I have noticed than in translation the Red Sea was mentioned and later found out it was the Reed Sea.These miss translated words make a big difference.What is to say that people haven't changed the bible to hide the truth.Even God knew people would try to change it or he would have never stated it at the end of the Bible.

Many people try and say the Bible contradicts itself.
I think it is more like our limited comprehension and maybe some translation problems but as a whole I don't see contradictions. Look at how all the countries that have changed their names from 50 years ago so maybe an e was dropped from the name.
I never saw it written as the reed sea before though.

Reed and red are nothing alike in Hebrew. Anyway, what is the practical difference in a depth of 6 feet and 100 feet if your nose is only 5 feet above the bottom?

You are reading and sadly believing too many of the myth teachings that try at times to disprove the bible.
The people who do not believe that God has power wants to find man made ways things could have happened.
They try and show it was not the true Red Sea that Moses crossed but he crossed further up stream in a area of Reeds.

The difference is if you wish to believe that God has all power and can do miricles or if you believe that they new were all the stones were to walk across the shallow areas in a swamp area.

Of course the horsemen chasing would not have drown in the swamp??

So in general what you have are the same type of people who believe in the novel books like the Divinci Code and other stories made to destroy the truths of the bible.

I have noticed than in translation the Red Sea was mentioned and later found out it was the Reed Sea. These miss translated words make a big difference.What is to say that people havent changed the bible to hide the truth.Even God knew people would try to change it or he would have never stated it at the end of the Bible.
With all respect for Christianity : the Bible is anything BUT accurate ! It is full of mistakes, inaccuracies, contradictions, "corrections", mistranslations, etc.

Isn't it strange that a deity - who is claimed to be the "creator" of the entire universe with everything in it in only 6 days - needed human beings to write his Christian manual for humanity ? The Bible is claimed to be God's word , but it seems more that it was written by many different wellwilling human beings who were claimed to be guided by God.
You can only BELIEVE that the Bible is what Christians say it is.

:>)

.

You are reading and sadly beleiving too many of the myth teachings that try at times to disprove the bible.
The people who do not believe that God has power wants to find man made ways things could have happened.
They try and show it was not the true Red Sea that Moses crossed but he crossed further up stream in a area of Reeds.

The difference is if you wish to beleive that God has all power and can do miricles or if you beleive that they new were all the stones were to walk accross the shallow areas in a swamp area.

Of course the horsemen chasing would not have drown in the swamp ???

so in general what you have are the same type of people who beleive in the novel books like the Divinci Code and other stories made to destroy the truths of the bible.I am
Only looking for the truth in a world of lies.If Satin in tempting the children of God then there is always a possibility for the truth to be covered up.Satin tries to separate Gods children from God.What better way then to steer them in the wrong direction.

I am only looking for the truth in a world of lies.
But there you have the problem : what is "the truth" and what are "the lies"?
There does not seem to be one "truth", or "truth" at all.
What you mean with "truth" is YOUR perception of what you BELIEVE, without any Objective Supporting Evidence for that.

The topic is : "Is the bible accurate?".
Reality is that it is not. The bible is full of mistakes, inaccuracies, contradictions, "corrections", mistranslations, etc.

Lets continue on that, and leave "Satin" out of it. That's an entire different topic.

:>)

.

With all respect for Christianity : the Bible is anything BUT accurate ! It is full of mistakes, inaccuracies, contradictions, "corrections", mistranslations, etc.

Isn't it strange that a deity - who is claimed to be the "creator" of the entire universe with everything in it in only 6 days - needed human beings to write his Christian manual for humanity ? The Bible is claimed to be God's word , but it seems more that it was written by many different wellwilling human beings who were claimed to be guided by God.
You can only BELIEVE that the Bible is what Christians say it is.

:>)

.I agree with your statement.How can you honestly trust man who has sinned from the beginning. Remember, this is satans playground and he misleads many.Translators even agree that certain gospels are missing parts.I believe these people made up endings for some gospels were there was none to be found because they were destroyed to hide the truth.I also find it hard to trust mans sayings when there is only one true God and so many denominations of churches.Jesus taught Judaism, now there seems to be everything but that.

I agree with your statement.How can you honestly trust man who has sinned from the beginning. Remember, this is satans playground and he misleads many.Translators even agree that certain gospels are missing parts.I believe these people made up endings for some gospels were there was none to be found because they were destroyed to hide the truth.I also find it hard to trust mans sayings when there is only one true God and so many denominations of churches.Jesus taught Judaism, now there seems to be everything but that.Most people are roman Catholics, wasn't Jesus tortured and killed by the hands of the romans?

I do not think the bible is true, I am an atheist and there is no proof whatsoever that the bible is accurate.

Most people are roman Catholics, wasnt Jesus tortured and killed by the hands of the romans?
Hmmmmmm.. .

"roman Catholics" and "the romans"

I assume you did not go to school but received private tutoring at home from family...
Roman Catholic is a Christian denomination, unrelated to the roman empire.
"the romans" were the "world" rulers for many hundreds of years, including the period -50 to +50 AD.

:>)

.

I do not think the bible is true ..//.. there is no proof whatsoever that the bible is accurate.
Indeed! However : anyone is free to believe whatever they like! As long as they do not claim or suggest that whatever they believe is "true", because that has to be proved first (OSE).

:>)

.

Indeed! However : anyone is free to believe whatever they like! As long as they do not claim or suggest that whatever they believe is "true", because that has to be proved first (OSE).

:>)

.


I never said they were'nt, this user has asked if the bible is accurate and I have given my opinion.

I never said they were'nt, this user has asked if the bible is accurate and i have given my opinion.
Correct. I did not suggest that you did. I added that in view of the general intolerance here.

:>)

.

Correct. I did not suggest that you did. I added that in view of the general intolerance here.

:>)

.

That's good, it is just that you quoted me.

For Chris' benefit. The rest of you don't have to look if you don't want to.


PROPHECY PROOF OF BIBLE

Prophecy Fulfillment Prophecy Fulfillment
1. Gen 3:15 (virgin birth) Mat 1:20 2. Isa 11:1 (descendent of Jesse) Mt 1:1-16
3. Micah 5:2 (place of birth) Lu 2:15,16 4.. Jer 31:15 (Herod's attempt) Mt 2:16
5. Isa 42:1 (ministry area) Mt 4:13-15 6. Zech 9:9 (grand entry) Lu 19:30-35
7. Ps 41:9 (Judas' betrayal) John 13:18 8. Zech 11:12 (betrayal price) Mt 26:15
9. Zech 11:13 (money for field) Mt 27:9,10 10. Gen 3:15 (“heel” bruised) John 19:18
11. Isa 53:3 (Jesus rejected) John 1:11 12. Ps 2:2 (council against Jesus) Mk 15:1 13. Zech 13:7 (arrest, deserted) Mk 14:27,50 14. Isa 53:8 (unfair trial) Mk 15:1-25
15. Ps 35:11 (perjured witnesses) Mk 14:56 16. Isa 53:5,6,10 (our penalty) Rom 5:6,8
17. Ps 69:19 (Jesus mocked) Mt. 27:28,29 18. Isa 50:6 (beaten, spit on) Mt. 26:67

19. Isa 53:7 (no defense offered) Mt 26:62,63 & Mt 27: 13,14
20. Isa 53:12 (with transgressors) Mk 15:27,28
21. Ps 22:16 (hands, feet pierced) Jn 19:18 22. Ps 22:1 (cry to Father) Mt 26:46
23. Ps 38:11 (friends view) Lu 23:49 24. Ps. 22:18 (gambling, clothes) Mt 27:35
25. Ps 22:6,7,8 (reproached) Mt 27:39-44 26. Ps. 69:21 (gall, vinegar) Mt 27:34
27. 109:25 (enemies shake heads) Mt 27:29 28. Ps 22:17 (watch Him die) Mt 27:36
29. Ps 31:5 (He yields spirit) Lu 23:46 30. Zech 12:10 (side pierced) Jn 19:34

31. Ex 12:46, Ps 34:20 (no bones broken) John 19:32,33,36

32. Amos 8:9 (sun darkened) Mt 27:45 33. Isa 53:9 (rich man's tomb) Mt 27:57-60

All above prophecies are from the Old Testament
Additionally, Jesus made some prophecies about Himself.

Mt 20:18,19 Eight separate details
1. I will be betrayed at Jerusalem.
2. I will be betrayed to the chief priests and scribes.
3. The priests and scribes will condemn me to death.
4. The priests and scribes will deliver me to the Romans. (gentiles)
5. The Romans will mock me.
6. The Romans will scourge me.
7. The Romans will crucify me.
8. I will rise from the dead on the third day.

The 33 details from the Old Testament plus the 8 details that Jesus gave in the New Testament make a total of 41 definite events perfectly fulfilled.

First no there is actually no such church called "Roman Catholic" there is a catholic church, and its current main office is in Rome. One of their major RITES is the Roman rite which shows what rules of orders and services they are to use There are several other rites in place.

With all respect for Christianity : the Bible is anything BUT accurate ! It is full of mistakes, inaccuracies, contradictions, "corrections", mistranslations, etc.

The Bible is inerrant. But if you have evidence of an error in the Bible, please show us.


Isn't it strange that a deity - who is claimed to be the "creator" of the entire universe with everything in it in only 6 days - needed human beings to write his Christian manual for humanity ?

Where did you get the impression He needed anyone to write the Bible? Please give me the evidence of God's NEED.


The Bible is claimed to be God's word , but it seems more that it was written by many different wellwilling human beings who were claimed to be guided by God.
You can only BELIEVE that the Bible is what Christians say it is.

The Bible has been examined more than ANY OTHER BOOK ever written for at least 2000 years. And it is proven inerrant to this day.

So lets see your evidence.

Sincerely,

De Maria

I have noticed than in translation the Red Sea was mentioned and later found out it was the Reed Sea.These miss translated words make a big difference.What is to say that people havent changed the bible to hide the truth.Even God knew people would try to change it or he would have never stated it at the end of the Bible.

The Bible has been examined more than any other book in history and is proven inerrant.

Sincerely,

De Maria

The Bible is inerrant. But if you have evidence of an error in the Bible, please show us.I did here on this board. Several times already. Up to 150 different examples out of a total of several hundreds. I showed all kinds of mistakes, of incorrectness, of wrong statements, of inconsistences, and of contradictions. It is clear and beyond any doubt that the Bible is full of - specially - contradictions.


Where did you get the impression He needed anyone to write the Bible? Please give me the evidence of God's NEED.
The evidence is in the Bible itself. A true perfect being that can create an entire universe in 6 days only would not need 60+ different imperfect human beings to write, hundreds of imperfect human beings to select which are the "real" bible books (various synodes), and millions of imperfect human beings to translate and re-translate, print, and distribute bibles.


The Bible has been examined more than ANY OTHER BOOK ever written for at least 2000 years. And it is proven inerrant to this day.
Where can any OSE be found on that inerrancy ? Or is that only what you BELIEVE ?

So lets see YOUR evidence.

:>)

.

I did here on this board. Several times already. Up to 150 different examples out of a total of several hundreds. I showed all kinds of mistakes, of incorrectness, of wrong statements, of inconsistences, and of contradictions. It is clear and beyond any doubt that the Bible is full of - specially - contradictions.

One at a time will be fine.


The evidence is in the Bible itself. A true perfect being that can create an entire universe in 6 days only would not need 60+ different imperfect human beings to write, hundreds of imperfect human beings to select which are the "real" bible books (various synodes), and millions of imperfect human beings to translate and re-translate, print, and distribute bibles.

Again, you have used the word "need". Where did you get the impression that God needs anything?


Where can any OSE be found on that inerrancy ? Or is that only what you BELIEVE ?

I haven't seen any errors.


So lets see YOUR evidence.

:>)

.

My evidence is that you haven't provided any examples of errors in the Bible.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Red Sea and Reed sea are my examples. They are not the same therefore one is wrong.That would be a mistake, correct? My point is if the Bible had been translated wrong it would take on a whole new meaning, as in not the original that it once was.If people had left out gospels which I believe they did, it would not be technically correct. The gospels I believe that were left out are the gospel of Phillip, Mary,Thomas,Judas,Apocrypha and the most important the gospel of Jesus.If these were missing would you call it accurate?And these are to state a few.

Red Sea and Reed sea are my examples.

I've never seen this Reed sea version. Where is it?


They are not the same therefore one is wrong.

Correct.


That would be a mistake, correct?

Correct.


My point is if the Bible had been translated wrong it would take on a whole new meaning, as in not the original that it once was.

That is correct.


If people had left out gospels which I believe they did, it would not be technically correct.

What makes you think they left out Gospels?


The gospels I believe that were left out are the gospel of Phillip, Mary,Thomas,Judas,Apocrypha and the most important the gospel of Jesus.

What is your criteria for a true Gospel?


If these were missing would you call it accurate?

Yes.


And these are to state a few.

That is also true.

The Church used the criteria of known Apostolic authorship. If a Gospel was not written by an Apostle or one of the Disciples, the Gospel was not included in the Bible.

The books, which we call the Apocrypha, (not the same books which Protestants call the Apocrypha)were not discarded however and were kept for study by Bible Scholars as they could give details of life in Biblical times. However, the Church does not guarantee their inspiritation as She does not know who were the true authors.

Sincerely,

De Maria

On Bible inconsistencies / faults / contradictions / etc.

One at a time will be fine.
Sorry, but I already did that several times. Long lists of hundreds of inconsistences. Just read back !

:>)

.

Parts of these gospels have already been found. A monastic order hid some of these at Nag Hammadi.

Parts of these gospels have already been found. A monastic order hid some of these at Nag Hammadi.

As I said, the Catholic Church kept the Gospels which were proved authentic writings of the Apostles and the Disciples.

What is your criteria for authenticity?

As I said, the Catholic Church kept the Gospels which were proved authentic writings of the Apostles and the Disciples. What is your criteria for authenticity?
All that can be stated is that the Gospels were the writings of these men. There never was any proof that the essence of what these men wrote was more than belief. Neither was there any proof that their belief was correct.

Back to square one.

:>)

.

One of the main proofs that the Bible is the Word of God is the fact that it was penned by so many different men over such a great period, yet is in agreement with itself. The Bible is a miraculous book, and contains records of many miracles, written by the people who observed them. Do you believe history books? Why? Do you have OSE for them? All of them? Some of them? Any of them? Or do you just BELIEVE?

One of the main proofs that the Bible is the Word of God is the fact that it was penned by so many different men over such a great period of time, yet is in agreement with itself.
No it is not. The Bible is full with mistakes, historical faults, and - specially - inconsistencies and contradictions. I have posted about that extensively here on this board in the past.


The Bible is a miraculous book, and contains records of many miracles, written by the people who observed them.
Observation is no OSE, but hear-say. You have to accept that the observer was correct with his claim without any OSE, i.e. you have to BELIEVE him/her. The contradictions in the Bible indicate that much that was written in the biblebooks was based on hear-say. Besides that : many stories are just PLAGIARIZED COPIES of existing local mythical reginal stories of that time. The "great flood" is a perfect example of that, being a copy of the Gilgamesh Epos.


Do you believe history books?
No I don't. You always must scrutinize the provided details for correctness.
German history books about WW2 are different to English history books.
US history books about the Vietnam war are different to Russian/Chinese history books.
Etc.

:>)

.

All that can be stated is that the Gospels were the writings of these men. There never was any proof that the essence of what these men wrote was more than belief. Neither was there any proof that their belief was correct.

Back to square one.

You are the first one clamoring for proof and the first one to admit you have none.

You are wrong however, these Gospels weren't written in a vaccuum. They were written in the midst of people who had seen and heard exactly what is depicted in the Gospels. And there are no denials. Even from those who are Jesus' enemies.

So, if you want to discount the evidence, that is your business, but the evidence of the Gospels would stand up in any court today.

Sincerely,

De Maria

No it is not. The Bible is full with mistakes, historical faults, and - specially - inconsistencies and contradictions. I have posted about that extensively here on this board in the past.

You keep saying that but I don't see any such things posted.


Observation is no OSE, but hear-say. You have to accept that the observer was correct with his claim without any OSE, i.e. you have to BELIEVE him/her. The contradictions in the Bible indicate that much that was written in the biblebooks was based on hear-say. Besides that : many stories are just PLAGIARIZED COPIES of existing local mythical reginal stories of that time. The "great flood" is a perfect example of that, being a copy of the Gilgamesh Epos.

Horse hockey! All you are doing is repeating anti-Christian propaganda without even looking into the facts. The fact is that the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses who lived with Jesus for approximately three years. He taught them and they witnessed his miracles and then later produced miracles themselves.

Of course, you don't want to believe in miracles, but you are the man who would rather believe that lifeless, unintelligent matter spontaneously becomes living organisms with more complexity than a super computer.

So I think your stance is a bit, to say the least, inconsistent.


No I don't. You always must scrutinize the provided details for correctness.
German history books about WW2 are different to English history books.
US history books about the Vietnam war are different to Russian/Chinese history books.
Etc.

You claim to believe only what you see, but as I explained before, you must believe in gravity. And you can only see the results of that invisible force.

Sincerely,

De Maria

If I write a story about a miracle I witnessed, and I swear that this story is true, and I have a witness that will swear that the story is true, would you believe it's true?

That's all the bible is, stories written by mortal men, fallible men, only men, not God.

To say that these men were "inspired" by God to write this book, well show me proof of that. If I told you I was inpsired by God to write a book would you believe me? Of course you wouldn't, you'd think I was crazy.

The bible is just a book written by men. Yes, it's interesting, yes, the stories are fantastic, but fact, word of God, no, it's not, there's no proof of that.

If I write a story about a miracle I witnessed, and I swear that this story is true, and I have a witness that will swear that the story is true, would you believe it's true?

Sure. I have no reason to believe you are lying. And if you have a witness, I have no reason to believe that both of you are lying.


That's all the bible is, stories written by mortal men, fallible men, only men, not God.

But men who lived with Christ and were inspired by God.


To say that these men were "inspired" by God to write this book, well show me proof of that. If I told you I was inpsired by God to write a book would you believe me? Of course you wouldn't, you'd think I was crazy.

Why would I?


The bible is just a book written by men. Yes, it's interesting, yes, the stories are fantastic, but fact, word of God, no, it's not, there's no proof of that.

Sure there is.

1. There is more evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ than for any other person of that era. And yet, most people only doubt Jesus' existence. Why is that? Because they don't want to believe.

2. The evidence which the Gospel writers provided is eyewitness testimony. They saw this with their own eyes and interviewed people who saw it with their own eyes. This is evidence that would stand up in court.

3. These men and many others died for their beliefs. Crazy men die for their beliefs
But their beliefs die with them. The beliefs these men held have persisted to this day and are getting stronger by the day. Why? Because of the beauty and wisdom of the teachings of Jesus Christ.

4. Jesus Christ was either a mad man or God. Because if He is not God as He claimed, then He must be mad. Or worse, a liar. But the beauty of His teachings proves that He was neither a mad man nor a liar and His miracles witnessed by many prove that He is God.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Ref. Your post #30 :

You are wrong however, these Gospels weren't written in a vaccuum. They were written in the midst of people who had seen and heard exactly what is depicted in the Gospels. And there are no denials. Even from those who are Jesus' enemies.
I am not what you describe as "Jesus' enemy". I have nothing against religion in general.
I have however strong feelings against religious activists who insist that the world accept their limited word view based on mythical views that were thought up by human beings several thousands of years ago to lower their fears for whatever was getting at them in life.
Believe whatever you like to believe, but don't claim it to be the "truth" : that you have to prove!!

As far as "these Gospels" are concerned : that is still hear-say, and NOT proof of anything.
If I go to the town of Roswell I will meet many thousands of people who are convinced of what is claimed to have happened there on July 7, 1947. But does that prove the existence in general - and actual presence there and at that time - of aliens visiting earth?

Get real!!


So, if you want to discount the evidence, that is your business, but the evidence of the Gospels would stand up in any court today.
No it would not. Any smart DA would not even let it get to that courtroom at all, as at least it is still common for the US justice system to rely on evidence, and not on hear-say!!
.

Ref. Your post #31 :

You keep saying that but I don't see any such things posted.
That is your problem, not mine. I have posted topics on that several times, once even with 100 different biblical contradictions.


All you are doing is repeating anti-Christian propaganda without even looking into the facts.
I do not agree with any anti-Christian or any other anti-whatever propaganda.
I always look at the facts : it is you who fails to do that!!


The fact is that the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses who lived ...
Just more hear-say. See my previous post and read the "Roswell" point.


Of course, you don't want to believe in miracles, but you are the man who would rather believe that lifeless, unintelligent matter spontaneously becomes living organisms with more complexity than a super computer.
What miracles? And for the umpteenth time : I DO NOT BELIEVE in abiogenesis. I can see that that thesis makes some sense, and is even - though only partial - underwritten by facts. Unlike your "creation" claim that is based on wild religious dogmatic claims only.


.... I explained before, you must believe in gravity. And you can only see the results of that invisible force.
Nobody can see any "natural" force. Only the result of existing forces can be seen. Your religion is build on nothing else but invisibility : an invisible deity in an invisible heaven surrounded by invisible angles and trillions of invisible souls of departed. You can not even see the results of what you BELIEVE to be your invisible force...

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Ref. your post #30 :

I am not what you describe as "Jesus' enemy".

Did you live in the time of Jesus? Why do you think I was referring to you?


I have nothing against religion in general.

Riiiight.


I have however strong feelings against religious activists who insist that the world accept their limited word view based on mythical views that were thought up by human beings several thousands of years ago to lower their fears for whatever was getting at them in life.

Where's the OSE for that?


Believe whatever you like to believe,

Thanks. But I didn't need your permission.


but don't claim it to be the "truth" : that you have to prove!!

When people, like you, challenge my beliefs, I defend them. I know you'd like it if everyone accepted your illogical view of the world, but unfortunately for you, we live in a free country where people can voice their opinions.


As far as "these Gospels" are concerned : that is still hear-say,

You might want to read up on what is "Hearsay evidence".


and NOT proof of anything.

If the Gospels were hearsay evidence, you would be correct. But the Gospels are examples of eyewitness testimonies. Eyewitness testimonies are accepted as evidence in every court in the world.


If I go to the town of Roswell I will meet many thousands of people who are convinced of what is claimed to have happened there on July 7, 1947. But does that prove the existence in general - and actual presence there and at that time - of aliens visiting earth? Get real!!

No. But it certainly lends credence to the idea.

Do you believe they are all lying? If so, why?


No it would not. Any smart DA would not even let it get to that courtroom at all, as at least it is still common for the US justice system to rely on evidence, and not on hear-say!!
.

Do you even know what is the definition of "hear say" evidence? Find out the definition of hear say evidence and then show me how that relates to the Gospels.

Sincerely,

De Maria

You keep saying that but I don't see any such things posted.



Horse hockey! All you are doing is repeating anti-Christian propaganda without even looking into the facts. The fact is that the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses who lived with Jesus for approximately three years. He taught them and they witnessed his miracles and then later produced miracles themselves.

Of course, you don't want to believe in miracles, but you are the man who would rather believe that lifeless, unintelligent matter spontaneously becomes living organisms with more complexity than a super computer.

So I think your stance is a bit, to say the least, inconsistent.



You claim to believe only what you see, but as I explained before, you must believe in gravity. And you can only see the results of that invisible force.

Sincerely,

De MariaI really don't understand why you say that all people are doing is repeating anti-christian propaganda without even looking into the facts.What facts?If you mean the Bible, then you truelly haven't looked very hard.If you base everything in the Bible as facts, then why don't you follow these teachings.My example being-Catholic tradition- call priests father.Bible says call no man your father upon this earth,for one is your father and He is in heaven.Mathew 23:9.Wouldnt this be an example of anti-christian?

I really dont understand why you say that all people are doing is repeating anti-christian propaganda without even looking into the facts.What facts?If you mean the Bible, then you truelly havent looked very hard.If you base everything in the Bible as facts, then why dont you follow these teachings.My example being-Catholic tradition- call priests father.Bible says call no man your father upon this earth,for one is your father and He is in heaven.Mathew 23:9.Wouldnt this be an example of anti-christian?

No. That's an example of an overly literal reading of one verse of Scripture. In fact, many Protestants believe that they should call no man father.

However, we note that Jesus Himself referred to Abraham as Father Abraham in this narrative:
Luke 16 30 But he said: No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will do penance.


And the Apostles referred to Abraham the same way.

Acts Of Apostles 7 2 Who said: Ye men, brethren, and fathers, hear. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charan.

And they recognized that their brethren had fathers:
Acts Of Apostles 7 2 Who said: Ye men, brethren, and fathers, hear. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charan.

And they even referred to themselves as fathers of their flocks.
1 Corinthians 4 15 For if you have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers. For in Christ Jesus, by the gospel, I have begotten you.

1 Thessalonians 2 11 As you know in what manner, entreating and comforting you, (as a father doth his children,)

Philippians 2 22 Now know ye the proof of him, that as a son with the father, so hath he served with me in the gospel.

So, if Jesus and the Apostles didn't take that verse literally, why would you?

Sincerely,

De Maria

Maria, that was only 1 example.There are many more.examples listed are:Catholic tradition-the pope bows to the statue of Mary,worshiping of the eucharist,the pope has people bow before him.Bible-Exodus20:4-20:5.Catholic tradition-Mary is queen of heaven.Bible-Jeremiah 7:17-18-19.Why pray to Mary?Holy Mary mother of God pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.Mary is not the mother of God. For this to be even possible she would have to be a god.Isaiah 43:10-Philippians 2:6-2:7.Catholic tradition-forbids priests to marry.Wasnt Peter married? The pope is supposedly continuing the apostolic line through Peter,right?Bible read 1Timothy.Catholic tradition-Mary never had otherchildren after Jesus.A perpetual virgin.What about His brethrenJames, Simon,Joses and Judas.Bible-Mathew13:55-56.Mark6:3.this is just to state a few.

Observation is no OSE, but hear-say. You have to accept that the observer was correct with his claim without any OSE, i.e. you have to BELIEVE him/her. The contradictions in the Bible indicate that much that was written in the biblebooks was based on hear-say. Besides that : many stories are just PLAGIARIZED COPIES of existing local mythical reginal stories of that time. The "great flood" is a perfect example of that, being a copy of the Gilgamesh Epos.



:>)

.[/QUOTE]

I will take this opportunity to deal with your "perfect example" and your claim that Moses plagiarized something.

I assume that you are saying that the Gilgamesh Epos was written before Genesis. If the Gilagmesh Epos describes a great flood, that gives you the OSE for the Bible account. The flood would have been common knowledge at that early date, and there were likely many accounts written about it. How many accounts have been written about events in WW2? Does that mean that the later writers plagiarized the earlier ones? You have no evidence to say that Moses' account was based on any previous writing. It was far more likely that it was based on oral accounts handed down from Noah. It was not many generations from the flood to Moses, and Japheth lived long enough to see several of those generations, so the time distance from a survivor of the flood to Moses was relatively short.

I'm glad you said this is your "perfect example" because it shows how weak your position really is.

I really dont understand why you say that all people are doing is repeating anti-christian propaganda without even looking into the facts.What facts?If you mean the Bible, then you truelly havent looked very hard.If you base everything in the Bible as facts, then why dont you follow these teachings.My example being-Catholic tradition- call priests father.Bible says call no man your father upon this earth,for one is your father and He is in heaven.Mathew 23:9.Wouldnt this be an example of anti-christian?


Because I can't rate your answer here as it is a discussion forum, I'm quoting you and letting you know that I agree 100%, here's your greenie. :D

This is another way that the bible is misquoted by people to suit their needs. As DeMaria said before the bible states that Jesus says we need the bible, even though the bible isn't mentioned in that scripture quote. Your example specifically says do not call any man your father upon this earth, and yet the Catholics do.

DeMaria, you can't have it both ways, you can't keep changing scripture around and then telling us it's the "word of God", no, it's the word of men, and you as a human are doing what all humans do, you are reading it, and then following what you "think" it says, not what it actually says. You are changing written words to suit you beliefs.

I can't say it enough, the bible is an interesting book, a great "story", but the word of God? I don't think so.

Even if it was the "word of God" so many men have translated it, re-translated it, decided what they think is being said even though it's clearly not what they think, well, there's very little left of the original words. Leave it to humans to mess things up, how could they have hoped to succeed, they are fallible, as we all are. If the bible is truly the "word of God", the "holy book", then it would be flawless, always, it is not.

Peace :)

Maria, that was only 1 example.

I know.


There are many more.examples listed are:Catholic tradition-
2 Thessalonians 2 14 Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle.


the pope bows to the statue of Mary,

A bow is an act of veneration. God sent an Angel to venerate the Virgin Mary:
Luke 1 26 And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God into a city of Galilee, called Nazareth, 27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary. 28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women.

God ordered the Israelites to venerate an image:
Numbers 21 6 Wherefore the Lord sent among the people fiery serpents, which bit them and killed many of them. 7 Upon which they came to Moses, and said: We have sinned, because we have spoken against the Lord and thee: pray that he may take away these serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people. 8 And the Lord said to him: Make brazen serpent, and set it up for a sign: whosoever being struck shall look on it, shall live. 9 Moses therefore made a brazen serpent, and set it up for a sign: which when they that were bitten looked upon, they were healed.


worshiping of the eucharist,

Jesus is God. The Eucharist is His Flesh which He commanded us to worship:
John 6 52 If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.

1 Corinthians 11 23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread. 24 And giving thanks, broke, and said: Take ye, and eat: this is my body, which shall be delivered for you: this do for the commemoration of me. 25 In like manner also the chalice, after he had supped, saying: This chalice is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as often as you shall drink, for the commemoration of me. 26 For as often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the chalice, you shall show the death of the Lord, until he come.


the pope has people bow before him.

In the Old Testament, God selected one man to represent Him:
Exodus 7 1 And the Lord said to Moses: Behold I have appointed thee the God of Pharao: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.

In the New Testament, God selected another man to represent Him:
Matthew 16 18 And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

When we bow to the Pope, we bow not to the man, but to Jesus whom he represents.


Bible-Exodus20:4-20:5.Catholic tradition-Mary is queen of heaven.

Jesus is King of Heaven. The mother of a King is the Queen:
3 Kings 2 19 Then Bethsabee came to king Solomon, to speak to him for Adonias: and the king arose to meet her, and bowed to her, and sat down upon his throne: and a throne was set for the king's mother, and she sat on his right hand.


Bible-Jeremiah 7:17-18-19.Why pray to Mary?Holy Mary mother of God pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.Mary is not the mother of God. For this to be even possible she would have to be a god.

Because we recognize that some people are more acceptable to God than others:

Job 42 8 Take unto you therefore seven oxen, and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer for yourselves a holocaust: and my servant Job shall pray for you: his face I will accept, that folly be not imputed to you: for you have not spoken right things before me, as my servant Job hath.

As the Mother of His Son, we believe Mary is one of those:


Isaiah 43:10-Philippians 2:6-2:7.Catholic tradition-forbids priests to marry.

It is in keeping with Scripture:

1 Cor 7 32 But I would have you to be without solicitude. He that is without a wife, is solicitous for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please God. 33 But he that is with a wife, is solicitous for the things of the world, how he may please his wife:


Wasn't Peter married?

Yes.


the pope is supposedly continuing the apostolic line through Peter,right?

Correct.


Bible read 1Timothy.Catholic tradition-

Read 1 Cor 7


Mary never had otherchildren after Jesus.A perpetual virgin.What about His brethrenJames, Simon,Joses and Judas.Bible-Mathew13:55-56.Mark6:3.this is just to state a few.

They are the children of Mary the wife of Clophas, who happens to be Mary's cousin:
John 19 25 Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalen.

Matthew 27 56 Among whom was Mary Magdalen, and Mary the mother of James and Joseph, and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.

Jude is identified as the brother of James. Which means he is also the son of Mary of Clophas.
Luke 6 16 And Jude, the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, who was the traitor.

As far as I know, Simon is nowhere else mentioned. Unless, in Matt 27:56, the sons of Zebedee are revealed as related to Mary of Clophas. In which case, Simon would be Simon Peter, the Apostle of Jesus Christ.

Sincerely,

De Maria

Sometimes being right is just wrong.

From a biblical perspective Jesus never walked around trying to prove one group of ideas as right and another wrong. He always gave them the choice to decide. We are broken, fallible, misdirected, biased, mortal, imperfect, weak and frail. We live for a few moments then die.

If the message of the Bible is love, unconditional love, even for your enemies – I can't understand how we can debate basic truths.

I see the sun during the day but I don't debate its existence at night. If a man came up to me and tried to convince me the sun wasn't real and told me that it was a lie... if he told me all that so called “proof” about the sun was full with mistakes, historical faults, and inconsistencies and contradictions I would just let him believe what he wanted to believe.

When I see people debate and argue I just think “This is wrong” there is so much disrespect and so much anger and so little love. That is how the rest of the world will know, not by facts and logic, but by our love one for another.