My errors?

Excuse me?

I'm sorry to inform you but the words, "eternal", "hell", "virgin", "jealously", etc., are the words that are actually used in the biblical TEXT.

If you have issues with those words and their meanings, take it up with the people who have translated the Bible. Not with me!

If you want to make an case that the biblical TEXT can no longer be "TRUSTED" because of gross errors during translations and transcriptions, I'll be the very FIRST to agree with you!

At that point, we may as well flush the TEXT down the toilet and move on to bigger and better things.

And I'd be more than happy to do that!

Well, I'm in agreement that the Biblical scriptures are indeed contradictory when it comes to this issues. There are actually many contradictions associated with this.

Here's another one:

At one point the scriptures say that the all judgment has been given to the son and the father no longer judges anyone. Yet, after that had supposedly been well-established, when on the cross, Jesus supposedly yells out "Father forgive them for they know not what they do?"

Well duh?

What is Jesus asking the Father to forgive people for if all judgment has been given over to him?

Blatant inconsistencies in these stories.

There can be no denial about it.

Sure, we can make feeble "apologetic excuses" for theses things. But those feeble apologetic excuses are NOT part of the story.

The stories are in blatant contradiction as they stand.

LOL, still in denial huh?


what you call the "biblical TEXT", I call a biblical translation...

The bible wasn't written in English, so I suggest you figure out what a concordance is or learn a different language.


That or be prepared to defend your so-called translation errors...

only answer that I can come up with is that Jesus was going to be dead for three days

he knows from past experiences that God can wipe out a lot of people in 72 hours

What, still no answer as what it was that God took from Adam?

POSTED BY YAHWEH
Genesis 2:22
And the Lord God built the rib which he took from Adam
into a woman: and brought her to Adam. ...

There's nothing to defend Peter.

For one thing, I pretty much address the modern day religious doctrines. Therefore, I'm right on target with what I'm addressing.

If you are suggesting that I should study ancient languages in an effort to try to decipher these ancient writings for myself, you may be surprised to learn that I had actually gone down that path at one point in my life.

What I very quickly discovered is that the very Hebrew language in which these texts were written was itself a very vague language even in the time it was being actively used. Hebrew words themselves could represent a myriad of various different meanings.

Therefore, even if you were alive at the very moment these things were being written down for the very first time and someone handed you the page with the ink still wet, and it was up to you to decide precisely what they meant, you would still be position to offer a wide variety of interpretations.

In short, the Hebrew language simply wasn't all that precise.

So any dream of getting at any sort of precise exact verbatim account of these scriptures is lost forever. That will never happen.

All we have are these vague highly questionable and grossly overly-translated doctrines to work with.

That's just the fact of reality.

I argue with the "currently popular texts" because that's what is currently being held-up by religious fanatics and fundamentalists as the "Word of God".

In terms actual "spirituality", I have no need for scriptures of any kind. I'm happy with my spiritual views and beliefs just as they are.

My involvement in all of this is truly not from a 'spiritual' point of view, but rather from a position of taking a stance against people (like Cowboy) who have actually deluded themselves into thinking that they, not only have the precisely verbatim "Word of God" in their hands, but they also feel like as if they are being a "servant of God" by preaching their own personal interpretations of it as though their personal interpretations are indeed the "Verbatim TRUTH of God's Word".



That's where I'm coming from Peter.

And like MorningSong so wisely recognizes. I'm not claiming to put words in "God's Mouth". On the contrary, I'm quite adamant about stating that it is my believe that all of these scriptures are fables. (even if the cause of them becoming fables was due to poor translations)

I personally don't believe that there ever was divine truth in any of these writings, but even if there may have been at one time, it's been totally lost by now for sure, IMHO.

That is a good explanation Funches, and it's typically the one given by Christian apologists when they are presented with this dilemma.

However, there's another very troubling thing here that I would question and it is this:

If Jesus could see that it would be wrong to condemn these people "for they know not what they do", then how is it that the all-wise Father could not also recognize this to be the case?

Why should Jesus have to point something like this out to the Father?

This suggests that either Jesus was wiser than the Father and trying to point something out to the Father that the Father might not be capable of comprehending on his own. Or that Jesus actually has MORE COMPASSION than the Father!

Either of these things are not good.

So the very idea of Jesus making a request to the Father as if Jesus doesn't TRUST the Father to do the right thing on his own is problematic in any case, IMHO.

As I always say, as fables, there is no problem. We can understand how men would have written such things into their fables.

But as the actual account of the "Word of God"? What sense would it make?

Why should Jesus need to make a plea to the Father to do something different from what the Father would have naturally done?

That can only suggest that Jesus and the Father aren't even close to being on the same wavelength. But that would surely fly in the face of Jesus being "one" with the Father if they would each deal with the same situation differently.

So for me, this is a serious problem that is not easily resolved.

Unless, of course, we accept that these are just man-made superstitious rumors. Then no resolution is required.

And that is indeed my solution to these outrageous contradictions.

That solves these problems completely.

Written by ancient Hebrews:
Genesis 2:22
21 And falling is a stupor on the human, caused by Yahweh Elohim, and he is sleeping. And taking is He one of his angular organs and is closing the flesh under it.

Hebrew Bible online:
http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/OTpdf/gen2.pdf


A fairly good explanation:
http://www.gtft.org/Library/condon/TheMakingOfWomanPriddy.htm


Concordant Literal Version:
http://studybible.info/CLV/Genesis%202

These are the kinds of discussions that, for me personally, are a total waste of time.

My objections with the overall myth is that it makes no sense to me that a supposedly all-wise creator who had a master plan would need to do this thing in the first place.

The whole tale implies a creator who did not intend to create women in the first place. He's doing it here as an afterthought. Apparently because Adam was unhappy, or needed some sort of helpmate.

But what would Adam need a helpmate for in the first place? What was his mission that he needed help with? Just being alive?

Assuming that Adam was a male he could not procreate. This brings into question why God had created MAN in the first place? If not to procreate, then for what purpose?

Had the story been told the other way around at least it would have made a tad bit more sense. Had God created a woman first who could potentially produce offspring without the need to be inseminated by a male, then at least she's have a PURPOSE. To procreate!

Then it makes sense that she might actually need a "helpmate" and potentially one who doesn't himself need to be bothered by having children.

So had the story started out with God created woman and then creating man as a helpmate to her it would have made at least a tad bit more sense.

But even then, it would still imply that God wasn't wise enough to have foreseen this need for a helpmate and just create the pair of them together in the first place.

So the story has serious problems that soar totally beyond any of these trivial interpretations.

And this type of thing pretty plagues all of these biblical tales IMHO.

It's not just the trivial interpretations, but it's the far greater bird's eye view of these stories.

For example, if the whole point of these stories was going to be that Adam and Eve fell from grace from God, why even bother bringing in a serpent to beguile them?

Why not just let them fall from grace on their own merit being their own idea? The very FACT that these stories require a serpent to beguile them brings up the very serious question of whether these people would have ever fallen from grace on their own.

And if they wouldn't have, then why is this God blaming humanity for something that he had to bring in a third party to CORRUPT?

He had to let his demonic fallen angel into the Garden of Eden to corrupt the humans because they wouldn't have fallen from grace on their own had they been left alone?

And I'm supposed to believe in these stories as a matter of pure FAITH?

Why would I want to have faith in such an underhanded creator?

This is a serious question.

Why would I want to have faith in a creator who isn't even willing to judge humanity on their own merit without contaminating them with an evil serpent that he ends up having to curse to crawl on it's belly for the rest of its days?

It just sounds like a totally made up nursery rhyme to me.

"and then the snake crawled away into the bushes and that's why snakes crawl on their bellies, and that's what will happen to you to if you are bad like the serpent. Now finish your glass of milk and I'll tuck you in and read you another bedtime nursery rhyme tomorrow night."

I mean seriously, that's precisely how these biblical stories appear to me. These are just tales that parents made up to tell their children, and when they began to realize that some people would continue to believe these stories clear into adulthood it became a RELIGION.

Abra, Jesus forgave sins while He walked the earth.

(Only GOD can forgive sins).

What Jesus spoke on the cross to the Father, was actually the

fulfilling of prophecy, and was

spoken for the benefit of the people (actually, there were

seven sayings Jesus spoke, while on the cross....all of very

important significance...but will go into all the sayings at a

later time):

.........................


Luke 23:34

“FATHER FORGIVE THEM, FOR THEY KNOW NOT WHAT THEY DO”


Intro: The crucifixion procession arrived at Calvary a little before

nine o’clock on Friday morning. The two thieves were fastened to

their crosses and raised into place. Next the Roman soldiers

fastened JESUS into his cross by driving sharp nails through his

hands and feet. Then they raised the cross with JESUS on it to an

upright position. Their JESUS hung, on the center cross, between

two criminals.


Underneath the cross-gathered crowds of people who shouted out their

hated at him, who himself never did anyone of them any harm. He did

nothing but show them love, peace and kindness.


When we come to the cross and the crucifixion of Christ, we find

that His death was just as much a miracle as His birth or

resurrection.


It could truly be said of His death, that it was Natural, Unnatural,

and Supernatural.


It was Natural because He really died. His death was a natural one.

It was Unnatural in that He should not have died. The wagers of sin

are death. He had no sin, yet He died. It was unnatural that He who

was perfectly holy should die.


It was also Supernatural in that He laid down His life. No one took

it from Him.


While on the cross, Jesus made seven utterances or statements. My

task and purpose today is to preach on the fires of just one of

those statements.


" Father forgive them, for they know not what they do.


I. THIS CRY WAS A FULFILLMENT OF PROPHECY .


The cry is, "Father forgive them..." The prophecy is found in Isaiah

53:12

Isaiah 53:12 “ . . . and made intercession for the transgressors."


Here it is in the wonderful prophecies of Isaiah! Hear we have a

prophecy written 745 years before the event!




II. THIS CRY IDENTIFIED HIM WITH HIS PEOPLE


Jesus never called on His father to forgive sins. He himself

demonstrated he had power, while on earth, to forgive sins.


· Luke 7:48 "And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven." ONLY GOD

CAN FORGIVE SINS and the Jewish leaders knew that.


· Mark 2:7 "Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? Who can

forgive sins but God only?"



III. THIS CRY SHOW THE IGNORANCE OF THE HUMAN HEART


Jesus was their Messiah. He was their only means of salvation. Only

through Him would and could the promises of God be fulfilled. But

they knew not what they were doing.


· Peter says in Acts 3:15: "And killed the Prince of life, whom God

hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses."


IV. THIS CRY SHOWS MAN’S GREATEST NEED


Notice what Jesus prayed for.

He did not pray for their wealth.

He did not pray for prosperity for the nation.

He did not pray for the hungry and the homeless.

Jesus prayed for their forgiveness.


The prodigal knew that he had sinned against the father and knew

that his greatest need was confession and forgiveness.

He said, "I have sinned..." He needed forgiveness most of all. Jesus

knows man’s greatest need.


V. THIS CRY SHOWS THE GREAT LOVE OF JESUS CHRIST FOR SINNERS


What would we do in the hour of man’s worst treatment of us? Would

we pray for their forgiveness or would we curse them and ask God to

destroy them?

This brings us to the sober reality of His DEITY !!! Only GOD could

LOVE like this.

John 15:13 "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down

his life for his friends."



ps....If that was not God (God the Son) on that cross, we are

still dead in our sins....because ONLY GOD HIMSELF could

BEAR and PAY for the sins of the whole wide world on that

cross for us.... no mere mortal man coud EVER do that !!!

Only GOD !!!!

Jesus was GOD HIMSELF ( God the Son) on that cross.


(exerts from sermoncentral.com )

I with you that this is indeed the position taken by the authors of the Bible. Clearly I don't accept their position.

A God can only forgive "sins" committed against the God himself.

In the meantime, only men can forgive the trespasses made against them. In fact, if a man trespasses against another man the only person who can forgive them is the person they trespassed against. Not God. God has no say in the matter.

If you have done someone wrong, the person to seek forgiveness from is the person you have wronged. Do not seek forgiveness from. God cannot forgive you for your trespasses against other men. Only those that you trespass against can forgive you your 'sins' against them.

Jesus was able to forgive sins made against "God" because he knew that all are God and that all that is required to be forgiven by God is to forgive yourself for the "sins" you have committed against yourself. You are the only person who can provide that forgiveness. And Jesus knew that, so all he was doing was giving people permission to forgive themselves.

Jesus was a very wise sage. I do accept that.

But there is no egotistical Zeus in the sky who can forgive anyone. There is no egotistical Zeus in heaven who holds grudges against people that need to be forgiven. That is the fallacy of this overall religion.

There are only two sources of forgiveness that a person must be concerned with. Forgiveness of those you trespass against, and forgiveness of your own trespasses for 'sins' you have committed against yourself.




Again, I totally understand that this is indeed what the author of the New Testament would love for us to believe. They tried really hard to make a case for this. However, they failed to convince me.

I can see exactly what they were doing. They were rooting through the Torah in an attempt to make a case that Jesus was the "Son of God" and they looked for potential prophecies, then simply claimed that Jesus had actually said all these things when he was crucified, thus fulfilling "prophecy".

The Jews didn't buy into this trickery, and neither do I.

I personally think it's all-too-obvious what these authors were attempting to do.

Moreover, if these are the kind of prophecies being "Full-filled" that everyone refers to (and they often are), then they are totally unimpressive. Not only were the authors of the New Testament fully aware of these prophecies, but they actually POINT right to them and say, "Hey look! This was full-filled when Jesus said this, "blah blah blah" and this prophecy was full-filled when Jesus said that, "blah blah blah".

The only problem is that it is these very same authors who are writing down the "blah blah blah" that they claim Jesus said!

How can we call that prophecy?

We have no clue if Jesus actually said any of those things.

For all we know he might not have said anything at all when he was being crucified. According to many scholars and people in the medical sciences, you wouldn't be talking very much if you were nailed to a pole with nothing holding you to the pole but spikes in your wrists and feet.

In short, MorningSong, I really see no reason to believe the authors of the New Testament.

I personally don't TRUST them.

People did nasty things in the name of religion back then. I mean, just think about it. The very crucifixion of Jesus was supposedly inspired by religion. The Pharisees had incited a mob to help them have Jesus crucified on a pole basically on charges of blaspheme.

People were doing horrific things in those days in the name of religion.

Why should we think that the authors of the New Testament were any less devious and nasty than all the other religious jerks who lived back in those days?

~~~~~

Where does Jesus ever tell anyone that they should worship the Torah as the "Word of God"? Even the Gospels don't have him making any such claim. On the contrary he taught totally opposite moral values and renounced the scribes and Pharisees as being hypocrites. When he did refer to the Torah he referred to as "Your Law" when speaking to the Scribes and Pharisees, not as "God's Word".

As far as I can see, this man named Jesus was actually renouncing the Torah as the hypocritical laws written by scribes and pharisees. He wasn't supporting it as the "Word of God".

Where do the Gospels have Jesus prophesying the coming of Saul/Paul to finish his ministry and complete teaching that he never completed?

He doesn't. He never even remotely suggests any such thing.

Where in the Gospels does Jesus tell anyone to write these things down or to create a collection of documents that must be accepted as his verbatim words?

He doesn't. He never even remotely suggests any such thing.

Where does it say ANYWHERE in the entire biblical cannon that such a cannon will someday come to pass and must be accepted as the verbatim "Word of God".

No such claims even remotely exist.

In short, there is no support for even holding the biblical cannon up as the "Word of God".

No support for that idealism even exists at all.

That very notion was also nothing other than the creation of men.


I have no problems with Jesus, and especially with the moral teachings that have been associated with him.

But I have very serious problems with holding Jesus up as an idol image of God to support a notion that some entire cannon of stories represent the infallible "Word of God".

That very idea right there has absolutely nothing at all to do with Jesus.

I personally like Jesus far better as a Jewish Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva.

It's the holding up of Jesus as an idol image of God to support the entire Christian Cannon as the "Word of God" that I reject.

And as I'm sure you are all too aware of, I reject that notion with GREAT PASSION.

I have no problems with Jesus.

But I have humongous problems with Christianity.

The RIB CAGE is a "hollow, angular vault" ...


God used Adam's rib (from his side), signifying that woman

would be man's equal..and walk side by side, and not walk

behind nor before her man....but equally side by side !!!


Some websites are not trustworthy.....sorry to say...and do not

line up with the Word of God....they take scripture out of

context, and don't include the rest of scripture....and sadly

just give us man's interpretation, and not the Holy Spirit led

interpretation of the Word of God at all.....

this is why one must be very careful of what one finds on

the internet these days.

Funches...

"if you are totally paralysed you will die until someone assist you ...the will can not help itself survive...this is why the will is part of the body ".

Beg to differ...

Will continues to fight for survival after death of the shell.

Free will gives us the ability to 'judge' ourselves and be reborn into the next life. 'Elsewere', a place where the 'shell' itself changes... But where also the 'spirit' continues to grow.

Morningsong, there are 2 separate words used that were translated into the English word rib. If a rib from the ribcage was the intended meaning, there would only be one word translated into "rib".


Sooooo, who's using "man's interpretation"?



BTW, do you think Simon the leper was really a leper?

You say, "signifying that woman would be man's equal.."

But it doesn't actually state that in the story, so this would be someone's personal interpretation of what this supposedly "signifies".

Others could, and have, suggested that since woman was made from a part of man, this "signifies" that the women is actually the property of the man. She is made from HIS rib, and thus it's clear that his was meant by God to show that she is his PROPERTY.

That's certainly a valid way to interpret these same things. That's the problem with these stories, when they don't actually spell things out, you can imagine them to "signify" all sorts of things.

Moreover, it really wouldn't matter what God had intended when he created Eve, it's crystal clear by the following that she must serve her husbands desires, and not the other way around:

Genesis 3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.


It's stated crystal clear here in Gen 3:16 that the man shall rule over the woman.

So even if their had been equality between them before the fall from grace, there sure as hell isn't any equality after the fall from grace.

That is on pretty solid ground by Genesis 3:16.

Isn't that funny?

The Christian's favorite verse is John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

But they sure don't like Genesis 3:16 "Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."

Is that a numerical freak accident? Chapter 3 verse 16. One is a favorite, and the other they'd rather sweep under the carpet, or makes all sorts of alternative interpretations for it.

Mistranslation of the word 'rib'(english).

God took a 'womb' from adam...

From which womb(rib) came Eve.

the word translated as 'rib' (in its use within Genesis) should read 'womb'...

Look it up.

don't take my word for it. Try a good search engine.

Come to think of it, maybe I should hook up with a Christian woman who actually BELIEVES in the Bible!

Any Christian women out there who believe Genesis 3:16?

Send me an email. Or better yet, "Come on over!"

I've got tons of work that needs to be done around here. Floors need scrubbed, walls need washed. Dirty dishes from last week need to be washed.

I'm a fair and righteous ruler like God. I would never do anything worse than make you crawl on you belly and eat dirt. I promise!

I won't even threaten you with hell fire. But I do expect you to keep the woodstove well-stoked with logs.

In fact, you can even chop them up whilst I practice my saxophone.

Don't worry, I'll play spiritual songs praising Jesus for providing me with my slave woman helpmate who's sole desire shall be to serve me just as I serve Jesus who sits at the right hand of God in heaven who's word we must all obey as I rule over thee.

that Jesus asked God to forgive, no matter how one tries to spin it seems more like a slap in God's face

FOR EXAMPLE:
Jesus expressing to God that he forgive those for what they done was placing himself in a position that he is more forgiving than God and indicating that God was not as forgiving and all about wrath

it could mean that Jesus having been among man and was a man were trying to rely to God than he understood Man more than God which could explain why some believed that God supposedly handed over judgement

but when it comes to what God supposedly have done to Jesus when Jesus said "God why have you forsaken me"....this was an expression of scorn thrown at God not forgivness or understanding

but I don't see any upside for Jesus asking God to forgive in front of witnesses..it seems more like a sign of disrespect to God

Peter_Pan ...can you explain what the heck an angular organ is? .....I sure hope with all that drama you were causing that it isn't a translation that means Rib