Question about the bible

sexysurfergirl

onelongsong wrote:

you don't sound like a nutter at all love. if you filter out the religion from revelations; you have a description of global warming. and if the 4 horseman are an analogy then we're only waiting for the pale horse now.

you don't sound like a nutcase and i'd fancy you not saying it anymore. your opinions are as valid as anyone elses and i view you as one of the enlightened.

awww thanks!

Collin

For those who haven't seen it, you should watch Secrets of Revelation, a national geographic documentary. It's quite interesting. Throughout history people have believed the "rapture" would come when they lived because the book of revelations described their world so accurately.

By the way, thanks for the replies people.

JordyWordy

Collin wrote:

For those who haven't seen it, you should watch Secrets of Revelation, a national geographic documentary. It's quite interesting. Throughout history people have believed the "rapture" would come when they lived because the book of revelations described their world so accurately.

Good Recommendation..

Also, as for the "UN..No Religion" prediction, watch the South Park where Science becomes the new Religion, the one with the Nintendo Wii i believe.

sexysurfergirl

Collin wrote:

For those who haven't seen it, you should watch Secrets of Revelation, a national geographic documentary. It's quite interesting. Throughout history people have believed the "rapture" would come when they lived because the book of revelations described their world so accurately.

ive seen it,tis interesting!
but the world hasnt 'ticked all of the boxes' sos to speak before, today, all the boxes have been ticked...all the things in 2 tim are happenin now exactly as it said.
all that is left (prophesy wise) is for the governments to turn on religion, and a world wide ban...then the bible says god steps in and brings about armaggeddon...


eeek!

(well eeek if you believe it anyways...)

sexysurfergirl

JordyWordy wrote:

Good Recommendation..

Also, as for the "UN..No Religion" prediction, watch the South Park where Science becomes the new Religion, the one with the Nintendo Wii i believe.

yes thats a good en!!!

ajedigecko

if you get a chance, check out Lee Stroebel and his writing. he is a lawyer and former unbeliever in Jesus. the guy is good.

even if you do not like Jesus.....you should read his book.

catefrances

JordyWordy wrote:

Good Recommendation..

Also, as for the "UN..No Religion" prediction, watch the South Park where Science becomes the new Religion, the one with the Nintendo Wii i believe.

is that the one where cartman(?) gets butters to freeze him?

whoever it was, that was the last sthprk ep i saw. even i found it highly amusing.

JordyWordy

catefrances wrote:

is that the one where cartman(?) gets butters to freeze him?

whoever it was, that was the last sthprk ep i saw. even i found it highly amusing.

thats the one alright

onelongsong

Collin wrote:

For those who haven't seen it, you should watch Secrets of Revelation, a national geographic documentary. It's quite interesting. Throughout history people have believed the "rapture" would come when they lived because the book of revelations described their world so accurately.

BRILLIANT! this helps me make my point about how the bible was written to seem relevant during all times. i did see the documentary and it's good. but i do think revelations applies to now because of the mention of computers and many other things people didn't have earlier. their worlds were as far as they could see. we now know the entire world and our actions have poisoned the entire world. we're no longer talking about sections of the earth that some people believe to be the entire world.
revelations doesn't mention the rapture. that's in a different book. fyi

sexysurfergirl

onelongsong wrote:

BRILLIANT! this helps me make my point about how the bible was written to seem relevant during all times. i did see the documentary and it's good. but i do think revelations applies to now because of the mention of computers and many other things people didn't have earlier. their worlds were as far as they could see. we now know the entire world and our actions have poisoned the entire world. we're no longer talking about sections of the earth that some people believe to be the entire world.
revelations doesn't mention the rapture. that's in a different book. fyi

yep!

onelongsong

sexysurfergirl wrote:

ive seen it,tis interesting!
but the world hasnt 'ticked all of the boxes' sos to speak before, today, all the boxes have been ticked...all the things in 2 tim are happenin now exactly as it said.
all that is left (prophesy wise) is for the governments to turn on religion, and a world wide ban...then the bible says god steps in and brings about armaggeddon...


eeek!

(well eeek if you believe it anyways...)

we believe the same but for different reasons. maybe it's because i'm a stubborn old sod but i still connect it with global warming. the governments turning on religion is the governments FAILURE TO TURN TO religion when the shite hits the fan.
with all the flooding i don't see the un even existing. i think a LEADER will try to sway the masses with false promises.

sexysurfergirl

onelongsong wrote:

we believe the same but for different reasons. maybe it's because i'm a stubborn old sod but i still connect it with global warming. the governments turning on religion is the governments FAILURE TO TURN TO religion when the shite hits the fan.
with all the flooding i don't see the un even existing. i think a LEADER will try to sway the masses with false promises.

well im only 22 so i know ive alot to learn!

i believe global warming is linked, most definately

onelongsong

sexysurfergirl wrote:

well im only 22 so i know ive alot to learn!

i believe global warming is linked, most definately

i'm still a stubborn old sod and that's as close as you'll get to me age.

sexysurfergirl

onelongsong wrote:

i'm still a stubborn old sod and that's as close as you'll get to me age.

with age comes wisdom!!.*........


and yu surely sound wise











* along with diminishing health, looks etc

chopitdown

Collin wrote:

Yet again I'm surprised about how some people take the word of the bible so literally. I don't claim to have a monopoly on the truth so perhaps their view is indeed the right one, I simply don't believe it and cannot believe it. However with that being said, what surprises me, or what is still unclear to me is how they do it.

Last week I found an old catechism in which there was a citation from the gospel of Luke, I think, which said in order to follow Jesus you must hate yourself and your family too. I don't remember the exact verses (I wrote it down somewhere but I can't remember where) so I searched the web because I was interested in the context of those words or views on those words and of course how this fits in with that commandment that says you should honour your father and mother, alas, I found nothing. Well, not what I was looking for anyway.
I did find that Jesus said he did not come to bring peace but a sword and he would divide families. But the bible also states Jesus did come to bring peace on earth.

the meaning of the word "hate" in that verse should actually be translated...love less. So in other words you must love God more than anything else.

Collin wrote:

So it would seem necessary to study the geographical and historic context as well, yet, I believe there aren't many people how actually do this... And then there's the question of the validity of the theories brought forth by those who have.

i agree wholeheartedly...you haev to look at historic context, word tranlsations, geographic distinctions. The best guide that I cna give is to use strongs concordance (greek word definitions) and then look for agreement amongst scholars on certain things.

Collin wrote:

I guess my question is how do people who believe in the bible (even if only certain parts) reconcile themselves to this "bible problem"? If the answer is 'faith', then isn't that blind faith?

There are certain things that are blind faith in the christian life. But the nice thing about the bible is that it has internal and external validity.

Collin wrote:

Another question is, how accurate are modern translations of the bible, in your opinion? And if they're fairly accurate can a person living today understand the bible like it was meant to be understood? Because I'm relatively sure that a person who is born 2000 years from now, would have a hard time understanding today's society. I mean we already have a hard time understanding the people living in other countries. I think some core principles won't change... but everything else does. In that case, can a person substract, so to speak, certain messages from the bible (love thy neighbour...) and live by them and never open the bible again and still be considered a 'christian'?

Well, long post and there are still so many things I'd like to ask but let's leave it at that for now.

modern translations try to capture the original greek/ hebrew intent and words. They are put together by true biblical scholars. Here's a snippet about different translations: http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/?action=getVersionInfo&vid=49
http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/index.php?action=getVersionInfo&vid=31&lang=2

I think it is important to look at different tranlsations to help with clarity.

I would say to be considered a christian you have to recognize what christ did for you. You could be considered religious even polite by carrying out a lot of the actions the bible says are good (love they neighbor, don't murder etc....) But that gets into a whole different discussion...grace vs works and that isn't the point of the thread. feel free to pm me (or post questions) if you have questions or would like some resource information.

onelongsong

sexysurfergirl wrote:

with age comes wisdom!!.*........


and yu surely sound wise











* along with diminishing health, looks etc

that depends on who you talk to around here. to some i am a blessing; to others i'm a curse. but thank you for the compliment.

sexysurfergirl

onelongsong wrote:

that depends on who you talk to around here. to some i am a blessing; to others i'm a curse. but thank you for the compliment.

your ace for an old chap!

onelongsong

sexysurfergirl wrote:

your ace for an old chap!

i'm not THAT old though. :eek:

sexysurfergirl

onelongsong wrote:

i'm not THAT old though. :eek:

he he he

shame your old and probably taken, you sound cool!
open minded

cornnifer

Collin wrote:

Yet again I'm surprised about how some people take the word of the bible so literally. I don't claim to have a monopoly on the truth so perhaps their view is indeed the right one, I simply don't believe it and cannot believe it. However with that being said, what surprises me, or what is still unclear to me is how they do it.

Last week I found an old catechism in which there was a citation from the gospel of Luke, I think, which said in order to follow Jesus you must hate yourself and your family too. I don't remember the exact verses (I wrote it down somewhere but I can't remember where) so I searched the web because I was interested in the context of those words or views on those words and of course how this fits in with that commandment that says you should honour your father and mother, alas, I found nothing. Well, not what I was looking for anyway.
I did find that Jesus said he did not come to bring peace but a sword and he would divide families. But the bible also states Jesus did come to bring peace on earth.

Anyway, my point is the bible seems to be full with conundrums, which seem hard to solve. I mean, sure you can read a verse in its entire context but how do we translate something that was written a long long time ago in a desert area somewhere into something which has the same meaning today without losing its original meaning or adding to it.

So it would seem necessary to study the geographical and historic context as well, yet, I believe there aren't many people how actually do this... And then there's the question of the validity of the theories brought forth by those who have.

I guess my question is how do people who believe in the bible (even if only certain parts) reconcile themselves to this "bible problem"? If the answer is 'faith', then isn't that blind faith?

Another question is, how accurate are modern translations of the bible, in your opinion? And if they're fairly accurate can a person living today understand the bible like it was meant to be understood? Because I'm relatively sure that a person who is born 2000 years from now, would have a hard time understanding today's society. I mean we already have a hard time understanding the people living in other countries. I think some core principles won't change... but everything else does. In that case, can a person substract, so to speak, certain messages from the bible (love thy neighbour...) and live by them and never open the bible again and still be considered a 'christian'?

Well, long post and there are still so many things I'd like to ask but let's leave it at that for now.

What you refer to is Luke 14:26
As you know, i'm not a big fan of soundbyte citation of scripture, but here it is as per NIV:



26"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple."

Now, there is a very similar passage in Matthew 10:37 which is very similar:


37"Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me."

Virtually the same with the language used in Luke being much harsher.
To me, i believe Christ's choice of words in Luke is simply an employment of hyperbole, or deliberate exaggeration. Christ was a master of parable and figurative language and used it quite often. The point he is making is that the cost of discipleship is complete devotion. Of course i should honor my mother and father up to the point they attempt to stand in the way of my discipleship with Christ, at which point, i must choose Christ.

See, it is nowhere near the "conundrum" you present it as. Nothing to reconcile.