Keenu Said
"The rest is actual history but it is a re-written, condensed and bastardized compilation of crap invented by the church to promote fear so that people will come blindly to the church and let it do what it wants to do. To promote itself, for it's own power."
I asked for proof of that statement, not proof of the Bible.
That's what I expect before I answer the question asked of me.
Such wild statements need to be aired out, before some uninformed person gets to believing them.
Peace and kindnmess,
Fred (arcura)
:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

Keenu Said
"The rest is actual history but it is a re-written, condensed and bastardized compilation of crap invented by the church to promote fear so that people will come blindly to the church and let it do what it wants to do. To promote itself, for it's own power."
:p

---

There is a lot wrong with that statement, although I believe I know where Keenu is coming from with it.


Keenu's long and complicated sentence eventually conjoins "actual history" and "crap."

Well, which is it? It cannot be both. It is either "actual history," or else it is "crap," which cannot be actual history.

Keenu says some it has been re-written. But which parts does he/she say are re-written, and why does he/she say that. I am inviting Keenu to set out the evidence for that statement. I do not say that I disagree with it, altogether, although I can not go as far as I believe Keenu wants me to go.

Keenu says that it has been condensed. What does he mean by that? Which parts have been condensed, and how does he know they have? In short, what is his prima facie and substantive evidence for that allegation?

Keenu says that the Bible has been "bastardized." An interesting phrase, but what, in the context nof the Bible, are we expected to make of it? Bastardized! I would appreciate an explanation and the provision of evidence of sorts to support that claim.

Keenu calls the Bible a compilation. On this point I need no more evidence than that furnished with my own eyes as I leaf through a Bible and see that it is indeed a collection - a compilation - of separate books, written by different writers.

Keenu calls the Bible "crap." Does he mean that everything in the Bible is "crap," or does he mean that certain parts of it are "crap," and the rest of it is "actual history?"

Perhaps Keenu will be kind enough to explain what it is.

As for it being "actual history" AND "crap" at the same time (!), perhaps he refers to Henry Ford's statement that "History is junk." Who knows.

Was the Bible invented by "The Church"? Ask a Jew.

Was it made to force people to church? If so, did it work? Did it fulfill its purpose of forcing people to church among illiterate populations who could not read what was written on its pages, and there were no pictures?

I go to church. Do I go because, as Keenu affirms, I am blind (ignorant, stupid, etc) and afraid? I admit to neither of those.

What I will admit to is a keen interest in Keenu's position on the Bible and also the source of his/her evidence and information that has put him/her in that position.

I sincerely hbope that Keenu will take the time to respond in a nice calm way and with the evidence requested. This could be an interesting and enjoyable discussion.

MORGANITE

:)

Morganite,
That's a lengthy breakdown of exactly what I want in the answer from Keenu.
Thanks. Glad to see that you are also interested.
But don't hold your breath.
He hasn't answered since I first asked it over a week ago.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura) :)

If I am not mistaken, Keenu has read some article or other, perhaps even a whole book, I don't know, that deals with thr transmission of Bible documents down to our English versions.

There are little seeds of truth in some of his statements, but in the end he/she goes overboard and tries to swallow himself.

There is a lot to discuss in the process of writing, editing, redacting, etc. the Bible books, but they mnust be seen against their own backgrounds, and understanding of these processes must be brought to bear to show whatreally happened and why.

It is not enough to dismiss the whole porocess with statemnts that are unsupported except by someone's imagination or hostile opinion.

I look forward to Keenu's return to the discussion table.


MORGANITE


:)

As do I await.
But I'm 72 years old and I'm hoping to see Keenu's answer within the next few years or sooner. Time's awasting.
Fred (arcura) :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

Keenu Said
"The rest is actual history but it is a re-written, condensed and bastardized compilation of crap invented by the church to promote fear so that people will come blindly to the church and let it do what it wants to do. To promote itself, for it's own power."
I asked for proof of that statement, not proof of the Bible.
That's what I expect before I answer the question asked of me.
Such wild statements need to be aired out, before some uninformed person gets to believing them.
Peace and kindnmess,
Fred (arcura)
:p

---

But you don't question any bible dogma, arcura as being wild statements?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happyperson

:) Hello everyone,

I have a question for all you Bible scholars. What is the theme of the Bible and what does it have to do with the end of this system of things?

Thanks,
Happyperson

---

Happyperson,

I just went through 7 pages of replies to your query looking for a response by you to any of those replies. I found none. Since you have given use your belief system in your question I will not ask you about that (lest Chrisl see it as another attack).

The bible is a Salvation History beginning with God's creation and ending with the destruction by fire of the Cosmos, and the creation of new heavens and earth. It is a history of the fall of man and his redemption through the finished work of God incarnate, Jesus (Son of God and God the Son). Pictures (types) of Christ abound in those scriptures written prior to his appearance (prophecies of both of His comings as well), then a history of His birth, teaching, death, and resurrecton, and finally prophecies and discriptions of his triumphant return for those who endured until the end.

I do not know, since you have not responded to any of your replies (at least as far as I can tell), if you will even read this reply. However, I hope that you do and that this reply is helpful.

Be blessed in Jesus,

Phil

No I don't see any and I've read it for years.
It's a matter of how you look at it and know what the Bible is.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura). :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phildebenham

Happyperson,

I just went through 7 pages of replies to your query looking for a response by you to any of those replies. I found none. Since you have given use your belief system in your question I will not ask you about that (lest Chrisl see it as another attack).

The bible is a Salvation History beginning with God's creation and ending with the distruction by fire of the Cosmos, and the creation of new heavens and earth. It is a history of the fall of man and his redemption through the finished work of God incarnate, Jesus (Son of God and God the Son). Pictures (types) of Christ abound in those scriptures written prior to his appearance (prophecies of both of His comings as well), then a history of His birth, teaching, death, and resurrecton, and finally prophecies and discriptions of his triumphant return for those who endured until the end.

I do not know, since you have not responded to any of your replies (at least as far as I can tell), if you will even read this reply. However, I hope that you do and that this reply is helpful.

Be blessed in Jesus,

Phil

---

Happyperson could have responded to individual posts by clicking on the scales icon at top right and entered an opinion of each post there. He might be gathering replies rather than wanting a long discussion.

Just a thought.


MORGANITE



:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morganite

Happyperson could have responded to individual posts by clicking on the scales icon at top right and entered an opinion of each post there. He might be gathering replies rather than wanting a long discussion.

Just a thought.


MORGANITE



:)

---

MORGANITE,

Happyperson is under no obligation (as far as I am concerned) to respond, but it would be nice if he/she acknowledged an answer either positively of negatively. At least then one would know the answer asked for had been read... ah, but you read it... what more could I ask?

Phil

What An Excellent Answer, Thank You.

I'll keep waiting.
I'd really like to see the documented historical proof of what was claimed about the Holy Bible.
But of course there probably isn't any that is factual, but then if there is I would like to see it.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura) :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by arcura

I'll keep waiting.
I'd realy like to see the documented historical proof of what was claimed about the Holy Bible.
But of course there probably isn't any that is factual, but then if there is I would like to see it.
Peace and kindness,
Fred (arcura) :)

---

Same could be said about proof that the events in the bible are factual so it's a wash.

Peace and good orgasms.

Excuse my tardiness but I have been working way too much!
Yes, I have read an article, a book, thousands of books.
If anyone interprets my postings as hostile that is their choice but I do not feel any hostility when I post. I find that quite amusing.
I can't prove what I believe any more than one of you can prove to me that what you believe is true.
The old testament is a compilation of ancient history, from all over the world, and it is so condensed as to be unintelligible. It requires that one research many ancient writings and myths and legends to figure out what it is really about, what it really means.
The new testament is also a compilation of stories. There are many, many more of those stories which give us very interesting information that were not included (they contained what the church considers as dangerous).
What I don't understand is why, when someone like myself, comes along and challenges accepted beliefs, they are pooh-poohed and everyone gets up in arms... when all we are doing is trying to point out that maybe there is another explanation that is better than the one we have and that answers many more questions and gives us a much better picture of how things really are. Why? And then they are put under pressure to prove what they are saying that they believe when the ones who are on the other end can't prove anything either?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keenu

Excuse my tardiness but I have been working way too much!
Yes, I have read an article, a book, thousands of books.
If anyone interprets my postings as hostile that is their choice but I do not feel any hostility when I post. I find that quite amusing.
I can't prove what I believe any more than one of you can prove to me that what you believe is true.
The old testament is a compilation of ancient history, from all over the world, and it is so condensed as to be unintelligible. It requires that one research many ancient writings and myths and legends to figure out what it is really about, what it really means.
The new testament is also a compilation of stories. There are many, many more of those stories which give us very interesting information that were not included (they contained what the church considers as dangerous).
What I don't understand is why, when someone like myself, comes along and challenges accepted beliefs, they are pooh-poohed and everyone gets up in arms...when all we are doing is trying to point out that maybe there is another explanation that is better than the one we have and that answers many more questions and gives us a much better picture of how things really are. Why? And then they are put under pressure to prove what they are saying that they believe when the ones who are on the other end can't prove anything either?

---

Be specific, please. What do you require proof of?

I am not requiring proof!
What a communication breakdown!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keenu

I am not requiring proof!
What a communication breakdown!

---

Yes they are confused. It is celtearth who required proof (after arcura asked him for proof first), not you. If they bothered to re-read the thread (hint: page 6) it would have been plainly obvious. Perhaps they only understand parables?

Parables! Giggle!

The theme of the Bible in short: It is God's written revelation of His will to humanity. Its central theme is salvation through Jesus Christ. The OT is the covenant God made with people about their salvation before Christ came. The NT is the agreement God made with people about their salvation after Christ came. The OT begins with God, the NT begins with Jesus Christ. In other words the OT commences what the NT completes. The OT gathers around Siani, the NT around Calvary. The OT is associated with Moses, the NT with Christ. From Adam to Abrahma we have the history of the human race. From Abraham to Christ we have the history of the chosen race. From Christ on we have the history of the church.

The Bible tells of the origin of sin and how the curse separated us all from God. We discover how utterly impossible it was for the law to bring us the salvation we need, for by the deeds of the law no flesh can be justified, for all have sinned. Then we find the promise of a Saviour. One who was to come to seek and to save that which was lost and give His life a ransom for many. We see all through the ages one purpose is evident, that of preparing a way for the coming of the Redeemer of the world.

There is one great purpose moving through the ages, the eternal design of the almighty God to redeem a wrecked and ruined world. From the origins of Genesis to the endings in Revelation, God is working things out.

The Bible is our roadmap, our directions for our journey through life. Just as you need a map or directions to travel through unknown parts of the world to arrive safely, you need the Bible for directions to arrive safely home with the Lord of Lords and King of Kings.

MaggieB

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by keenu

I am not requiring proof!
What a communication breakdown!

---

You said: "And then they are put under pressure to prove what they are saying that they believe when the ones who are on the other end can't prove anything either?"

I would assume that I am one of those "on the other end." If that is true, then you have stated that I, as one of those on the other end, can't prove anything either. I don't believe that to be true, so I asked what you require proof of. Where is the breakdown?

Phil