 24:8
Moses then took the blood, sprinkled it on the people and said, "This is
the blood of the covenant that the LORD has made with you in accordance
with all these words."
******************************# Exodus 34:27
Then the LORD said to Moses, "Write down these words, for in accordance
with these words I have made a covenant with you and with
Israel."***************************************
Numbers 3:16
So Moses counted them, as he was commanded by the word of the LORD.
# Numbers 3:51
Moses gave the redemption money to Aaron and his sons, as he was
commanded by the word of the LORD.
(Jesus' quote of the following, in the New Testament): Deuteronomy 8:3
He humbled you, causing you to hunger and then feeding you with manna,
which neither you nor your fathers had known, to teach you that man does
not live on bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of
the LORD.
# Joshua 24:27
"See!" he said to all the people. "This stone will be a witness against
us. It has heard all the words the LORD has said to us. It will be a
witness against you if you are untrue to your God."
1 Samuel 1:23
"Do what seems best to you," Elkanah her husband told her. "Stay here
until you have weaned him; only may the LORD make good his word."
1 Samuel 3:1
[ The LORD Calls Samuel ] The boy Samuel ministered before the LORD
under Eli. In those days the word of the LORD was rare; there were not
many visions.
# 1 Samuel 3:7
Now Samuel did not yet know the LORD : The word of the LORD had not yet
been revealed to him.
1 Samuel 3:21
The LORD continued to appear at Shiloh, and there he revealed himself to
Samuel through his word.
1 Samuel 8:10
Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him
for a king.#
1 Samuel 15:23
For rebellion is like the sin of divination, and arrogance like the evil
of idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, he has
rejected you as king."
# 1 Samuel 15:26
But Samuel said to him, "I will not go back with you. You have rejected
the word of the LORD, and the LORD has rejected you as king over Israel!"
# 2 Samuel 7:4
That night the word of the LORD came to Nathan, saying:
# 2 Samuel 7:28
O Sovereign LORD, you are God! Your words are trustworthy, and you have
promised these good things to your servant.
# 2 Samuel 22:31
"As for God, his way is perfect; the word of the LORD is flawless. He is
a shield for all who take refuge in him.
# 2 Samuel 23:2
"The Spirit of the LORD spoke through me; his word was on my tongue.
# 2 Samuel 24:11
Before David got up the next morning, the word of the LORD had come to
Gad the prophet, David's seer:
# 1 Kings 2:27
So Solomon removed Abiathar from the priesthood of the LORD, fulfilling
the word the LORD had spoken at Shiloh about the house of Eli.
1 Kings 6:11
The word of the LORD came to Solomon:
(SEVERAL more references in 1 & 2 Kings, 1 & 2 Chronicles, Ezra, who
quotes Jeremiah, Psalms, Isaiah, *loads more* from Jeremiah, Ezekiel,
Daniel, who also quotes Jeremiah in Chapter 9, three in Hosea, a few in
Amos, Jonah, Micah, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, which I
won't quote here).
Singular references in two more OT books:
# Lamentations 2:17
The LORD has done what he planned; he has fulfilled his word,
Joel 1:1
The word of the LORD that came to Joel son of Pethuel.
The centurion showed his faith in the WORD of Jesus here:
Matthew 8:8
The centurion replied, "Lord, I do not deserve to have you come under my
roof. But just say the word, and my servant will be healed.
The recording of Jesus' works by HIS WORD is here:
Mark 16:20
Then the disciples went out and preached everywhere, and the Lord worked
with them and confirmed his word by the signs that accompanied it.
Luke 22:61
The Lord turned and looked straight at Peter. Then Peter remembered the
word the Lord had spoken to him: "Before the rooster crows today, you
will disown me three times."
John 6:68
Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words
of eternal life.
Acts 4:29
Now, Lord, consider their threats and enable your servants to speak your
word with great boldness.
Acts 8:25
When they had testified and proclaimed the word of the Lord, Peter and
John returned to Jerusalem, preaching the gospel in many Samaritan villages.
Acts 13:44
On the next Sabbath almost the whole city gathered to hear the word of
the Lord.
Acts 13:48
When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the
Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.
Acts 13:49
The word of the Lord spread through the whole region.
(Six more references from ACTS, 1 in Philippians, one in 1 Thessalonians.)
Peter had this to say about the word of the LORD and its endurance:
1 Peter 1:25
but the word of the Lord stands forever." And this is the word that was
preached to you.
and finally, an angel said:
Revelation 22:6
The angel said to me, "These words are trustworthy and true. The Lord,
the God of the spirits of the prophets, sent his angel to show his
servants the things that must soon take place."
==========================================
Sorry this was so long, Jude. I have a question for you; if the Bible
isn't God's recorded words to His people, what is it for you?
God bless,
Feather
Feather Forestwalker
> "Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
> news:BCP9f.4431$Rl1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>Jude Alexander wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>The bible is NOT a recording of words that proceeded out the "mouth" of
>>>God.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Uh, yes it is. In several places, in fact.
>
>
> sensi:
> The bible is a book....a material item easily manipulated by man.
> Add a word here, take a word there.
I believe that since God is Sovereign, that He has managed to
supernaturally preserve His words over time. :)
> We are to worship God in spirit.
And in truth. :)
> Spirit cannot be manipulated no matter how many words are changed, taken
> away or added.
True enough.
>
> In early America the Indians didn't read a bible, they didn't need one but
> *somehow* they *knew* the laws of life from the actual experience of living.
> Why would the laws of life be any different today? Why add a bible to the
> law when the laws are about actual living, experiencing and learning from
> life's experiences.
Life is more than living in the world, however. :)
>
> I always wondered if the Christians in those days thought all the Indians
> went to hell cause they didn't read a bible. Hmm
God chooses, not Christians.
God bless,
Feather
>
>
>
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
Well, perhaps that is true but not overall THAT I'm positive of. God
doesn't author absurdity and you DID quote Job which is one of the bible's
WORST absurdity of all.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
Too many errors to be the COMPLETE inspiration of God.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
> Feather Forestwalker wrote:
>
> > Jude Alexander wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> The bible is NOT a recording of words that proceeded out the "mouth"
> >> of God.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Uh, yes it is. In several places, in fact.
>
> For the sake of clarification -
>
>
> "This is what the LORD Almighty (GOD) says" references:
>
> 1 Samuel 15:2
> This is what the LORD Almighty says:
This is what SAMUEL said the Lord Almighty said.
>
> Jeremiah 5:14
> Therefore this is what the LORD God Almighty says:
This is what Jermiah said that the Lord God Almighty said, so on and so
forth.
Some of the prophets are REALLY doubtful they were ANYTHING but bonafide nut
cases such as the naked prophet and the prophet that cut up a whore into
twelve pieces for the twelve tribes, so on and so forth.
Diana
"Jude Alexander" <Jude @thesouth.usa> wrote in message
Have you ever played the game tell the person next to you and them the one
next to them and so forth then when it is told back to you it is different
than it started? Well the Bible has been written and re-written many times
and translations upon translations however I have read my KJV Bible at least
7 times in its entirety and I know without a doubt that what spoke to my
heart through those passages was not of man but of the Almighty Living God
Jehovah. So I do believe the Bible is written by the Inspiration of that
same God.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
Well, I've read the bible even more than you have but 7 times is a goodly
number for sure. There are too many geological, mathmatical, sequential
mistakes as well as absurdities and inconsistencies in the bible. Just
reading it front to back will NOT give you any insight into most of the
mistakes of the bible. However, IF you really were reading it well, didn't
it "give you pause" when you read about some of the things people did in the
bible saying God told them to do it such as the prophet who cut up a
prostitute into 12 pieces and give each tribe a piece along with a "message
from God." How about the NAKED prophet, running around with no clothes.
Sounds EXACTLY like those pitiful temporal lobe seisure schizophrenics out
on the streets of the big cities. I've listened to them and they CLAIM to
talk to God also and will tell you stuff just like the "prophets" of the
bible.
>
>
Diana
"Jude Alexander" <Jude @thesouth.usa> wrote in message
"Giving Pause" no I did not as I trusted God to open new wisdom and meaning
to me as he felt I was able to accept and receive it. I don't question God
as He and His word are perfect.
Mark T
There are several words meaning "word" in the bible. A study????
Mark T
>> "This is what the LORD Almighty (GOD) says" references:
>>
>> 1 Samuel 15:2
>> This is what the LORD Almighty says:
>
> This is what SAMUEL said the Lord Almighty said.
>
>>
>> Jeremiah 5:14
>> Therefore this is what the LORD God Almighty says:
>
> This is what Jermiah said that the Lord God Almighty said, so on and so
> forth.
>
> Some of the prophets are REALLY doubtful they were ANYTHING but bonafide
> nut
> cases such as the naked prophet and the prophet that cut up a whore into
> twelve pieces for the twelve tribes, so on and so forth.
Yep!
From The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
WORD
The commonest term in the Old Testament for "word" is dabhar (also
"matter" "thing"); in the New Testament logos ("reason," "discourse,"
"speech"); but also frequently rhema. Rhema is a "word" in itself
considered; logos is a spoken word, with reference generally to that which
is in the speaker's mind.
....
sometimes simply "the word"; with Jesus "the word of the Kingdom"
(Matthew 13:19; Mark 2:2; Acts 4:4,29,31, etc.). In John's Gospel Jesus
frequently speaks of His "word" and "works" as containing the divine
revelation and requirements made through Him, which men are asked to believe
in, cherish and obey (John 5:24; 6:63,68, etc.); "the words of God" (John
3:34; 8:47; 14:10; 17:8,14, etc.); His "word" (logos and rhema) is to be
distinguished from lalia, speech (compare Matthew 26:73; Mark 14:70),
translated "saying," John 4:42 (4:41, "Many more believed because of his own
word" (logos); 4:42, "not because of thy saying" (lalia), the Revised
Version (British and American) "speaking"); in the only other occurrence of
lalia in this Gospel (John 8:43) Jesus uses it to distinguish the outward
expression from the inner meaning, "Why do ye not understand my speech?"
(lalia), "Even because ye cannot hear my word" (logos).
....
For "word" the Revised Version (British and American) has
"commandment" (Numbers 4:45, etc.); for "words," "things" (John 7:9; 8:30;
9:22,40; 17:1), "sayings" (John 10:21; 12:47,48); for "enticing words,"
"persuasiveness of speech" (Colossians 2:4); conversely, "word" for
"commandment" (Numbers 24:13; 27:14; Joshua 8:8, etc.), with numerous other
changes.
Mark T
>> The bible is NOT a recording of words that proceeded out the "mouth" of
> God.
>
> No some of it was the words of Jesus and the rest is by the Inspiration of
> God.
The bible also has material attributed to Jesus which the historical Jesus
of Nazareth never said. How much of the Upper Room discourse can be
remembered word for word when John's gospel was written 90 -120 CE??????
Inspiration does not equal truth.
Richard Dawkins
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2332> wrote in message
news:4367...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Although viewing yourselves as "free thinkers", you all have a Party Line
you follow rather closely.
It isn't difficult to anticipate your arguments on any
given point. Most intelligent religious individuals almost always can
correctly predict what
you'll say next.Interestingly, militant atheists get much of their beliefs
about "Christianity" from liberal Christians.
They'll pejoratively label all Christians as "Fundies",
then presumptively attack liberal theological concepts
they suppose us "Fundies" subscribe to !
Nearly all militant atheists are followers of the
religion of Scientism. Their priests wear white lab
coats. Their sacramental objects are the microscope,
the telescope, and the test tube. Blasphemy is to
deny the ultimate authority of science.
But the militant atheists -the ones who have devoted
their lives to refuting Christianity- are almost like the
demons ...who believe more firmly in God's existence
than do Christians !
It can unequivocally be stated that militant atheists are some
of the people who most solidly believe in God !
Ain't talking 'practical atheists' here ...those who don't
even think much about atheism. They're the true
atheists.
Professional atheists who've dedicated themselves
to eradicating the Lord do so because they hate Him.
They're the God-haters.
To which they'll invariably reply: 'How can we hate
something we don't believe in ?'.
Exactly ! It's their belief in God which drives them to
relentlessly attack Him.
Run of the mill, everyday 'practical atheists' don't
give God a second thought. They're the ones
I worry about.
Whereas militant atheists are fighting against the
innate knowledge of suppressed in their hearts.
As a militant atheist I can unequivocally state that there is no time in
your life that you
totally disbelieved in God. And -in fact- were driven to
work against the Lord by belief in Him !
It isn't that militant atheists don't believe God exists.
Instead: That they don't want God to exist.
Richard Dawkins
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2332> wrote in message
Richard Dawkins
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2332> wrote in message
Richard Dawkins
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2332> wrote in message
news:4367...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Feather Forestwalker
Ohhh, innnteresting.....OK, Jude, I'll bite:
First: Why do you think the Bible is not the inspired word of God?
Second: Why do you think that Job is absurd? (I found it to be very
enlightening.)
God bless,
Feather
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
Gee, Feather, I wouldn't have NEVER thought you'd ask.... :)
Job is ABSOLUTELY absurd because it depicts that God will do something
because the devil derides him about Job. Also, the story would HAVE to have
the devil NOT knowing that God is all knowing and could just tell the Devil,
if I do such and such to Job, he would do such and such. The story line
shows God taking a dare from the Devil, one of his creations. God does many
awful tormenting of Job, killing his WHOLE family (God doesn't care about
innocent people - He'll kill them JUST to show the devil how faithful Job
is --- big duh there) , taking away ALL that he owned and striking him with
disease and boils. The hidden message of the story. If your whole family
is killed, all your assets lost and you're full of disease, God just maybe
making a show to the devil about your faithfulness.
The bible is full of 100s of geological, mathematical, sequential mistakes,
inconsistencies between text as well as absurdities.
Feather Forestwalker
Jude,
How much faith do you put in God that He can, will and has, done things
that confound the human mind?
God bless,
Feather
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
Being confounded by the story of Job? Puleeze, Feather... :)
That story is so awful AND awfully absurd. These are stories were told by
ancient Jews to explain why God could still be in charge when all these
awful things can happen to people. God could be taking a dare from the
devil and showing how faithful you are. God ALREADY knows hows we would act
in ALL ways in ALL situations. The devil, Satan, is EVERY MORE THAN US aware
of God's all knowing powers.
Diana
"Jude Alexander" <Jude @thesouth.usa> wrote in message
The problem is Jude that the devil DOES know God is all knowing and he tries
to set himself ABOVE God and that is what got him into trouble to begin
with. He thinks he is more powerful but I have news for him. WRONG
WRONG WRONG the devil is a thousand times WRONG.
Mark T
> First: Why do you think the Bible is not the inspired word of God?
If the bible is literally the "word of God" then God is a dreadful writer
who makes several hundred mistakes and contradictions.
The bible never claims that it is the "word of God" (NT & OT combined) ...
anywhere!
The bible came togerther as we have it around 400 CE. What happened
beforehand????
> Second: Why do you think that Job is absurd? (I found it to be very
> enlightening.)
God NEVER answers Job's legitimate questions with any kind of real answer.
"I'm God and I'm greater than you" is no answer at all. The problem of evil
remains.
###################################################
Is god willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he is not
omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he
both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor
willing? Then why call him god? - Epicurus (341-270 BCE)
##################################################
Feather Forestwalker
>
> Being confounded by the story of Job? Puleeze, Feather... :)
No, more like the sudden explanation to Job when he started complaining,
towards the end, in Job 40. What did God say to him? Something like,
"WHO ARE YOU, MERE MAN TO QUESTION GOD?!" I'd say that in that moment,
Job was mighily humbled indeed.
What I found most interesting about the story was how his friends and
his wife reacted. His wife said, "Curse God and die," and his friends
questioned Job's own faith in God.
It illustrates for me, the idea that none of us knows the other's minds
or hearts; that only GOD knows.
>
> That story is so awful AND awfully absurd.
I don't agree.
> These are stories were told by
> ancient Jews to explain why God could still be in charge when all these
> awful things can happen to people.
I'd say they're pretty good explanations.
> God could be taking a dare from the
> devil and showing how faithful you are.
a dare?
Job 1
Prologue
1 In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was
blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil. 2 He had seven
sons and three daughters, 3 and he owned seven thousand sheep, three
thousand camels, five hundred yoke of oxen and five hundred donkeys, and
had a large number of servants. He was the greatest man among all the
people of the East.
NOTE: Job shunned evil; he lived a BLAMELESS life. NONE of us can
compare to THAT statement, EVER.
Here is what you call a dare:
Job 1:
Job's First Test
6 One day the angels came to present themselves before the LORD, and
Satan also came with them. 7 The LORD said to Satan, "Where have you
come from?"
Satan answered the LORD, "From roaming through the earth and
going back and forth in it."
8 Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job?
There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man
who fears God and shuns evil."
9 "Does Job fear God for nothing?" Satan replied. 10 "Have you not put
a hedge around him and his household and everything he has? You have
blessed the work of his hands, so that his flocks and herds are spread
throughout the land. 11 But stretch out your hand and strike everything
he has, and he will surely curse you to your face."
12 The LORD said to Satan, "Very well, then, everything he has is in
your hands, but on the man himself do not lay a finger."
Then Satan went out from the presence of the LORD.
That wasn't a dare FROM Satan: God said, "Consider my servant Job," as a
way of showing Satan something he could never be: OBEDIENT to God.
Satan thought he'd do a one-upmanship and basically said, "I'll show
YOU, God! YOU smite him with all kinds of hardships; I bet he curses You
to Your face!"
So Satan went out and killed all Job's livestock, all the fodder in his
fields, his servants, and finally, all his children. And what did Job do?
Job 1
20 At this, Job got up and tore his robe and shaved his head. Then he
fell to the ground in worship 21 and said:
"Naked I came from my mother's womb,
and naked I will depart.
The LORD gave and the LORD has taken away;
may the name of the LORD be praised."
22 In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.
How many of US can lay claim to this very act of patience? NOT ONE.
So what happens next?
Job 2
Job's Second Test
1 On another day the angels [a] came to present themselves before the
LORD, and Satan also came with them to present himself before him. 2 And
the LORD said to Satan, "Where have you come from?"
Satan answered the LORD, "From roaming through the earth and
going back and forth in it."
3 Then the LORD said to Satan, "Have you considered my servant Job?
There is no one on earth like him; he is blameless and upright, a man
who fears God and shuns evil. And he still maintains his integrity,
though you incited me against him to ruin him without any reason."
4 "Skin for skin!" Satan replied. "A man will give all he has for his
own life. 5 But stretch out your hand and strike his flesh and bones,
and he will surely curse you to your face."
6 The LORD said to Satan, "Very well, then, he is in your hands; but
you must spare his life."
God would NOT permit Satan to kill Job.
What happened?
Job 2:
7 So Satan went out from the presence of the LORD and afflicted Job with
painful sores from the soles of his feet to the top of his head. 8 Then
Job took a piece of broken pottery and scraped himself with it as he sat
among the ashes.
9 His wife said to him, "Are you still holding on to your integrity?
Curse God and die!"
10 He replied, "You are talking like a foolish woman. Shall we accept
good from God, and not trouble?"
In all this, Job did not sin in what he said.
How many of us can say we accept trouble from God as well as goodness
from God? Not very many, that's for sure.
How did Job's friends initially respond? By crying loudly, then going
and sitting silently with him:
Job 2:
Job's Three Friends
11 When Job's three friends, Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuhite
and Zophar the Naamathite, heard about all the troubles that had come
upon him, they set out from their homes and met together by agreement to
go and sympathize with him and comfort him. 12 When they saw him from a
distance, they could hardly recognize him; they began to weep aloud, and
they tore their robes and sprinkled dust on their heads. 13 Then they
sat on the ground with him for seven days and seven nights. No one said
a word to him, because they saw how great his suffering was.
Job then, in chapter three, elaborated on how cursed the day of his
birth was, but again, did not sin against GOD.
In Chapter four, Eliphaz commiserated with Job, and encouraged him, and
in chapter five, most of that continues. Job answers with more lament
throughout chapter six, and in seven, begins to speak to God as well as
Eliphaz.
Bildad sort of picks up where Eliphaz left off through much of chapter
eight, and begins to also question Job's integrity, suggesting that if
Job were as upright as he claimed, that he wouldn't be suffering.
(I am reminded of Jesus' words regarding the man born blind, when the
people asked "What sin did his parents commit, that this man was born
blind?" And Jesus responds with the fact that the man was born blind so
that the glory of GOD could be revealed in him).
In Job 9 and 10, Job again elaborates on how much he hates his life. . .
That's when Zophar rebukes him in chapter 11. Job argues many of
Zophar's points in chapter 12, then again speaks directly to God in
chapter 12.
In 13 Job's wisdom is revealed in many of his statements that are made
as questions. . .
but Eliphaz questions his wisdom in the opening verses of chapter 14. .
.then he continues at once attempting to encourage, and at another
place, rebuking Job for questioning God through chapter 15.
Job 16 shows Job's response. . .breating the way his very own friends
are treating him, and in 17, he says again that he feels broken in his
spirit.
In 18, Bildad shows his impatience with Job's "speeches," and asks him
to STOP already. . .but in 19, Job starts all over again. . .
Zophar is troubled by Job's "dishonoring words against me," in chapter
20, and continues his own discourse around what Job has done wrong in
God's sight, in order that he be afflicted in this manner....(but
remember, Job had still not sinned against God - he had not cursed God
at all during these many discourses).
I love what Job says in the beginning of chapter 21:
Job 21
Job
1 Then Job replied:
2 "Listen carefully to my words;
let this be the consolation you give me.
3 Bear with me while I speak,
and after I have spoken, mock on.
4 "Is my complaint directed to man?
Why should I not be impatient?
5 Look at me and be astonished;
clap your hand over your mouth.
Effectively, he's saying: My complaints are not against you, but against
my very own LIFE, so shut UP.
In chapter 22 Eliphaz has again missed the point - by suggesting that
Job has not been in complete submission to God.
(This reminds me of the attitude that many charismatic/legalistic
Christians take when they say, "You wouldn't be sick if there weren't
some unconfessed sin in your life." Gimme a break).
Job explains again his case, but gets caught up in the argumentativeness
a little in chapter 23.
In 24 he questions why God doesn't do some things but does others. . .
In 25, Bildad gives a short but sweet answer:
Job 25
Bildad
1 Then Bildad the Shuhite replied:
2 "Dominion and awe belong to God;
he establishes order in the heights of heaven.
3 Can his forces be numbered?
Upon whom does his light not rise?
4 How then can a man be righteous before God?
How can one born of woman be pure?
5 If even the moon is not bright
and the stars are not pure in his eyes,
6 how much less man, who is but a maggot—
a son of man, who is only a worm!"
Job seems thankful for these words in chapter 26. In 27, the heading in
verse one actually says "And Job continued his discourse. . ." *LOL*
Seems Job had a lot to say, and to me, we could learn a lot from him.
This discourse continues through Chapter 28, 29, 30, & 31.
In Chapter 32, Elihu comes into the picture, having been silent until now.
But boy, was he angry!
Job 32
Elihu
1 So these three men stopped answering Job, because he was righteous
in his own eyes. 2 But Elihu son of Barakel the Buzite, of the family of
Ram, became very angry with Job for justifying himself rather than God.
3 He was also angry with the three friends, because they had found no
way to refute Job, and yet had condemned him. 4 Now Elihu had waited
before speaking to Job because they were older than he. 5 But when he
saw that the three men had nothing more to say, his anger was aroused.
(remind you of anything that happens sometimes in this very newsgroup?????)
He continues explaining his position in Chapter 33, 34, 35, 36 & 37.
THEN, GOD speaks, in Chapter 38.
The first few verses say:
Job 38
The LORD Speaks
1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:
2 "Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?
3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.
4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
In 39, 40 & 41, God gets the FINAL word, but gives Job a chance to
respond, as we see in Chapter 42:
Job 42
Job
1 Then Job replied to the LORD :
2 "I know that you can do all things;
no plan of yours can be thwarted.
And having humbled himself before GOD, this is what happened:
Job 42: 12 The LORD blessed the latter part of Job's life more than the
first. He had fourteen thousand sheep, six thousand camels, a thousand
yoke of oxen and a thousand donkeys. 13 And he also had seven sons and
three daughters. 14 The first daughter he named Jemimah, the second
Keziah and the third Keren-Happuch. 15 Nowhere in all the land were
there found women as beautiful as Job's daughters, and their father
granted them an inheritance along with their brothers.
16 After this, Job lived a hundred and forty years; he saw his
children and their children to the fourth generation. 17 And so he died,
old and full of years.
> God ALREADY knows hows we would act
> in ALL ways in ALL situations.
True, but WE don't, and it's WE who have to learn these lessons.
> The devil, Satan, is EVERY MORE THAN US aware
> of God's all knowing powers.
Scripturally, show me where that is true. Satan has been *defeated* at
the Cross. He has no power over believers. We should respect him as an
adversary, but he's not in heaven anymore and has no more access to
God's throne other than to accuse us before Him day and night. . .and
our Advocate is Christ Jesus - Who sits at the right Hand of God,
speaking on OUR behalf; those of us who know Him as Savior and LORD.
Satan knows only as much as GOD is willing to allow him to know, and
it's not as much as we might think. We give him far too much power. He's
not an equal adversary to GOD, for NONE is equal to God in ANY way: he's
a defeated enemy.
God bless,
Feather
Richard Dawkins
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2332> wrote in message
how hard he was humping...his fist slipped off his penis and into his eye
socket, rendering him unconscious. A first class rookie mistake; too much
lube and not enough material to work with.
Mark T
> Job is ABSOLUTELY absurd because it depicts that God will do something
> because the devil derides him about Job.
Basically because it is a fairy story. The first fiction written in the
bible to explore the problem of evil. We have an edited version.
> Also, the story would HAVE to have
> the devil NOT knowing that God is all knowing and could just tell the
> Devil,
> if I do such and such to Job, he would do such and such.
At thgat time in theology God was seen as a "tribal war god" with limited
powers and whop acted in a very human manner ... like Zeus. Theology had not
yet evolved to the point where God was a universal spirit.
> killing his WHOLE family (God doesn't care about
> innocent people - He'll kill them JUST to show the devil how faithful Job
> is --- big duh there)
Job's wife and children ... and servants and their wives and children ...
don't matter. Only the Patriach of the family mattered as Lord / Boss.
Wives, children and servants were possessions of the Patriach / Lord / Boss
... just as Job was a possession of God whom god could do with as God
pleased.
> The bible is full of 100s of geological, mathematical, sequential
> mistakes,
> inconsistencies between text as well as absurdities.
Yep! If it is the "word of God' then God is an idiot!
Personally, I prefer to look at the bible as being written by imperfect
fallible men (sexism intended) rather than God. God is perfect and would
never have written such a collection of books with so many mistakes. Don't
blame God for the mistakes in the bible!!! It ain't His / Her / Its fault.
BIBLE TIMELINE
Dates are approximate
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3000 BC
- Egyptian songs written that were the source of many of the Psalms
2000 BC
- Eclessiastes written
1900 BC
- Abraham comes to Palestine
- Beginning of oral tradition later recorded in the bible
1375 - 1358 BC
- Reign of Egyptian Pharoah Amenhotep IV ( later called Ikhnaton)
inspiration of much of Moses' writing.
1250 BC
- Moses leads Isrealites out of Egypt
1030 - 1010 BC
- Reign of Saul
1010 - 970 BC
- Reign of David
1000 BC
- Bible begins to be written with Job (fiction)
970 - 931 BC
- Reign of Solomon
960 BC
- The YAHWIST editor began in Jerusalem. He calls God YHWH.and describes God
in humanlike terms. The Yahwist editor wrote Genesis 2 ( Genesis 1 had not
yer been written.). Bible heroes are not whitewashed - Abraham is called a
liar (Gen 20), Noah's drunken state is described (Gen 9) and Lot's incest is
told (Gen 19). The monarchy and priesthood in Jeruslem are important. This
editor wrote the first version of the 10 Commandments in Exodus 34 which
contains no reference to resting on the Sabbath.
850 BC
- The ELOHIST editor began in Samaria. He calls God Elohim. The
Elohist editor has a democratic value system and so asserts that no priest,
leader or king can claim permanent status over God's people. There is no
dynasty established. He starts his story with Abraham and wrote about Isaac
and Jacob. He places importance on the Northern kingdoms power and shrines.
He uses dreams, miracle and magic as a way to demonstrate God's power. He
asserts that God raises up prophets whn required.
621 BC
- The DEUTERONOMIST editor began in 621 BCE in the reign of King Josiah in
Jerusalem. The "discovered" book was called the second (deuters) giving of
the Law (nomas) and became known as Deuteronomy. It was responsive to the
prophetic tradition of Hosea, Amos, Isaiah, Micah and Jeremiah (who was
alivce at the time of writing). The deuteronomist editor centralised worship
under the supervision of the Jerusalem priesthood. Its interest's were in a
high spiritual monotheism and therefdore wrote than no image could be made
of God.
596 BC
- The PRIESTLY editors began after the city of Jerusalem fell to
Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians. Many of the Psalms were
written in this time (including Psalm 137). The priests edited and rewrote
massive parts of the sacred story. They emphasised circumcision, dietary
laws and Sabbath day observance and were responsible for writing Genesis 1
to provide a reason for observing the Sabbath abnd it was one of the last
parts of the Old Testament to be written. At the same time synagogues were
built to indoctrinate the people. As a result thje etails of worship, the
rules of worship, the observance of worship became important and resulted in
much of Exodus, almost all of Leviticus and major portions of Numbers. All
the chronologies were written by the priestly editors. The incompleted
harmonisation of the Yahwist and Elohist editors produce most of the
contradictions in the Old Testament.
400 BC
- Emphasis on individualism and life after death
200 BC
- Daniel written (fiction)
6 BCE
- Jesus birth
27 - 34 CE
- Jesus' death
50 - 60 CE
- 1 Thessalonians. Philippians, Galatians, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians,
Romans, Philemon
50 - 80 CE
- Colossians
50 - 95 CE
- Hebrews
65 - 80 CE
- Mark's gospel
70 - 100 CE
- James
80 -100 CE
- 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Matthew's gospel (written in Antioch),
80 -110 CE
- 1 Peter
80 CE - 130 CE
- Luke's gospel, Acts (both written in Caesarea)
90 - 95 CE
- Revelation of John
90 -120 CE.
- John's Gospel, I John, 2 John, 3 John, Jude
100 -150 CE
-1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus
100 -160 CE
- 2 Peter
1001 Errors in the Christian Bible
http://hometown.aol.com/abdulreis/myhomepage/
A Primer for Second Semester Divinity School Students
http://members.aol.com/DrSwiney/primer.html
BBC Religion and Ethics
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/index.shtml
Beliefnet
http://www.beliefnet.com/
Bible Study Tools
http://www.biblestudytools.net/Information/
Biblical Inconsistencies
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.shtml
Catholic Encyclopedia
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/
Compass (ABC)
http://www.abc.net.au/compass/
Downloadable Bible Links
http://www.e-sword.net/bibles.html
Early Christian Writings
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/
Early Church Fathers
http://www.ccel.org/fathers2/
Early Church
http://www.earlychurch.org.uk/sitemap.html
Encyclopedia Mythica
http://www.pantheon.org/
Faith & Reason
http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/f/faith-re.htm
Five Gospels Parallels
http://www.utoronto.ca/religion/synopsis/
From Jesus To Christ
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/
Fundamentalists Annonymous
http://www.fundamentalists-anonymous.org/
Internet Christian Library
http://www.iclnet.org/
Intelligent Christian
http://www.intelligentchristian.org/
Internet Sacred Texts Archive
http://www.sacred-texts.com/index.htm
Its All About Christianity
http://christianity.miningco.com/
Island of Freedom
http://www.island-of-freedom.com/theos.htm
Jesus Seminar Forum
http://religion.rutgers.edu/jseminar/
Jewish Texts & Torah
http://www.nmmc.net/Guide/jtt.html
Jewish Encyclopedia
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/index.jsp
John A T Robinson
http://www.preteristarchive.com/StudyArchive/r/robinson-john-at_redating.htm
John Mark Ministries
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/
Jungian-Christian Dialogue
http://www.innerexplorations.com/jctext/jungian-.htm
Jesus Homepage
http://www.rejesus.co.uk/
Karen Armstrong
http://www.2think.org/hii/armstrng.shtml
Kierkegaard on the Internet
http://www.webcom.com/kierke/
Landover Baptist Church
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/
Neilsen's Psychology of Religion
http://www.psychwww.com/psyrelig/index.htm
No Answers In Genesis
http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/
Official Denominational Websites
http://hirr.hartsem.edu/org/faith_denominations_homepages.html
Patron Saints Index
http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/indexsnt.htm
Reference - Theologians of the second half of the 20th century
http://www.newgenevacenter.org/reference/20b-theology2.htm
Religious Resources
http://www.religiousresources.org/
Rudolph Bultmann
http://religion.rutgers.edu/nt/primer/bultmann.html
Religious Tolerance
http://www.religioustolerance.org/welcome.htm#new
Religions - Reference Library
http://www.campusprogram.com/reference/en/wikipedia/r/re/religion.html
Scientific Boo-boos in the Bible
http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/1991/1/1boobo91.html
Sea of Faith
http://www.sofn.org.uk/
Ship Of Fools
http://ship-of-fools.com/
Skeptics Annotated Bible
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/
True Christian Church
http://www.truechristian.com/index.html
Theology Thinkers
http://www.theology.ie/thinkers.htm
U2
http://www.u2propaganda.com/
Virtual Religion Index
http://religion.rutgers.edu/vri/xnity.html
What the Christian fundamentalist doesn't want you to know
http://www.bidstrup.com/bible2.htm
Mark T
> How much faith do you put in God that He can, will and has, done things
> that confound the human mind?
Tonnes!
However, God does not intentionally put in hundreds of mistakes in the bible
just to show how clever he is ... or create dinosaur fossils to fool those
evilooshunists!
There is an evolution of thought in the bible from Genesis to Revelation.
God is NOT the same all the way through. This is particularly evident in
the first two chapters of Genesis. In Genesis 2 (written first) God
fashions man from the dust of the ground ... just like a clay idol that was
popular in the region. In Genesis 1 (written later) God speaks and man is
formed. Likewise Paul would never have agreed with John's gospel (written
after Paul's death). Paul never claims that Jesus is God.
God evolves from a local tribal war god with human characteristics to a
universal perfect spirit. In the same manner God elvoves from the Old
Testament belief in ONE God to the latter NT belief of THREE Gods ... one of
which is a human (If God is an infinite spoirit how can he be a finite
human?)
What matters most? God or the bible?????
I can do without a bible. Abraham and Moses did very well without a bible.
I cannot do without God (neither could Abraham and Moses)
Mark T
> That story is so awful AND awfully absurd.
Job was written circa 1000 BC and conforms in style to other fictional
stories in the Near Middle East at that time. It reads like a play.
OIne really needs to study HOW the bible was put together. I learnt much
from my history studies at uni on Ancient Israel.
Read http://www.factbites.com/topics/History-of-ancient-Israel-and-Judah
... and this classic work !!!! ... the main uni text.
I think it is now in a 4th edition.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A History Of Israel
By John Bright
500 pp. Philadelphia, The Westminster Press, 1959. $7.50.
The author of this book is the well-known Professor of Hebrew and the
Interpretation of the Old Testament at Union Theological Seminary, Richmond.
In this volume Dr. Bright has given us an authoritative history of the Old
Testament and met a long-felt need for such a work in English. With his
knowledge of Semitic languages, archaeology, ancient history, and Biblical
theology he is well qualified to undertake a task of this nature and he has
succeeded admirably in accomplishing his purpose.
Ancient Israel never lived in a vacuum, and revelation took place in
history. Accordingly, in order to understand the Old Testament, one has to
study more than the national history of the Chosen People. It is also
necessary to know the cultural and political situation in the ancient Near
East even from prehistoric times as well as the international scene in which
Israel fulfilled its destiny. The author in clear fashion presents such a
panorama and properly sets ancient Israel into its environment. With this in
view he begins with a Prologue in which he discusses the Ancient Orient
before ca. 2000 B.C. In this section he reviews the foundations of
civilization in Bible lands, and in connection with the third millennium
B.C. he treats Mesopotamia in the earliest historical period, Egypt and
Western Asia, and the Ancient Orient on the eve of the patriarchal age.
The history after ca. 2000 is divided into six parts, which bear significant
titles. The age of the patriarchs is called "Antecedents and Beginnings." In
this connection Bright gives a survey of the Ancient Orient ca. 2000-1550
B.C. He avoids hypothetical reconstructions, and while he recognizes that
much is obscure, he believes that the patriarchal traditions have an
historical basis. While he does not identify the Hebrew ancestors with the
Khapiru (Habiru), he thinks it legitimate to consider them as belonging to
that ancient stratum of society. Concerning patriarchal religion, the author
accepts as authentic the Genesis presentation of a personal relation between
the individual and his God, and he does not regard the patriarchal covenant
as anachronistic. He recognizes that the evolutionary approach associated
with the name of Wellhausen has few defenders today, but at the same time he
rightly points out that even scholars who speak of oral traditions still
feel bound to work with blocks of material or strata of thought
corresponding to the well-known symbols J, E, D, and P.
In the second part, or "The Formative Period," he discusses the Exodus, the
Conquest, and the Judges. In this connection he concludes that Sethos I is
the Pharaoh who began the oppression of Israel, while Ramesses II is the one
under whom the Exodus took place. Accordingly this notable event happened in
the thirteenth century and is placed ca. 1280 (?) B.C. The writer is correct
in finding no evidence that Yahweh was worshiped before the time of Moses,
but he is certain that through Moses Yahwism was given a new content. The
covenant at Sinai is accepted as a reality, and from the very beginning
Israel's faith forbade the worship of any god but Yahweh. While the faith of
early Israel was not monotheism in any philosophical sense, Bright maintains
that it is best to retain the term even for that period.
It is profitless in the view of the author to inquire which of the twelve
tribes were in Egypt and participated in the Exodus. It is assumed, however,
that by the end of the thirteenth century the Conquest of Palestine had been
completed and the amphictyony had been formed. Eventually the Philistine
crisis forced a fundamental change in the political structure of Israel.
Parts III and IV, which treat of the monarchy, are well-named the Period of
National Self-determination and Crisis and Downfall. Bright sets into clear
light the covenant with David, which formed the basis of the national
theology of the Davidic dynasty. In Excursus I (pp. 282-287) is found an
important discussion of the campaigns of Sennacherib. Part V, which is
devoted to the Exilic and Postexilic periods, is called "Tragedy and
Beyond." Even though the fall and destruction of Jerusalem were a disaster,
through the teaching of the prophets Israel's faith continued to develop
until a definite monotheism was reached in the message of Deutero-Isaiah. In
the plan of God, however, Israel was not destined to become an empire like
that of the Egyptians, Assyrians, and Chaldeans, but its mission lay in
suffering and in proclaiming to the rest of the world the will of God.
Throughout the work Bright uses sane and reserved judgment. He concludes
that the Chronicler telescoped the work of two men, Sheshbazzar and
Zerubbabel. As regards the careers of Ezra and Nehemiah, he recognizes the
difficulty of the relative chronology of these two men, but he prefers 428
as the date of Ezra's arrival, thus placing him after Nehemiah. He does not,
however, eliminate as impossible the year 458, the traditional date
apparently favored by the canonical evidence. In Excursus II (pp. 375-386)
is presented a clear exposition of three points of view of the date of Ezra.
Part VI, which contains Chapters 11 and 12, is devoted to the "Formative
Period of Judaism," in which the author takes us through the Maccabaean
period, and then in the final chapter is found a discussion of Judaism at
the end of the Old Testament period. The Chronological Charts, which are
very helpful for visualizing the course of ancient history, contain a
synchronism of dates from before 2000 to 150 B.C. The index of Scripture
references is copious, and that of subjects is quite extensive.
The Epilogue, which bears the title: "Toward the Fullness of Time," ends
with a religious emphasis. The author observes that Israel's history leads
either to the Talmud or to the Gospel. To the Christian, however, Old
Testament history becomes Heilsgeschichte (salvation history) and reaches
its fulfillment in Christ. This book is indispensable to pastors and
students of the Bible and theology and is also wholeheartedly recommended to
laymen and teachers of ancient history.
Henry S. Gehman
Princeton Theological Seminary
Princeton, New Jersey
From http://theologytoday.ptsem.edu/jul1960/v17-2-bookreview16.htm
Mark T
> "WHO ARE YOU, MERE MAN TO QUESTION GOD?!" I'd say that in that moment, Job
> was mighily humbled indeed.
...
> I'd say they're pretty good explanations.
Er ... no. This is the classic complaint against the book of Job. It gives
no answer to the problem of evil. One only has to read the philosophy books
in this area over the past 3000 years to see that is no decent answer at
all. Carl Jung's book on Job is the best but still falls short of an
answer.
> NOTE: Job shunned evil; he lived a BLAMELESS life. NONE of us can compare
> to THAT statement, EVER.
That is because Job isn't a real person. He is like the perfect knight in
shining armour that only exists in one's mind.
> [Satan]'s not in heaven anymore
Where is he? Is Satan finite? If Satan is confined to the world can we
travel to a distant galaxy and be away from him and all evil?
Feather Forestwalker
> "Feather Forestwalker" wrote:
>
>
>>How much faith do you put in God that He can, will and has, done things
>>that confound the human mind?
>
>
> Tonnes!
>
> However, God does not intentionally put in hundreds of mistakes in the bible
> just to show how clever he is ... or create dinosaur fossils to fool those
> evilooshunists!
>
> There is an evolution of thought in the bible from Genesis to Revelation.
> God is NOT the same all the way through. This is particularly evident in
> the first two chapters of Genesis. In Genesis 2 (written first) God
> fashions man from the dust of the ground ... just like a clay idol that was
> popular in the region. In Genesis 1 (written later) God speaks and man is
> formed. Likewise Paul would never have agreed with John's gospel (written
> after Paul's death). Paul never claims that Jesus is God.
He sure came close, though:
Ephesians 4:
3 Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of
peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one
hope when you were called— 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God
and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
>
> God evolves from a local tribal war god with human characteristics to a
> universal perfect spirit. In the same manner God elvoves from the Old
> Testament belief in ONE God to the latter NT belief of THREE Gods ... one of
> which is a human (If God is an infinite spoirit how can he be a finite
> human?)
>
> What matters most? God or the bible?????
>
> I can do without a bible. Abraham and Moses did very well without a bible.
>
> I cannot do without God (neither could Abraham and Moses)
None of us can do without GOD, but when we uphold the words of men above
the words of God as quoted in the Scripture, we run a serious risk of
being spiritually deceived into becoming spiritual adulterers:
Colossians 2:8
See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive
philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of
this world rather than on Christ.
If we hadn't had Scriptures or an oral tradition of same passed down,
would we have still had God's words spoken to us? If we had no means of
recording them, whether written or repeated orally, what would we do?
As far as Carl Jung is concerned (from your other post); I have serious
issues with a humanistic psychologist claiming to know *anything* of
God, when he puts more reliance on human intellect over God.
"If *I* can't figure this all out, then it *must* be myth" just doesn't
cut it.
God bless,
Feather
Mark T
>> Likewise Paul would never have agreed with John's gospel (written after
>> Paul's death). Paul never claims that Jesus is God.
>
> He sure came close, though:
>
> Ephesians 4:
>
> 3 Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of
> peace. 4 There is one body and one Spirit—just as you were called to one
> hope when you were called— 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God
> and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.
Mmm ... maybe. Ephesians may not have been written by paul. It is still in
the undecided basket.
Even then .........
One Lord / Boss = Jesus of Nazareth.
One God & father of all = YHWH.
The two are not confused.
>> I can do without a bible. Abraham and Moses did very well without a
>> bible.
>> I cannot do without God (neither could Abraham and Moses)
>
> None of us can do without GOD, but when we uphold the words of men above
> the words of God as quoted in the Scripture, we run a serious risk of
> being spiritually deceived into becoming spiritual adulterers:
BUT ... the words of nonChriustian men ARE used in the bible .....
Acts 17:28 from Aratus
1Corinthians 15:33 from Euripides
Titus 1:12 from Epimenides
Were Aratus, Euripides and Epimenides inspired of God?????
> Colossians 2:8
> See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive
> philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of
> this world rather than on Christ.
May not have been written by Paul.
THOUGH ... it does have Paul's trademark distinction between God and God's
messiah .....
Colossians 1:3 "... GOD, the Father of our Lord [Boss] JESUS [the] Christ "
3:1 "[the] CHRIST is, seated at the right hand of GOD."
3:17 "... Lord [Boss] JESUS, giving thanks to GOD the Father through him."
> If we hadn't had Scriptures or an oral tradition of same passed down,
> would we have still had God's words spoken to us?
Yes! It worked perfectly well for Abraham and Moses.
> If we had no means of recording them, whether written or repeated orally,
> what would >we do?
Rely on God rather than a fallible book.
> As far as Carl Jung is concerned (from your other post); I have serious
> issues with a humanistic psychologist claiming to know *anything* of God,
> when he puts more reliance on human intellect over God.
Have you read Carl Jung????? His "Memories, Dreams, Reflections" is one of
the best books I have ever read.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jung ( Memories, Dreams,..) - Review
Contrary to more voluminous magna opera like "Mysterium Coniunctionis" or
"Psychology and Alchemy", this is a more accessible and, at the same time,
central book of Jungian myth.
.....
Q. What, then, is the message of Jung's life, that,what William James had
described as ordeal of consciousness ?
A. The goal of Jungian individuation is expansion & integration of the
psychic contents ("soul") within the field of awareness, the ego being the
center of conscious life. The grand finale would be fusion, coniunctio, of
the "soul" ( psyche ) and "Spirit" ( pneuma/Self ), with ego retaining its
"privileged" position as the center of the conscious life.
Q. So is this expansion and integration something one is aware of when it is
happening or when it has happened ?
A. Well, that's a tricky subject. I'll try to give some hints a few
outspoken Jungians like Marie Louise von Franz, and Jung himself have
adumbrated. Of course, the entire spiritual "enterprise" is based on the
Western Hermetic/Gnostic tradition, from Corpus Hermeticum to alchemists's
"opera". In short, you got a growth of inner ( and outer life ) on various
levels of consciousness ( altered states, dreams, hypnagogic dreams, guided
imagination, prayer, conscious ponderings, listening your inner
daemon/voice, ordeals of emotional & family life,....). The goal is
"individuated" man/woman: that is, someone who lives an authentic life (
Shakespearean "to thine own self be true" ), not an onedimensional spiritual
saintly prototype nor a conformistic ego- centered mediocre. I suppose the
ultimate ideal would be someone like Goethe or Plato- a multidimensional,
creative individuum with strong sense of "I", yet in deep contact/fusion
with the divine wellspring within- in sum, ideal of the "Renaissance man".
from http://www.kheper.net/topics/Jung/MemoriesDreamsReflections_review.html
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From the book itself .....
Carl Jung - "Memories, Dreams, Reflections" (Collins, Fount Paperbacks;
London:1961)
p.17 Like every other being, I am a splinter of the infinite deity ...
p. 63 It often seemed to me that religious precepts were being put in place
of the will of God - which could be so unexpected and so alarming - for the
sole purpose of sparing people the necessity for understanding God's will.
... All the people around me seemed to take the jargon for granted, and the
dense obscurity that emanated from it; thoughtlessly they swallowed the
contradictions ....
p. 72 [On the Communion service] There was no mention of the fact it was now
1860 years since Jesus had died, where as in all other memorial services the
date was stressed. I saw no sadness and no joy, and felt that the feast was
meagre in every respect, considering the extraordinary importance of the
person whose memory was being celebrated. It did not compare at all to
secular festivals.
p. 73 It is an absence of God; the church is not a place I should go to. It
is not life which there, but death.
p. 75 God has a personality and is the ego of the universe, just as I myself
am the ego of my psychic and physical being.
p. 236 Not only do I leave the door open for the Christian message, but I
consider it of central importance for Western man. it needs, however, to be
seen in a new light, in accordance with the changes wrought by the
contemporary spirit. Otherwise it stands apart from the times, and has no
effect on man's wholeness.
p.242 Blind acceptance never leads to a solution; at best it leads only to a
standstill and is paid for heavily in the next generation.
p. 326 ... this life is a segment of existence which is enacted in a
three-dimensional boxlike universe especially set up for it.
p. 343 Myth is the natural and indispensable intermediate stage between
unconscious and conscious cognition.
p. 360 ... the life of the psyche [spirit] requires no space and no time.
p. 369 ...I prefer the term unconsciousness", knowing that I might equally
well speak of "God" or "daimon" if I wished to express myself in mythic
language.
p. 370-371 ... the service which man can render to God, that light may
emerge from the darkness, that the Creator may become conscious of His
creation, and man conscious of himself.
p. 373 It is not we who invent myth, rather it speaks to us as a Word of
God. The Word comes to us and we have no way of distinguishing whether and
to what extent it is different from God. ... the Word happens to us; we
suffer it, for we are victims of a profound uncertainty: with God as a
complexio oppositorum, all things are possible, in the fullest meaning of
the phrase.
p. 383 All conceivable statements are made by the psyche [spirit]. Among
other things, the psyche appears as a dynamic process which rests on a
foundation of antithesis ...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Some "humanist"!!!!!
Psyche = spirit!
Jung explores the human spirit in his work.
Do you know how many times he mentions God and Jesus in his work?
What does "humanistic psychologist" mean in the real world?
All truth is God's truth.
MattB
<fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote:
>sensi wrote:
>
>> "Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
>> news:BCP9f.4431$Rl1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>
>>>Jude Alexander wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>The bible is NOT a recording of words that proceeded out the "mouth" of
>>>>God.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>Uh, yes it is. In several places, in fact.
>>
>>
>> sensi:
>> The bible is a book....a material item easily manipulated by man.
>> Add a word here, take a word there.
>
>I believe that since God is Sovereign, that He has managed to
>supernaturally preserve His words over time. :)
I have a stupid question one brought up at the University one time.
Which Version is the true word of God? They all can't be because they
all aren't the same. If they were we would have one version.
Matt
>
>> We are to worship God in spirit.
>
>And in truth. :)
>
>> Spirit cannot be manipulated no matter how many words are changed, taken
>> away or added.
>
>True enough.
>
>>
>> In early America the Indians didn't read a bible, they didn't need one but
>> *somehow* they *knew* the laws of life from the actual experience of living.
>> Why would the laws of life be any different today? Why add a bible to the
>> law when the laws are about actual living, experiencing and learning from
>> life's experiences.
>
>Life is more than living in the world, however. :)
>
>>
>> I always wondered if the Christians in those days thought all the Indians
>> went to hell cause they didn't read a bible. Hmm
>
>God chooses, not Christians.
>
>God bless,
>Feather
>
>>
>>
>>
Let not your anger bind you to
the past, to the offense, or to
the offender. Instead, turn the
ashes of your experience into a
kindling of dignity for yourself
and compassion for others DRL
HeLovesYou
>
> "HeLovesYou" <menothome@myhouse> wrote in message
> news:l5mdnYw0Aes...@midco.net...>> news:K_H9f.81214$Hs.6...@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
>> >
>> > "Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
>> >> Mark T wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > "Diana" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>>The Stop Public Pornography (SPP) movement aims to remove the
>> > disgusting
>> >> >>>obscenity that infiltrates our public streets, buildings, parks,
>> >> >>>churches,
>> >> >>>and television & radio. If you care about protecting our children
> from
>> >> >>>obscenity, please read the following carefully. I trust that you
> will
>> >> >>>prove sympathetic to our crusade.
>> >> >>>Warning: this document is meant to be read only by adults. Please
>> >> >>>keep away from children.
>> >> >>>It has come to our attention that one of the most blatant examples
> of
>> >> >>
>> >> >>public obscenity occurs within the very pages of our Holy Bible.
> Nobody
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>that the Bible contains material so shocking and pornographic that
> we
>> >> >>>would not want our children to be exposed to it.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>Mark I love you. I realize you have a right to say what you want. I
>> >> >>hate
>> >> >>though when you desecrate my Holy Bible like this.
>> >> >
>> >> >
> oops!)
>> >> >
>> >> > It is poking fun at how some Christians use the bible not the bible
>> > itself.
>> >> >
>> >> > If the same argument for banning art that is used by some Christians
>> >> > was
>> >> > used against the bible then the bible would have to be banned.
>> >> >
>> >> > I visited Newcastle Art Gallery last week and was greeted by a sign
> on
>> > the
>> >> > second floor saying "Warning: images may offend some people" ...
>> >> > they
>> > had
>> >> > exposed breasts! The curator said that some Christians complained.
>> >> > Hello!!! The nude is a central figure in artworks all over the
>> > world!!!!
>> >> >
>> >> > Mmm ... has anyone ever seen pictures of the Sistine chapel ...
>> >> > where
>> >> > Christians worship?????? Is the Sistine Chapel
>> > offensive????!!!!!!!!!!!!
>> >> >
>> >> > The following extract comes from Vasari's "Lives of The Artists"
>> > (Translated
>> >> > by George Bull, Penguin; Middlesex, England: 1965; p. 379)
>> >> >
>> >> > *****************************
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > To return to the Last Judgement: Michelangelo had already finished
> more
>> > than
>> >> > three~fourths of the work when Pope Paul went to see it. On this
>> > occasion
>> >> > Biagio da Cesena, the master of ceremonies and a very high-minded
>> > person,
>> >> > happened to be with the Pope in the chapel and was asked what he
>> >> > thought
>> > of
>> >> > the painting. He answered that it was most disgraceful that in so
>> >> > sacred
>> > a
>> >> > place there should have been depicted all those nude figures,
> exposing
>> >> > themselves so shamefully, and that it was no work for a papal chapel
>> >> > but
>> >> > rather for the public baths and taverns. Angered by this comment,
>> >> > Michelangelo determined he would have his revenge; and as soon as
>> >> > Biagio
>> > had
>> >> > left he drew his portrait frorn memory in the figure of Minos, shown
>> > with a
>> >> > great serpent curled around his legs, among a heap of devils in
>> >> > hell;
>> > nor
>> >> > for all his pleading with the Pope and Michelangelo could Biagio
>> >> > have
>> > the
>> >> > figure removed, and it was left, to record the incident, as it is
>> >> > today.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > *******************************
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >>I still believe with all my heart that you are my brother in the
>> >> >>Lord
>> >> >>though
>> >> >>I don't understand some of the things you feel the need to say.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Lots of people don't understand me. All you need to do is love me.
> I'd
>> >> > never do anything ti intentionally hurt you.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hehe, well, I guess some people would be offended by the entire
> allegory
>> >> of the Song of Solomon, eh? Or how about Proverbs? *Let her breasts
>> >> satisfy you all your days*
>> >>
>> >> *ROTFL*
>> >>
>> >> God bless,
>> >> Feather
>> >
>> > My hubby only wishes, Feather LOL.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> *snicker* Di - YOU are the one that gets me rolling on the floor
>> laughing...always have, always will.
>>
>> I Love God's Word--to read it, to ask Him to interpret/reveal it to me -
> the
>> deep treasures/nuggets hidden within.
>>
>> You guys ALL are pretty special too!
>>
>> :o)
>>
>> :o)
>>
> Gosh isn't this a very pleasant surprise !!! Oh how I miss you Faye. I
> read
> your response in the other group and you may write me at the same address.
> I
> would love hearing from you as often as you are led and have time. I love
> you so much and miss you and Jean and our friendship we shared. I really
> do.
> Please forgive me for all I have done to upset you or that you did not
> agree
> with. I wish I could take all of it back but I can't and only can ask you
> to
> forgive me and love me anyway. Please?
>
>
Dear sister and Friend,
Nothing EVER to forgive--please don't think there is anything to forgive. I
was working a job that had extremely long days--back at night. I am now in
a position to breath a bit again--so please forgive me for not keeping up
with you.
We are pressing on in Him; we are both going to be what He intends us to be,
because He is God. One thing I have learned is that we will all have
various opinions on things as we are His unique creations. You are special
to Him and so is each and every one of us, IMHO.
I'll catch you up on some things shortly. I want to hear how your move went
as well.
:o)
Diana
"HeLovesYou" <menothome@myhouse> wrote in message
You are so sweet. There is nothing to forgive you for either. I thought you
were just taking that time to love and hold your Grandchild LOL. I know I
use to do that and still would but he is growing up way too fast to hold
anymore.
I will look forward to catching up with each other. That will be awesome to
me.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
Can't you see the absurdity? Yes, the devil is God's creation according to
the bible, up close and personal until he was kicked out of heaven for
rebellion. The devil KNOWS God is all knowing and so therefore all God has
to do is tell the devil how Job would react IF all those things happened to
him. God KILLS a family to PROVE to the devil something? Come on now!
The bible is full of 100s of geological, mathematical, sequential,
biological (both human and animal) mistakes/errors as well as
inconsistencies between text along with absurdities.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
You're as brain washed as the next Fundamentalist, Feather. That doesn't
mean I don't like you. You're a nice person and easily likeable. If you or
any other person can read Job more than a couple of times and "walk away"
with no questions not even a small one, you've been completely indoctrinated
to accept absurdities by a preformed belief that the book is "God's word"
and described in truth all of "God's work," and as one does that they say
to themselves they have no right to question GOD but it's not GOD they're
questioning, it's the validity of inerrancy.
God doesn't KILL people on double dog dare from the devil. Why do I know
that? Because ONCE I accept that God is sacred being beyond stupidity,
beyond evil, beyond frivolous actions, beyond hatred, beyond .... well YOU
get the point, I have to basically turn my back on the stone aged product of
the Old Testament as mostly superstition and feeble attempts to explain
nature as well as God, natural disasters, evil, etc.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2332> wrote in message
> "Feather Forestwalker" wrote:
>
> > "WHO ARE YOU, MERE MAN TO QUESTION GOD?!" I'd say that in that moment,
Job
> > was mighily humbled indeed.
> ...
> > I'd say they're pretty good explanations.
>
>
> Er ... no. This is the classic complaint against the book of Job. It
gives
> no answer to the problem of evil. One only has to read the philosophy
books
> in this area over the past 3000 years to see that is no decent answer at
> all. Carl Jung's book on Job is the best but still falls short of an
> answer.
>
>
> > NOTE: Job shunned evil; he lived a BLAMELESS life. NONE of us can
compare
> > to THAT statement, EVER.
Does the biblical author really claim Job lead a blameless life? So God, on
a DARE from one of his CREATIONS (who turned evil) torments and tortures a
man who lead a blameless life? Why can't people see this ridiculous story
for what it is ---- a ancient Jewish fable.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
What's so ironic about your statement is that the bible IS the words of MEN,
not God.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2332> wrote in message
> "Jude Alexander" wrote:
>
>
> > That story is so awful AND awfully absurd.
>
> Job was written circa 1000 BC and conforms in style to other fictional
> stories in the Near Middle East at that time. It reads like a play.
>
> OIne really needs to study HOW the bible was put together. I learnt much
> from my history studies at uni on Ancient Israel.
>
> Read http://www.factbites.com/topics/History-of-ancient-Israel-and-Judah
Thanks for the link.
Diana
"Jude Alexander" <Jude @thesouth.usa> wrote in message
I won't apologize for what I believe and I do believe in God and his Holy
Word. I believe many things happen to us for a reason and when all is said
and done then God will reveal to us why and what he did.
Feather Forestwalker
>
>
> You're as brain washed as the next Fundamentalist, Feather. That doesn't
> mean I don't like you. You're a nice person and easily likeable.
hehe, well, what a left-handed compliment, Jude. . . *lol*
> If you or
> any other person can read Job more than a couple of times and "walk away"
> with no questions not even a small one, you've been completely indoctrinated
> to accept absurdities by a preformed belief that the book is "God's word"
> and described in truth all of "God's work," and as one does that they say
> to themselves they have no right to question GOD but it's not GOD they're
> questioning, it's the validity of inerrancy.
Hey, *everyone* has a right to question, of course. If we learn
*nothing* from the story, be it true, accurate or merely a parable such
as Jesus taught in, then we've got a problem with our relationship with God.
Because I don't question the validity of inerrancy, you call me
brainwashed. Sad, really.
See, trust in God overcomes *all* of man's intellect and reasoning
abilities, as far as I've experienced, for most of my life as a
Christian (23 years).
So what if, for example, Matthew wasn't so concerned about quoting a
major prophet "exactly right." What he did was quote according to the
traditional methods as he was taught in the synagogue; he quoted a
couple of major prophets and attributed it to one. A lot of the Jewish
scholars of his day did the same thing. He wasn't so concerned about
getting the facts straight as he was getting the message across that
Jesus Christ fulfilled, in his day, some of the prophecies surrounding
the Messiah.
>
> God doesn't KILL people on double dog dare from the devil.
That's true. God said in the chapter I cited, that He did not allow
Satan to touch Job's body to have it die.
> Why do I know
> that? Because ONCE I accept that God is sacred being beyond stupidity,
> beyond evil, beyond frivolous actions, beyond hatred, beyond .... well YOU
> get the point, I have to basically turn my back on the stone aged product of
> the Old Testament as mostly superstition and feeble attempts to explain
> nature as well as God, natural disasters, evil, etc.
What I see in most natural disasters is the fallen state of this world
we live in, whether we are Christian or not: the fact remains, it's a
fallen world we live in, things degenerate and die. While that's
"natural," it is by no means "perfect," nor was it God's original intent
in creating the world. Someday, we are told in Colossians, Jesus Christ
will reconcile *all* things to Himself - *everything* in creation,
whether in heaven or on the earth. I take that to mean that someday,
this earth will be perfected again, according to the way it was in Eden
- perhaps better than that, even. I place my hope in things that are not
seen because I trust God's promises, not because I am brainwashed.
When we studied the book of Job in our evening service, as a discussion
group, a lot of questions came up. We read each chapter and discussed
each point almost exhaustively; a service that started at 6:30 PM
sometimes wouldn't get out until nearly 10 PM - wish you could have been
there. You would have found it very interesting, indeed.
God bless you, Jude.
Feather
Feather Forestwalker
> ......
> .... All the people around me seemed to take the jargon for granted, and the
The answer can be found in his very own statement that "ego" retains its
"priviledged position" at the center of man's life.
That is humanistic psychology - it puts man in the place of God. What
does it mean to "die to self" but to slay the human ego within and let
GOD be the center of our lives?
>
> All truth is God's truth.
No, it isn't. Human-istic lines of thinking are contrary to God's desire
for us.
God bless,
Feather
>
>
Feather Forestwalker
> On Tue, 01 Nov 2005 20:43:14 GMT, Feather Forestwalker
> <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote:
>
>
>>sensi wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
>>>news:BCP9f.4431$Rl1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>>
>>>
>>>>Jude Alexander wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>The bible is NOT a recording of words that proceeded out the "mouth" of
>>>>>God.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Uh, yes it is. In several places, in fact.
>>>
>>>
>>>sensi:
>>>The bible is a book....a material item easily manipulated by man.
>>>Add a word here, take a word there.
>>
>>I believe that since God is Sovereign, that He has managed to
>>supernaturally preserve His words over time. :)
>
>
> I have a stupid question one brought up at the University one time.
> Which Version is the true word of God? They all can't be because they
> all aren't the same. If they were we would have one version.
>
> Matt
>
A lot of what is considered a translation, isn't.
There are, as far as I know, a couple of texts available and they have
some mild discrepancies between them, but the KJV is based on one of
them, while the NIV, for example, is based on an entirely different one.
Both sets of translators claim that these works are based on the oldest
of these two texts. Who is correct?
Meantime,
Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do
not see.
It's not easy, faith, but it *is* possible,
God bless,
Feather
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
> Jude Alexander wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > You're as brain washed as the next Fundamentalist, Feather. That
doesn't
> > mean I don't like you. You're a nice person and easily likeable.
>
> hehe, well, what a left-handed compliment, Jude. . . *lol*
lol.... okay, you're welcomed. I REALLY didn't mean it to be a left handed
compliment. Just reality. I see you as brainwashed, however, not
obnoxious. I can see, now that I've looked twice, that it could be
construed as a left handed compliment.
Not quite the same thing, but here in parts of the south there's a joke sort
of that you can give a person almost any criticism and if it is follow by,
what a dear heart, OR bless his soul, it flies, i.e. Oh, that dear heart,
what a ugly face, bless his soul....
> > If you or
> > any other person can read Job more than a couple of times and "walk
away"
> > with no questions not even a small one, you've been completely
indoctrinated
> > to accept absurdities by a preformed belief that the book is "God's
word"
> > and described in truth all of "God's work," and as one does that they
say
> > to themselves they have no right to question GOD but it's not GOD
they're
> > questioning, it's the validity of inerrancy.
>
> Hey, *everyone* has a right to question, of course. If we learn
> *nothing* from the story, be it true, accurate or merely a parable such
> as Jesus taught in, then we've got a problem with our relationship with
God.
>
> Because I don't question the validity of inerrancy, you call me
> brainwashed. Sad, really.
No, because it is OBVIOUS that there are massive contradictions within this
story that doesn't fit an all knowing God, a God who loves his creations and
don't deem them much more than pawn pieces in a dare from an created devil
who God has NOT to prove anything to. It makes God into a human being. IF,
one can't see that, then one is brainwashed by the prejudgement of the book
BEFORE ones reads it. There HAS to be a transfomation done to one's
perceptions PRIOR to reading the bible in order to continue seeing it
without errors and something to be described as the "word of God."
> See, trust in God overcomes *all* of man's intellect and reasoning
> abilities, as far as I've experienced, for most of my life as a
> Christian (23 years).
God and logic are not opposite terms.
> So what if, for example, Matthew wasn't so concerned about quoting a
> major prophet "exactly right." What he did was quote according to the
> traditional methods as he was taught in the synagogue; he quoted a
> couple of major prophets and attributed it to one. A lot of the Jewish
> scholars of his day did the same thing. He wasn't so concerned about
> getting the facts straight as he was getting the message across that
> Jesus Christ fulfilled, in his day, some of the prophecies surrounding
> the Messiah.
THAT is an error, therefore, that YOU can just say that and STILL maintain
it's is inerrant is proof right there of brainwashing. Sorry, Feather. I
truly don't mean you in particular any hurtful criticism. You're not at all
like Dave nor Eric nor a scattering of others on these ngs.
> > God doesn't KILL people on double dog dare from the devil.
>
> That's true. God said in the chapter I cited, that He did not allow
> Satan to touch Job's body to have it die.
But the story says that God killed this man's whole family and everybody and
took everything away and struck him down with disease JUST to "prove"
something to an evil entity.
> > Why do I know
> > that? Because ONCE I accept that God is sacred being beyond stupidity,
> > beyond evil, beyond frivolous actions, beyond hatred, beyond .... well
YOU
> > get the point, I have to basically turn my back on the stone aged
product of
> > the Old Testament as mostly superstition and feeble attempts to explain
> > nature as well as God, natural disasters, evil, etc.
>
> What I see in most natural disasters is the fallen state of this world
> we live in, whether we are Christian or not: the fact remains, it's a
> fallen world we live in, things degenerate and die. While that's
> "natural," it is by no means "perfect," nor was it God's original intent
> in creating the world. Someday, we are told in Colossians, Jesus Christ
> will reconcile *all* things to Himself - *everything* in creation,
> whether in heaven or on the earth. I take that to mean that someday,
> this earth will be perfected again, according to the way it was in Eden
> - perhaps better than that, even. I place my hope in things that are not
> seen because I trust God's promises, not because I am brainwashed.
>
> When we studied the book of Job in our evening service, as a discussion
> group, a lot of questions came up. We read each chapter and discussed
> each point almost exhaustively; a service that started at 6:30 PM
> sometimes wouldn't get out until nearly 10 PM - wish you could have been
> there. You would have found it very interesting, indeed.
>
> God bless you, Jude.
I think the same of you, Feather.
Feather Forestwalker
Actually, the story says that God allowed Satan to kill the man's entire
family (except his wife, of course, who came by and told Job to "curse
God and die.")
:)
That's good.
I cannot post much more today. . .am posting the reason in a separate post.
God bless and keep you well,
Feather
>
>
Pastor Dave
<fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> spake thusly:
>So what if, for example, Matthew wasn't so concerned about quoting a
>major prophet "exactly right." What he did was quote according to the
>traditional methods as he was taught in the synagogue; he quoted a
>couple of major prophets and attributed it to one. A lot of the Jewish
>scholars of his day did the same thing. He wasn't so concerned about
>getting the facts straight as he was getting the message across that
>Jesus Christ fulfilled, in his day, some of the prophecies surrounding
>the Messiah.
Read it carefully. Matthew does not say it was in the
writing of the prophet he named. He said it was SPOKEN
by the prophet he named. Thus, the proper conclusion is
that the prophet he named SPOKE the prophecy that was
written and was confirming it.
--
Pastor Dave
1st Century Church of Christ
The end timers believe in a literal, physical
New Jerusalem. But is that what Scripture teaches?
No, it doesn't! So what is the New Jerusalem? It
is amazing what the end timers miss, especially
since it is stated clearly that the New Jerusalem
is the bride of Christ, the church.
Revelation 21:1,9-10
1) And I saw a new heaven and a new earth. For the
first heaven and the first earth had passed away.
9) And one of the seven angels who had the seven
vials full of the seven last plagues came to me and
talked with me, saying, Come here, I will show you
the bride, the Lamb's wife.
10) And he carried me away in the Spirit to a great
and high mountain and showed me that great city, the
holy Jerusalem, descending out of Heaven from God
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Pastor Dave" <1news-gr...@nospam-tampa-bay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:ug4im19c4mdll8dbl...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 17:23:09 GMT, Feather Forestwalker
> <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> spake thusly:
>
>
> >So what if, for example, Matthew wasn't so concerned about quoting a
> >major prophet "exactly right." What he did was quote according to the
> >traditional methods as he was taught in the synagogue; he quoted a
> >couple of major prophets and attributed it to one. A lot of the Jewish
> >scholars of his day did the same thing. He wasn't so concerned about
> >getting the facts straight as he was getting the message across that
> >Jesus Christ fulfilled, in his day, some of the prophecies surrounding
> >the Messiah.
>
> Read it carefully. Matthew does not say it was in the
> writing of the prophet he named. He said it was SPOKEN
> by the prophet he named. Thus, the proper conclusion is
> that the prophet he named SPOKE the prophecy that was
> written and was confirming it.
So, this is the apologist's way of covering up Matthew's mistake? It's so
incredibly pathetic how the Fundies keep on making up stories to continue to
believe in inerrancy. So, if a prophet SPEAKS a prophecy, it doesn't mean
that it was written down as that prophet's written word? STUPID STUPID
STUPID.
>
Feather Forestwalker
Of course not: the prophet Matthew quoted as having spoken was more than
likely quoting the other prophet. Namely: Matthew quoted the *spoken*
words of Zechariah, who in turn had been quoting Jeremiah while speaking. ;)
God bless,
Feather
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
Do you REALLY believe that piece of stupid explanation? If you are
incapable of seeing the gross dishonesty of such, what can I say?
thedir...@yahoo.com
Feather Forestwalker wrote:
> Regarding what JESUS said about GOD's WORDS:
>
> Matthew 4:4
> Jesus answered, "It is written: 'Man does not live on bread alone, but
> on every word that comes from the mouth of God.' "
>
#1 Jesus? It's not really JESUS you're quoting here, is it. You're
quoting 'Matthew". "Matthew" telling the story of how Jesus went into
the desert ALONE, and had a chat with the magical supernatural debil.
"Matthew" Chapter 4 1
Then Jesus was led up by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted
by the Devil.
2 And after He had fasted 40 days and 40 nights, He was hungry.
3 Then THE TEMPTER approached Him and SAID, "If You are the Son of God,
tell these stones to become bread."
4 But HE ANSWERED, "It is written: Man must not live on bread alone,
but on every word that comes from the mouth of God."
5 Then THE DEVIL took Him to the holy city, had Him stand on the
pinnacle of the temple,
6 and SAID to Him, "If You are the Son of God, throw Yourself down. For
it is written: He will give His angels orders concerning you, and,
they will support you with their hands, so that you will not strike
your foot against a stone. "
7 JESUS TOLD HIM, "It is also written: You must not tempt the Lord your
God."
. . . etc. etc.
Let me get this right. Jesus goes to the desert ... alone. And
"Matthew" reports Jesus' chat with the debil . . . word for word. Is
that your theory?
I'm just wondering, how do you imagine "Matthew" was able to quote the
debil and Jesus here? Was "Matthew" there - with Jesus ALONE in the
desert - do you imagine? Were they alone together?
On what grounds do you distinguish this story from other impossible
ancient legends?
-----------------------
#2 Do you know the first ancient Christian to mention the Gospel of
"Matthew"? Or the year, roughly, when "Matthew" was first mentioned?
-------------------------
#3 Are you aware there is no evidence the G of "Matthew" was known to
the early Fathers? His gospel is not mentioned, not cited, not quoted,
by Ignatius, Polycarp, 1 Clement, Marcion, or Justin?
On what EVIDENCE do you believe the gospel of "Matthew" existed before
the middle of the second century?
Dirk Hartog
---------------------
I don't care what you believe.
I care what the evidence is.
I care about the reasoning you use to justify your beliefs.
It is not morally acceptable to say ... our story is truth but yours is
myth; ours is history but yours is a lie. It is even less morally
acceptable to ... manufactur[e] defensive or protective strategies that
apply only to one's own story. [John Crossan, The Birth of
Christianity, 1998, pg 28 - 29]
Mark T
> If you or
> any other person can read Job more than a couple of times and "walk away"
> with no questions not even a small one, you've been completely
> indoctrinated
> to accept absurdities by a preformed belief that the book is "God's word"
> and described in truth all of "God's work," and as one does that they say
> to themselves they have no right to question GOD but it's not GOD they're
> questioning, it's the validity of inerrancy.
It is that most people don't don't critically look at the bible text. They
are taught not to question.
Critical reflection is a part of praxis for all professionals ... but not
for
fundamentalists.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Critical reflection has been elevated to the major objective of adult
education in the work of Mezirow (1990).
"Perhaps even more central to adult learning than elaborating established
meaning schemes is the process of reflecting back on prior learning to
determine whether what we have learned is justified under present
circumstances. This is a crucial learning process egregiously ignored by
learning theorists." (Mezirow, 1990:5)
He maintains that such reflection on assumptions and presuppositions
(particularly about oneself) leads to "transformative learning"
"Perspective transformation is the process of becoming critically
aware of how and why our presuppositions have come to constrain the way we
perceive, understand, and feel about our world; of reformulating these
assumptions to permit a more inclusive, discriminating, permeable and
integrative perspective; and of making decisions or otherwise acting on
these new understandings. More inclusive, discriminating permeable and
integrative perspectives are superior perspectives that adults choose if
they can because they are motivated to better understand the meaning of
their experience." (Mezirow, 1990:14 - my emphasis)
In other words, the real significance of adult learning appears when
learners begin to re-evaluate their lives and to re-make them. This, for
Mezirow, takes precedence over whatever it was they set out to "learn" in
the first place.
From http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/critical1.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2332> wrote in message
> "Jude Alexander" wrote:
>
>
> > If you or
> > any other person can read Job more than a couple of times and "walk
away"
> > with no questions not even a small one, you've been completely
> > indoctrinated
> > to accept absurdities by a preformed belief that the book is "God's
word"
> > and described in truth all of "God's work," and as one does that they
say
> > to themselves they have no right to question GOD but it's not GOD
they're
> > questioning, it's the validity of inerrancy.
>
> It is that most people don't don't critically look at the bible text.
They
> are taught not to question.
>
> Critical reflection is a part of praxis for all professionals ... but not
> for fundamentalists.
Can you believe this newest dishonest that Matthew NOW didn't make a mistake
because they're saying that Jeremiah SAID it and then later (more than 60
years later, btw.... wink wink) Zechariah WROTE it down. They have NOTHING
to prove that. They can just say ANYTHING to continue looking at the bible
as inerrant!
Feather Forestwalker
On the grounds of faith and faith alone.
And, I won't even argue with you.
God bless,
Feather
Feather Forestwalker
Obviously you didn't see the humor in my statement. . .so much for using
emoticons. They're *obviously* lost on *you*. ;) ;)
Those were winks, by the way,
God bless,
Feather
PS. Actually, Pastor Dave has it right. . .
Mark T
> Hey, *everyone* has a right to question, of course.
... except fundamentalists.
> See, trust in God overcomes *all* of man's intellect and reasoning
> abilities, as far as I've experienced, for most of my life as a Christian
> (23 years).
While God is greater than even the combined intellect and reasoning of the
human race ... one's intellect and reasoning are not to be abandoned as they
are a God-given gift to be used.
What does a Christian teacher, philospher and artist do over the 33 years of
his Christian life? (Moi!)
The three professions - Education, Philosophy and Art - are all engaged in
the life of the mind. They also look at the big questions in life ... and
the most difficult of questions.
For me, the most effective argument against the existence of God is the
problem of evil for which there is no answer. So I trust God but I still
explore the problem. I read people exploring the problem outside my belief
system ... like Phillip Yancey (Evangelical) who clearly sees the problem
and wants to help others in this area. I don't find his argumenmts
convincing but at least I am aware of them. Most fundamentalists are
unaware of anything outside their own narrow interpretation of faith. Been
there! Done that!
All truth is God's truth. One needs to value truth over one's own
prejudices and any type of dogma.
Mark T
> No, because it is OBVIOUS that there are massive contradictions within
> this
> story that doesn't fit an all knowing God, a God who loves his creations
> and
> don't deem them much more than pawn pieces in a dare from an created devil
> who God has NOT to prove anything to. It makes God into a human being.
> IF,
> one can't see that, then one is brainwashed by the prejudgement of the
> book
> BEFORE ones reads it. There HAS to be a transfomation done to one's
> perceptions PRIOR to reading the bible in order to continue seeing it
> without errors and something to be described as the "word of God."
That's the problem!
The fundamentalist reads the text with a pre-conceived notion of what to
expect.
We all bring our own worldview to a text. The challenge is to read the text
through the eys of the writer taking into account all that impinges upon the
writer - worldview, society, politics, literary form, etc etc etc
Read the bible through 1st century JEWISH eyes ... not 21st century
fundamentalist Christian eyes.
To do that you need to klnow something about Jews of the 1st century!
> God and logic are not opposite terms.
Logos = mind / reason / word /
Do a word study from a 1st century JEWISH / GREEK point of view ... not a
21st century Christian point of view.
Mark T
>> Of course not: the prophet Matthew quoted as having spoken was more than
>> likely quoting the other prophet. Namely: Matthew quoted the *spoken*
>> words of Zechariah, who in turn had been quoting Jeremiah while speaking.
> ;)
>
> Do you REALLY believe that piece of stupid explanation? If you are
> incapable of seeing the gross dishonesty of such, what can I say?
Here is what I have been talking about today!
Matthew takes a literary form to fit his story of Jesus into the life of
Moses & Exodus. His book has five divisions like the Pentateuch (not
evident in our chapter / verse bibles). Matthew is a conservative who
emphasisies the division between the Jews and Christians because he is a
part of the Dispora writing circa 80 -100CE at Antioch. 90% of Jesus'
references to hell are found in this book!
With that information one can read Matthew in a different light. Matthew
selectively uses bits of information to suit his format ... sometimes
putting things into people's mouths as if they were original when they were
not. He uses the Greek translation of the OT and so messes up the concept
of Mary as a virgin. This also indicates that he is NOT an eyewitness as a
Jew would use the original Hebrew and not make such a mistake.
Does the above mean that one cannot trust anything Matthew says? No. It
does mean that one has to use one's God given mind and discern truth from
Matthew's imposed form, realising that Matthew is human and fallible and the
text is not inerrant.
All truth is God's truth. God matters more than the bible.
Mark T
>> None of us can do without GOD, but when we uphold the words of men above
>> the words of God as quoted in the Scripture, we run a serious risk of
>> being spiritually deceived into becoming spiritual adulterers:
>
> What's so ironic about your statement is that the bible IS the words of
> MEN,
> not God.
Read the bible through JEWISH eyes.
No Jew thinks that the bible is literally God's word.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Feather Forestwalker" <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> wrote in message
Well, which is it a wink with humor or Dave has it right? You can see why
you confuse me.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2332> wrote in message
I thought that fundamentalist Jews did. Is that incorrect?
Mark T
>> What does "humanistic psychologist" mean in the real world?
>
> The answer can be found in his very own statement that "ego" retains its
> "priviledged position" at the center of man's life.
>
> That is humanistic psychology - it puts man in the place of God. What does
> it mean to "die to self" but to slay the human ego within and let GOD be
> the center of our lives?
You misread the text. One must understand the terms as they are used by the
author and not as commonly used.
"Ego" as used by Jung is part of his archetypal figures.
Ego is your sense of purpose and identity. A healthy ego balances the the
conscious and unconscious elements of the psyche (spirit).
Ego is related to the Shadow which is our dark side - the inferior
uncivilised animal qualities which the ego wishes to hide from others.
(Paul's "flesh").
Ego is not "Self" (the final goal of the individuation process - the
wholeness of the personality). Ego which identifies with the self becomes
inflated and dangerouysly god-like. An inflated Ego projects the Shadow
onto othres and sees them as evil (Like the Nazis projected the Collective
Shadow onto to the Jews).
The Ego is related to the Persona which is a mask we show to the outside
world. The unconscious Persona is the Soul Image (for males the female
Anima, for females the male Animus).
From Jungs point of view Jesus Christ is the Original Man - in the
archetypal symbolism of Communion (Mass for Jung) Christ represents the
Self, and Communion represents the individuation process. The mystery of the
Eucharist (Communion) transforms the soul of the empirical human, who is
only part him / herself, into his / her totality, symbolically expressed by
Jesus Christ. The indivuadation process to wholeness is what fundamentalists
would call "placing God at the centre of one's life".
Now ... yes, this is all very complicated and condensed to the minimum ...
but you can see that your conclusion is NOT what Jung had in mind.
Most fundamentalists have never read Jung ... including the ones that write
books about him and lecture about him!!! When I originally joined up with
Christian schooling in 1988 I sat through a series of lectures on "Secular
Humanism". The lecturer had never studied philosophy (I have!). His notes
were taken from a single book by a fundamentalist writer who likewise had
never studied philosophy in a real university (a fundamentalist Bible
College doesn't count!). When I had the opportunity to rewrite their manual
for setting up their schools I attempted to address these problems ... but
they still remain in Christian schooling ... and fundamentalism as a whole.
>> All truth is God's truth.
>
> No, it isn't. Human-istic lines of thinking are contrary to God's desire
> for us.
So some truth is created by Satan and God doesn't know about it?
Mark T
> If you or
> any other person can read Job more than a couple of times and "walk away"
> with no questions not even a small one, you've been completely
> indoctrinated
> to accept absurdities by a preformed belief that the book is "God's word"
> and described in truth all of "God's work," and as one does that they say
> to themselves they have no right to question GOD but it's not GOD they're
> questioning, it's the validity of inerrancy.
It is that most people don't don't critically look at the bible text. They
are taught not to question.
Critical reflection is a part of praxis for all professionals but not for
*Peace of Christ*
<Jude @thesouth.usa> wrote:
-"Mark T" <www...@tdoyoumean.2332> wrote in message
-news:43695684$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
-> "Jude Alexander" wrote:
->
->
-> >> None of us can do without GOD, but when we uphold the words of men
-above
-> >> the words of God as quoted in the Scripture, we run a serious risk of
-> >> being spiritually deceived into becoming spiritual adulterers:
-> >
-> > What's so ironic about your statement is that the bible IS the words of
-> > MEN,
-> > not God.
->
->
-> Read the bible through JEWISH eyes.
->
-> No Jew thinks that the bible is literally God's word.
-
-I thought that fundamentalist Jews did. Is that incorrect?
The Torah, or the first five books of what "we" call the Bible is "God's
Word" for what you would call "fundamentalist Jews", but even so they
are open for interpetation, dicussion and commentary.
*Peace of Christ*
http://grace.break.at
To send e-mail, remove "youhat" from address
Pastor Dave
<fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> spake thusly:
Jude is a foolish man. No matter how many times you refute
his foolish little games, he will call it "a cover up". I
don't waste my time with people who are so foolish and who
make it their life mission to ridicule God's word and that
is the only reason Jude is here. Follow the threads he's in
and show me anywhere, where he is in communion with those
who believe in Christ and have a true faith and who believe
in God's word as just that... God's word.
What we see, is Jude constantly arguing that people who do
have faith in what God has said, should not and rather,
should heed and bow to whatever current society says. Unless
of course, society begins to honor God. (:
Jude would never be welcome in my home, because Jude is not
simply a sinner among the unsaved. Jude claims salvation
and is therefore a heretic and Jesus Himself, never welcomed
heretics, which is what the Pharisees for example were. They
claimed to know God and followed Satan and Jesus blasted
them and said to be done with them, when they rejected the
message of truth and all through the epistles of the New
Testament, we see the Apostles teaching the same thing. I
advise everyone to reject him in the name of Christ and to
stop catering to those who pervert the word of God, as if
there is some reason we should be friendly with those who do
that and retain relationships of any kind with them and as
if Jesus is sitting in Heaven, saying to the Father how glad
He is that Christians make friends of heretics, who
consistently reject Him! After all, that is what we're
doing, when we keep these people in our lives and we are
also telling Jesus, that we know better than Him what we are
supposed to do. As for me, I will follow what the word of
God says, whether Jude likes it or not and even if every
other person in the world, who calls themselves a Christian,
rejects me for it. Better to be "alone" with God, than
surrounded by the worldly, who claim salvation.
Pastor Dave
<fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> spake thusly:
>> Can you believe this newest dishonest that Matthew NOW didn't make a mistake
>> because they're saying that Jeremiah SAID it and then later (more than 60
>> years later, btw.... wink wink) Zechariah WROTE it down. They have NOTHING
>> to prove that. They can just say ANYTHING to continue looking at the bible
>> as inerrant!
>
>Obviously you didn't see the humor in my statement. . .so much for using
>emoticons. They're *obviously* lost on *you*. ;) ;)
Jude is perverted, period and there is no reason to even
think that you owe someone who is perverted an apology,
because you stood with God. To Hell with Jude. Unless
God intervenes, that's where he's going.
One thing for sure... Jude rejects anyone who stands for
God and all we do, when we answer him, is feed the fire of
his perverted ways and anyone blessed by us, is blessed in
spite of and not because of us and frankly, no offense, but
seeing you trying to make good with Jude here, does not
bless me and I doubt it blesses anyone else. It only shows
that you're concerned about what a heretic who just finished
calling both of us dishonest, thinks. (:
W-A-K-E U-P !!!!!
Feather Forestwalker
The Torah contains more than the first five books, which are called The
Penteteuch. . .I just don't remember how many more books the Torah contains.
Anyone else?
Feather
thedir...@yahoo.com
Feather Forestwalker wrote:
> On the grounds of faith and faith alone.
>
> And, I won't even argue with you.
Your post is reflection of how far along the Church is in it's decline
-- so far that Christians have just given up even trying to answer
reasonable questions. The obvious answers give results you don't like.
So when someone brings up facts and reasons Christians don't like, you
give up and run back to "That's my story and I'm sticking with it." You
are confusing "faith" with flat-Earth superstition, with stubborn
belief contradicted by the basic facts. Stubbornness and magic are
Christianity's only "reasons".
The greater culture laughs at your flat-earth superstition. That debate
is over. Christianity lost -- thus it's decline in the culture. Your
stubborn retreat to mindless superstition betrays the values of your
faith.
Diana
<thedir...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1131002929.8...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Answering a question is one thing but when others want to draw a Christian
into an argument or "Change" the Christians mind about how he/she believes
that is another. The non Christian says to themselves that a Christian just
won't listen or that they are a fool however I am here to say it is the Non
Christian who derives dissention, who is those things and need to beware the
coming of the Lord Jesus.
Feather has done wonderful standing alone trying to answer everyone's
questions. I agree with her that she should not argue. You can't teach a
fool anything when they have their ears closed to the truth.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
Guess, what, Dave? I don't care that you wouldn't invite me into your
house. Why would I want to go there? DUH
YOU are lying and making up a story that Jeremiah spoke something and then
Zechariah wrote it down. PROVE IT. You can't because it's just a made up
story in order to NOT accept that the bible is ERRANT!
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
> On Wed, 02 Nov 2005 23:49:34 GMT, Feather Forestwalker
> <fea...@DONTWANTNOSPAM.net> spake thusly:
>
>
> >> Can you believe this newest dishonest that Matthew NOW didn't make a
mistake
> >> because they're saying that Jeremiah SAID it and then later (more than
60
> >> years later, btw.... wink wink) Zechariah WROTE it down. They have
NOTHING
> >> to prove that. They can just say ANYTHING to continue looking at the
bible
> >> as inerrant!
> >
> >Obviously you didn't see the humor in my statement. . .so much for using
> >emoticons. They're *obviously* lost on *you*. ;) ;)
These are ALL lies of Dave to make me look as awful as possible in order
that ALL people, dispite ALL the evidence to the contrary, will continue to
believe that the bible is inerrant.
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"*Peace of Christ*" <His_child2...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:His_child2005yourh...@h-68-164-9-144.chcgilgm.dynamic.c
ovad.net...
I have to say, NOT from what I've been told, seen or read. Where do you get
that?
thedir...@yahoo.com
Diana wrote:
> > ---------------------
> > I don't care what you believe.
> > I care what the evidence is.
> > I care about the reasoning you use to justify your beliefs.
> >
> > It is not morally acceptable to say ... our story is truth but yours is
> > myth; ours is history but yours is a lie. It is even less morally
> > acceptable to ... manufactur[e] defensive or protective strategies that
> > apply only to one's own story. [John Crossan, The Birth of
> > Christianity, 1998, pg 28 - 29]
> >
>
> Answering a question is one thing but when others want to draw a Christian
> into an argument or "Change" the Christians mind about how he/she believes
> that is another. The non Christian says to themselves that a Christian just
> won't listen or that they are a fool however I am here to say it is the Non
> Christian who derives dissention, who is those things and need to beware the
> coming of the Lord Jesus.
>
> Feather has done wonderful standing alone trying to answer everyone's
> questions. I agree with her that she should not argue.
You fail to understand the point. I'm sure Feather is a wonderful
person, doing her best. Good for her. As I said, I don't care what
Feather does or doesn't believe. I'm care about facts and reasons.
To the extent you are able to understand the _reasons_ behind the
analysis, I accept that you also have no facts or reasons to support
Feathers claim. Fine. Superstition then.
> You can't teach a
> fool anything when they have their ears closed to the truth.
You can't give reasons, so instead you attack: "these are Jesus'
words because . . . because Dirk is an argument picking fool whose ears
are deliberately closed to the truth." Your nasty hatred betrays you:
you do see that having no _reasons_, just superstitions, makes you look
foolish.
May I say as well that your Christians' quickness to answer simple
questions with vicious, hateful personal attacks -- right out in the
open, right where your angry nastiness is exposed to your Christian
brothers -- points to the deep bigotry of your faith. Your religion
teaches you it's _OK_ to hate. You wouldn't steal in public. You
wouldn't cheat or lie or masturbate in public. But hurtful hateful
personal attacks you do openly. You're not ashamed at all. None of
your brothers will scold you. You all take this hatred for granted.
Amazing. And sick.
Take it to Jesus in prayer Diana. He'll maybe have something else
shitty hateful you can say. We'll accept that as your witness.
Diana
<thedir...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1131055577.6...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Whatever... Argumentative people and condemning people only see it their way
or no way so I just say...Whatever.
Richard Dawkins
"Jude Alexander" <Jude @thesouth.usa> wrote in message
news:Yipaf.33299$_31....@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
The foolish apostate makes up alot of stories.
Take it with a grain of salt.
I have :0)
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
"Richard Dawkins" <Daw...@Hell.com> wrote in message
news:bexaf.40$6g4...@news.uswest.net...
Perhaps a pound of salt will do. :O lol
*Peace of Christ*
traditionalist/"fundamentalist" Jews approacj "Scripture" amd the "Law":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash
also see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishnah
@thesouth.usa Jude Alexander
ovad.net...
> Jere is a link that may help in seeing how some
> traditionalist/"fundamentalist" Jews approacj "Scripture" amd the "Law":
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midrash
>
> also see:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mishnah
Yes, I'm already aware of these works but not intimately. I didn't know
THAT is what you were referring to. Thanks for the links, though.