Bible Teachings or Traditions of Men?

ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:
I am a Christian and have the deepest respect for God's inspired Word, the Judeo-Christian Bible. I invite fellow Christians to participate in the questions for discussion. Two of the most basic teachings in Christendom are as follows: 1. THE TRINITY
The teaching that God is split up into three individual persons that are combined into one "Godhead" (Father, Son, and holy ghost/holy spirit). All three of these persons are said to be CO-EQUAL (meaning they have the same power) and CO-ETERNAL (meaning they have always existed at the same time and none of them can die). 2. HELLFIRE
The teaching that God will burn a person's soul in everlasting hellfire for committing wicked deeds. In other words, God will supposedly punish people forever in fiery flames of hell--despite the fact the crimes the persons committed were only done during the persons' brief human lifespan. QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:
1. Are there scriptures in the Bible to support the teachings of Trinity and hellfire? If so, present the scriptures by giving Bible book, chapter, and verse and also explain why you believe the scripture you present is talking about Trinity or literal hellfire. 2. Why are these teachings found in pagan/false religions that never worshipped the God of the Judeo-Christian Bible? For instance there were pagan trinities at least 200 years before Jesus came to the earth as a human. A. In the 2nd century B.C.E. (two centuries before Christ came to the earth), Egypt had a triad of gods consisting of (1) Horus, (2) Osiris, and (3) Isis. B. Likewise, in the 2nd century B.C.E. (two centuries before Christ came to the earth), Babylon had a triad of gods consisting of (1) Ishtar, (2) Sin, and (3) Shamash. C. In fact, during the 1st century AD when Jesus was on earth, Palmyra, which was an ancient city in Syria, had a triune god which consisted of (1) moon god, (2) Lord of Heavens, and (3) sun god. 3. If the Trinity and hellfire are Bible teachings, why is it that Jesus and his apostles who followed him around never taught anyone about the Trinity and literal hellfire? 4. How is it that both the Trinity and hellfire teachings did not become "Christian" teachings until the Roman Catholics copied both of them from pagan/false religions--AFTER the resurrected Jesus Christ returned to heaven? 5. If hell is a place of literal fiery torment, how is it that the Bible says Jesus went to hell for the entire three days that he was dead?"He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that HIS SOUL WAS NOT LEFT IN HELL, neither his flesh did see corruption." (Acts 2:31--King James Version) 6. If hell is a place of literal torment, why is it that the word "hell" also means "Sheol" and "Hades" and "the grave"? 7. Does the Bible teach that humans have an immortal soul that survives the death of the person so that the soul can then be burned in eternal flames? If so, please present scriptures to this effect to prove it. 8. Are the words "Trinity" and "Godhead" in the Bible? If so, were those words part of the original writings?

Thread copied here from the Bible Teachings or Traditions of Men? thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

Would you, by any chance, be a Jehovah's Witness?

I think the best answer is that the Bible (the only document that we can rely on for information about God/Jesus) is unreliable.People do all kinds of mental gymnastics to get their take on religion to work in their heads.Some even think that Jesus is in fact Gabriel. Imagine that?

LARNI:
I think the best answer is that the Bible (the only document that we can rely on for information about God/Jesus) is unreliable. ALTER2EGO:
I disagree that the Bible is unreliable. In fact, from my study of the Bible, I have found it to be quite the opposite. But since you are making the claim, perhaps you could present a few examples by identifying various scriptures and explaining why they are evidence that the Bible is "unreliable." Be sure and provide Bible book, chapter, and verse along with your explanation.

Welcome to EvC, it's a great place to learn if you check your assumptions in at the door (you can get them on the way out, though). Genesis 7:23 Thus He blotted out every living thing that was upon the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky, and they were blotted out from the land; and only Noah was left, together with those that were with him in the ark.If every living thing was dead (apart from 14 of the clean and 2 of the unclean animals) there would be a genetic bottle neck for every species around 4600 years ago.As there is not we can conclude the description of the Noachian Flood is unreliable.Your go.Edited by Larni, : Clean and un clean animals.Edited by Larni, : No reason given.Edited by Larni, : You're to your

This is said over and over here and I've answered it over and over. Just one more time, exactly WHAT do you think would show that there had been a bottleneck 4500 years ago that we don't see?My impression is that this new poster is a Jehovah's Witness or something along those lines, as Tangle asked. Questioning the Trinity is a clue.

Such an extreme loss of genetic variation in animals we know to have under gone such bottle necking can have transplants (skin grafts, for example) that do not provoke immune responses due to being so close genetically.This does not occur in every single species, does it?Score one for not the Bible.

Are you inviting anyone else?
I am not a Christian. But I have some questions. Don't feel like you have to answer them if you don't want to, though.You seem very serious and strict about your thoughts on God. I wonder why that is. Are you only afraid of Him?
Or is there another reason you seem so stressed? I think the Bible is just traditions of men.
It sounds like all the other religious traditions of men.
Mysterious "powerful" gods.
Miracles.
Unsupported claims about the afterlife.
Guides to live by.
Promises.
Teachings to take for granted.However, like all traditions of men, it doesn't actually provide anyone with anything that can't be met or exceeded by other sources anyway.For example:Some Bible believers are very happy, and safe and calm and wonderful people.
...but so are some non-Bible believers.Some non-Bible believers are very angry and dangerous and shady.
...but so are some Bible believers.In fact, there's nothing about the Bible that grants people anything special.
It can help, it can be helpful to many. It can be the only thing that helps certain people.
But, it's definitely not required to help everyone.
It's also possible that, for some people, the Bible definitely cannot help them. At all.The big indicator, though, is that using the Bible also doesn't even "help" more than not using the Bible on average.This is proven by looking at Bible believers as a whole.
As a whole, they are non-distinct from any other sector of the population taken as a whole.If there was something special to the Bible... then it would be visible by the results.
However, after 2000 years... the Bible simply doesn't produce any special results.It's not really a negative, though. No "traditions of men" really produce any special results.We all have to figure out how to live with our own minds in our own way.
We all have unique fears, unique traits, unique minds.
It's not that big of a surprise that different people will take different ways to find peace.The only "wrong way" is to think that there's specifically one way that will work for everyone... and then to try and force that on them.

Thank you. What this means is that there are many fixed loci or homozygous genes for many traits. It's what happens when there is a bottleneck NOW, but there is no reason to think it's what would have happened at the time of the Flood when according to Creationist assumptions there would have been a great deal more genetic variability so that even reducing the numbers that greatly wouldn't lead to homozygosity for many traits, perhaps none. It doesn't occur in any that I know of unless there has been a much more recent bottleneck, but it is easily explained on the basis of the Creationist assumptions as I say above.There is currently something like 7% heterozygosity in the human genome, our normal percentaqe, according to a creationist source I'd have to look up, and I suppose animals may have something similar, but this is no doubt a much reduced percentage brought about over the generations since the Flood. At that time the percentage should have been much much higher, and at the Creation itself even higher, since death would reduce it somewhat, and a huge bottleneck like the Flood reduce it all the more. If it was ever 100% I can't even guess but even 50% would be an enormous degree of genetic variability compared to what we have now.In other words the bottleneck of the Flood IS expressed in the reduced heterozygosity from the previous assumed levels, just not the extreme lack of heterozygosity created by a bottlenecked species today. There is no way to prove this that I know of, but it's a very reasonable explanation and quite logical.

quote:

---

Such an extreme loss of genetic variation in animals we know to have under gone such bottle necking can have transplants (skin grafts, for example) that do not provoke immune responses due to being so close genetically.

​

This does not occur in every single species, does it?

​

Score one for not the Bible.

---

You and Faith know better than to talk science issues on the religious side.The originator didn't even say what the Bible was reliable for and you present an ancient cultural story as a factual event. Why?The Bible is a religious book. It isn't a science book or a history book. The originator didn't claim that it was and hopefully won't since this is on the religious side of the forum.I'm sure it would be greatly appreciated if you wouldn't take the thread down the same old flood path that belongs on the science side.Foundational myths don't make a religious book unreliable for religious teachings or beliefs.

silly dupe..Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

I hope that this is not the entire thrust of the discussion here because I don't think the Bible's reliability is central to the question raised by the OP. In fact, asserting unreliability in this way suggests that the questioner does not really care about the OP's question.What is being asked here is whether there are Bible verses that support specific doctrine. If the Bible is inconsistent on that doctrine, that would be of interest, but a general denial that the Bible is often correct would seem beside the point. After all, this is not the science section.

quote:

---

LARNI:
If every living thing was dead (apart from 14 of the clean and 2 of the unclean animals) there would be a genetic bottle neck for every species around 4600 years ago.

---

ALTER2EGO -to- LARNI:
So let me see if I understand your question. Are you saying there were a total 16 animals on Noah's ark? I don't quite get what you are speculating.
*****

If you're going to start a discussion about what is written in the Bible, perhaps you should have read it:

quote:

---

Genesis 7 (KJV)
1 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house
into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this
generation.
2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens,
the male and his female: and of beasts that [are] not clean by
two, the male and his female.
3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the
female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

---