Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2015 12:34:14 GMT -6
As a Bible reader I have noticed a few errors but for the most part accurate. As far infallible, there were so many people involved in writing the Bible and over such a long period of time mistakes are possible. I would like to believe it's infallible. I believe the Bible is incomplete, there were other very valuable books that could have been added.
|
|
|
Post by rdlb on Jan 1, 2015 13:48:11 GMT -6
As a Bible reader I have noticed a few errors but for the most part accurate. As far infallible, there were so many people involved in writing the Bible and over such a long period of time mistakes are possible. I would like to believe it's infallible. I believe the Bible is incomplete, there were other very valuable books that could have been added. Referring to the Gnostic Gospels perhaps? Here is my short take on the idea. The Bible was subjected to computer analysis along with the Book of Mormon, among others as well. I will stay with the two the Bible and BoM. They found that the Bible had many diverse authors and the BoM had one. Scholars and those whose textual criticisms had long labored to either discredit or give support to the Biblical narrative cannot explain away the underlying continuity of the message contained within the Bible. This continuity can be found from Genesis to Revelation. With the BoM the case against it is so overwhelming that it is useless as a narrative or "another gospel of Jesus". God used many authors to speak and write the same Biblical precepts throughout from beginning to end. That in and of itself is quite a miracle. Joseph Smith and the BoM on the other hand, only sought to build himself up. See for the complete details of JS and the LDS. www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changecontents.htm
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2015 14:44:53 GMT -6
As a Bible reader I have noticed a few errors but for the most part accurate. As far infallible, there were so many people involved in writing the Bible and over such a long period of time mistakes are possible. I would like to believe it's infallible. I believe the Bible is incomplete, there were other very valuable books that could have been added. Referring to the Gnostic Gospels perhaps? Here is my short take on the idea. The Bible was subjected to computer analysis along with the Book of Mormon, among others as well. I will stay with the two the Bible and BoM. They found that the Bible had many diverse authors and the BoM had one. Scholars and those whose textual criticisms had long labored to either discredit or give support to the Biblical narrative cannot explain away the underlying continuity of the message contained within the Bible. This continuity can be found from Genesis to Revelation. With the BoM the case against it is so overwhelming that it is useless as a narrative or "another gospel of Jesus". God used many authors to speak and write the same Biblical precepts throughout from beginning to end. That in and of itself is quite a miracle. Joseph Smith and the BoM on the other hand, only sought to build himself up. See for the complete details of JS and the LDS. www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changecontents.htmI was referring to The book of Jasher, The book of Tobit and The Book of Enoch.
|
|
|
Post by rdlb on Jan 1, 2015 15:11:48 GMT -6
Referring to the Gnostic Gospels perhaps? Here is my short take on the idea. The Bible was subjected to computer analysis along with the Book of Mormon, among others as well. I will stay with the two the Bible and BoM. They found that the Bible had many diverse authors and the BoM had one. Scholars and those whose textual criticisms had long labored to either discredit or give support to the Biblical narrative cannot explain away the underlying continuity of the message contained within the Bible. This continuity can be found from Genesis to Revelation. With the BoM the case against it is so overwhelming that it is useless as a narrative or "another gospel of Jesus". God used many authors to speak and write the same Biblical precepts throughout from beginning to end. That in and of itself is quite a miracle. Joseph Smith and the BoM on the other hand, only sought to build himself up. See for the complete details of JS and the LDS. www.utlm.org/onlinebooks/changecontents.htmI was referring to The book of Jasher, The book of Tobit and The Book of Enoch. Like many potential pseudepigraphal books and Apocryphal writings there are some serious flaws within the writings that do not line up with the majority of the 66 books chosen. Historical inaccuracies and doctrinal problems. However, having said that, a discerning reader could read them with the knowledge of those facts. Personally I have read all of the Apocryphal books,some pseudepigraphal books, Elaine Pagels "The Gnostic Gospels" and other writings including those of the LDS. I prefer still the Bible (KJV as I am used to it). Pulling doctrine from books other than the 66 has created some rather interesting ones. Tobit 6:5-8, If the Devil, or an evil spirit troubles anyone, they can be driven away by making a smoke of the heart, liver, and gall of a fish...and the Devil will smell it, and flee away, and never come again anymore.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2015 15:26:42 GMT -6
Yeah, but there are equally silly sounding things all through the Bible. Some of the Books go into a lot more detail for example it says Cain killed Abel with the iron part of a plow. Cain was later killed by a man named Lamech.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2015 18:14:27 GMT -6
Deuteronomy 28:53 says: "Then because of the dire straits to which you will be reduced when your enemy besieges you, you will eat your own children, the flesh of your sons and daughters whom the Lord has given you."
When you're under seige, you can't exactly go out for pizza. So what do you do about food? According to the Bible, you eat your children. Why does the bible have so many stories that involve eating kids?
That makes Tobit 6:5-8 sound like childs play don't it. Smoking a fish dosen't sound nearly as bad now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2015 5:05:52 GMT -6
The Bible is riddled with mistakes an inaccuracies.
2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the work of truth.
When reading the Old Testament you need to keep in mind some of these books were written by people barely out of the stone age.
|
|
|
Post by rdlb on Jan 3, 2015 12:59:50 GMT -6
The Bible is riddled with mistakes an inaccuracies. 2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the work of truth. When reading the Old Testament you need to keep in mind some of these books were written by people barely out of the stone age. What I keep in mind is the Bible in its entirety is full of symbolism both within the OT and NT; I see no mistakes or inaccuracies within the OT and NT. For example, it is impossible for Genesis 1 to have occurred as written. Inaccurate? Mistake? The parables of Jesus reflect a inward spiritual context. Did Jesus make inaccurate accounts within the parables? The books of Daniel, Ezekiel and Revelation depict more of what is going on within those whose fallen states need to be elevated into "spiritual life" than remain in the state of "spiritual death". Are they historically accurate? Who is Cain and Able within you or me? What do they represent symbolically to us as an allegory? Genesis 4:2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. Hebrews 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.
I know that you are familiar with the scriptures enough to know what sacrifices we are to offer to God. See how those sacrifices relate to Abel's? See how those who offer earthy sacrifices relate to Cain? As to the other pseudepigraphal books and Apocryphal writings? Those have no continuity to the current Bible as written in regards to the symbolism, parables, allegorical and metaphysical content. It is my sincere intent not to come across in any manner to you or others in a way not respectful to ideas represented here on this board. I mean to not come across as attacking, just discussing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2015 13:42:07 GMT -6
Who is Cain and Abel within me? Abel I suppose would represent the spiritual side of us (me). Someone That walks by faith and not by sight. 2 Corinthians 5:7. Cane would be the carnal side, the worldly, earthy side of me. Having not the spirit. Jude 1:19.
What do they represent symbolically to us as an allegory. It's difficult to differentiate between the 2 questions. For me that is.
I also don't mean to come across as aggressive, just telling my take on things. I don't know everything and I doubt that anyone does but I'm willing to learn.
The books that I mentioned I think are a pleasure to read. There are many, all are available. The Acts of Peter, The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Mary Magdalene. Just like the people that put the NIV together and left out many verses. The people that put together the 66 books of the bible left out a number of books.....But I still read them. I'll be the judge of what I should read, not someone that gave their opinion over 400 years ago. (smile) I think by reading these books you get a more rounded view of the Bible. Mathew, Mark, Luke and John are all simular. The gospel of Mary, Thomas and Acts of Peter are different so they were left out (my opinion). It seems who ever put the Bible together had a view of what the Gospels should be and anything that differed from their view they left out.
|
|
|
Post by rdlb on Jan 4, 2015 14:02:55 GMT -6
Who is Cain and Abel within me? Abel I suppose would represent the spiritual side of us (me). Someone That walks by faith and not by sight. 2 Corinthians 5:7. Cane would be the carnal side, the worldly, earthy side of me. Having not the spirit. Jude 1:19. What do they represent symbolically to us as an allegory. It's difficult to differentiate between the 2 questions. For me that is. I also don't mean to come across as aggressive, just telling my take on things. I don't know everything and I doubt that anyone does but I'm willing to learn. The books that I mentioned I think are a pleasure to read. There are many, all are available. The Acts of Peter, The Gospel of Thomas, The Gospel of Mary Magdalene. Just like the people that put the NIV together and left out many verses. The people that put together the 66 books of the bible left out a number of books.....But I still read them. I'll be the judge of what I should read, not someone that gave their opinion over 400 years ago. (smile) I think by reading these books you get a more rounded view of the Bible. Mathew, Mark, Luke and John are all simular. The gospel of Mary, Thomas and Acts of Peter are different so they were left out (my opinion). It seems who ever put the Bible together had a view of what the Gospels should be and anything that differed from their view they left out. Discovering who and how Cain and Abel are represented within codifies the scriptures in us and depicts a pathway to follow. One of the issues Jesus presented to the Jews who sought to kill him was found in the OT scriptures. Well, part of the issue with what books have been included as canon is with the roles of Roman Emperor Constantine I (272–337 AD) and the Roman historian Eusebius. I agree that many of the other books are not only a pleasure to read but also informative as well.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2015 15:22:13 GMT -6
It's interesting. Is there a place I can look this up?
|
|
|
Post by rdlb on Jan 10, 2015 12:45:07 GMT -6
It's interesting. Is there a place I can look this up? Roman Emperor Constantine I (272–337 AD) and the Roman historian Eusebius can be read at Wikipedia Council of Nicaea, Eusebius and Origen. Through the activities of the theologian Origen (185/6–254) and the school of his follower Pamphilus (later 3rd century – 309), Caesarea became a center of Christian learning. Origen was largely responsible for the collection of usage information regarding the texts which became the New Testament. The information used to create the late-fourth-century Easter Letter, which declared accepted Christian writings, was probably based on the Ecclesiastical History [HE] of Eusebius of Caesarea, wherein he uses the information passed on to him by Origen to create both his list at HE 3:25 and Origen's list at HE 6:25. Eusebius got his information about what texts were accepted by the third-century churches throughout the known world, a great deal of which Origen knew of firsthand from his extensive travels, from the library and writings of Origen. Origen excelled in multiple branches of theological scholarship. For instance, he was the greatest textual critic of the early Church, directing the production of the massive Hexapla ("Sixfold"), an Old Testament in six columns: Hebrew, Hebrew in Greek characters, the Septuagint, and the Greek versions of Theodotion, Aquila of Sinope, and Symmachus. He was one of the greatest biblical scholars of the early Church, having written commentaries on most of the books of the Bible, though few are extant. He interpreted scripture both literally and allegorically. Origen was largely responsible for the collection of usage information regarding the texts which became the New Testament. The information used to create the late-fourth-century Easter Letter, which declared accepted Christian writings, was probably based on the Ecclesiastical History [HE] of Eusebius of Caesarea, wherein he uses the information passed on to him by Origen to create both his list at HE 3:25 and Origen’s list at HE 6:25. Eusebius got his information about what texts were accepted by the third-century churches throughout the known world, a great deal of which Origen knew of firsthand from his extensive travels, from the library and writings of Origen.[26] In fact, Origen would have possibly included in his list of "inspired writings" other texts which were kept out by the likes of Eusebius, including the Epistle of Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermas, and 1 Clement. "Origen is not the originator of the idea of biblical canon, but he certainly gives the philosophical and literary-interpretative underpinnings for the whole notion. For the comprehensive readings of the early church fathers writings can be found at: www.ccel.org/fathers.html
|
|