Redact of the Bible

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi Richard:

Ok... In all seriousness, Think THEORIES!... NO PROOF for anything will be sufficient for you anyways so for now I am not attempting to go there!

Good morning Mystykal,

Where do you come up with this stuff? I have not been demanding absolute PROOF of any of your theories. My point has been that they lack evidence and so have a low probability of being true.

And your assertion that no amount of evidence would be sufficient for me is utterly ridiculous! I accept anything that is supported by evidence. You are just saying that because you can't provide sufficient evidence for any rational person to believe your claims.

You say I am alone in my understanding of Scripture but I am not! I even reference you!

Obviously, I wasn't saying that everything you believe is unique to you. My point was that in general, your views are quite idiosyncratic, and that's exactly what we would expect from your fundamentally subjective epistemology.

You don't think your analysis is wrong or of your own interpretation per se...

Of course not. If I thought it was wrong I would change it, which I have by the way! I'm not a Christian anymore. But still, when I look at my old writings, I see they stand because they were based on logic and evidence. The only thing that has changed is my presuppositions.

And just for the record - The idea that the Bible functions as a book of Magic is NOT my original idea that statement comes from a very well known Christian Leader who heads a church with more than two million followers - who I just happen to agree with that particular statement. So I think that you are trying to side-line me just because I sound so strange to you and my understanding of the Bible is NOT a typical Fundamentalist veiwpoint per se.

Which leader are you talking about? Why didn't you name him or her?

But no, I am not trying to "sideline" anything. I know from experience how paranoid Christians can be about things that sound occult like "magic".

I wish I could wash your brain and you could start over with the Christian belief system or the Bible and its true meanings. You have too many dead ends for me to be able to convey the true meaning which is there imbedded in Scripture. This is not my interpretation per se... I think you are making the same pointless argument the big wigs made agaisnt your book! Just because you do not understand something does not mean that it is false! You keep making references to the fact that:

Why do you say that I am the one who made "dead ends". You have admitted that your comments have been very self-contradictory. You justified this by saying that your confusion is like a koan. I personally don't by that. Koans are supposed to be very pithy one-liners, not long posts designed to answer specific questions.

There is some superficial similarity with the critics of my book, but the sad fact is that not one critic could ever sustain their objections in light of the evidence. Not one! My standards for evidence have not changed. That's why I cannot refute the Bible Wheel and holographs even though my presuppositions have changed and I am now an atheist. And your comment is rather dubious since you have rejected the Bible Wheel evidence anyway.

It seems to me that you are just arbitrarily (and with no good reason) declaring that the Bible is the perfect inerrant inspired Word of God no matter what it actually says, and then whenever you find an error, contradiction, absurdity, or moral abomination attributed to God, you simply treat it as a "koan" or something "symbolic" or whatever.

No and No! If you look at what I said I never said I believe the Bbile to be the "inerrant" anything! I said the Bible is the Word of GOD in that it reveals a system called "Saving Faith." The so called "errors" that we see in the Bible are not "inspired" per se... But despite these anomalies the holographs persit! The words are conveying a message and the Holy Spirit is still driving the enlightenment process home! It is beyond me why you keep ignoring this model! The facts become clear when we realize that the FACTS are not the issue all the time! The Truth is! And as I have said before FACTS or NOT TRUTH! The truth is a subtle thing which can only be understood through the Koan process or the meditation process. This is why I say the Bible is written as an Oriental book not as a Western book.... so that Greek is a corrupted language for the true meaning of the words to come accross like English or Latin. This is why it is absurd for Fundamentalists to insist on word inspiration of anything! The ideas however, still are peeking through the language despite all the "errors".

Your comments seem self-contradictory. If the Bible is not inerrant, then why do you suggest that all the stories are true? And what does it mean for it to be the "Word of God" if it is not "inspired"?

I have no problem with the idea that the Quran, Kama Sutra, Vedas, Book of Mormon, Catholic Bible, Protestant Bible was designed by the Holy Spirit to convey spiritual truths in a veiled manner. But if that's true, there's no way for anyone to prove it, and since the claim is indistinguishable from all the claims of the false religions, it seems foolish to believe it.

Yes, the holographs persist and are a deep mystery that I doubt we will ever be able to explain. But they are found in both the Old and New Testaments, but you seem to think the OT is more "authoritative" than the NT in some sense. I don't have a clue about what you really believe about the Bible, and this is after many months discussing it. As far as I can tell, you simply don't know what you believe, or if you do, you have not found words to express it. So you see, it is not I who has put up any "dead ends" to stop you. I have simply asked for clarification of what you believe, and why.

You make a distinction between "facts" and "truth" makes no sense at all. Facts are DEFINED as true:

FACT:
1: something that truly exists or happens : something that has actual existence
2: a true piece of information

Morality is a made up idea. One man's trash is another man's treasure. YOU act like GOD must live up to your STANDARD of moral judgment. Ok But what if your opinion is wrong?

The fact that it is morally wrong to rape, murder, and plunder is not a "made up idea".

Morality is not mere opinion. It is objective, like a pair of scales that objectively compare one weight with another. That's what we mean by words like "fairness" and "justice" which are the foundation of our moral intuitions.

I know it's easy to get roped into thinking that our perspective is the right one. However, in the big picture it might be different. This is why I opt for the less leathal position of looking for hidden clues as to why the GOD of Love whould appear to be so Un-loving! The story is flawed... But the truth is still there waiting to be dug up and used as a way to save ourselves from self-destuction. Perhaps the surface story is just a way to hide the truth of the holographs! Or perhaps the Enemy of Souls planted a lot of weeds in the garden! Whatever the reason for all the crap it should not get in the way of the truth as seen through the meditative process as guided by the Holy Spirit. The surface level crap is just that - crap!

Why hide the truth? Why make the "truth" indistinguishable from lies in a world filled with lies? That totally contradicts both reason and the Bible, which asks "What fellowship hath light with darkness?" It sounds to me that you are simply making excuses to justify your personal beliefs.

You say that the "Holy Spirit" reveals "truth" to you. Great! Anyone can use that as a justification for every flight of fancy they invent. Famous Christian apologist William Lane Craig says that believers don't need no stinking evidence because they have the "witness of the Holy Spirit" that his particular fundamentalist version of Christianity is the One True Faith. We've been over this a thousand times. I don't understand why the confusion persists. If there is no way for anyone to discern between truth and falsehood of religious beliefs, then why should anyone think any of them are true?

You Said:

Though I agree truth is not always easy to find, I wouldn't say that it is "very complicated" in essence - on the contrary, once it is seen it is usually very plain and easily demonstrated.

Totally disagree! If salvation akatruth/saving faith) was "easy" why is it called the "narrow way" - "And few there be that find it!"? Matthew 7:14

I was talking about things that are demonstrably true, not unverifiable metaphysical speculations derived from an ancient religious text. The most likely reason it is "hard to find" is because it does not exist.

So I know we say that the way to salvation is simple like believe in Jesus and say a prayer yada yada yada but that is a pack of lies! Nothing could be further from the truth! "Many are called...But few are chosen."

We were talking about TRUTH like "there is a tree in the yard" which is very easy to PROVE. You are talking about empty words that refer to nothing in reality and so cannot be proven.

Once again "Spiritual things are Spiritually discerned." You keep acting like logic can explain all truth and all processes having to do with GOD or the Bible. And that is just not the right method to understand the hidden truths in the Word which lie below the surface.

And what, exactly, does it mean for something to be "spiritually discerned"? That term is empty and meaningless. You cannot tell me what it means. And how, exactly, does it differ from "logic"?

Anyone can make up any "hidden meanings" they want. How do you propose to discern between truth and error?

how do you discern between truth and falsehood? Why should anyone believe the Bible is any more true than any other ancient religious text?

Simple... The GOD of the WORD can raise you from the dead and give you life everlasting! No other GOD can do that! Period. I know! It happened to me. It happened to my uncle. It happened for many people who I know personally. The GOD of the Bible is real... you just have to find Him!

OK - once again you are sounding like a typical fundamentalist. I'm sorry, I don't mean to offend, but your claim that I can be "raised from the dead" and "know" that I have "received eternal life" is the central dogma of fundamentalist Christianity. But it strikes me as absurd. How exactly do you "know" that you now have "eternal life"? I'll tell you how you "know" - you "know" because 1) You read it in a book you think is the "Word of God" and 2) Your experienced some feelings that you interpreted as confirmation by the "Holy Spirit". In other words, you have had a traditional Christian fundamentalist conversion experience, and you think this gives you "true knowledge". Personally, I think that's egregiously erroneous epistemology. E cubed.

All the best,

Richard

PS: Are you really satisfied using the male pronoun for God?

[Mystykal]

Good morning Mystykal,

Where do you come up with this stuff? I have not been demanding absolute PROOF of any of your theories. My point has been that they lack evidence and so have a low probability of being true.

And your assertion that no amount of evidence would be sufficient for me is utterly ridiculous! I accept anything that is supported by evidence. You are just saying that because you can't provide sufficient evidence for any rational person to believe your claims.


Obviously, I wasn't saying that everything you believe is unique to you. My point was that in general, your views are quite idiosyncratic, and that's exactly what we would expect from your fundamentally subjective epistemology.


Of course not. If I thought it was wrong I would change it, which I have by the way! I'm not a Christian anymore. But still, when I look at my old writings, I see they stand because they were based on logic and evidence. The only thing that has changed is my presuppositions.


Which leader are you talking about? Why didn't you name him or her?

But no, I am not trying to "sideline" anything. I know from experience how paranoid Christians can be about things that sound occult like "magic".


Why do you say that I am the one who made "dead ends". You have admitted that your comments have been very self-contradictory. You justified this by saying that your confusion is like a koan. I personally don't by that. Koans are supposed to be very pithy one-liners, not long posts designed to answer specific questions.

There is some superficial similarity with the critics of my book, but the sad fact is that not one critic could ever sustain their objections in light of the evidence. Not one! My standards for evidence have not changed. That's why I cannot refute the Bible Wheel and holographs even though my presuppositions have changed and I am now an atheist. And your comment is rather dubious since you have rejected the Bible Wheel evidence anyway.


Your comments seem self-contradictory. If the Bible is not inerrant, then why do you suggest that all the stories are true? And what does it mean for it to be the "Word of God" if it is not "inspired"?

I have no problem with the idea that the Quran, Kama Sutra, Vedas, Book of Mormon, Catholic Bible, Protestant Bible was designed by the Holy Spirit to convey spiritual truths in a veiled manner. But if that's true, there's no way for anyone to prove it, and since the claim is indistinguishable from all the claims of the false religions, it seems foolish to believe it.

Yes, the holographs persist and are a deep mystery that I doubt we will ever be able to explain. But they are found in both the Old and New Testaments, but you seem to think the OT is more "authoritative" than the NT in some sense. I don't have a clue about what you really believe about the Bible, and this is after many months discussing it. As far as I can tell, you simply don't know what you believe, or if you do, you have not found words to express it. So you see, it is not I who has put up any "dead ends" to stop you. I have simply asked for clarification of what you believe, and why.

You make a distinction between "facts" and "truth" makes no sense at all. Facts are DEFINED as true:

FACT:
1: something that truly exists or happens : something that has actual existence
2: a true piece of information


The fact that it is morally wrong to rape, murder, and plunder is not a "made up idea".

Morality is not mere opinion. It is objective, like a pair of scales that objectively compare one weight with another. That's what we mean by words like "fairness" and "justice" which are the foundation of our moral intuitions.


Why hide the truth? Why make the "truth" indistinguishable from lies in a world filled with lies? That totally contradicts both reason and the Bible, which asks "What fellowship hath light with darkness?" It sounds to me that you are simply making excuses to justify your personal beliefs.

You say that the "Holy Spirit" reveals "truth" to you. Great! Anyone can use that as a justification for every flight of fancy they invent. Famous Christian apologist William Lane Craig says that believers don't need no stinking evidence because they have the "witness of the Holy Spirit" that his particular fundamentalist version of Christianity is the One True Faith. We've been over this a thousand times. I don't understand why the confusion persists. If there is no way for anyone to discern between truth and falsehood of religious beliefs, then why should anyone think any of them are true?


I was talking about things that are demonstrably true, not unverifiable metaphysical speculations derived from an ancient religious text. The most likely reason it is "hard to find" is because it does not exist.


We were talking about TRUTH like "there is a tree in the yard" which is very easy to PROVE. You are talking about empty words that refer to nothing in reality and so cannot be proven.


And what, exactly, does it mean for something to be "spiritually discerned"? That term is empty and meaningless. You cannot tell me what it means. And how, exactly, does it differ from "logic"?

Anyone can make up any "hidden meanings" they want. How do you propose to discern between truth and error?


OK - once again you are sounding like a typical fundamentalist. I'm sorry, I don't mean to offend, but your claim that I can be "raised from the dead" and "know" that I have "received eternal life" is the central dogma of fundamentalist Christianity. But it strikes me as absurd. How exactly do you "know" that you now have "eternal life"? I'll tell you how you "know" - you "know" because 1) You read it in a book you think is the "Word of God" and 2) Your experienced some feelings that you interpreted as confirmation by the "Holy Spirit". In other words, you have had a traditional Christian fundamentalist conversion experience, and you think this gives you "true knowledge". Personally, I think that's egregiously erroneous epistemology. E cubed.

All the best,

Richard

PS: Are you really satisfied using the male pronoun for God?

---------------
Hi Richard:

Man oh man! Yikes! Slow down! You really do not give a careful reading to what I write! I am beyond dismayed with your inability to look beyond your Fundamentalist mind set and see the actual words I am saying. I never said that I HAVE eternal life! I said, The same GOD CAN give eternal life that is the SAME GOD that raises people from the dead! The raising people from the dead thing is the subject! You completely missed my point! And by the way - I only used the word He for god once! Jesus calls GOD Father - so I am in good company! EVENTHOUGH I THINK GOD CAN BE BOTH FEMALE AND MALE OR WHATEVER IT (Spirit) wants to be! I know the word "he" is inserted by the translators when it comes to the word for Holy Spirit! So don't even go there!!!!

Where do you come up with this stuff? I have not been demanding absolute PROOF of any of your theories. My point has been that they lack evidence and so have a low probability of being true.

Look, your "lack of evidence" argument is the same as me saying you want "proof"! My POINT is that there IS proof! That is the raising of dead people! The stories in the Bible are NOT just stories... They should be able to be duplicated in real time TODAY! Now, you only make excuses as if since YOU have not SEEN anything strange happen to you therefore it does not exist - is just a dead end! The truth is it happens all the time in real time. So, the problem is you and your narrow experiences! I am not making false claims as the Fundees do! You are really not listening to me!

You have admitted that your comments have been very self-contradictory. You justified this by saying that your confusion is like a koan. I personally don't by that. Koans are supposed to be very pithy one-liners, not long posts designed to answer specific questions.

Koans are a style of writing! The truth is only arrived at when the conscious mind is stilled and the "other mind" takes over... Only a master can decipher when a Koan has been answered correctly. In like manner, the Bible is written in a style which hides the truth and like the parables of Jesus the truth cannot be arrived at or known without the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Granted many say they have the Holy Spirit but very few actually do. And those that do can RAISE THE DEAD! And there is the difference! You keep acting like there is no "evidence" or proof that the Holy Spirit exists... Well it does and those who have it can perform feats which are beyond science to understand.

Why hide the truth? Why make the "truth" indistinguishable from lies in a world filled with lies? That totally contradicts both reason and the Bible, which asks "What fellowship hath light with darkness?" It sounds to me that you are simply making excuses to justify your personal beliefs.

See, you did it again! You cannot get past the fact that the Fundees screwed up your logical brain!. I am not the one who spoke in parables! Jesus did that! And he said he did it to confuse those who where not chosen! Ok.
The truth and lies are different in that the truth has power to litterally move the mountain and raise the dead! The whole issue of life and life eternal is at the core of why anyone should want to know the truth about Creator GOD! If He does not exist then we are just the "walking dead"! No future! No eternal life! This is it! This pathetic existence is all we get! But if GOD is real then there is a way to get eternal life! To live forever! To raise the dead! "Choose ye this day whom ye shall serve!" This is the gospel message in a nutshell. The OT is the foundation. The NT is is the icing on the cake. We must be careful to run all ideas through the strainer found in Isaiah 8:20. "To the law and to the testimony!...If they speak not according to this WORD it is because there is no light in them!"

You make a distinction between "facts" and "truth" makes no sense at all. Facts are DEFINED as true

Yes facts CAN be true! However, TRUTH is something more than a FACT or piece of information. So that the truth is in FACT a piece of information which transcends a mere fact! You once again are trying to dummy down the options of reality! You cannot say that something true like murder - is the truth; in the sense that murder somehow holds a true position in the life of a person. In the same way, something which is formed from the truth can never be diluted into being less than truth! Facts alone do not make up the substance of something true! Again, I urge you to stop dumming down the terms I use and then twisting them to look like I don't understand the word itself! Please!

And your assertion that no amount of evidence would be sufficient for me is utterly ridiculous! I accept anything that is supported by evidence.

http://www.odditycentral.com/videos/...-hot-coal.html


So how do you think this guy does it? Do you think there is a scientific explanation? I don't know... I do know I have seen hotter coals than these eaten by people in a trance! So maybe there is an explanation....

My point was that in general, your views are quite idiosyncratic, and that's exactly what we would expect from your fundamentally subjective epistemology.

idiosyncratic? That is YOU! I don't think that I am really that! I think you say that because you want to discredit my position without really looking at it!

Your comments seem self-contradictory. If the Bible is not inerrant, then why do you suggest that all the stories are true? And what does it mean for it to be the "Word of God" if it is not "inspired"?

And here is where the rubber meets the road. Once again your idea of inspiration is flawed by your Fundee background. The "inspiration" of the Bible does not make the fallible man who writes down words and thoughts which are of the Spirit - it does not make the writings/man in anyway infallible. What it does is gives a clear path to follow and as we are led by the SAME Spirit we find the Truth! And it is the truth which will set us free! Why cannot you get that through your head?! Spiritual things are Spiritually discerned! The proof is in the pudding! Like I always say, "Don't eat the pudding! lol

Namaste,

Mystykal

[Richard Amiel McGough]

how do you discern between truth and falsehood? Why should anyone believe the Bible is any more true than any other ancient religious text?

Simple... The GOD of the WORD can raise you from the dead and give you life everlasting! No other GOD can do that! Period. I know! It happened to me. It happened to my uncle. It happened for many people who I know personally. The GOD of the Bible is real... you just have to find Him!

OK - once again you are sounding like a typical fundamentalist. I'm sorry, I don't mean to offend, but your claim that I can be "raised from the dead" and "know" that I have "received eternal life" is the central dogma of fundamentalist Christianity. But it strikes me as absurd. How exactly do you "know" that you now have "eternal life"? I'll tell you how you "know" - you "know" because 1) You read it in a book you think is the "Word of God" and 2) Your experienced some feelings that you interpreted as confirmation by the "Holy Spirit". In other words, you have had a traditional Christian fundamentalist conversion experience, and you think this gives you "true knowledge". Personally, I think that's egregiously erroneous epistemology. E cubed.

Hi Richard:

Man oh man! Yikes! Slow down! You really do not give a careful reading to what I write! I am beyond dismayed with your inability to look beyond your Fundamentalist mind set and see the actual words I am saying. I never said that I HAVE eternal life! I said, The same GOD CAN give eternal life that is the SAME GOD that raises people from the dead! The raising people from the dead thing is the subject! You completely missed my point!

Good morning Mystykal,

I would hope that you intended "beyond dismayed" to be some cute hyperbole. I can't imagine how you could have meant it seriously. You specifically said that "The GOD of the WORD can raise you from the dead and give you life everlasting" and then you said that you knew this was true because it happened to you, to your uncle, and to many people you personally know. What did you say happened? You said God had raised you from the dead and had given you eternal life! If something has been given you, then you "have" it, right? Now you say that you didn't mean that you HAVE eternal life, which means that God has not yet given it to you, and so now you are denying what you said.

So once again we are going in circles, and I seriously doubt it would help if I read any slower!

And by the way - I only used the word He for god once! Jesus calls GOD Father - so I am in good company! EVENTHOUGH I THINK GOD CAN BE BOTH FEMALE AND MALE OR WHATEVER IT (Spirit) wants to be! I know the word "he" is inserted by the translators when it comes to the word for Holy Spirit! So don't even go there!!!!

The Bible, which you say is "the Word of God", uses the male pronoun to refer to God from beginning to end. It doesn't matter how many times you used it in that one post!

The fact that Jesus calls God "Father" seems to me to be part of the problem, not the solution.

There are occasions where "he" is used rather than the grammatically correct "it" for the Holy Spirit but that's because there also are places where the masculine pronoun is used in reference to the Spirit which in Greek is neuter (and in Hebrew it is feminine, and in Latin it is masculine). So obviously, we can't derive anything about the gender of the Third Person of the Trinity from the grammatical gender of the word referring to him. This is particularly obvious because "he" is called Spirit (neuter), "Wisdom" (feminine), and "Comforter" (masculine). Some folks think the latter proves "he" is both personal and masculine. Here is the explanation from the wiki:

William Mounce argues that in John's gospel, when Jesus referred to the Holy Spirit as Comforter (masculine in Greek), the grammatically necessary masculine form of the Greek pronoun autos is used,^[15] but when Jesus speaks of the Holy Spirit as Spirit, grammatically neuter in Greek,[16] the masculine form of the demonstrative pronoun ekeinos ("that masculine one") is used.[15] This breaking of the grammatical agreement expected by native language readers is an indication of the author's intention to convey the personhood of the Holy Spirit, and also the Spirit's masculinity.[17] Daniel Wallace, however, disputes the claim that ekeinos is connected with pneuma in John 14:26 and 16:13-14, asserting instead that it belongs to parakletos. Wallace concludes that "it is difficult to find any text in which πνευμα is grammatically referred to with the masculine gender".^[18]

When I was a Christian I tried to "fix" the problem of the extremely gender biased image of God by interpreting the Holy Spirit as feminine. I can see why you would find this appealing, but I think it's more honest to simply admit that the God of the Bible is not accurately represented as a balance between male and female. Not by a long shot - especially when viewed in the context of the inextricable sexism that saturates the text.

Where do you come up with this stuff? I have not been demanding absolute PROOF of any of your theories. My point has been that they lack evidence and so have a low probability of being true.

Look, your "lack of evidence" argument is the same as me saying you want "proof"! My POINT is that there IS proof! That is the raising of dead people! The stories in the Bible are NOT just stories... They should be able to be duplicated in real time TODAY! Now, you only make excuses as if since YOU have not SEEN anything strange happen to you therefore it does not exist - is just a dead end! The truth is it happens all the time in real time. So, the problem is you and your narrow experiences! I am not making false claims as the Fundees do! You are really not listening to me!

Well, mere evidence does not equate with "proof". I was just trying to be clear with my words, because other folks on this forum recently castigated me for using the word "proof" when I should have used "evidence."

You assertion that the stories in the Bible are not just stories has no basis in fact, and indeed, you agree that many of the stories are NOT factual. You arbitrarily assert that some really happened in "real time" while others are mere metaphors. Your position seems quite inconsistent to me. And your assertion that people should be able to perform similar miracles today seems quite absurd because Christians have had two thousand years to demonstrate their superpowers and they have utterly failed. Why do you think any of the stories are true? I asked you this, (see above), and you said that you KNOW because you HAVE RECEIVED eternal life from God. Now you say that you didn't mean that, so we are back to square one. How do you discern between truth and falsehood? As far as I can tell, you don't bother with this question. You merely believe what you want to believe.

Where in the world do you get the idea that people are commonly raised from the dead in "real time"? That's not even close to true.

Koans are a style of writing! The truth is only arrived at when the conscious mind is stilled and the "other mind" takes over... Only a master can decipher when a Koan has been answered correctly. In like manner, the Bible is written in a style which hides the truth and like the parables of Jesus the truth cannot be arrived at or known without the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Granted many say they have the Holy Spirit but very few actually do. And those that do can RAISE THE DEAD! And there is the difference! You keep acting like there is no "evidence" or proof that the Holy Spirit exists... Well it does and those who have it can perform feats which are beyond science to understand.

Why do you keep saying that there are people who can really raise the dead? If that were true, it would be worldwide news. I get the impression you are being very gullible. I remember when the lying adulterous clown freak Todd Bentley said that there had been 31 people raised from the dead at his Carnival of Christian Confusion aka Lakeland Revival. I note that hundreds of thousands fo Christians who totally believe in the reality of modern miracle workers flocked to watch that conman. This is what happens if you have no standards to discern between truth and falsehood. And of course, this leads to the question: You judge many who claim to have the Holy Spirit as false. How do you do that? How do you discern between a person who "really" has the Spirit and one who falsely claims that?

Why hide the truth? Why make the "truth" indistinguishable from lies in a world filled with lies? That totally contradicts both reason and the Bible, which asks "What fellowship hath light with darkness?" It sounds to me that you are simply making excuses to justify your personal beliefs.

See, you did it again! You cannot get past the fact that the Fundees screwed up your logical brain!. I am not the one who spoke in parables! Jesus did that! And he said he did it to confuse those who where not chosen! Ok.

The "fundies" have not messed with my brain. You are the one making claims that are logically and factually indistinguishable from common fundamentalist claims. I'm the one asking how a rational person could distinguish between your claims and those others.

The truth and lies are different in that the truth has power to litterally move the mountain and raise the dead! The whole issue of life and life eternal is at the core of why anyone should want to know the truth about Creator GOD! If He does not exist then we are just the "walking dead"! No future! No eternal life! This is it! This pathetic existence is all we get! But if GOD is real then there is a way to get eternal life! To live forever! To raise the dead! "Choose ye this day whom ye shall serve!" This is the gospel message in a nutshell.

OK - I didn't know you thought life on this earth was so bleak, pathetic, and meaningless. We are very different in this regard. I find life to be very rich and filled with much meaning.

This is a very interesting topic worthy of much discussion. Many folks have the feeling that life would be totally meaningless if their EGO could ever cease to exist. That is the direct opposite of what the Wisdom Masters teach.

The idea that this life would meaningless if we don't live forever makes no sense to me. My life last year did not become "meaningful" only because I am alive now and can remember it. It was meaningful in and of itself when it was actually happening in real time. If this life is not meaningful in and of itself now, regardless of our future, then it won't suddenly become meaningful at any time in the future. How would mere continued existence change something from being meaningless to meaningful? I think there is gross confusion about the meaning of meaning.

The OT is the foundation. The NT is is the icing on the cake. We must be careful to run all ideas through the strainer found in Isaiah 8:20. "To the law and to the testimony!...If they speak not according to this WORD it is because there is no light in them!"

Your view on the relation between the OT and NT seems entirely upside down. The primary meaning of the Gospel can be read and understood from the NT alone. There would be a lot of missing context, but the Gospel message could be discerned. The same cannot be said of the OT. Without the NT, there would be no Gospel at all. Your elevation of the OT over the NT makes not sense to me at all. Do you not believe they are both equally the "Word of God" in all ways? I get the impression that answer is no.

And your assertion that no amount of evidence would be sufficient for me is utterly ridiculous! I accept anything that is supported by evidence.

http://www.odditycentral.com/videos/...-hot-coal.html

So how do you think this guy does it? Do you think there is a scientific explanation? I don't know... I do know I have seen hotter coals than these eaten by people in a trance! So maybe there is an explanation....

You've got to be kidding me! Eating hot coals is not a supernatural feat! It totally follows normal physics. It's like the silly "fire walking" fad that people think is supernatural. Here's a video of skeptic Michael Shermer walking on coals.



Like Shermer says, firewalking is a typical illusion used in Buddhism, Hinduism, an pop New Age spirituality.

Your comments seem self-contradictory. If the Bible is not inerrant, then why do you suggest that all the stories are true? And what does it mean for it to be the "Word of God" if it is not "inspired"?

And here is where the rubber meets the road. Once again your idea of inspiration is flawed by your Fundee background. The "inspiration" of the Bible does not make the fallible man who writes down words and thoughts which are of the Spirit - it does not make the writings/man in anyway infallible. What it does is gives a clear path to follow and as we are led by the SAME Spirit we find the Truth! And it is the truth which will set us free! Why cannot you get that through your head?! Spiritual things are Spiritually discerned! The proof is in the pudding! Like I always say, "Don't eat the pudding! lol

Wow, you seem totally confused on this topic. On the one hand you say the Bible is the Word of God while on the other you say it is full of stories that are not true and cannot be trusted because they are written by fallible men. Which is it?

And you didn't answer my question. I still have no idea why you think all the stories are true if they are not inspired. Of course, you say they are and then you say they are not, and then you say that your words are a "koan".

Now you say that the Bible gives a "clear path to follow." What path is that? And if it is so clear, why can't you even say what it is, and why do the vast majority of the most devout Bible believers disagree not only with you but amongst themselves?

And again you repeat the common idea that "Spiritual things are Spiritually discerned" but you seem to have forgotten that I asked a very pertinent question that must be answered. What does it mean to discern something "spiritually". How can you discern if you discernment is valid? Suppose two people come to different conclusions. How could an objective third party discern between truth and error? How could I know who was right and who was wrong? This is the question I have been asking you for many months, and all you can tell me is that you KNOW your beliefs are true because God has "raised you from the dead and given you eternal life"? Would you become a Hindu if a Hindu told you he saw his guru levitating? Do you understand the difference between anecdotes and evidence?

Great chatting,

Richard

[Timmy]

Hi there Richard and Mysti



Bon Ami,

The notion of redactors was checked out some years ago.

The biggest problem seen here with it, is that if taken at face value, with all five books parsed, the theory does not hold up consistently.

The second biggest problem with it is there are several places where it appears that more than one, sometimes more than two of the redactors are writing so the theory loses consistency in this way, too.

...and where do you propose placing the passages referring to Yaweh Elohim, hunh? J or E or D or P?

I've seen other schematics that add more redactors than four yet this only convolutes the idea that much more.



...and Mystical?

Some of the stuff you say about the Bible, if followed through does not help anyone, particularly yourself...and then tacking on other things, too¿

Aside from your mistaken understanding concerning what actual Biblical meditation entails--and it is completely opposed to all other Eastern Religion's modes of emptying your mind to find oneness-- for now, please consider your statement of the purpose of parables.

All parables in the Bible are about the onset of God's judgment. No matter who the prophet is using the parabolic imagery, the end result is judgment falling...because they all speak about judgment.

This is why when you see the parables told (by Y'shua) in the hearing of the Torah Teachers (scribes) and Parushim (Pharisees), their tendency was to become irate, thinking stuff like, "Who is this bastard (lit.) to speak to us like this" and at the same time wanting to understand the meaning.

Gentiles think allegorically redesigning Biblical passages is a smart thing to do, but if they understood how they could be bringing judgment upon themselves in so doing, they probably would not be so swift to misrepresent what they do not really comprehend. The same is true of the Rabbi or the Gambini who further mystifies these Scriptures. The Bible is the revelation of God to man, and to convoluted what it is about is only to create more of what it is opposing: confusion and every evil work.



Of course parables were so that most the hearers did not understand, and yet every parable from any prophet, particularly the Son of Man, was given after telling the people plainly the right thing to do. The parable is told after God's plain message is rejected.

People who cannot really understand what the Bible actually says also see yet cannot perceive, hear and yet do not understand. God in mercy has made it this way so that a person is not accountable for what they cannot conceive nor understand...unless they audaciously do claim they do understand. Things hidden in plain sight like this, whether because of not actually understanding what the Bible reveals, or examples from the parables (and there is more to all of them than what is made obvious in the text) are all result of people bringing God's judgment upon themselves (because they do not follow through with what they should do from what they already know of, about, or from God.



As to the parables though, if you do not believe what you are now being told about them all being a sign of God's judgment, almost any Rabbi should be able to clarify this...or check the parables out from the Bible and see for yourself the different degrees of God's judgment. (There are clear enough indications ithroughout the pages of the Bible itself that will confirm this truism). Some things are not all that clear, but a true God fearer will be able to show you where to set your course in this...or, here:

Y'shua explained the above principle in a parable (keep in mind, parables represent God's judgment). In fact, he said that if you do not "get" this one, neither will you understand any of all the others (told by Him or not). Remember, there is more to this one parable than what is revealed in the text, as is true with all the others: Mt. 13.1-23/ Mk. 4.1-20/ Lk. 8.4-15)


Waka Waka eh eh,

[Mystykal]

Hi there Richard and Mysti



Bon Ami,

The notion of redactors was checked out some years ago.

The biggest problem seen here with it, is that if taken at face value, with all five books parsed, the theory does not hold up consistently.

The second biggest problem with it is there are several places where it appears that more than one, sometimes more than two of the redactors are writing so the theory loses consistency in this way, too.

...and where do you propose placing the passages referring to Yaweh Elohim, hunh? J or E or D or P?

I've seen other schematics that add more redactors than four yet this only convolutes the idea that much more.



...and Mystical?

Some of the stuff you say about the Bible, if followed through does not help anyone, particularly yourself...and then tacking on other things, too¿

Aside from your mistaken understanding concerning what actual Biblical meditation entails--and it is completely opposed to all other Eastern Religion's modes of emptying your mind to find oneness-- for now, please consider your statement of the purpose of parables.

All parables in the Bible are about the onset of God's judgment. No matter who the prophet is using the parabolic imagery, the end result is judgment falling...because they all speak about judgment.

This is why when you see the parables told (by Y'shua) in the hearing of the Torah Teachers (scribes) and Parushim (Pharisees), their tendency was to become irate, thinking stuff like, "Who is this bastard (lit.) to speak to us like this" and at the same time wanting to understand the meaning.

Gentiles think allegorically redesigning Biblical passages is a smart thing to do, but if they understood how they could be bringing judgment upon themselves in so doing, they probably would not be so swift to misrepresent what they do not really comprehend. The same is true of the Rabbi or the Gambini who further mystifies these Scriptures. The Bible is the revelation of God to man, and to convoluted what it is about is only to create more of what it is opposing: confusion and every evil work.



Of course parables were so that most the hearers did not understand, and yet every parable from any prophet, particularly the Son of Man, was given after telling the people plainly the right thing to do. The parable is told after God's plain message is rejected.

People who cannot really understand what the Bible actually says also see yet cannot perceive, hear and yet do not understand. God in mercy has made it this way so that a person is not accountable for what they cannot conceive nor understand...unless they audaciously do claim they do understand. Things hidden in plain sight like this, whether because of not actually understanding what the Bible reveals, or examples from the parables (and there is more to all of them than what is made obvious in the text) are all result of people bringing God's judgment upon themselves (because they do not follow through with what they should do from what they already know of, about, or from God.



As to the parables though, if you do not believe what you are now being told about them all being a sign of God's judgment, almost any Rabbi should be able to clarify this...or check the parables out from the Bible and see for yourself the different degrees of God's judgment. (There are clear enough indications ithroughout the pages of the Bible itself that will confirm this truism). Some things are not all that clear, but a true God fearer will be able to show you where to set your course in this...or, here:

Y'shua explained the above principle in a parable (keep in mind, parables represent God's judgment). In fact, he said that if you do not "get" this one, neither will you understand any of all the others (told by Him or not). Remember, there is more to this one parable than what is revealed in the text, as is true with all the others: Mt. 13.1-23/ Mk. 4.1-20/ Lk. 8.4-15)


Waka Waka eh eh,


Þ.Œ:

Hey Timmy:

I respectfully disagree with your statement about the way meditation is understood from a Biblical perspective! You clearly do not really speak as an authority on anything! Of course you could say the same about me! The difference is that your perspective is very "Fundamentalist" in its orientation with a Jewish bent. Ok I actually like reading your perspective and agree with much of what you say!.. The issue you are now trying to prove is beyond your capacity to address. And here is why...

The Rabbi clan you refer to as smart as they may be are NOT followers of the True Way! The Jewish perspective is correct in as far as they can go into the truth. Jesus did speak in parables and at times secretly explained the meanings of those parables to certain individuals and as a result we too have their "notes" on the subject. However, I totally disagree with the notion that a Rabbi can explain salvation from a Christian perspective as they do not view Jesus or the process of salvation as meaningful in that context. Modern day Judiaism does not resemble the religion of the OT in any particular. The notion that the Israel nation of today is a GOD given GOD ordained organization flies in the face of the words of Jesus when He said, Your house is left unto you desolate!" It would appear that you think that the key to salvation is through the traditions imposed by culture (jewish) and not by the Truth as it is in Jesus. Isaiah 8:20 still stands however so you are quite correct to make the comparisons as you do to the notions of Jews and weave that into the Christian doxology... Even Jesus said to the woman "Salvation is of the Jews". However, I do not see Him making that connection outside of Himself. her question was specific and Jesus responded and said "I am he!" The Messiah for the Jews was Jesus! And NO Rabbi in the Jewish culture believes that! A "Christianized" Rabbi is not recognized as a Rabbi any longer within the tenants of modern Jewish culture.

...And concerning emptying the mind... that is an explanation which is NOT Eastern but Western in ideology! Many Yogis use words in English in an incorrect way! The meditative process is NOT about "Emptying" the mind per se; but rather a "stilling" of the mind by using one point concentration which allows the "pool" of thoughts to settle and become calm and reflective in a way which allows for true thoughts to arise. YOU my friend DID NOT learn from a true master! Your ideas are very incorrect when it comes to the meditative process. I learned from one of the original 10 GrandMasters which lived before 1945 when the martial arts were split up into different schools and "sold" to the West in a corrupted state.

I suggest that if you want to know what the Bible really says about meditation you look up the phrase "deep sleep" not the translated word "meditate" or meditation. The "Be still and know that I am God" reference comes close to explaining one aspect of the meditative process.


Thanks!

Namaste,

Mystykal

[Mystykal]

Good morning Mystykal,

I would hope that you intended "beyond dismayed" to be some cute hyperbole. I can't imagine how you could have meant it seriously. You specifically said that "The GOD of the WORD can raise you from the dead and give you life everlasting" and then you said that you knew this was true because it happened to you, to your uncle, and to many people you personally know. What did you say happened? You said God had raised you from the dead and had given you eternal life! If something has been given you, then you "have" it, right? Now you say that you didn't mean that you HAVE eternal life, which means that God has not yet given it to you, and so now you are denying what you said.

So once again we are going in circles, and I seriously doubt it would help if I read any slower!


The Bible, which you say is "the Word of God", uses the male pronoun to refer to God from beginning to end. It doesn't matter how many times you used it in that one post!

The fact that Jesus calls God "Father" seems to me to be part of the problem, not the solution.

There are occasions where "he" is used rather than the grammatically correct "it" for the Holy Spirit but that's because there also are places where the masculine pronoun is used in reference to the Spirit which in Greek is neuter (and in Hebrew it is feminine, and in Latin it is masculine). So obviously, we can't derive anything about the gender of the Third Person of the Trinity from the grammatical gender of the word referring to him. This is particularly obvious because "he" is called Spirit (neuter), "Wisdom" (feminine), and "Comforter" (masculine). Some folks think the latter proves "he" is both personal and masculine. Here is the explanation from the wiki:

William Mounce argues that in John's gospel, when Jesus referred to the Holy Spirit as Comforter (masculine in Greek), the grammatically necessary masculine form of the Greek pronoun autos is used,^[15] but when Jesus speaks of the Holy Spirit as Spirit, grammatically neuter in Greek,[16] the masculine form of the demonstrative pronoun ekeinos ("that masculine one") is used.[15] This breaking of the grammatical agreement expected by native language readers is an indication of the author's intention to convey the personhood of the Holy Spirit, and also the Spirit's masculinity.[17] Daniel Wallace, however, disputes the claim that ekeinos is connected with pneuma in John 14:26 and 16:13-14, asserting instead that it belongs to parakletos. Wallace concludes that "it is difficult to find any text in which πνευμα is grammatically referred to with the masculine gender".^[18]

When I was a Christian I tried to "fix" the problem of the extremely gender biased image of God by interpreting the Holy Spirit as feminine. I can see why you would find this appealing, but I think it's more honest to simply admit that the God of the Bible is not accurately represented as a balance between male and female. Not by a long shot - especially when viewed in the context of the inextricable sexism that saturates the text.


Well, mere evidence does not equate with "proof". I was just trying to be clear with my words, because other folks on this forum recently castigated me for using the word "proof" when I should have used "evidence."

You assertion that the stories in the Bible are not just stories has no basis in fact, and indeed, you agree that many of the stories are NOT factual. You arbitrarily assert that some really happened in "real time" while others are mere metaphors. Your position seems quite inconsistent to me. And your assertion that people should be able to perform similar miracles today seems quite absurd because Christians have had two thousand years to demonstrate their superpowers and they have utterly failed. Why do you think any of the stories are true? I asked you this, (see above), and you said that you KNOW because you HAVE RECEIVED eternal life from God. Now you say that you didn't mean that, so we are back to square one. How do you discern between truth and falsehood? As far as I can tell, you don't bother with this question. You merely believe what you want to believe.

Where in the world do you get the idea that people are commonly raised from the dead in "real time"? That's not even close to true.


Why do you keep saying that there are people who can really raise the dead? If that were true, it would be worldwide news. I get the impression you are being very gullible. I remember when the lying adulterous clown freak Todd Bentley said that there had been 31 people raised from the dead at his Carnival of Christian Confusion aka Lakeland Revival. I note that hundreds of thousands fo Christians who totally believe in the reality of modern miracle workers flocked to watch that conman. This is what happens if you have no standards to discern between truth and falsehood. And of course, this leads to the question: You judge many who claim to have the Holy Spirit as false. How do you do that? How do you discern between a person who "really" has the Spirit and one who falsely claims that?


The "fundies" have not messed with my brain. You are the one making claims that are logically and factually indistinguishable from common fundamentalist claims. I'm the one asking how a rational person could distinguish between your claims and those others.


OK - I didn't know you thought life on this earth was so bleak, pathetic, and meaningless. We are very different in this regard. I find life to be very rich and filled with much meaning.

This is a very interesting topic worthy of much discussion. Many folks have the feeling that life would be totally meaningless if their EGO could ever cease to exist. That is the direct opposite of what the Wisdom Masters teach.

The idea that this life would meaningless if we don't live forever makes no sense to me. My life last year did not become "meaningful" only because I am alive now and can remember it. It was meaningful in and of itself when it was actually happening in real time. If this life is not meaningful in and of itself now, regardless of our future, then it won't suddenly become meaningful at any time in the future. How would mere continued existence change something from being meaningless to meaningful? I think there is gross confusion about the meaning of meaning.


Your view on the relation between the OT and NT seems entirely upside down. The primary meaning of the Gospel can be read and understood from the NT alone. There would be a lot of missing context, but the Gospel message could be discerned. The same cannot be said of the OT. Without the NT, there would be no Gospel at all. Your elevation of the OT over the NT makes not sense to me at all. Do you not believe they are both equally the "Word of God" in all ways? I get the impression that answer is no.


You've got to be kidding me! Eating hot coals is not a supernatural feat! It totally follows normal physics. It's like the silly "fire walking" fad that people think is supernatural. Here's a video of skeptic Michael Shermer walking on coals.



Like Shermer says, firewalking is a typical illusion used in Buddhism, Hinduism, an pop New Age spirituality.


Wow, you seem totally confused on this topic. On the one hand you say the Bible is the Word of God while on the other you say it is full of stories that are not true and cannot be trusted because they are written by fallible men. Which is it?

And you didn't answer my question. I still have no idea why you think all the stories are true if they are not inspired. Of course, you say they are and then you say they are not, and then you say that your words are a "koan".

Now you say that the Bible gives a "clear path to follow." What path is that? And if it is so clear, why can't you even say what it is, and why do the vast majority of the most devout Bible believers disagree not only with you but amongst themselves?

And again you repeat the common idea that "Spiritual things are Spiritually discerned" but you seem to have forgotten that I asked a very pertinent question that must be answered. What does it mean to discern something "spiritually". How can you discern if you discernment is valid? Suppose two people come to different conclusions. How could an objective third party discern between truth and error? How could I know who was right and who was wrong? This is the question I have been asking you for many months, and all you can tell me is that you KNOW your beliefs are true because God has "raised you from the dead and given you eternal life"? Would you become a Hindu if a Hindu told you he saw his guru levitating? Do you understand the difference between anecdotes and evidence?

Great chatting,

Richard

-------------
Hi Richard:
Wow! we are really off the trail now... Aha! You do frustrate me with your ignoring of my actual statements which you incorretly quoted. In regards to the idea that firewalking is NOTHING but "tricks" - I agree. However, eating fire is a little more difficult to pull off however I would not call it a "trick". I am not saying it is the same as "raising the dead" - and my statement about raising the dead and the fact that GOD CAN save you - are not to be mixed up as YOU have done. Salvation is an internal understanding which cannot be known except to the person... where as being raised from the dead DOES happen and is unexplainable by doctors or science. YOU keep acting like it NEVER happens. You just can't face the reality of people who are doctors themselves being pronounced dead - no heart beat no brain waves for long period of time and coming back to life and getting well and moving on. In my uncles case he was disconnected from all life support machines and pronounced dead. After three hours in that state he came back to life and had no brain damage or any neurological damage.


CNN "To Heaven and Back" with Anderson Cooper. Is an interesting show on near death experiences... The doctor was clinically dead for 30 min. and strangers carried her through the woods chopping a trail as they went and when they got to the road an ambulance was there waiting... No one called 911. Listen to me carefully - There are strange things that happen every day with people coming back from the dead... I think you are very ignorant in thinking it never happens! These are MDs who know death and know how to test for life and know that these things happen... You just are ignoring their own experiences.

You continue to act like I combined knowing my salvation with the phrase "come back from the dead" as if they are realted. They are not! Then you tried to say I was changing my mind because I said I didn't know if I was saved. Let's get this straight - salvation is known to the individual alone! That's why I said "the same GOD CAN save you!" I meant that the act of raising someone from the dead is a PHYSICAL demonstration of the power which CAN also save you eternally. And let's understand that however fullfilling your life is here it pails in comparison to eternal life. My point is that immortality is the ONLY goal worth having in the BIG picture as eternity is a long time to enjoy the same joys we have today here on earthl You act like the Bible is false and then you argue that GOD is not sprit (The trinity doctrine in my opinion is a little over blown as rigid dogma not really supported in the OT/NT as a dogma per se. So once again you are arguing from a Fundees perspective which I do not accept.

The Bible, which you say is "the Word of God", uses the male pronoun to refer to God from beginning to end.

That is not true! In English the pronoun is inserted by the translators. You even explain the Spirit being feminine in word structure! And GOD according to Jesus is Spirit! So eventhough in prayer Jesus addressed GOD as "the Father" that does not negate the fact that the Spirit/GOD is referenced as a female/mothering entity in many places in the Bible.

there also are places where the masculine pronoun is used in reference to the Spirit which in Greek

My problem with you now is that you are making statements which you know are false from a word structure perspective! I also think you keep acting like I am not answering the age old question of how do you tell the false from the true....

I said Isaiah 8:20 and raising the dead to life. But you keep acting like that means nothing! I answered your question but you ignore my answer...

So once again to the law (Torah) if they speak not according to this word it is because there is no light in them! this means that the OT trumps the NT! And for good reason. The NT assumes you already know the OT... So many things are not spoken about in the NT which are foundational to understanding the Bible. So many times "Christians" get their doctrines wrong because they assume the NT is saying something which is not allowed by the OT. Case and point the issue of SOUL/Spirits... Isaiah 8:20 is written in the context of answering a question about speaking to the dead... It is a known fact that the viewpoint of the Greeks and the views of the Hebrews/Jews are very different as to how they understand the after life. The whole notion of your soul being a separate entity from your body is a Platoistic notion. That notion violates the OT notion of no body soul separation at death. So that "Christians" adopted wrong theology because the NT was written in Greek with these ideas already imbedded in the language. That is a huge problem! So that all theology must be grounded first in the OT and then understood in the NT. And the NT can never override the OT and its theological foundation as laid out in the Torah. So your idea that it is the other way around is incorrect based on the facts as presented in the OT/NT. Ispiration is NOT a seal of the words as if they are SPOKEN by GOD! There are mistakes in the Bible but in spite of those mistakes the SPIRIT will guide the true seeker after truth to find the truth in the Bible and any other book which is "inspired" by the Spirit. (if such a book or books exists) "When the Spirit of truth is come he(it) will guide you..." John 16:13

You act like GOD the Spirit and GOD the Father and God the Son are DIFFERENT things. I suggest that they are not! They are forms of the ONE. Not three different things!


TBC




Namaste,

Mystykal

[L67]

People who cannot really understand what the Bible actually says also see yet cannot perceive, hear and yet do not understand. God in mercy has made it this way so that a person is not accountable for what they cannot conceive nor understand...unless they audaciously do claim they do understand. Things hidden in plain sight like this, whether because of not actually understanding what the Bible reveals, or examples from the parables (and there is more to all of them than what is made obvious in the text) are all result of people bringing God's judgment upon themselves (because they do not follow through with what they should do from what they already know of, about, or from God.

Nobody definitively understands what the Bible says. If Christians all understood the true meaning of the Bible, then they would be united as whole. But we don't see that. We see 10,000 different interpretations and each one claiming theirs is the only true one. Every Christian on this forum asserts their own beliefs as the true understanding. And the fact that anyone can make the Bible say what they want says it all.

And God does NOT have mercy for the ignorant. All will be judged according to the Bible. Event the ignorant of his word.

2 Thess 1:5-8

5 Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:

6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;

7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:


Acts 17:30-31 30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”


That is neither merciful or just. The Bible is clear. Ignorance is no excuse.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Bon Ami,

The notion of redactors was checked out some years ago.

The biggest problem seen here with it, is that if taken at face value, with all five books parsed, the theory does not hold up consistently.

The second biggest problem with it is there are several places where it appears that more than one, sometimes more than two of the redactors are writing so the theory loses consistency in this way, too.

...and where do you propose placing the passages referring to Yaweh Elohim, hunh? J or E or D or P?

I've seen other schematics that add more redactors than four yet this only convolutes the idea that much more.

Howdy hi, Timmy,

I agree the documentary hypothesis does not clearly "hold up" throughout the entire Torah. But there are enough examples to make it seem that at least some of the stories were woven from different traditions. The Flood story is one of the most obvious because it divides so naturally according to the divine name used.

What about Yahweh Elohim? That would naturally be explained as the product of the merging of the two traditions, J and E. We don't have much knowledge about how the documents were put together. The scholars are forced to do a lot of guessing. After the two traditions were merged it may be impossible to tell which came from which, except by analogy with other texts that are clearly of one or the other tradition. But still, there's a lot of guess work.

...and Mystical?

Some of the stuff you say about the Bible, if followed through does not help anyone, particularly yourself...and then tacking on other things, too¿

Aside from your mistaken understanding concerning what actual Biblical meditation entails--and it is completely opposed to all other Eastern Religion's modes of emptying your mind to find oneness-- for now, please consider your statement of the purpose of parables.

All parables in the Bible are about the onset of God's judgment. No matter who the prophet is using the parabolic imagery, the end result is judgment falling...because they all speak about judgment.

This is why when you see the parables told (by Y'shua) in the hearing of the Torah Teachers (scribes) and Parushim (Pharisees), their tendency was to become irate, thinking stuff like, "Who is this bastard (lit.) to speak to us like this" and at the same time wanting to understand the meaning.

Gentiles think allegorically redesigning Biblical passages is a smart thing to do, but if they understood how they could be bringing judgment upon themselves in so doing, they probably would not be so swift to misrepresent what they do not really comprehend. The same is true of the Rabbi or the Gambini who further mystifies these Scriptures. The Bible is the revelation of God to man, and to convoluted what it is about is only to create more of what it is opposing: confusion and every evil work.

The constant focus on a God of anger, wrath, rage, and judgment in the Bible only confirms its God cannot be the true God. It is a monstrous ego-demon projected by angry men filled with rage and wrath and a desire to see their enemies not merely destroyed, but tormented in a "lake of fire" forever. Why anyone would elevate such moral reprobates to the status of "prophet of God" is beyond me. Of course, that's after having done it myself for over a decade ... so who am I to talk, eh?

Of course parables were so that most the hearers did not understand, and yet every parable from any prophet, particularly the Son of Man, was given after telling the people plainly the right thing to do. The parable is told after God's plain message is rejected.

People who cannot really understand what the Bible actually says also see yet cannot perceive, hear and yet do not understand. God in mercy has made it this way so that a person is not accountable for what they cannot conceive nor understand...unless they audaciously do claim they do understand. Things hidden in plain sight like this, whether because of not actually understanding what the Bible reveals, or examples from the parables (and there is more to all of them than what is made obvious in the text) are all result of people bringing God's judgment upon themselves (because they do not follow through with what they should do from what they already know of, about, or from God.

If everything is so "plain" why is there so much disagreement amongst believers? I could perhaps see your argument working for why unbelievers "don't see" but then again, if that's really true then we have a test to determine who is the real unbeliever. Here is is: Anyone who disagrees with the universally seen and understood "plain meaning of the Bible"! But wait ... how do we settle disputes over the "plain meaning"? Do we hire the worlds best philosophers, scholars, linguists, and lawyers to make a committee to judge these matters? Ha! Don't think that would help!


I'm sorry Timmy, but I do believe your words are actually vacuous because there is no way for anyone to objectively determine who is right and who is wrong when it comes to the Bible.

As to the parables though, if you do not believe what you are now being told about them all being a sign of God's judgment, almost any Rabbi should be able to clarify this...or check the parables out from the Bible and see for yourself the different degrees of God's judgment. (There are clear enough indications ithroughout the pages of the Bible itself that will confirm this truism). Some things are not all that clear, but a true God fearer will be able to show you where to set your course in this...or, here:

Y'shua explained the above principle in a parable (keep in mind, parables represent God's judgment). In fact, he said that if you do not "get" this one, neither will you understand any of all the others (told by Him or not). Remember, there is more to this one parable than what is revealed in the text, as is true with all the others: Mt. 13.1-23/ Mk. 4.1-20/ Lk. 8.4-15)


Waka Waka eh eh,


Þ.Œ:

There is lot to be said for the ability to "get it". Most of my extended debates on this forum have focused on a refusal and/or inability to "get" things that seem to me to be entirely impossible not to "get". So I was forced to conclude that they probably did "get it" but simply refused to admit it because of pride.

I see your point about parables and judgment. But the judgment failed to occur as advertised, except in as much as it was about the first century city of Jerusalem, so I'm not too worried. It seems to me to be the ultimate demonstration of how doomsday cults persist in the face of the most absolute evidence of their failed prophecies. Christianity was born as a doomsday cult, and so now the greatest Christian virtue is to believe falsehoods despite the mountain of evidence to the contrary. And in this way, Christianity is indistinguishable from all other cults of delusion that despise the truth, and so it is impossible to believe that the "True God" would have chosen one of the ten thousand varieties of "Christianity" as the standard by which to judge the world. And that brings me back to the concept of "judgment" - there is a relevant pun here: judgment also means intelligence, as in having the ability to judge, discern, understand. So maybe THAT was the "judgment' that Christ was talking about. The ability to see through the bullshit of the Bible which most people take to be the "plain meaning" .... Now there's something to think about!

Great chatting bon ami,

Richard

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Nobody definitively understands what the Bible says. If Christians all understood the true meaning of the Bible, then they would be united as whole. But we don't see that. We see 10,000 different interpretations and each one claiming theirs is the only true one. Every Christian on this forum asserts their own beliefs as the true understanding. And the fact that anyone can make the Bible say what they want says it all.

Yep, that's the problem. The Bible is nothing but a pile of words with no clear connection to reality so there is no way to for anyone to determine what it actually means. It has the same problems as Philosophy, only worse because philosophies are usually grounded on realistic presuppositions whereas the Bible is founded on preposterous presuppositions. Science doesn't have this problem in as much as it is founded upon experiment which is a direct connection with reality.

And God does NOT have mercy for the ignorant. All will be judged according to the Bible. Event the ignorant of his word.

2 Thess 1:5-8

5 Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:

6 Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;

7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:


Acts 17:30-31 30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”


That is neither merciful or just. The Bible is clear. Ignorance is no excuse.

This touches upon one of the most fundamental contradictions in the Bible - What is required to be saved? Many fundamentalists believe that you must actually hear the name of "Jesus" and explicitly "accept him as your lord and savior" or you will go to hell. But Paul seems quite confused on this question, since in Romans 2 he said that anyone could work their way to heaven by simply "seek eternal life" by patiently doing good works. And then of course there are the Calvinists, who were dominant amongst the Protestant Reformers, who say this was all decided before you were born so there is absolutely nothing that anyone can do to change their fate. Then they talk in circles to get around what they just said. Its all confusion of words based on false presuppositions.

[duxrow]

The Crossroad...

At every crossroad there's a sign, directing left or right,
and when the wrong way beckons, the sign's a welcome sight.
Those who know the way by heart don't pay it much attention,
But if you're lost, the Holy Cross will lead you to redemption.

Two by two they entered the Ark, a vessel of haven to them,
Two by two he sent them out, to tell the world about Him.
It takes two to tango, sure enough, and also for a marriage,
Two witnesses in Scripture are the Truth that men disparage. Gen41:32

"If I be lifted up", he said, "I'll draw all men to me"..
That's why we speak about the Truth nailed down at Calvary.
Two holy legs, two holy hands, because by two it's decreed,
When you haven't a leg to stand on, your truth is sick indeed. Jn19:32

If your story won't hold water, then we look at it askance,
But Scripture is the holy water that makes us sing & dance.
The kind of bread that's very dry without a single drop,
But with the Holy Spirit it's the "two" that makes a sop!


The subject of TWO is best understood in light of Gen41:32 "by two it's established". The animals went into the Ark by two's, and Jesus sent out the seventy by two's. The two are frequently reciprocals (heaven/hell, love/hate, angels/devils) but more often are used in comparison or analogy: two tablets, two pillars, two mountains, two dreams, two spies, two Covenants, two baptisms, two kingdoms, two resurrections, two Jerusalems, two witnesses, two brothers/sisters, etc.

The pragmatic view will appreciate how it takes two lines for parallel, two dots for distance, two subjects for comparison, and two lines of sight for depth of vision. We often hear "You can't fly on one wing" or "waiting for the other shoe to drop", and Amos 3:3 asks "Can two walk together except they be agreed?"

Critics and novices who haven't studied or observed the subject of the Two's in Scripture sometimes object to the "two accounts" of Adam's creation in Genesis 1:27 and 2:7, or to the repetitive accounts in Kings/Chronicles and the Synoptic Gospels. The study gives us a new awareness of the verse "..if any TWO of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them". Mt18:19.

If you don't understand about the Two's, can you ever hope to grasp the Three's?