Google Ads

Google Ads

Bible Wheel Book

Google Ads

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 50

Thread: Ivan Panin

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    40

    Ivan Panin

    Richard … you may (?) be interested in the following that I found on the net.

    Numeric Materials

    (Note from David: We at UBM do not sell any materials but because these important materials are not easily found we are making Mr. Irwin's service known to you. I highly recommend the Numeric English New Testament by Ivan Panin. It is the most accurate in the world, proven by God's own numeric pattern. I also highly recommend Mathematics Prove Holy Scripture, also called Astounding New Discoveries, by Karl Sabiers. It is the simplest, clearest explanation of the numeric pattern as a way to prove authenticity of the original Greek and Hebrew texts. Not so much as a letter may be added or removed without being exposed by this pattern. The American Revised Version mentioned in this little book has been popularly known as the American Standard Version.)

    Bible Numerics Materials By Ivan Panin, Price List and Order Form.

    * Numeric English New Testament @$25.00......................

    * Writings of Ivan Panin @$30.00…………………….

    * Shorter Works @$5.00........................

    * Bible Numerics @$3.00........................

    * The Last Twelve Verses Of Mark @$4.00........................

    * A Holy Challenge For Today @$5.00........................

    * Verbal Inspiration Of The Bible
    Scientifically Demonstrated @$4.00........................

    * Inspiration Of The Scriptures
    Scientifically Demonstrated @$1.00........................

    * Inspiration Of The Hebrew Scriptures
    Scientifically Demonstrated @$4.00........................

    * The Gospel And The Kingdom @$1.50........................

    * Once In Grace, Always In Grace? @$5.00........................

    About Bible Numerics (Not by Mr. Panin)

    * Mathematics Prove Holy Scripture by Karl Sabiers @$5.00........................

    * Absolute Mathematical Proofs @$1.00........................

    Please SEND payable to "J.W. Irwin"
    Prices are in United States Dollars. Please add 25% for postage and handling.

    J. W. Irwin
    81 Bayview Ridge
    Toronto, Ontario
    M2L 1E3
    Fax: 416-445-4060
    Jirwinc617@rogers.com


    PS I have an extra copy of "Bible Chronology" by Panin 192 pgs.
    If you wish to pm your address, I will send it along.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Quote Originally Posted by ccc View Post
    Richard … you may (?) be interested in the following that I found on the net.

    Numeric Materials

    (Note from David: We at UBM do not sell any materials but because these important materials are not easily found we are making Mr. Irwin's service known to you. I highly recommend the Numeric English New Testament by Ivan Panin. It is the most accurate in the world, proven by God's own numeric pattern. I also highly recommend Mathematics Prove Holy Scripture, also called Astounding New Discoveries, by Karl Sabiers. It is the simplest, clearest explanation of the numeric pattern as a way to prove authenticity of the original Greek and Hebrew texts. Not so much as a letter may be added or removed without being exposed by this pattern. The American Revised Version mentioned in this little book has been popularly known as the American Standard Version.)

    PS I have an extra copy of "Bible Chronology" by Panin 192 pgs.
    If you wish to pm your address, I will send it along.
    Hi ccc,

    Thanks for the offer of Panin's book. I would be happy to review it. You can send it to

    Bible Wheel Ministries
    PO Box 10677
    Yakima, Wa 98909

    As for Panin's work - I am not confident that he was a "prinicipled student of the Bible" or that his results can be trusted. For example, this site documents how he changed the text of the last twelve verses of Mark to make them fit his pattern. I have verified some of the claims on that site, but since I don't own a copy of Panin's pamphlet called "The Last Twelve Verses of Mark" I can not verify everything they claimed. But if they are correct, it would be one of the worst crimes that can be committed against God's Holy Word. I would be very interested if you could check out the claims on that site, and let us know how much of them are true.

    Thanks!

    Richard
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  3. #3
    Thanks!That's Great!


    __________
    Cafeteria and Buffet Chains

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Our friend Alec Cotton sent me this email:

    Quote Originally Posted by Alec Cotton
    Hello Richard.

    I have no words to express my admiration and gratitude for your colossal work.

    The only reason I'm not putting this on the forum is that I am determined not to discourage or stumble any one. I'll try to be brief. I only got a computer about two years ago and I might make a hash of attaching . This is from “the shorter works of Ivan Pannin”. He takes the view that the translators of the bible sought to put the books in chronological order. Instead of the original order. I am sure that both are right. The Spirit moves where he will. Not where we expect him to be. In his analysis of the genealogy of Jesus he said that there were 72 words I could only count 71. Using Wescott and hort. My knowledge of Greek is abysmal . Pannin says that in mat.1.18-25 “of the 77 words the angel uses”. I could only count 74. In my mind these errors caused a long shadow of doubt to creep over the rest of his writings. I have tried all night to copy and paste to make this make sense but failed . I will now try to attach it to an email. The next thing I did was to take your Bible wheel and impose pannin's scheme onto it to see if I could find any correlation. I found nothing. By the way,I used a Bible printed entirely in Hebrew to check the way in which the books were arranged. I do get bored with writing. There is so much I would like to say . If you want to print any or all of this on the forum or none it is up to you. Do be careful ,I copied some of this from the printed page. Kind regards and best wishes

    Alec

    P.S What a struggle that was.
    Alec sent these images from Panin's work with the word counts that don't seem correct:




    There are many problems with Panin's calculations on this page. According to this website, they don't match any of the known Greek documents. I haven't had time to check it out, but Alec's comments seem to be correct.

    The other issue Alec brought up was the order of books that Panin suggested on this page:



    Alec put together this rough image of what this would look like when displayed on the Wheel:



    The first thing to note is that the little book of Zephaniah replaces the all-encompassing Book of Isaiah on Spoke 1. This alone proves that the order Panin suggested is greatly inferior to the traditional order of the Bible. Another extremely obvious degradation is the displacement of the Song of Solomon from Spoke 22 where it aligns with Revelation to establish the great theme of Consummation of Chirst and His Bride the Church. I think there is great value in this kind of comparison because it exemplifies how any variation from the traditional order degrade the patterns revealed in the Bible Wheel. This is the essence of the Bible Wheel Challenge which as yet no one has ever successfully met.

    Richard
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    Hi Ram

    It was my interest in Panin that led me to this site. First up let me say the work on the bible wheel looks fascinating, I cant say I fully understand what it is all about yet, but I applaud anything and anyone who aims to demonstrate the infallibity of Gods word. Thankfully as supernaturally regenerated human beings some of us are blessed enough to have all the proof we need. Others may need work like this to assist them to come to the Lord.
    Hi Panman,

    Welcome to our forum,



    In general, I have taught that the Bible Wheel proves that the Bible was designed by God, but I have never taught that it proves the Bible is "infallible" or "inerrant." This is because I do not believe in those doctrines, and I never have. They are man-made doctrines that have no support in the Bible. On the contrary, if we assume that the Bible is God's Book, then we must accept it the way God designed it, warts and all. If we deny the contradictions that God plainly placed in the Bible, then we are denying the Word of God as God revealed it, and that seems wrong, very wrong.

    Simply stated, I think that folks who deny the contradictions in God's Book have a very low view of Scripture, and of God. They write as if God were so stupid that he couldn't give us a coherent book, so the "apologists" write big books correcting God's Book to support their false claim that God's Book is "infallible and inerrant." To my mind, it makes God look like a very poor author. The proper approach is to hold the Bible in the highest possible esteem and to wrestle with the question of why God made it "seem" to have so many contradictions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    Somone kindly posted the site were all of Panins work can be purchased. I had the pleasure of dealing with John at that site and purchased most of the Panins available works about two years ago. John and His father dedicated their lives to making Panins work available, from what I can gather, both men are committed godly men. John trusted me enough to send me all Panins work prior to receving payment and I live in New Zealand, and he in Canada.
    I have no reason to doubt that they are "committed godly men" - but that doesn't mean they have not been deceived by false claims, or that they did not fail to confirm the validity of the claims that they are propagating. The world is filled with falsehoods propagated by "committed godly men." Just look at all the books claiming to refute established Science (Young Earth Creationism, anti-evolution, etc.).

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    On the one hand it is easy to fall for the disinformation on the odd website (quite a few have been posted) designed to refute Panins works with a few throw away lines. Im sure there have been a few posted about the bible wheel here and there, and Im sure that irratates you somewhat, as the panin sites do me.

    Im a bit dissapointed to see that you have surmised, from said disinformation Panin sites, that he is, potentially, not a principled student of the bible.
    Yes, there has been plenty of erroneous attempts to refute the Bible Wheel, but the refutations of Panin's work seem justified from what I've seen. I have never been impressed by his writings. His logic seems very weak and simple-minded. He appears to have been obsessed with multiples of seven, whereas the Biblical patterns involve all numbers. But my mind is open. I know that some of his results had some validity, since I know that some passages in Scripture show amazing numerical designs. But I think he missed the real patterns for the most part because of his obsession with the number 7. And I think there is evidence he "monkeyed with the text" which has always ranked as "one of the worst crimes" against God's Word in my book. But I will review the evidence before asserting that as a fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    Panin spent at least 50 years of his life studying the bible and applying his numeric theories to every scripture, he wrote a numeric version of the New Testament in Greek and a translation of it into English, I own the English one.

    To be honest I was a died in the wool Panin convert before I eventually realised that his NEw Testament English version includes many of the strange anomolies pointed out By Terry Watkins on Bible Corruption at http://www.av1611.org/ Prior to that, from the books I purchased, his research revealing a phenomena in the bible certainly appears to be quite legitimate and if it is, I think it deserves a little more research than acknowledging a hurridly thrown together disinformation web page on the subject.

    Panin apparently has well over 40,000 pages of notes on the topic, and he answers the over 3000 queries in Westcot and Horts new testamnet liner notes. If that isn't a principled and commited student of the bible, then Im not sure what is. Granted; you can be a serioulsy unprincipled committed student of the bible, but Im quite sure Panin does not fit into that category.
    Are you a "KJV only" believer? If so, then how would you reconcile Panin's "proofs" with that?

    In my studies of the Bible Wheel, I have found that the KJV text displayed more significant and confirmatory patterns than the modern versions. That's one reason I put the KJV cover page in the intro to my book. But I was never a KJV only person.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    The last great battle ground in these last days is by far the doctrine of the inerrency of Scripture and I believe, inspite of little or no support from the church, Panin dedicated his whole life, in isolation, to proving that Gods word could be trusted, and further more, that the resurection in bodily form of the Lord Jesus Christ, as in the last 12 verses of Mark, was a real supernatural event in History, able to take away the sins of the world. An unprincipled bible scholar would be doing his darndest to prove this didnt happen, not the other way around.
    Hummm ... what makes you think we are in the "last days"? Folks have been saying that for nearly 2000 years. Lot's of folks predicted Christ would come in the 70s and 80s and 90s and then a few said that God would absolutely definitely come before the year 2000 and then many Christians went nuts with Y2K (some are still eating beans they bought to survive the coming destruction) ...

    As for the last 12 verses of Mark - the doctrine of the resurrection does not stand or fall on those verses since it is found in the other gospels and the apostolic letters.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    PS, may I kindly suggest you buy "The last 12 verse of Mark" from the site on this thread before posting such frightful disparaging remarks about Ivan Pamin IE " One of worst crimes comitted against Gods word" - my goodness, thats some accusation. A potentially libleous accusation no less.
    I have a copy and will check the facts.

    All the very best,

    Richard
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Here's the first data we need to consider - it's the word counts of Mark 16:9-18 in the various versions of the Greek text listed on this site:



    This was one of the facts that I said I needed to confirm before coming to any solid judgment about Panin's work on the last 12 verses of Mark. I have not counted the words in all the various versions.

    Now on page 5 of Panin's pamphlet, he presents what he claims to be the Wescott-Hort Greek text. It is different than the Wescott-Hort text that I have in my Bible Works 7 software. It would be helpful if you (Panman) could find a source that confirms the text Panin claimed to be that used by Westcott and Hort. If no such text exists, then it appears that we must conclude that Panin falsified the Greek text he used in his analysis of the last 12 verses of Mark.

    Update: I counted the Wescott & Hort text in Panin's pamphlet and found only 174 words, rather than his claim of 175 = 7 X 25. He left out the particle "de" in verse 12 which is found in all versions I checked. But worse, he twice divided the single word contraction kakeinoi (and they) into the meaningless two word phrase "ka keinoi" which does not appear in any Greek text in my Bible Works 7 software. Likewise, he divided the single word contraction kan (and if) into the meaningless two word phrase "k an" in vs. 18. I assume therefore that the missing "de" in verse 12 was an accident, since it is needed to get to the magic number 175 = 7 x 25 which is achieved only when Panin manipulates the text by dividing the contractions. I'm pretty sure that he would not have divided those contractions if the text gave him a multiple of seven as is. This really makes me doubt the validity of his work. And there is another fundamental problem. There is no reason we should think that the text by Westcott & Hort is absolutely correct. It was an attempt to reconstruct the originals which we do not have. It has many variations. Indeed, Panin left off the last part of the long that was included in Westcott and Hort's text.

    PS: When the contractions are omitted and the de included (as it should be) the word count is 172 which confirms the data from the website posted above.
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    Hi Richard thanks for the welcome, no offense mate, but you probably will want to see the back of me after this.

    As the bible was delivered by God in the Greek and Hebrew languages, to be a KJV only person would be imbecilic. I do hold to the view that the KJV it is most likely the best English translation and it is therefore my personally preferred version for reading and study.
    Hey there my friend,

    No worries. No worries at all. I like straight talk. And I am happy to admit when I am wrong. It's actually a very good thing that you give me an opportunity to correct errors in what I have said. Nobody is perfect and indeed, acknowledging our weakness takes a big load off our backs since we don't have to try to pretend to be something we are not!

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    I told you in the previous post that I cant reconcile Panin’s Proof with that, especially after reading Terry Watkins expose in the "new improved" versions of the bible. Im no longer a died in the wool Paninite. I’m simply making a comment that you appear to have bought into some meaningless disinformation about his work which neither categorically refutes nor proves his work and yet you make very harsh judgments about the man and his motives. Clearly you haven’t studied his work at all, because 7 is only one of the many numbers he reveals to have patterns in the bible, 13, 11 and 19 are others. You should see his work on the patterns of 11 in the 66 books of the bible - it’s quite phenomenal. I will post it if you are interested.
    You may well be correct that some of my judgments were too harsh, or perhaps premature. But on the other hand, I have no patience for anyone who monkeys with the text to create patterns that are not really there. This is extremely common amongst practitioners of gematria and oddly, folks who proclaim that they are proving the original text of the Bible was designed by God letter for letter! So I may have conflated some of Panin's work with errors I have seen in others. Time will tell.

    But I have seen some of Panin's ruminations on the numbers 11 and 13. The thing that sticks in my mind is a claim he made against an imagined foe he called "Mr. Cavalier" who rejected one of his patterns as not in the text, and Panin corrected him by admitting that yes, the numbers 11 and 13 were not there, but the number 12 was, and so we could see the numbers 11 and 13 "standing as guards" to the left and the right of the number 12. Do you recognize this argument of his? I have not been able to find it, and would like to since it is one of my favorite examples of what I don't like about his reasoning.

    And here is the primary error in Panin's work: In general, he makes lists of "features" that involve a number, and then says "That's improbable!" when in fact it is not. The error is that he does not close his sets. He picks out a set of features that yields multiples of the seven, say, but ignores all the similar features that do not. For example. he notes that the sum of the numerical values of all the FORMS of the words are a multiple of seven (Feature 4), but ignores the fact that the sum of the numerical values of all the words in the VOCABULARY is not a multiple of seven. Likewise, he notes that the number of letters in the VOCABULARY is a multiple of seven (Feature 6), but ignores the fact that the number of letters in the FORMS is not a multiple of seven. So to calculate the probability, he must begin by closing the set of possibilities, and then checking to see if the number of sevens found in that entire set is significantly larger than 14% (the number we would expect with a random text).

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    I see you don’t believe the doctrine of the inerrancy and inspiration of Gods word. IE that every word is God breathed. That’s disappointing to read to say the least. It is clearly one of the most fundamental and important of all Christian doctrines. I must assume you aren't a Christian. It appears as though you hold to "science" and a theory of evolution too. If you are a "Christian", then that would be a can of worms I have no desire to open.
    I would be delighted to discuss evolution with you. My wife Rose and I are studying it a lot right now and the evidence is truly amazing. Have you read any genuine scientific books explaining the theory? If not, you would be wrong for judging it as false, right? Just as I would be wrong for judging Panin's work without giving it an adequate review.

    Now as for the inerrancy and inspiration of Scripture: Your position mystifies me. You know that the Bible is not inerrant, so why do you claim otherwise? We know the answer of course. You say that all the errors in the Bible are not found in the "original" inspirited documents. I have never seen any evidence of that and we have no "original" documents to check, so your assertion of inerrancy has no foundation in the text. Furthermore, it is a humanly crafted doctrine. There is nothing in the Bible that says the Bible contains no errors. So now you are telling God that He is not free to produce a book that has errors. Exactly where did you get such authority to direct the action and wisdom of God? What if God desired the Bible to contain signs of it's human origin??? Maybe human errors were needed in order for the "written Word of God" to be order to be fully human and fully divine just like Jesus Christ, the "living Word of God." Anyone who tells God what he can and can not do has crossed the line in my estimation.

    This has nothing to do with the "inspiration" of Scripture. I never denied that. Indeed, there is nothing for me to deny, since there is only one verse that speaks of "all Scripture" as "God-breathed" and folks can debate forever exactly what that passage means. Some folks come down on the "plenary verbal inspiration" side which says that the human writers of the Bible were like scribes who simply wrote down what God "dictated" and others, like myself, take it to mean that the Bible is "God's Book" and he will design it as he pleases without any demands from us humans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    You didn't qualify what you meant by contradictions in the Bible, but no need to, I don’t care for personal opinions on such important matters. I’ve seen enough of the so called "contradictions in the Bible" disinformation disseminated from Muslim fundamentalist web sites, all easy to refute if one has the time to bother with them. Any way, a perceived contradiction does not mean; not inerrant or, uninspired of course.
    Excuse me for speaking plainly, but your words strike me as absurd. Granted, there a many enemies of Christianity make all sorts of false assertions about supposed "contradictions" in Scripture, but to assert that the Bible does not actually contain any contradictions is simply contrary to the facts of the situation. I've studied the Bible for decades. I own and have read encyclopedias of Bible difficulties. To me, it is like somebody casually leaning on the back of a two ton elephant and saying "What elephant? There's no elephant in the room!" We can not make the Bible into something it is not by merely saying so!

    And you are correct - the existence of contradictions (whether "apparent" or real) tell us nothing about whether the Bible is inspired. But they certainly say a lot about the doctrine of inerrancy. And here's the bottom line: The Bible we have received from God via history is full of tangles and seemingly irreconcilable contradictions. If God wanted us to believe the Bible inerrant, then why did he make it look like it was full of errors? I believe it is impossible for anyone who really reads the Bible with an open and honest mind to maintain the doctrine of inerrancy. Therefore, it seems to me that the people who proclaim the Bible inerrant are forced to lie (deceive) themselves and others. Ironic, is it not? Folks who push the Bible as inerrant by arguing that "God cannot lie" are themselves forced to lie by their very proclamation!

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    A supernaturally unregenerated human being will never understand or make sense of the Bible and frankly one can say, and or, make the Bible say what ever one likes. (every body does and the cults make a fortune out of it) This doesn't affect the inerrancy of every word of it. One can throw muck at a crystal; it has no effect on it.
    Excellent point. And that's why "inerrancy" is meaningless. Suppose you are correct and the Bible is inerrant. What does it matter? It still must be read by us fallible humans! And that means that folks will never agree about what it really means, and there will be no way for two REGENERATE CHRISTIANS to come to agreement if they interpret things differently. The only way out of this mess is to assert that you happen to be one of the lucky few with a mind enlightened by God, and so anyone who disagrees with you must be blind, even if they hold to all the same doctrinal points and believe they are regenerated.

    See the problem? Having an "inerrant" text does not help up resolve any of our disagreements about how to interpret that "inerrant" text! So it is functionally equivalent to an errant text, but worse because we are denying things that we plainly see with our own eyes, such as the irreconcilable differences between the four accounts of the death, burial, resurrection, and ascension of Christ.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    The Bible is a whole other universe of supernaturally revealed facts which can only ever be revealed through personal experience in connection with the Holy Spirit of God and the will of God, and if one's personal experience do not align perfectly with the scripture then the personal experience is meaningless.
    That's a very problematic view. Can you tell me how we should discern between "supernaturally revealed facts" and our own fallible interpretations?

    Here is the reason for the problem. It is our "personal experience" that teaches us about reality. If we try to learn about reality only by reading the Bible, we will run the risk of becoming ignorant monsters like medieval Roman Catholic Church who thought they were adhering to what the Bible really taught when they said the earth was at the center of the universe. It was Galileo's personal experience that corrected their reading of the Bible. It's not the other way around. The Bible, taken alone without reference to personal experience, misleads people into all kinds of errors based upon their ignorance, prejudice, and misinterpretations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    Bible wheel and numeric patterns are also meaningless, unless of course they align perfectly with the scripture. Nothing usurps the word of God, which is why He bothered to give it to us in the first place - IE to stop liars dead in their tracks.
    Nothing usurps the word of God? Again, I must ask, how do you distinguish between your personal interpretation and the true meaning of the Bible? And as for stopping liars "dead in their tracks" - where did you get that idea? The Devil, the Father of Lies, delighted in quoting Scripture. I've never seen the Bible stop a liar. On the contrary, I've seen liars use the Bible more than any other book!

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    It is my humble opinion that if the words of God about the Word of God are not inerrant then the whole book is a waste of time and we may as well all be down the boozer, off our scones, trying to score, whilst waiting for aliens to come. Either that or take up Buddhism or convert to Islam. But that's just me.
    That's a very low view of God and the Bible in my estimation. I am shocked that you impose your own view of how God must behave with such vehemence. Who are we to tell God that his book is crap if it does not mean what we think it should mean???

    This is the problem with the doctrine of inerrancy. It is a human doctrine born of bad logic and intellectual arrogance. Don't worry, I'm not blaming you because it's not your fault. You were taught this false doctrine by others. You did not invent it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    The 66 books of the bible, as received and recorded in the Greek and Hebrew text, are most definitely the inerrant word of God and any professing believer who says other wise is at best apostate and at worst, worthy of being taken to with a knotted rope and clattered about the head with it. The unbeliever can say what ever they like as far as I'm concerned. If you are not a believer then you can, and most probably will, take everything I've written here with a pinch of salt.
    Wow! Now you've taken your human doctrine of inerrancy and have placed it above the Gospel itself as the standard of "apostasy." I am stunned. Christians have never held the doctrine of inerrancy as the acid test of faith! Look at the creeds. It's not there. Where did you get this idea?

    But worse - your doctrine is demonstrably false. The Bible we possess today is not inerrant. No one can deny this simple fact. The best you can do is to try to explain away the errors as errors that crept in when the original "inerrant" Bible was copied.

    And worst of all - you have taken the false doctrine of inerrancy and declared that all Christians must believe it or be "apostate." You have invented a new form of Christianity.

    This post is getting too long. I'll answer the rest in another.

    But before I go, let me say that I hope you will stick around and continue this conversation. I find it very interesting.

    All the very best,

    Richard
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Yakima, Wa
    Posts
    15,148
    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    In my opinion to hold the belief that the Bible is erroneous renders a bible wheel as about as much use as a Childs cut -out on the side of a wheetbix packet – seriously; what would be the point in developing something like that to "prove God designed the Bible?" If the Bible is judged, by you, to be erroneous (remember if something is not inerrant, means it is therefore erroneous IE full of error), this of course would mean you have quite brilliantly designed a tool to prove something to be erroneous, therefore making your tool also equally erroneous. Quite bizarre to say the least, and people actually buy a book about it? Poor deluded gullible children of men, I do despair.
    Your comments have a few false assumptions. I never said I developed the Bible Wheel to "prove God designed the Bible." On the contrary, the Bible Wheel is something I simply discovered - I was not trying to prove anything at all. The fact that it proves design is like saying a car proves design. It's true, but that's not the purpose of the car! The car was designed to get people from Point A to Point B. It was not designed to prove that cars were designed! Same goes for the Bible Wheel. It proves that Bible was designed, but that is not its purpose. And it does NOT prove that the Bible is inerrant or infallible. That's something else altogether. For example, my friend Yoseph Sopherim could have made up the whole Bible himself last Tuesday and all the patterns of the Bible Wheel would remain, but the implication of inerrancy would not.

    Sloppy thinking does not glorify God.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    One can't say God designs erroneous things. Unless of course one wishes to hold God to account for sin and Satan and all satanic manifestations, leading to the potential presumption that, as the bible is erroneous, then it was quite possibly even written by Satan. Indeed it has been perverted to high heaven by him, but God promised to preserve every jot and title of His word and not a bit of it will ever pass away. (There is nothing in this promise to assume it means "preserved on the "original" papyrus the words where first written down on, either) Best you get back in line with the truth if you want to be taken seriously in regards to all things Bible. Just a suggestion.
    Uh oh. You just accused God of failing to keep his word. You say that he promised to "preserve every jot and title of His word" but you know that the copies of the Bible have many errors (even in the Greek and Hebrew), and we don't possess the inerrant originals. So where is this "preserved" word? In heaven? If that's all that God meant, then it has nothing to do with the Bible we have here on earth so it has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

    So where is this "preserved" word? If we don't have it, how can you say that God preserved it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    What makes me say we are in the last days? Good question, there is only one unfulfilled Biblical prophesy that has not taken place prior to the supernatural transformation of the church (also known as the rapture, another great bone of contention with the unbelievers and apostate bible pervertor) and preparations for its completion are imminent, that being the construction of the third temple in Jerusalem. The Rabbinical Priests have been rearing and ready to go for at least a decade on this. I'm not a fatalist or a doom and gloom merchant, I have a 2 year old son, I would love to live a long life on earth and see him enjoy one too, this of course will happen either way for the believer, but it will of course have a few odd turns in the supernatural road ahead for us.
    Wow! Why are you making up stuff that's not in the Bible? It contains no prophecy about any "construction of the third temple in Jerusalem." None. Nada. Zilch. Zero. You have fallen for one of the most obvious and ridiculous false teachings out there. The irony blows my mind. You are an advocate of the Bible as the perfect and inspired inerrant Word of God, yet you believe all sorts of things not taught anywhere in Scripture! This truly amazes me. Do you also believe in the magic stretchable 2000+ year imaginary gap in Dan 9 between the 69th and 70th week? Do you believe that the Bible teaches something about an "Antichrist" who is going to be a world dictator? All that stuff is made up man! Made up out of whole cloth! It's not in the Bible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    Check out The Final Count Down By Pastor Billy Crone (Youtube or getalife ministries) to learn more about the Rabbinical Priest's preparations for the Third Temple. Further more 2000 years ago the Jewish Nation of Israel was a pipe dream, it happened in 1948 in "a day" just as was prophesied in Isaiah. One would be very foolish to ignore the significance of such prophesy. This is the real deal and occurred only 62 years ago. The new temple can be constructed in approximately eleven years and there is even a view that the construction of a temple is not required to re-institute the rabbinical sacrifices of the Red heifer, the Red heifer has been genetically engineered to meet the required standards prophesied as well - also waiting in the wings since, I believe 2007, possibly earlier. Not to mention companies like Mondex (meaning right hand) who are ready to mark every human being on earth with RIFD chips on the forehead or right hand or the work of organisations like the UN to prepare for a one world religion.
    This shows again that you are believing things that are not taught anywhere in the Bible. It blows my mind. The mark is a BRAND that shows allegiance to the "world system" in Rev 13. The Bible never says that the brand identifies the individual - on the contrary, it identifies the OWNER of the individual, the "beast" who rules the "world system" (first century Roman empire).

    Please think about this. Your entire body of beliefs are made up of all sorts of things not found anywhere in the Bible. Nowhere! The mark is like a brand. E.g. "This bull belongs to Bar-S Ranch." It does not say "This Bull's name is Fred."

    Your mention of the fact that it's been 62 years since the establishment of the modern secular state of Israel amplifies the error of using it as "God's prophetic timepiece." Major Christian leaders like Chuck Smith PREDICTED the end in 1981 = 1948 + 40 - 7. When that failed, others predicted 1988. And then 1989. And then 1990. And then ... You get the picture. They were all wrong. And always have been wrong. I have no reason to think they will every get it right. Indeed, I know they can not get it right because their doctrines are just made up like cartoons with no foundation whatsoever in the Bible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    Finally, thanks for the effort you made to check out the Panin research. If I may say, Panin referred to Westcott and Hort a lot because he clearly respected their research, but he did not rely solely on Westcott and Hort for his findings. That said, I don't put my faith in Ivan Panin, but I still maintain the point of view that his work is given scant regard by you and others here, given that it has been shown by Bible scholars to irrefutably prove beyond cavil, the inspiration of scripture - messing about with the figures in the way you are doing is very deceptive and is a misrepresentation of the facts. (Again, not that God ever needed Panin to prove the inerrancy of scripture) For you to accuse Panin of the worst crime of bible tampering with the same tongue that spouts forth "I don’t believe in the inerrancy of scripture" renders any opinion out of the your mouth on the bible as pointless as a Base Player auditioning for a gig with a one man band. But I do agree that anyone who sets a date on the actual return of Christ, as far as days and dates etc, is not to be taken serioulsy, even Jesus Christ (AKA God in His human form) was not given that information to pass on to us.
    Like I said, my accusation of tampering with the text may have been too strong. After a more careful examination, the only "tampering" I could find had to do with the separation of contractions. I believe this is wrong and unjustified, but it does not rise to the kind of manipulation that was claimed in the critics I had read. Remember, I explicitly stated that I needed to check into the fact before making a firm judgment and I only said it would be the "worst crime" if it proved to be true. But the jury is still out because he wrote a lot of other stuff that I have not reviewed.

    But I do not believe your assertion that Panin's work "has been shown by Bible scholars to irrefutably prove beyond cavil." Could you provide a link to one or two of the primary "Bible scholars" who have shown this? Thanks!

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    PS: one more point if I may - it is intellectually immoral to refuse to research and seek out one pathway to truth while at the same time embracing all others. If you choose to refuse not to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ as taught in the Scripture, by at least testing them, then that is intellectual immorality, it is skeptisicm and God has no time or interest in the skeptic - the agnostic, I believe He has all the time in the world for. Spinning your wheels and holding to the scientific doctrines of men, whilst skeptically point blank refusing to even investigate something that can only be revealed supernaturally is a crying shame and fool hardy not to mention exceedingly arrogant and completely annoying, particularly in light of the words of your signature -
    I am wide open to investigate and discuss any and all evidence that is brought to my attention. If there is something you think I am overlooking, please notify me so I can correct that error.

    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    please, please, please don't tell me your a theistic evolutionist?? I can live with the 13.5 billion year old universe types if that's your bag, even though I still believe the history of man on earth is around 6000 years, and that God made this planet for us, which therefore would mean the age of the universe is at best a moot point, at worst rediculous to think it took Him 13.5 billion years to prepare it for our habitation, as rediculous as you obviously think the Young Earth Creationist is, which is, and lets be honest about it, just another smart alec "nur nurne nur nur" name for a bible believing Christian and I'm over it already.
    No, I am not a theistic evolutionist. I would be happy to look at any evidence that you think necessitates that point of view. I understand that there are some gaps in our understanding of the precise path of our evolutionary history. But those gaps are not a good place to put God because then every time one of the gaps gets filled with knowledge we squeeze God out of the picture.

    Have you ever read any popular scientific books on evolution? If not, how can you have such a strong opinion? The evidence for common descent appears to be rock solid. It's based on DNA which is accepted in courts to determine paternity and guilt even in capital crimes.

    It is very important that you do not ignorantly invent another "rule" for God to follow. You do not know if evolution must be "theistic" to fit with the Bible. I presume by "theistic evolution" you mean "evolution guided by God." If so, then you have a lot of learning to do, because the idea of "guided evolution" is very much like an oxymoron. The beauty of evolution is that it is a response to environmental pressures. There is nowhere in the theory that we would ever think of "guidance" happening. Read the "Blind Watchmaker" for a good explanation.

    Well, we've got quite a few issues on the table! I hope you will feel like pursuing them. They are very interesting, and it is my impression that a lot of your opinions are based on false assumptions about what I believe. And I also think that your Biblical fundamentalism is not clearly thought out, and if you took the time to think about it, you would see that it is not correct intellectually or biblically.

    All the very best,

    Richard
    • Skepticism is the antiseptic of the mind.
    • Remember why we debate. We have nothing to lose but the errors we hold. Who but a stubborn fool would hold to errors once they have been exposed?

    Check out my blog site

  9. #9
    Uh Oh.
    Wow.
    Truly amazing.
    etc etc.

    Your just another of the many Bible disinformaton terrorists that populate internet forum land with far too many GAPS in your thinking that warrant or deserve exploring. Particulalry in light the fact that every weird and whacky opinion you hold dear has been explored by people like you who refuse to accept the TRUTH for over 6,000 years, isn't that about long enough?? And the fact that many of your statements are bald face lies is what has led me to this rather prompt and curt FINAL reply.

    All the best.

    Panman.
    Last edited by Panman; 10-23-2010 at 02:01 AM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Lake district U.K
    Posts
    314
    Quote Originally Posted by Panman View Post
    Uh Oh.
    Wow.
    Truly amazing.
    etc etc.

    Your just another of the many Bible disinformaton terrorists that populate internet forum land with far too many GAPS in your thinking that warrant or deserve exploring. Particulalry in light the fact that every weird and whacky opinion you hold dear has been explored by people like you who refuse to accept the TRUTH for over 6,000 years, isn't that about long enough?? And the fact that many of your statements are bald face lies is what has led me to this rather prompt and curt FINAL reply.

    All the best.

    Panman.
    Phew that's a relief. I suppose we should be grateful for small mercies.
    Alec

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •