Why the bible is wrong...

[IGotTheCottons]

Originally posted by OkieTokie
No, total bull plop does not get a person stoned (maybe dizzy and messy) and Frank's Sense & Murry was what the old stoner's called reefage or schwag or green or Mary Jane or grass or weed or ...........

um... show me where in the Bible it talks about them getting wasted after burning incense. and frankincense and mhyre spoke of in the Bible are incense... they were a sign of wealth due to them being quite hard to come by. back in those days cannibas grew rampant, so anyone could just go and pick some, thus not making it very valuable.

AND there is no such thing as HELL. It was a analogy that was used to promote the church as a family. Outside of Jersulem there was a public dump. It was in a deep ravine and got to be so big that the local officials burned it. It burned day and night due to the constant fuel input. The Greek name for the dump was "Hellios". The story was that if a person died without someone to claim his body and bury it in the Jewish way, the body would be thrown in the dump and burned. If that happened the Jew could never get into their version of heaven. Sooooooooo, the story of hell was that if you die without a family, we (your new chruch friends) will claim your body and perform the rituals required by the Hebrew laws.
That way you will be saved from Hell and get into heaven.

See the way that things get twisted around? Talking about twisting around, I think I will twist one around my brain and think about how the original priests ate hash on their bread and saw visions of paradise. Milk and wild honey? My ass.
It was hash and homemade wine.......

okietokie

well, there's just 1 problem with your theory...

Revelation 19:19-20 says: "And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone."

or we can go to Revelation 20:11-15 which says: "And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire."

notice the beast and false prophet are cast ALIVE into a LAKE of fire. and for those who don't know, brimstone literally means burn-stone. it's literally burning sulfur. can anyone tell me what has lakes of burning sulfur? if you guessed volcanos you guessed correctly. so the best way to describe the lake of fire would be a gigantic lava pool.

[OkieTokie]

Your whole arguement is based on the assumption that you can use The Bible as the be-all and end-all of sources. That arguement only works if both sides agree that Bible is the ultimate harbinger of right and wrong.

So telling me what it says in Revelation or Corinthians or
Coronas (no, wait that is my beer order) does not make your point valid. If I do not believe the Bible to be true then you are ALWAYS wrong. Facts baby, facts. That is what counts.

Telling me what is says in the Beavis & Butthead Holdiay Special Editon also says some things. True or Not?

And the very fact that reefage grew wild and was plentiful proves that it was a useful and used herb. The early church
used what the population was used to to indoctrinate them.

Everything seen in clouds of smoke or burning bushes or dreams or visions or in a flash of light kind of sounds like it could be taken many ways.

[GREENhaze]

This is my whole theory on religion. I dont think any of it is true. I think that one day people will look back on religion like the way people look at mythology today. I think that if that it is not right to say that there is one god (a human figure the way the bible portrays him) created the whole universe and so on. I also think that God or the ruler (even if there is a ruler of everything) wouldnt be so close minded like the bible portrays him. Like he wouldnt care if you were gay or whatever you did. What may be wrong to do in our minds may be completely right in some other universe or whatever. So thats my whole theory in a nutshell...

[IGotTheCottons]

Originally posted by OkieTokie
Your whole arguement is based on the assumption that you can use The Bible as the be-all and end-all of sources. That arguement only works if both sides agree that Bible is the ultimate harbinger of right and wrong.

So telling me what it says in Revelation or Corinthians or
Coronas (no, wait that is my beer order) does not make your point valid. If I do not believe the Bible to be true then you are ALWAYS wrong. Facts baby, facts. That is what counts.

Telling me what is says in the Beavis & Butthead Holdiay Special Editon also says some things. True or Not?

i was using the Revelation quotes to show you that the Hell spoken of in the Bible, and the Hell you were speaking of were 2 totally different Hells. you were talking about the burning dump. the Bible was talking about a literal burning lake of fire...

would you consider specific prophecies from the Bible coming true as evidence of the validity of the Bible? if so stick around for a while... i'm getting a pretty good chunk of my prophecy site finished. i just finished the 4-fold prophecy of Matthew 24, and am hoping to get a few more finished by tonight... when the site's finished (should take about 2 weeks) i will post it on the web... if you're honest enough with yourself, you'll at least have to admit that it's interesting how the Bible predicted so much of what's happened in the world hundreds, and even thousands of years before they've happened.

[ReformMaryJaneLaws]

Originally posted by humblepie
the bible is wrong because it was written by man. its not the true word of god. it is a device to control the masses

So, with that argument, everything written by man is wrong.

[IGotTheCottons]

ugh... if the Bible is the word of man... than how come no one here can show me a single legitimate contradiction?

[IGotTheCottons]

the salvation by works or faith thing... not a contradiction. you are saved by faith, and justified by works done after salvation... justification, in this case, is not talking about salvation (go to the context if ya don't believe me). if you know anything about the Bible, you know not to take things out of context.

[outaker]

Originally posted by Reform MaryJane Laws
So, with that argument, everything written by man is wrong.

I think he means that the Bible is a fallacy due to the fact that it was written by humans and not "God" like it was supposed to be.

Originally posted by GREENhaze
This is my whole theory on religion. I dont think any of it is true. I think that one day people will look back on religion like the way people look at mythology today. I think that if that it is not right to say that there is one god (a human figure the way the bible portrays him) created the whole universe and so on. I also think that God or the ruler (even if there is a ruler of everything) wouldnt be so close minded like the bible portrays him. Like he wouldnt care if you were gay or whatever you did. What may be wrong to do in our minds may be completely right in some other universe or whatever. So thats my whole theory in a nutshell...

I fully agree. I think people will look back and realize how far religion got them and how far science got them. Back during the Greeks times, they lived their lives based on mythology and the word of the "Gods". Today we look at them and laugh at the fairy tells, however, I find it ironic and amusing that people have the nerve to laugh at their beliefs and believe something nearly identical.

[Jewishtoker]

I HAVE ONE WORD FOR ALL YOU DAM GOD LOVING SON'S OF BITCHES CONTROL......thats all the bible is another form of conrtol all of orgnized relgion is a way of controling the masses giving them socital values put in place by people of power now dont get me rong i am not saying we should not follow the rules set forth because look at the progress of the human spicies.....look at what a speck of gas has become yet then you can look at the problems of humans and if god is suprem and perfect and we are in his image then why do we have imperfections. is there some higher being playing a pratical joke on us playing with our puny lesser mind pulling this cloth we call realty over our eyes...........the matrix it's telling the truth i can tell u that

[IGotTheCottons]

well well well... if it's all about control... then how come Biblical churches teach that everyone has the right to do whatever they want to do (a majority of churches now are NOT Biblical churches, by the way)? i mean... does the Bible not say that we have free will? it's our choice to do what we want. now, there are consequences that come with these choices, whatever they may be. don't get me wrong. i'm not saying everyone should go around and run-a-muck... what i'm saying is that ultimately, it's your choice what you're going to do, and yours alone.

why do we have imperfections? because mankind chose to sin. we were created as perfect, sinless people... but we had the right to choose who we were going to follow. we followed satan.

when the Bible says we were made in God's image... that doesn't mean we were God-like. it just means that He gave us something that separated us from the animals (a spirit).

and i repeat my previous question... if the Bible is the word of man... how come no one here has been able to show me just 1 single legitimate contradiction? every single argument made against the Bible in this thread has been given a reasonable explaination. i mean... c'mon... if this book really is what you guys say it is... why is it so hard to find just 1 legitimate contradiction?

[Chillout]

hey man,


don't worry about what the bible says so much as how you can make the people around you feel

but also about the control factor,

the best way to get people to do something is to convince them that they have chosen that way for themselves

[IGotTheCottons]

i don't quite get your statement about control...

the way i see it is that people are presented with a choice. if they choose to believe the Bible, they must also choose whether or not they're going to follow it. if they choose not to believe the Bible, they have made their choice, and whoever claims to believe the Bible should respect that choice.

afterall... you didn't see Jesus chasing after those who didn't want to believe. He preached to those who wanted to hear it, and if people didn't want to hear it... it was their choice... He left them be.

and the whole point of this thread for was Zylark (and whoever else wanted to) to try to find a legitimate contradiction in the Bible... which so far, hasn't been accomplished.

and just on a side note... the Bible has never once, since it's completion approximately 1,900 years ago, been proven to contradict itself... so guys... keep looking

[sidious]

Originally posted by IGotTheCottons
and just on a side note... the Bible has never once, since it's completion approximately 1,900 years ago, been proven to contradict itself... so guys... keep looking

aghh but would it be the same if the vatican was to allow the book of Thomas to be considered of the same time?.....as i have never read it, but only hearsd of it, and that they deny that it is real, but it has been proven that it was from the same time.........Peace out.......Sid

[IGotTheCottons]

the vatican doesn't control the Bible... they have the Catholic Bible, which contains different manuscripts than the original Greek and Hebrew texts... some of these manuscripts were found in the garbage, mind you. and other manuscripts they use were written by Wescott and Hort, who were professed devil worshippers who hated the textus receptus (the original greek and hebrew texts), and decided to write their own... this edited version of the Bible is now used in not only the Catholic Bible, but also, in every modern day translation (NIV, ASV, NSV, NKJV, etc.)... only the King James holds to the Textus Receptus

an example... they leave out a big chunk of the book of Hebrews because it forbids their priesthood by naming Jesus as the eternal high priest, and the only mediator between man and God.

i could go into it more. but don't really have the time at the moment.

EDIT: another reason the vatican refuses to recognize the book of thomas because they believe you have to have your sins forgiven by a priest in their church... totally against what the Bible says.

[IGotTheCottons]

Originally posted by Neo of WNEC
Also, Cottons... don't be dumb. The bible isn't any less important if it contridicts it self.

well... here's where we run into our first problem. if the Bible contradicts itself even <b>ONE</b> time... it's <b>NOT</b> the word of God. God is perfect, and therefore His word is perfect... just one contradiction in the Bible would mean that God didn't write it and that people did. so... "don't be dumb"... because it is very much important if there is a contradiction found in the Bible.

Zylark showed you a few of the places. It's still the Friggin bible man!

here's where we run into our second problem... Zylark showed me what at first appeared to be contradictions... if you actually read this thread, you'll find that none of them were really contradictions. just misunderstandings due to verses being taken out of context... and if there's any i failed to explain... please feel free to show me. i'll be more than happy to show you again.

Not to completely invalidate everything said so far, but Noah could have had an Ark, and it could have carried a lot of shit on it, and it could've floated around the world for a while.

well, if it "could have"... explain to me why we have several first hand accounts of a very large, wooden bardge, shaped like the Biblical specifications of the ark just kinda milling about on the top of Mt Ararat in Turkey? and also... how come this is exactly where the Bible said the ark ended up after the flood?

now... about how it "could have floated around the world for a while"... some scientists built a scale model of the ark and tested it in a wave pool. the waves being the equivelant to 200 foot storm surges... the tests concluded that not only was the ark very sea worthy... but that it was virtually unsinkable. it could have been tilted up to a 90 degree angel, and still level itself out.

also, they proved that it contained pleanty enough room for the animals that were on board and noah's family... this is including all the food they'd need to survive for the duration of the flood.

Really, the only bible thingy you have to bend is that the flood covered a piece of the world (near those damned sinners) instead of the whole world. And the only piece of science you need to manipulate, is where land oculd have remained.

oh yeah? then explain the layer of mud that encircles the entire globe. explain why there's a giant crack in the earth that goes around the entire globe... right down the middle of the ocean... explain why they've found fossils of giant clams deep in the apalachian mountains (which were never under water scientifically speaking)... there's just too much that can only be explained by a <b>GLOBAL</b> flood.

But cottons, c'mon man... the bible can't be taken verbatim... you have to interpret the shit out of that fucker.

actually... there's very little in the Bible that requires interpreting. it's a very literal and specific book. it's actually very easy to tell if somethings a metaphore or not when reading the Bible... you can tell by the surrounding texts. also... the best way to interpret scripture is with other scripture. that's why when people look up a subject in the Bible, they're given multiple verses dealing with that subject. and what's really cool... is that all those verses agree with eachother.

I love my God, but even I know the bible isn't the word straight from his mouth. Its people telling the story. Two angels here, and 5 angels there, is kinda a minute difference when you figure they're both talking about a man rising form the dead. Put it in more relevant terms.

well, that's where we have a difference in opinion. the Bible was totally (verbally) inspired by God... EVERY WORD OF IT... you disagree? then prove it... find me 1 legitimate contradiction in that book that i can't find a reasonable explaination to. i'm willing to bet my life that you can't.