makes sense, but....the bible is supposedly God inspired, but anything outside the bible is NOT Godly inspired so how can we use fraudulent data as proof of the bible? its like saying lets go ask a baby how a computer works! lol
thats the point though, if you have a book claiming to be the one word of god, you have to find something outside it that supports its claim.
so is the book written by god or by men inspired by god? theres nothing in the text that suggests that it was written by god.
sorta, i knew it was someone out of the bible tho
i don't think josphious was in the bible
ok lets say he wasnt ready for the child scenario: that means that he DID do it with her right? but he does have a mouth what did Joseph say to her is another key factor in WHAT she really is
what?
they obviously didnt do it, becuase the bible clearly says before they got together. so the fact of the matter is, the problem for Joseph ISNT that "hes not really for a child" before the fact of the matter is "how is she pregnant? we didnt do it"
yes and it has nothing to do with her being a virgin
now him thinking it wasnt his child IS the point! that COULD be what hes thinking thats probably why he wanted to hide her privly. but then the Ghost talks to Joseph and says "she has concieved a child of the Holy Ghost"
well yes, but he wanted to get rid of her secretly to save face
at what age can a jew woman be espoused, im sure there is a constant age especially at that time, so we KNOW that she is not 8 years old or anything. she is at the correct age to be married etc. and according to Jewish tradition i bet if Mary wasnt a virgin she would not be allowed to take another man. and on top of that Joseph was a JUST man, so he woudlnt have taken an unclean woman. AND on top of that, what cleanliness would there be of an un-virgin woman to be pregnant with Jesus? thre woudl be none, she has to be a virgin because that would be considered CLEAN. all of these aspects would narrow down the search, if that word meant young, then that woudl widen the search and make Mary not so special.
yes and this goes to show that jesus's birth is more important than what he did.
being that its a story to get pagans to convert to christianity, i find wheither or not shes a virgin irrelevent
besides if people knew she was a virgin and hasn't had sex with joesph, they would think jesus was someones bastard, so it would ruin everyones reputation, thats the gist of it, just to add, this story i always felt was pretty weakly written, just like a lot of folk myths
oh dude, thats TODAY, but back in the day its very very very important, actually i wouldnt want to take ANY woman as my wife who has slept with another man, it wouldnt make me feel right. i cant do it. but today's society doesnt care about all that.
uh no, it was common to try to have virgin wives, but it has nothing to do with virginity. it has to do with money and land ownership. think about it, if your wife had a child with another man, would you make him your heir? we are talking of a time when at least 5-6 out of 8 would die in the first 5 years of life
for his time joseph would care more about whiether or not the kid is his solely for lineage
which in this case means josephs line died
may i conclude that the compilation of these BOOKS were man made, but the correct BOOKS somewhere in there were inspired by God? is that a possible answer? Canon is what you call an original right? but you mean original compilation of books to call A BIBLE, i understand that
no a canon is a collection of books considered the selected books of the church, they considered them inspired by god
forget that, i mean select all books and put them all down, now take out ALL the fakes, then you got yourself the true bible inspired by God, then you start to hand it out, AT THAT POINT would you consider that bible Man made? or Godly made? the compilation of the books was manly intervined, but that doesnt CHANGE the divineness of the books because we are only rearranging the books not CHANGING the text at all
how would you know whats a fake? how would you know whats true? the bible isn't built of authentic texts, its built of texts that profess a set of beliefs and all the books picked reflect it
for instance: for well over a thousand years since it was written revelation was argued over, many thought it was inspired and many did not, it wasn't until the council of trent in the 1500s that it was settled on
by the way intrepretions change the text, most people who read rev, read the warning about not changing a word in the text to mean the whole bible, but its only speaking of revelations
Ive done that, the main agreeable fact is that all the floods were massive and only a family was spared. in all of the religions they all say that. of course they use different Gods or different reasons or different ways the flood came about but all of these religions speak of a massive flood and that a single family or person survives. Very vaguely similar but nonthelesss its not comparing Basketball to Checkers.
this is untrue, only 10% talk about a family being the only ones spared. they are the middle eastern ones, genesis is influenced by older cultures around that area. or the story is influenced by missionaries
most of the flood stories are about the creation or war or some other ways, in fact the differences outweigh the simularities
how? lol its not like im bringing something out of thin air when i say, "the bible says there was a flood!" then you go "ok well its only you so its not true" then i say "nope other religions also claim of a massive flood"
so how is that not helping? as a matter of fact, it makes my case a little bit better
because you are bringing up a point that has no relevence to weither the bible is true or not.
if you have a group of people by a source of water that floods, sooner or later they will have a story about a huge flood or a story that starts out with the earth covered with water
its not really all that useful to base an argument on
ah but we trust scientists....how can we validate what happens in court if we cant even detect if one person is saying truth or not? where is the justice?
evidence
f i murdered your family and you saw me and you were the only one and took me to court and i lied like a dog and got off the hook, you beleive there was justice? no of course not, but you cant prove it, just by saying "he did it i saw him" just like how you dont believe the people said "he healed him! i saw Jesus heal him"
the courts don't use just one persons testimony, you'd have to read more about how they investigate things, they do a lot more than just eye witnesses
evidence outside of peoples word is needed
then felony is the thing of the past right?
what does this have to do with it?
i dont, i research and think about stuff, thats why im here still and not saying "these guys are thick headed and never gonna get it, im just gonna give up" what i say is "cool i get to learn new things"
thats good, but remember logic is more important than emotional begging, if it makes no logical sense then explore it more
point proven, what about people who were atheist and discovered Christianity as truth later on? i think they had the opposite idea in teh beginning. its rare for this transition but still possible
i doubt many christian-turn-athiest-turn-christians as being truely atheistic.
most of the people who say they are that way are lying to discredit atheism as a valid position
thats true, God even says, "let us reason"
yes and paul contradict god, he says to let faith in god guide you, and thinking is wrong
yes they are old lets get rid of them, a new society requires a new law right? times are changing and so should the laws....right?
no, you are making a strawman out of what nuggin said, he's saying books of useless laws that have no meaning for our society should not be used
ie: pretty much all the laws in the OT
have you ever taken english? thats what every teacher says.
when a book written in olden times with old english that a normal person doesnt understand they read the sentence over again and realize what the meaning of the word is. or better yet in spelling B's why do you think the addition of "say it in a sentence" is added? so that the person woudl understand better what the WORD means!
uh well this may work in spelling bees, but we are talking about translations of a text from another translation, over the course of two thousand years
now maybe if you were reading the text in aramaic and hebrew it would work better, but translations don't convey all the meanings of the words
for instance when it says "..and adam knew eve" or "blahblah layed with blah blah"
how do you know if thats what the author wrote? they translate it like that, but a lot of meaning is lost
as i read recently when it talks of people having sex, its talking about rape not consentual sex, heck the lev law about two men having sex is talking about rape.
you wouldn't know that from the KJV
short and thus im not perfect. but is that part of the 10 comandments? because when we and going to be judged THAT is what he bases our judgment on, the 10 comandments, not if we shaved our head or shaved our beards. he didnt change his mind he gave you suggestions, being baptized isnt a requirement its a suggestion to show that you obey God's words, but if you dont get baptized that doesnt mean you arent going to heaven.
where does it say this in the bible?
the 10 commandments have nothing to do with the christians, thats for the jewish people
which laws do you think apply to you? the laws of noah or the laws of jesus?
jesus only has 2 laws: to love god with all your heart and to love your nieghbor as yourself
by the way if we are judged based on the big ten, then every person since 400 ad has gone to hell, since they worship on the wrong day, sabbath is on friday after the sun goes down until the following saterday evening, not sunday as the christians do
worshiping on sunday is a hold over from pagan religions that worshipped the sun
we do not sacrifice any animals anymore becuase Jesus took our sins and became the ultimate sacrifice. in the Old testament they did this on tehir waight for Jesus' arrival, and now after Jesus' arrival we dont have to because Jesus was our ultimate sacrifice.
so you don't sin anymore? you are no longer a sinner? what jesus did was change the way people repent for sin, since the sacrificing was for repentence
men shoudlnt do it anyway! you want to get in a fight with your girl while shes PMSing? lol i have trouble with that myself. =/ and plus its a suggestion of how to live, he suggests that you dont do it for your wellbeing. woudl you rather him say, be MORE in contact with a girl who is PMSing? lol no he gives you logic.
hrm, the only reason they had that law was superstition, go read some history on ritual cleanliness and also on fear of witchs and female mysticism
the fact is they condemned it based on fear of women
Edited by ReverendDG, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2
