The Religion Discussion

[AdamB]

Why did Moses go up to Mt Sinai BY HIMSELF? Why didn't his people take a hike with him?

No, no, no, hold yourself to the same standard, which verse did you get this from?

EXODUS 19:16-25

Exodus 19:16-25
New International Version (NIV)

16 On the morning of the third day there was thunder and lightning, with a thick cloud over the mountain, and a very loud trumpet blast. Everyone in the camp trembled. 17 Then Moses led the people out of the camp to meet with God, and they stood at the foot of the mountain. 18 Mount Sinai was covered with smoke, because the Lord descended on it in fire. The smoke billowed up from it like smoke from a furnace, and the whole mountain[a] trembled violently. 19 As the sound of the trumpet grew louder and louder, Moses spoke and the voice of God answered him.[b]

20 The Lord descended to the top of Mount Sinai and called Moses to the top of the mountain. So Moses went up 21 and the Lord said to him, “Go down and warn the people so they do not force their way through to see the Lord and many of them perish. 22 Even the priests, who approach the Lord, must consecrate themselves, or the Lord will break out against them.”
23 Moses said to the Lord, “The people cannot come up Mount Sinai, because you yourself warned us, ‘Put limits around the mountain and set it apart as holy.’”

24 The Lord replied, “Go down and bring Aaron up with you. But the priests and the people must not force their way through to come up to the Lord, or he will break out against them.”
25 So Moses went down to the people and told them.

[maj. tom]

So he could take 40 days to carve out his ideas of what morality is on a stone tablet and show people later. No witnesses. It would take about 40 days to do this by yourself, would it not? Then lightning struck a tree and set it on fire; he saw a burning bush that talked, perhaps due to some starvation and fasting on his part. We know this story. Most people just choose to believe that fairy tale that has been passed on and on for thousands of years.

Perhaps he did this because that's what political leaders have to do sometimes to lead people through difficult times. And God was a very powerful and confirmed figure back then for an oppressed people during a revolution. Telling people that God wrote and spoke to you would have pretty much cemented Moses as a leader through the hard years to come for the refugees, and given them hope and faith.


This is most likely what actually happened. If this happened today, this is what every sane person in the world would understand happened. If you read this in the newspapers tomorrow or had read a similar story in the Brothers Grimm publications, you would scoff. Strange what time does to a belief.

[Sacchetto Boutique]

I believe the Quran's account of what happened. People just ignoring the link i sent with the comparison of the Bible and Quran. The ORIGINAL bible n torah had alot of the same info found in the quran. Its easy to believe what is written in it yet not everyone will see the truth and accept it

[Chimera]

took this from my facebook feed, the guy is someone i went to school with years ago



idk, i find God cudda well link him with a bess job

[Habit7]

Like when the jews asked Moses to talk to GOD of the Old Testament.

Which verse did you get this?

AdamB I dont think you are being honest. You referenced Moses interceding for the Jews to the God of the Old Testament and then quote the Quran as a proof text?

Could I guess that you thought what you where saying existed in the Old Testament and when you couldn't find it, you are quoting the Quran as if me or any other Christian sees it as an authoritative account of Moses' life?

[Habit7]

So he could take 40 days to carve out his ideas of what morality is on a stone tablet and show people later. No witnesses. It would take about 40 days to do this by yourself, would it not? Then lightning struck a tree and set it on fire; he saw a burning bush that talked, perhaps due to some starvation and fasting on his part. We know this story. Most people just choose to believe that fairy tale that has been passed on and on for thousands of years.

Perhaps he did this because that's what political leaders have to do sometimes to lead people through difficult times. And God was a very powerful and confirmed figure back then for an oppressed people during a revolution. Telling people that God wrote and spoke to you would have pretty much cemented Moses as a leader through the hard years to come for the refugees, and given them hope and faith.


This is most likely what actually happened. If this happened today, this is what every sane person in the world would understand happened. If you read this in the newspapers tomorrow or had read a similar story in the Brothers Grimm publications, you would scoff. Strange what time does to a belief.

Well sir, I think you believe what you are saying here because you are a naturalist. You believe all processes which occur on the Earth all have an explanation through natural law and principles.

But if one were to follow that reasoning to its natural (excuse the pun) conclusion, you will meet a brick wall. Because if everything that exist has an natural explanation through a natural inception, then what created naturalism? You will then have to throw away your naturalism and believe in the supernatural. And if we are to judge this supernatural entity from what exists naturally, we can see that it features design and logic, and from our observance we know that design and logic only comes from an intelligent mind. We also see that intelligent minds are also communicative and expressive, so we can tell that this supernatural entity is also communicative and expressive. In addition, we can observe nature and see whether this entity has communicated and/or expressed itself to us. So long story short, an account of a supernatural interaction, with supernatural items, supernaturally recorded in a book, is not as big of a stretch as you are making it out to be.

In fact, believing that the only things that are real are those that can be observed by my 5 senses, leaves one in a predicament. Because, I then understand that I am an arbiter of reality. Likewise, if my morality is not God-given then, I am my own moral arbiter too. And you can easily deceive yourself as to what is real or not and what is truly right or wrong. In essence, you become your own god. You can live your life under the religion of Me, judging others, proselytising your views on internet forums, and living with the hope that with your faithful adherence to Me, you will die and go to the heaven of Me. A heaven of blissful non-accountability and rest; the heaven of non-existence.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ so you are saying when we cannot find an answer in science and nature we should just use the supernatural to explain it.

that kind of logic is what had man thinking Thor created thunder!

[Habit7]

By you logic can I believe that red herrings can evolve into strawmen?

[maj. tom]

what?

[Habit7]

What I set out to prove is that naturalism doesn't explain everything. The Bible includes several miracles, even the initial one of a six day creation. If you or I cannot wrap our mind around a biblical description of a supernatural event, that does mean it did not happen.

Whatever else you deduce from that, you are on your own and please do not ascribe it to me.

[bluefete]

^ so you are saying when we cannot find an answer in science and nature we should just use the supernatural to explain it.

that kind of logic is what had man thinking Thor created thunder!

Oh Duane!!!

Man, with his infinite knowledge, likes to think that he is greater than his non-existent Creator.

All science does is validate God's great handiwork. Nothing else!!

Did the telescope create itself or evolve from the sea?

Yet, the creator of the telescope created it for a purpose.

As long as rationalists and scientists fail to understand that all they are doing is asserting what God has already created (and only in God's time), they will continue to miss the point.

Many of the astronauts who went to the moon in the late 1960's / early 1970's were very intelligent engineers / scientists. Quite a few of them came back changed when they witnessed the awesomeness of God's creation from a perspective billions of us will never get to see in our lifetime.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ yes yes many Muslims claim Neil Armstrong converted to Islam on the moon after hearing the Adhan there - turned out to be a false claim refuted by Mr. Armstrong himself. It doesn't discredit Islam whether he heard it not though.

"intelligent engineers / scientists" understand the science behind the solar system and its awesomeness.

Did the telescope create itself or evolve from the sea?

seriously that is your argument? I guess 2000 years ago you would have said "the Colosseum didnt create itself, everything has a creator, just as Thor creates each peel of thunder and Zeus crafts each bolt of lightning!"

If you or I cannot wrap our mind around a biblical description of a supernatural event, that does mean it did not happen.

so any description of a supernatural event that we cannot wrap our minds around is proof it happened?

What about the scientific and logical reasoning that we do not resort to magic and supernatural explanations but try to find real evidence through testing and observation?

You're saying if I can't wrap my head around a leprechaun with a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow that doesn't mean it doesn't exist - so we should believe in it!

The Bible is more than just a fairytale, I understand, but the argument holds no water since any religious text looks like a fairytale to another religion; just the same way Greek religions seem to us today.

Your argument amounts to burden of proof. And we know that it is the person making the claim that something exists is the one who bears the burden of proof.

My point is not to refute your beliefs but to show that your statements concerning your beliefs are not logical.

[DFC]

"In the future ,science will crush all religions, and only the TRUTH will remain"- Swami Vivekananda.

Truth is, Humanity is its own savior and destroyer.

But things are slowly improving.

[Habit7]

First let me clear up a grammatical error I made:
If you or I cannot wrap our mind around a biblical description of a supernatural event, that doesn’t mean it did not happen.

I think in my response to maj.tom I set out to prove the existence of the supernatural even from a naturalist position. So when the Bible says something is supernatural I tend to believe it because the supernatural is just as real as the natural.

Now I have observed that you tend to engage in the red herring fallacy of straw man arguments. If I were to say the sky is blue you might respond that how come white planes don't return to Earth stained blue? Likewise, I make specific arguments from occurrences relative to the Bible and Christianity and you extrapolate that to mythology and folklore as if they lie on the same plane and you ignore the very nomenclature of their names which inherently says it is false. You have been doing this for about ten pages, I called you out on it before and I see that you did concede somewhat in saying that the Bible is not a fairy tale, but we are going down the same road again.

I digress. The issue that you and I are faced with is that with the account of Moses on Mt. Sinai with the burning bush et al is that it is a historical account. We cannot apply live scientific observation to the account because it is completed and it was so far in the past that whatever evidence could have been there could be corrupted. We can try to explain based on scientific principle to either proof or disprove the event and while good arguments can be made on both sides, at the end it is just conjecture as we have no objective means of verifying what actually happened. We then come to the explanation from the supernatural; this is where faith comes in. You probably do have faith in the God of the Bible so you might disregard this as a reason. So there are three main arguments, it was supernatural, it was natural or it didn't happen. Either one is correct or all are wrong.

I believe it was a supernatural event, not just because of my faith in the God of the Bible alone, but because of the accuracy of prophecy and other supernatural characteristics in the Bible. On pg. 452 I posted Isaiah 53 where it specifically outlined the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, 700 years prior. The Dead Sea Scrolls attest that Isaiah was unchanged, and secular sources confirmed the existence and death of Jesus. How do you account for this?

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ I posted taking into consideration your typographical error. My answer doesnt change.

it's not red herrings or straw men! Infact YOU are most guilty of the red herrings when we bring a point and you decide to bring up another point to divert attention!

I extrapolate that to mythology and folklore because I am showing you that to another religion your doctrine is no more than mythology and folklore. You have yet to show any valid reason why one religion is right and the other wrong other than someone's personal faith in it!

I said I UNDERSTAND why it is not a fairytale to you. I said that so that you would save me the repetition that it cannot be compared to any other text - but that didn't work.

Again, I am not stating that any text is right or wrong. However there is no evidence that you are right and AdamB is wrong or vice versa other than your respective faith in what you believe to be true.

I believe it was a supernatural event, not just because of my faith in the God of the Bible alone, but because of the accuracy of prophecy and other supernatural characteristics in the Bible. On pg. 452 I posted Isaiah 53 where it specifically outlined the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, 700 years prior. The Dead Sea Scrolls attest that Isaiah was unchanged, and secular sources confirmed the existence and death of Jesus. How do you account for this?

firstly there is no real scientific evidence of supernatural events ever occuring, which is why they are called "supernatural"!!!

secondly you posted on "Isaiah 53 where it specifically outlined the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, 700 years prior" however the same Bible (as a compilation of texts) is the ONLY text that "outlined the life, death and resurrection of Jesus".

The Dead Sea Scrolls contained the scrolls of Isaiah but it also contained alot of texts that were left out of the Bible. The Isaiah Scrolls do match the text in the Bible but that only proves that the men who put the Bible together used the text in the same format that was also foudn in the Dead Sea Scrolls!

Jews believe that Isaiah 53 talks about the Nation of Israel, Christians believe that Isaiah 53 is talking about Jesus. The right one to you is the one you have faith in.

Secular sources may have confirmed the existence and death of of a man named Jesus. Secular sources do not confirm anything supernatural.

All you are saying here is that the Bible says that the Bible is true.
That is circular logic.

[Habit7]

Mythology & Folklore - doesn't not claim
Religious text - claim to be true

Compare oranges with oranges and apples with apples, people of other religions don't see other religious text as fairy tales; they see them as wrong in their truth claim

Again, I am not stating that any text is right or wrong. However there is no evidence that you are right and AdamB is wrong or vice versa other than your respective faith in what you believe to be true.

I know you want to appear objective, but I can at least recall that you believe the Bible is wrong on the issue of Creation and your need to repent and believe the Gospel.
Again you are saying there is no evidence of me being right and AdamB being wrong yet I can just scroll up on this very page and see where I responded to you and stated that the Bible outweighs the Qu'ran by manuscript evidence (the means by which historians verify historical data) and archaeological evidence. Plus I outlined to Sacchetto that Muhammad advised his followers to observe the Torah, Psalms and Gospel and that these book can never be corrupted. Yet as later literate Muslims realised that these books contradict Islam, they claimed them all to be corrupted even though in the 7th Century these books of the Bible were already widely distributed throughout the world and yet analogous. But just as you did 20 pages prior you will claim there is no evidence, and when given the evidence you will gloss over it and 10 pages later claim absolutely there is NO evidence.

firstly there is no real scientific evidence of supernatural events ever occuring, which is why they are called "supernatural"!!!

Let's do a word study, the prefix 'super-' means over, so if something is over-nature how can natural law and principle quantify it? It iss like a fish in bowl wanting to quantify the entire world without leaving the bowl and judging it based on observations within the bowl.

however the same Bible (as a compilation of texts) is the ONLY text that "outlined the life, death and resurrection of Jesus".

There four major texts that outline the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. These texts are based on 1st hand eyewitnesses and collected 1st hand eyewitness accounts. It was all written within the lifetime of impartial eyewitnesses and widely distribute with enough time for them to put forward contradicting views. Furthermore, within the four accounts there are apparent contradictions consistent within legal eyewitness accounts, all of which reflect different perspectives but not true contradictions. This is the best historical account that could be done for a person.
Again if you scroll up I repeated a list that I gave you and AdamB of secular sources of Jesus' life. So the Bible is not “the ONLY text” that speaks of Jesus. You, like a Muslim, in order to disagree with the Gospel account will have to bring equally verifiable historical evidence to counter. Also to doubt the Gospel accounts of Jesus, you will also have to discredit every ancient account of anybody because the manuscript evidence for Jesus outweighs everybody else.

The Dead Sea Scrolls contained the scrolls of Isaiah but it also contained alot of texts that were left out of the Bible.

The Dead Sea Scrolls was an attempt of a sect of ppl to preserve their library. To claim that every book within the DSS is supposed to be in Bible is facetious. The DSS has every book in the Old Testament at least partially except Esther. To say that the book on my bookshelf that is next to my Bible is just as inspired as my Bible is incorrect. The DSS shows the preservation of scripture and that it wasn't revised to match current occurrences.

Jews believe that Isaiah 53 talks about the Nation of Israel, Christians believe that Isaiah 53 is talking about Jesus.

Yeah and my cousin Cecil thinks it means that if you go into KFC after 11pm the chicken meals should all be half price.
People could have varying interpretations, but only one is right. You believe your interpretation of the natural world points to evolution, I interpret it points to Creation. We are either both wrong or one is correct, likewise with the Jews and the Christians. But before you run to the Jewish interpretation to prove ambiguity, read it and say if it does or doesn't give a specific prophetic account of Jesus.

The secular sources confirm the supernatural once it is something that was specifically prophesied before.

My logic is no more circular than yours if according to you, we are to determine truth only by scientific evidence, and see whether that statement is true, we will investigate the scientific evidence of it.

[~Vēġó~]

someday (GOD willing) I'll find the strength to go through all 454 pages....but today is not that day....

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Mythology & Folklore - doesn't not claim
Religious text - claim to be true

something claiming to be true does not make it true. Scientology claims to be true! Do you think it is?

Compare oranges with oranges and apples with apples, people of other religions don't see other religious text as fairy tales; they see them as wrong in their truth claim

well I just compared one religion to the other above. Did that change your myopia?

Again, I am not stating that any text is right or wrong. However there is no evidence that you are right and AdamB is wrong or vice versa other than your respective faith in what you believe to be true.

I know you want to appear objective, but I can at least recall that you believe the Bible is wrong on the issue of Creation and your need to repent and believe the Gospel.

I stated that there is no evidence of a young earth. There is no evidence that the earth is 6,000-12,000 years old as you stated. There is however extensive scientific evidence that the earth is billions of years old.

I also disagree with your hero, Dr. Jason Lisle, that when a scientific answer contradicts what is written in a holy text, we should ignore the scientific evidence and resort to what the holy text tells us.

Again you are saying there is no evidence of me being right and AdamB being wrong yet I can just scroll up on this very page and see where I responded to you and stated that the Bible outweighs the Qu'ran by manuscript evidence (the means by which historians verify historical data) and archaeological evidence.

YOu saying it does not make it true! You are being subjective and closed minded. Which passages of the Bible trumps the Qur'an on this "evidence"?

Historians take manuscripts to support historical and scientific research. You say the Bible claims man and dinosaurs walked the earth together yet historians, archaeologists, scientists all show evidence that they were millions of years apart and never existed together. Now you want to use "archaeological evidence" as a point to prove the Bible's accuracy? That is flawed logic.

Plus I outlined to Sacchetto that Muhammad advised his followers to observe the Torah, Psalms and Gospel and that these book can never be corrupted. Yet as later literate Muslims realised that these books contradict Islam, they claimed them all to be corrupted even though in the 7th Century these books of the Bible were already widely distributed throughout the world and yet analogous. But just as you did 20 pages prior you will claim there is no evidence, and when given the evidence you will gloss over it and 10 pages later claim absolutely there is NO evidence.

sorry I missed it, mind posting that evidence again?

firstly there is no real scientific evidence of supernatural events ever occuring, which is why they are called "supernatural"!!!

Let's do a word study, the prefix 'super-' means over, so if something is over-nature how can natural law and principle quantify it? It iss like a fish in bowl wanting to quantify the entire world without leaving the bowl and judging it based on observations within the bowl.

If the fish decides to claim all unexplained things are supernatural, how does the fish decide which explanation of the "supernatural" is true and which isn't?

The ONLY logical way is to use scientific observation and testing. When man started carrying out this scientific process, many things that were believed to be supernatural turned out of have very natural explanations.

Not too long ago major religions believed the world was flat and the earth was the center of the universe.

however the same Bible (as a compilation of texts) is the ONLY text that "outlined the life, death and resurrection of Jesus".

There four major texts that outline the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. These texts are based on 1st hand eyewitnesses and collected 1st hand eyewitness accounts. It was all written within the lifetime of impartial eyewitnesses and widely distribute with enough time for them to put forward contradicting views. Furthermore, within the four accounts there are apparent contradictions consistent within legal eyewitness accounts, all of which reflect different perspectives but not true contradictions. This is the best historical account that could be done for a person.

what proves they were impartial?

Again if you scroll up I repeated a list that I gave you and AdamB of secular sources of Jesus' life. So the Bible is not “the ONLY text” that speaks of Jesus. You, like a Muslim, in order to disagree with the Gospel account will have to bring equally verifiable historical evidence to counter. Also to doubt the Gospel accounts of Jesus, you will also have to discredit every ancient account of anybody because the manuscript evidence for Jesus outweighs everybody else.

YOU are the one making the claim therefore the burden of proof is on you to prove it. I don't have to disprove it.

As I said before, there is ample historical evidence that Jesus existed, but no scientific evidence that anything supernatural occurred.

That's doesn't mean noting supernatural happened, but I'm saying there is no scientific evidence of it.

The Dead Sea Scrolls contained the scrolls of Isaiah but it also contained alot of texts that were left out of the Bible.

The Dead Sea Scrolls was an attempt of a sect of ppl to preserve their library. To claim that every book within the DSS is supposed to be in Bible is facetious. The DSS has every book in the Old Testament at least partially except Esther. To say that the book on my bookshelf that is next to my Bible is just as inspired as my Bible is incorrect. The DSS shows the preservation of scripture and that it wasn't revised to match current occurrences.

But you are saying that the books that made it in the final Bible are inspired, therefore anything else found would be uninspired - so you'd write it off anyway!

Jews believe that Isaiah 53 talks about the Nation of Israel, Christians believe that Isaiah 53 is talking about Jesus.

Yeah and my cousin Cecil thinks it means that if you go into KFC after 11pm the chicken meals should all be half price.
People could have varying interpretations, but only one is right.

Not really. All could be wrong!

You believe your interpretation of the natural world points to evolution, I interpret it points to Creation.

Mine is not an interpretation. it is based on looking at scientific evidence. Not on faith.

We are either both wrong or one is correct,

first logical thing you've said so far.

likewise with the Jews and the Christians. But before you run to the Jewish interpretation to prove ambiguity, read it and say if it does or doesn't give a specific prophetic account of Jesus.

Obviously a Christian reading the Bible account will lean towards the divinity of Jesus.

But reading it objectively with an open mind I see where it can definitely allude to the suffering of Jesus in some aspects, but it was also written in past tense (a prophesy should be written in future tense since it is stating what will happen) and if you read on a bit more, Isaiah 49:3 says "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will display my splendor.", considering Isaiah 53 is the "Song of the Servant" then that supports the Jewish belief.

At the end of the day none of that makes it even true! Isaiah could have been talking about someone or something else entirely! the world was much harsher then and servants and slaves and famine and drought and oppression were real, everyday realities.

The secular sources confirm the supernatural once it is something that was specifically prophesied before.

and what was specifically prophesied before?

You can make a number of events appear as though they were specifically prophesied before by Nostradamus if you massaged it enough!

My logic is no more circular than yours if according to you, we are to determine truth only by scientific evidence, and see whether that statement is true, we will investigate the scientific evidence of it.

umm no.
scientific evidence is actual factual proof, so showing proof to prove something is not circular at all.

non-circular: Jimmy DOES have a ball, there it is.
circular: Jimmy DOES have a ball, because Jimmy said he has a ball.

[~Vēġó~]

good LORD Duane....way sah!!!!

[maj. tom]

You all know who you are in this thread.

[AdamB]

Like when the jews asked Moses to talk to GOD of the Old Testament.

Which verse did you get this?

AdamB I dont think you are being honest. You referenced Moses interceding for the Jews to the God of the Old Testament and then quote the Quran as a proof text?

Could I guess that you thought what you where saying existed in the Old Testament and when you couldn't find it, you are quoting the Quran as if me or any other Christian sees it as an authoritative account of Moses' life?

Habit7,
You have missed the point. This line of discussion had to do with the prophets LEADING and INTERCEDING for their "flock" on the day of judgment but there is evidence that they also did so, for other matters tho, in this life.

I showed you two accounts, one from the Quran and the other from the Old Testament. In the latter, the jews went with Moses to talk to GOD but ONLY MOSES was allowed to go up (then with his brother Aaron after).

[AdamB]

took this from my facebook feed, the guy is someone i went to school with years ago



idk, i find God cudda well link him with a bess job

And who says that TODAY one should follow the laws of the jews? Each revelation of the past with its laws were for a restricted time , place and people.

The Seventh Day Adventists have tried to hold on to practises of the Old Testament when the rest of Christendom have let it go.

Habit7 claims he follows the OT too but does he (and other christians):
1. circumcise their male?
2. not eat pork (and other unclean meat specified in OT)?
3. observe the sabbath?
4. observe punishment of death for murder?
5. put to death the one who strikes or curses his/her mother or father?
6. do not allow the sorceress to live?
7. put to death the one who has intercourse with an animal?
8. if he seduces a virgin, pay her price and make her his wife?
9. do not demand usury / interest for money lent to the poor?

TO NAME A FEW...

[AdamB]

Well the Encyclopedia Britannica is made up entirely of analogous material and corroborated historical fact.

The point I was making is that you are arguing this point with AdamB and he believes the Qur'an to be perfect and so he would think "there is no other book outside our recent era that has more analogous manuscripts and corroborated historical fact." and so it does not make the Bible or your feelings for a book unique.

Also I said I AGREE with the logic "the amount of people who follow it shouldn't matter" since many people believing something does not make it true.

Encyclopaedia Britannica is not commonly referred to as an ancient book.

AbamB cannot say that because I don't think you are aware that the Quran (which means recitation) were all recitations that were committed to memory. Long after the death of Muhammed was there an attempt to compile these recitations in a document called the Quran. The manuscripts of the Quran does not exceed the Bible, neither does any other book from antiquity. The Bible speaks about corroborated historical and archaeological fact not just within its immediate surrounding but areas ranging North Africa, Western Europe and the Middle East all with attested names, genealogies and geography. The Quran nowhere matches this.
Is that why no one knows who wrote some of the books of the bible?[color=#000080][/color]
Well if you "agree" with the logic, why did you go against it in trying to prove your point?

According to that then all prophets that came after the resurrection are the false christs? This means then Mohammed is a false christ?

No argument from me here
This just means that you reject a true prophet just like the jews rejected jesus. According he them, he was also a "false christ". Isn't that so?

Did jesus say that there would be no prophets, revelations or books from GOD to follow? If that's the case, then the entire NEW TESTAMENT has NO VALIDITY!!

The scripture on anti-christ is written so that no other religion can be formed in these Christian states. No other religion being formed=the oligarchy remains. It was a means for those in power to remain in power.

Christianity was formed within the mighty Roman Empire, in a distant province, within a small religion of a defeated people. It taught its adherents to not seek political power, obey the instructions of the land and live peaceably. Its founder and leader was murdered and rose again and did not urge retribution. Its early chief proponents all suffered brutal persecution both from pagan and secular sources.
It taught its adherents to chill their grill OR SUFFER THE SAME FAITH!!![color=#0000FF][/color]
Tell where in the establishment of this religion, was there plans to set up an oligarchy?

You still did not answer my question :-
Which other book can I cross reference the bible/Jesus with?
It is strange that the Bible was the only published book in those days.
Does this not hint at a cover up?

Secular sources include: Josephus (Jewish historian), Tacitus (Roman historian), Pliny the Younger (Roman politician), Phlegon (freed slave who wrote histories), Lucian (Greek satirist), Celsus (Roman philosopher), Mara Bar Serapion (prisoner awaiting execution), Suetonius, and Thallus.

Which days are you talking about? Because the printing press was invented in 1450 and books weren't "published" until then. They were all handwritten and copied as manuscripts in which there are several other than the Bible.

Who are in possession of those books and who can attest to their authorship and authenticity? That they have not been tampered with, corrected to fit the status quo?

[Habit7]

Wow, many responses, I will respond later or tomorrow God willing. But I will love if people other than the usual commentators say something, because most of these stuff Duane, AdamB, maj.tom, et al heard me say already.

[Kasey]

^^are you getting uncomforatble? The questions posed to you are valid and I would like to hear the responses to them, especially the ones from Duane.

If I can find where I kept the information, I will post some of the many inconsistencies in the so called 'mostly authenticated' bible.

Does anyone who was here a while, remember there was an individual in early 2012 who was posting here with the name 'darklordtnt' (or somm like that) ? Now that guy was interesting....

Also, anyone know where is dspike? Havent heard from him a while. Is he ok?

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

Each revelation of the past with its laws were for a restricted time , place and people.

does the current revelation fit absolutely with our time , place and people?

what about the revelations of slavery?
what about space travel?

I've always wondered which direction should a Muslim on the International Space station face when praying? Seeing that it rotates and it travels at 27,724 KM/h around the earth that also rotates.

[Chimera]

WHAT?there are muslims on the international space station??!!!

well Space Jihad in we mc.

[bluefete]

Each revelation of the past with its laws were for a restricted time , place and people.

does the current revelation fit absolutely with our time , place and people?

what about the revelations of slavery?
what about space travel?

I've always wondered which direction should a Muslim on the International Space station face when praying? Seeing that it rotates and it travels at 27,724 KM/h around the earth that also rotates.

WHAT?there are muslims on the international space station??!!!

well Space Jihad in we mc.

Why you so ABA??

Duane: If the earth is spinning, when a Muslim faces east to pray, won't the earth's rotation move him from that direction very quickly? (Although he will still believe he is facing east because he is earth-based compared to being on the space station?)

[bluefete]

Who are in possession of those books and who can attest to their authorship and authenticity? That they have not been tampered with, corrected to fit the status quo?

AdamB - Before the Bible was put together, it was a bunch of separate manuscripts written over a period of time. We can speculate and make all kinds of assertions about the Bible and any other set of books as well.

There are books in the Ethiopian Bible not found in the King James Version (Book of Enoch for example) but yet the Book of Enoch is mentioned in the New Testament in the Book of Jude.

There is a lot of support for the Books than made it into the final collection we call the Bible. The Gnostics are assumed to be written to provide a counter to the early writings.

[marlener]

There are other books that didnt make it into the bible as they were just simply historical accounts of evidence giving a eye witness account but not inspired,there are actually books that go against the bible and encourage some rather strange practises,the Maccabees is an example of one such book.Some of the writers themselves never even claimed to be inspired.
@AdamB,how is the individual holding on to the laws of the Jews,can you prove that from the bible,I can prove that is not the case.But I will give you first go at proving your point.
Question: why have the rest of Christian let it go?
Will deal with your points one by one depending on if you answer the questions.Your arch enemy again bro The dreaded BURDEN OF PROOF.