I'm not understanding the Bible at this point

[jay_a2j]

[joecoolfrog]

Congratulations Jay you can post silly pictures but not answer a straight forward question , truly you are an inspiration and a stunning endorsement for all those who wish to follow your example.

[BigBallinStalin]

God loves us as much as Jesus loves being crucified...?

[MeDeFe]

Is it just me or is the frequency of orthographic mistakes in jay's pictures higher than the norm?

[PLAYER57832]

Jay, if you want to BE respected, then SHOW respect!

I am definitely not Atheist, but to claim they have "no morals" is idiotic. AND, you have engaged in that debate enough before to know that.

[Ducttapers4JC]

Ok, I see that this is a sore issue for many people, as we have begun to attack the other people, instead of the other arguments.

God loves us as much as Jesus loves being crucified...?

The point of this picture is that Jesus (who was fully God and fully man) loves us enough to die for us. And this death wasn't a lethal injection either; it was a long, painful death.

Thank you Ray Rider, I was thinking of the early Christians, including the disciples, but I wasn't very clear . Also, the reason that I wrote "one of the most banned books" is that I don't know for sure if it is the most banned book, and I thought it was better to write it like that then to lie.

Your logic simply does not add up , by your reasoning all the heretics ( those Christians whose views differed from the Church line ) who were persecuted must have been right as well.

If someone dies for something, they most likely believe it to be true. (There are some crazy people out there, but I am referring to sane people.) I don't believe that all the disciples where crazy, so the only other conclusion is that they believed that Jesus rose from the dead. Assuming that the disciples stole the body of Jesus to make it look like he rose from the dead, why would they then die for that lie? Why not just tell the truth? I would rather denounce a lie then die wouldn't you? So I believe that the disciples truly believed what they said and wrote.

[Snorri1234]

So I believe that the disciples truly believed what they said and wrote.

So?

[jay_a2j]

Jay, if you want to BE respected, then SHOW respect!

I am definitely not Atheist, but to claim they have "no morals" is idiotic. AND, you have engaged in that debate enough before to know that.

I just love the fact that you constantly attack me, yet defend everyone else. You couldn't write this stuff any better!


I'll spell it out so that even you PLAYER, can understand.


I noticed that, for some odd reason, someone started to post anti-Christian images in this thread. I, just for the fun of it. went to Google images to see if I could muster up my own images to counter the anti-Christian ones being posted. ( I DID NOT MAKE THESE IMAGES ON MY COMPUTER- as you seem to think I did)


And then along comes PLAYER.......



.....the advocate for anything against God.



Like I said in a previous post somewhere. It might be better to say nothing, then to so adamantly attack those who you claim are on your side. You seem to have a problem with "choosing you this day whom will you serve." But it seems to me that you have solidly picked your side. Which is fine. Just stop attacking others "in the name of Jesus".

[PLAYER57832]

Jay, if you want to BE respected, then SHOW respect!

I am definitely not Atheist, but to claim they have "no morals" is idiotic. AND, you have engaged in that debate enough before to know that.

I just love the fact that you constantly attack me, yet defend everyone else. You couldn't write this stuff any better!


I'll spell it out so that even you PLAYER, can understand.


I noticed that, for some odd reason, someone started to post anti-Christian images in this thread. I, just for the fun of it. went to Google images to see if I could muster up my own images to counter the anti-Christian ones being posted. ( I DID NOT MAKE THESE IMAGES ON MY COMPUTER- as you seem to think I did)


And then along comes PLAYER.......



.....the advocate for anything against God.



Like I said in a previous post somewhere. It might be better to say nothing, then to so adamantly attack those who you claim are on your side. You seem to have a problem with "choosing you this day whom will you serve." But it seems to me that you have solidly picked your side. Which is fine. Just stop attacking others "in the name of Jesus".

#1 I said something about the first image as well.

#2 advocating against you is not advocating against God.

Or, as you should have learned a few years ago -- "2 wrongs don't make a right"

[jay_a2j]

#1 I said something about the first image as well.

#2 advocating against you is not advocating against God.

Or, as you should have learned a few years ago -- "2 wrongs don't make a right"

#1 Then it must be written in invisible ink cause it's nowhere in this thread.

#2 I didn't make God's laws.

Or what you should have learned a few years ago-- "actions speak louder than words"

[notyou2]

Arguing with a thick headed, closed minded idjit is like arguing with a wall.

[WidowMakers]

its a mistranslation

the original meaning of the verse was speaking of men who were faithful to God. "sons of God" means followers of God. daughters of men is speaking of people not faithful to God.

its quite simple but certain people want to create this thing about aliens or half man/ half demon nonsense

Agreed

[Snorri1234]

I noticed that, for some odd reason, someone started to post anti-Christian images in this thread. I, just for the fun of it. went to Google images to see if I could muster up my own images to counter the anti-Christian ones being posted. ( I DID NOT MAKE THESE IMAGES ON MY COMPUTER- as you seem to think I did)

"f*ck turning the other cheek!"?

The best thing you can do when someone is trolling your side with images is not trolling them back. It makes you look like a fool.

[jay_a2j]

Arguing with a thick headed, closed minded idjit is like arguing with a wall.

Luckily, I'm not arguing with you.

[PLAYER57832]

#1 I said something about the first image as well.

#2 advocating against you is not advocating against God.

Or, as you should have learned a few years ago -- "2 wrongs don't make a right"

#1 Then it must be written in invisible ink cause it's nowhere in this thread.

Here it is Jay ....

Belittlement, as always the sign of someone with nothing significant to add..

#2 I didn't make God's laws.

Obviously. You might try reading them again, though .. particularly the parable of the woman about to be stoned.

Or what you should have learned a few years ago-- "actions speak louder than words"

Exactly ....
and I never claim to be anything but an imperfect human being trying to follow Christ's teachings.

[2dimes]

Player, Jay is right to be upset with your attacks. He knows I don't let him off as easy as most here but I believe he'll admit I'm fair with him and I reach out with an apology when I go too far or hurt his feelings because of intenet miss comunication.

You claim to be a christian fair enough and you seem to have a decent heart for taking it easy on people as long as they are not jay. You don't need to take a step back and look at the way you attack him but you should. Later.


Jay, walk it off man.

Snorri, jay could post pretty much anything and even if it was great it would look like the rest of his mad rants to you.

[WidowMakers]

But the real truth is the veracity of the Bible is not to be found in secular scholarship. It is a matter of faith.

If the veracity of the Bible is not there and it is only a matter of faith, what parts are right? What parts can we ignore and what parts do we adhere to?
The Bible cannot have errors in doctrine and contradict itself. Once it does or you allow yourself to say it is not all true, then you have opened the door to allow all of it to be ignored.
I for one do not have blind faith that the parts of the Bible are true, I have faith that it is all inspired and given to us by God.

2 Timothy 3:16 (New International Version)

• All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

Some excerpts from the link below regarding the Bible as it relates to other historical documents.
...we would see that the Bible is in a class by itself regarding the number of ancient copies and their reliability.
...So far, however, there isn't a single archaeological discovery that disproves the Bible in any way.
http://www.carm.org/christianity/bible/ ... l-document

WM

[jay_a2j]

#1 How vague can we be?

#2 You might recall, Jesus told her to "go and sin no more". He didn't then advocate for prostitution!

[jay_a2j]

Player, Jay is right to be upset with your attacks. He knows I don't let him off as easy as most here but I believe he'll admit I'm fair with him and I reach out with an apology when I go too far or hurt his feelings because of intenet miss comunication.

You claim to be a christian fair enough and you seem to have a decent heart for taking it easy on people as long as they are not jay. You don't need to take a step back and look at the way you attack him but you should. Later.


Jay, walk it off man.

Snorri, jay could post pretty much anything and even if it was great it would look like the rest of his mad rants to you.

walking......

[notyou2]

Arguing with a thick headed, closed minded idjit is like arguing with a wall.

Luckily, I'm not arguing with you.

I'm sorry, did you hear that?

[2dimes]

Good call on the timothy reference widow makers.

2 Timothy 3:16 (New International Version)
All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,

I could be just reading things through my filter but Player seems to trust her high end scientists more than scripture. The trouble we all have is keeping the last word in there. I know I'm a hypocrite and call out others while relaxing with the log in my eye. Don't hold back on pointing it out if you feel the need. (everyone's invited for that party)

its a mistranslation

the original meaning of the verse was speaking of men who were faithful to God. "sons of God" means followers of God. daughters of men is speaking of people not faithful to God.

its quite simple but certain people want to create this thing about aliens or half man/ half demon nonsense

Agreed

I think you were going for "misinterpretation" I can go with that and I agree what you're saying sounds pretty plausable. What about the giants?

This is specifically what my Bible says:

And it came to pass when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born unto them that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were fair and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the lord said "my spirit shall not that always strive with man for that he also is flesh. Yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. There were giants in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men. And they bear children to them. The same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth. And that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was evil continually. And It repented the lord that he made man on the earth.

[Juan_Bottom]

gannable wrote:its a mistranslation

the original meaning of the verse was speaking of men who were faithful to God. "sons of God" means followers of God. daughters of men is speaking of people not faithful to God.

its quite simple but certain people want to create this thing about aliens or half man/ half demon nonsense

Agreed



I think you were going for "misinterpretation" I can go with that and I agree what you're saying sounds pretty plausable. What about the giants?

It's gonna get all quotey now.
From my travels I have learned that it was a common expression in Jesus's own time to refer to yourself as "son of God" because we are all God's children. This being an expression is also mentioned specifically in the Dead Sea Scrolls. So this sounds plausible, though in a Biblical sense this would pre-date Jesus a bit... But if we are talking rationally here, why were the giants mentioned? And does that mean that "mighty men which were of old, men of renown" is simply saying that these guys were honest and trustworthy? That they followed the word of God to the letter? And why does the author feel the need to say that the mixing of "God's Children" and non-Judea o/Christian peoples produce mighty men? Is this just a way to tell people it is "ok" to find love anywhere?
And I am hearing from a lot of people that this is a reference to fallen angels. They would have all died during the Great Flood. Seems like there is a lot of disagreeing here.

[2dimes]

See and I would sugest that from my point of view, actual fallen angels cross breeding with people gives a reason for the flood rather than just some how direct people back to following God. If everyone but Noah's wife and kids had been a cross breed. One way to get rid of them all would be the flood.

[Juan_Bottom]

See and I would sugest that from my point of view, actual fallen angels cross breeding with people gives a reason for the flood rather than just some how direct people back to following God. If everyone but Noah's wife and kids had been a cross breed. One way to get rid of them all would be the flood.

This is truly a confusing section. I think it works both ways.

And it came to pass when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born unto them that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were fair and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the lord said "my spirit shall not that always strive with man for that he also is flesh. Yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."

Who is God talking to if not fallen angels? This sounds like God is saying "go ahead and do as you please on Earth, but you are warned that in 120 years I am going to destroy mankind."

[2dimes]

And it came to pass when men began to multiply on the face of the earth and daughters were born unto them that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were fair and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the lord said "my spirit shall not that always strive with man for that he also is flesh. Yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."

Who is God talking to if not fallen angels? This sounds like God is saying "go ahead and do as you please on Earth, but you are warned that in 120 years I am going to destroy mankind."

I agree, I'm thinking this is also supporting the need to take them out. It says Man is also flesh but he only lives around 120 years during this era. The angels were built better and would way out live that. I don't think there's an expiry on them, so it's possible they were not going away hence having to kill them. One of the real cool things about the bible to me is the things that may have simple explinations yet can't be explained. I think the purpose in that is to force us to choose a side. Like Robert L. Ripley would say, believe it or not.