Where did we get The Bible? - A IN-DEPTH STUDY

[Augustin56]

And if they jumped off a cliff I would not follow them.

The fetish for virginity came about after the biblical era. The phrase Virgin Mary does not appear in the scriptures...that is a red flag....it usually means some one wants you to believe a lie. The whole New Testament is there.....If Yahweh impregnated Miriam in an abnormal way, miraculous zapping, it would have been described that way....Ok beam Him in Scotty! Ok now beam Him out Scotty! And Miriam swore off sex with her husband because it was so dirty, nasty, and sinful, created by the devil to tempt men.........laughable theology at best.

Lies are hard to support. As I said once you tell one you spend your life tap dancing to explain it.

Tell us how you think this sequence happened, without Yahweh having sexual relations with Miriam.

Did He cast his seed into here like baseball pitcher? Is there a strike zone?

Did He manifest His seed in her?

For the pre-existing people….Did Yahweh shrink Yeshua to a seed or fetus and then throw Him in there?

Did Yeshua shrink Himself and manifest in her, which means He is His own father?

The only way for Yeshua to be the real Son of God is for things to go along the normal way.

But I would love to hear your explanation of it.

As far as Miriam not having sex with her husband or having children….of coarse the scriptures do not indicate that....but explain the reason why she would do that and what benefit it would be?

Nowhere in the Bible, does the Bible say it is the be all end all of Divine Revelation. In fact, it says that not everything Jesus did and taught is in the Bible. Yet, Jesus commanded the Apostles to teach all that He taught them. Jesus didn't write a book to spread His truths. He founded a (one) Church to do so. Historically, this was the Catholic Church. St. Paul refers to the Church (the only one in existence) as the "pillar and foundation of truth" in 1 Tim 3:15. Nowhere does the Bible refer to each individual, personally interpreting Scripture to be anywhere close to this.

I don't know you at all, but from your post, you seem to think you have the responsibility to reinvent the wheel through your own personal interpretation of the Bible. Yet, the St. Peter warns against just such personal interpretation of Scripture in 2 Peter 1:20-21. And, really, since the Protestant Reformation, how has this approach worked? It has splintered Protestantism into literally thousands of man-made, doctrinally contradicting denominations. That cannot be the grounding and bullwark of the fullness of truth which Christ brought to mankind.

 

[Grailhunter]

He founded a (one) Church to do so. Historically, this was the Catholic Church. St. Paul refers to the Church (the only one in existence) as the "pillar and foundation of truth" in 1 Tim 3:15.

Ya I went on a site seeing tour of that church....very beautiful.....it is at 315 youareoutofyourmind ave.

I don't know you at all, but from your post, you seem to think you have the responsibility to reinvent the wheel through your own personal interpretation of the Bible. Yet, the St. Peter warns against just such personal interpretation of Scripture in 2 Peter 1:20-21. And, really, since the Protestant Reformation, how has this approach worked? It has splintered Protestantism into literally thousands of man-made, doctrinally contradicting denominations. That cannot be the grounding and bullwark of the fullness of truth which Christ brought to mankind.

I can understand why you think what I say is shocking....truth can be shocking....the uneducated live in a state of shock.
My religion is based on God, not what the Catholic Church says. Love the Catholics but they are a gullible bunch, with a fantasy outlook on history.

We can criticize the Protestants, but they really did not have much choice and they only had so much information to work with so they centered on what was in the scriptures....not a lot of cultural or historical back ground. But they were faced with a Church that thought the Spirit of Christ lead them to torture mothers and chop them up and force feed them to their children.....there was of level of insanity there that justified the reaction of the Protestants.

 

[St. SteVen]

Nowhere in the Bible, does the Bible say it is the be all end all of Divine Revelation. In fact, it says that not everything Jesus did and taught is in the Bible. Yet, Jesus commanded the Apostles to teach all that He taught them. Jesus didn't write a book to spread His truths. He founded a (one) Church to do so. Historically, this was the Catholic Church. St. Paul refers to the Church (the only one in existence) as the "pillar and foundation of truth" in 1 Tim 3:15. Nowhere does the Bible refer to each individual, personally interpreting Scripture to be anywhere close to this.

I don't know you at all, but from your post, you seem to think you have the responsibility to reinvent the wheel through your own personal interpretation of the Bible. Yet, the St. Peter warns against just such personal interpretation of Scripture in 2 Peter 1:20-21. And, really, since the Protestant Reformation, how has this approach worked? It has splintered Protestantism into literally thousands of man-made, doctrinally contradicting denominations. That cannot be the grounding and bullwark of the fullness of truth which Christ brought to mankind.

That sounds like a complete CONDEMNATION of Protestantism.
Is that the official Catholic Church stance? Or only your own personal interpretation?

 

[St. SteVen]

You do realize that all of the original Reformation fathers believed in Mary's perpetual virginity, right?

Sounds as if they weren't FULLY reformed. - LOL
Back to REFORM school for them!

Wouldn't REFORMED indicate something new?
The word reformed should carry the idea of being corrected.
Prisons are supposed to reform criminals by correcting them to proper behavior.

The Reformers were SUPPOSED to be correcting wrongs, not carrying them forward.
Evidently this was a LONG process.
Thus giving opportunity to the current institution of the Church (capital "C") to criticize them.

Should we review the acts of the Church (capital "C") that led to the NEED for a Reformation?
Why didn't the Church (capital "C") reform itself? Did it benefit in some way?

 

[Lambano]

Should we review the acts of the Church (capital "C") that led to the NEED for a Reformation?
Why didn't the Church (capital "C") reform itself? Did it benefit in some way?

Are you sure you want to indulge in that diet of worms?

 

[St. SteVen]

Are you sure you want to indulge in that diet of worms?

Interesting that they would use the writings of the EARLY Reformers to bludgeon present-day Reformers.
As if the present-day Reformers should return to the "original" faith of the NOT-SO-REFORMED early Reformers.

Just bad FORM on their part, I suppose. - LOL
Perhaps they should inform their form on their inFORMation on the early Reformers.

 

[Lambano]

Interesting that they would use the writings of the EARLY Reformers to bludgeon present-day Reformers.
As if the present-day Reformers should return to the "original" faith of the NOT-SO-REFORMED early Reformers.

Just bad FORM on their part, I suppose. - LOL
Perhaps they should inform their form on their inFORMation on the early Reformers.

Semper Reformanda, as they say in Rome.

 

[Augustin56]

Ya I went on a site seeing tour of that church....very beautiful.....it is at 315 youareoutofyourmind ave.


I can understand why you think what I say is shocking....truth can be shocking....the uneducated live in a state of shock.
My religion is based on God, not what the Catholic Church says. Love the Catholics but they are a gullible bunch, with a fantasy outlook on history.

We can criticize the Protestants, but they really did not have much choice and they only had so much information to work with so they centered on what was in the scriptures....not a lot of cultural or historical back ground. But they were faced with a Church that thought the Spirit of Christ lead them to torture mothers and chop them up and force feed them to their children.....there was of level of insanity there that justified the reaction of the Protestants.

So, hmmm. Did God appear to you personally, and give you a different message than He gave the Apostles?

 

[St. SteVen]

Semper Reformanda, as they say in Rome.

Exactly.
Why don't they stick with the original Fathers?
(or the Bible, for that matter - toss the Traditions)

 

[St. SteVen]

So, hmmm. Did God appear to you personally, and give you a different message than He gave the Apostles?

Oh my.
Did you really write that? (appears so) - LOL
That saw cuts both ways.

 

[Augustin56]

Exactly.
Why don't they stick with the original Fathers?
(or the Bible, for that matter - toss the Traditions)

Did you know that the New Testament came from the Tradition (capital T). Tradition in this sense means teaching, not common practices, etc. See 2 Thes 2:15, where St. Paul gives equal weight to oral teaching vs written teaching. "Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours." Jesus taught orally. He didn't write a book, nor do we see Him telling anyone else to write a book. Makes sense, though, since it's only been in the last 100 years or so that there was any interest worldwide in universal literacy. The vast, vast majority of earth's population was illiterate before that.

 

[St. SteVen]

Did you know that the New Testament came from the Tradition (capital T).

The word "Tradition" (capital T) in this sense meaning the western/Latin Church? (capital C)
Yes, I knew that. Thanks. (capital T) - LOL

Tradition in this sense means teaching, not common practices, etc. See 2 Thes 2:15, where St. Paul gives equal weight to oral teaching vs written teaching. "Therefore, brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours."

I wonder why the translators goofed up? That "traditions" was supposed to read "teachings"? - Oops!

What happens if we replace 'traditions" (small t) with "teaching"?
... stand firm and hold fast to the teaching you were taught...
Seems as awkward as it is redundant.

Jesus taught orally. He didn't write a book, nor do we see Him telling anyone else to write a book.

Right. So what did you do? Published a book. Terrific.

 

[Grailhunter]

So, hmmm. Did God appear to you personally, and give you a different message than He gave the Apostles?

No I am preaching what the Bible says.
It is the Catholic Church that has to do all the tap dancing because of their false doctrines. False beliefs are not generally congruent with other scriptures and one false belief can skew the meaning of dozens of scriptures.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I can disassociate myself from you without killing you or ruining your life. Which is usually what happened with Catholic excommunication but not what the Bible suggests

More of your idiotic refivionist nonsense.

Excommunication was not a reason for executon because it didn't usually involve heresy. It is a last ditch move due to the behavior of an unruly member, not doctrinal disagreement. Even witb Luther - it was his arrogamce and unruly behavior that became the problem.

Nature of all men....not contagious sin through sex with babies going to hell. The doctrine of Original Sin is a lie from a mad man.

As I already proved to you - it is all spelled out specifically in Rom. 5:12-19.

You can deby Scruoture until the cows come hme - and you'll STILL be wrong Rejection of God's sacred Word is what is "mad" . . .

That is another lie. Never ask a Catholic about history....LOL
Not much of a challenge.....I am losing count of how many times I have corrected you on this.....no bishops...no Popes....no central organization, no power....until after the Ecumenical councils…..keep pushing that poop dung beetle.

If you had any understanding at all about Christian history you would know that the overall purpose of the Ecumenical Councils were to establish all that. Before that, no organization and no power.

The scholars disagree.....push that poop.

This is quite possibly, your most asinine statement on this tread.

Only a complete moron would make this claim after reading the account of the FIRST ecumenical Council in Acts 15 – which was ALL about Authority.

You need to take some time off – STUDY your Bible, then get back in the game . . .

 

[Grailhunter]

Excommunication was not a reason for executon because it didn't usually involve heresy. It is a last ditch move due to the behavior of an unruly member, not doctrinal disagreement. Even witb Luther - it was his arrogamce and unruly behavior that became the problem.

Wrong

As I already proved to you - it is all spelled out specifically in Rom. 5:12-19.

You can deby Scruoture until the cows come hme - and you'll STILL be wrong Rejection of God's sacred Word is what is "mad" . . .

Show me the phrase Original Sin in the scriptures or you are talking out your bottom.

Be fruitful and multiple so sin will fill the world!…and babies will go to Hell! So saith the Lord….LOL…I don’t think so!

This is quite possibly, your most asinine statement on this tread.

Only a complete moron would make this claim after reading the account of the FIRST ecumenical Council in Acts 15 – which was ALL about Authority.

You need to take some time off – STUDY your Bible, then get back in the game . . .

I was talking about the Ecumenical Councils in the 4th century....brainiac!

 

[BreadOfLife]

Say what?

End of discussion. I don't need this kind of abuse.

Fine, if you don't want to have a discussion.

BIT - if you make any more ignorant anti-Catholic statements - I'll expose you again . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Wrong

THAT'S your answer??

You have a habit of making ridiculously stupid claims without SHRED of evidence.

Show me the phrase Original Sin in the scriptures or you are talking out your bottom.

Be fruitful and multiple so sin will fill the world!…and babies will go to Hell! So saith the Lord….LOL…I don’t think so!

This is the same weak, semantic argument you always use.

Do people have “Problems?
Have YOU ever made a “Mistake”?
By Jesus’s sacrifice – are our sins “Paid for”
Are we NOT supposed to engage in “Discipleship”?
Is that NOT our earthly “Mission”
Are we NOT supposed to have a “Personal relationship” with Jesus?

The answer to EVERY ONE of those questions is “YES”.
HOWEVER – not a SINGLE one of those words or phrases is in the Bible.

So much for your idiotic semantics . . .

I was talking about the Ecumenical Councils in the 4th century....brainiac!

Uhhhh, that's NOT what you said, Einstein . . .

YOU saud:
"If you had any understanding at all about Christian history you would know that the overall purpose of the Ecumenical Councils were to establish all that."

Use your head before making such embarassingly STUPID claims . . .

 

[Grailhunter]

THAT'S your answer??

You have a habit of making ridiculously stupid claims without SHRED of evidence.

You just deny all of history so it is a waste of time.
So your home work is to find all the people that the Catholic Church excommunicated and why and what happened to them.

o people have “Problems?
Have YOU ever made a “Mistake”?
By Jesus’s sacrifice – are our sins “Paid for”
Are we NOT supposed to engage in “Discipleship”?
Is that NOT our earthly “Mission”
Are we NOT supposed to have a “Personal relationship” with Jesus?

The answer to EVERY ONE of those questions is “YES”.
HOWEVER – not a SINGLE one of those words or phrases is in the Bible.

True statements but none of this has to do with the non biblical concept of Original Sin....and the plan of God.

Be fruitful and multiple so sin will fill the world!…and babies will go to Hell! So saith the Lord….LOL…I don’t think so!

Humans are not gods.....so ya they will make mistakes.

And a relationship with God does not mean you are damned from birth. LOL That would be one heck of a plan....consistent from the mind of a madman.

"If you had any understanding at all about Christian history you would know that the overall purpose of the Ecumenical Councils were to establish all that."

Use your head before making such embarassingly STUPID claims . . .

"If you had any understanding at all about Christian history you would know that the overall purpose of the Ecumenical Councils were to establish all that."

Yes that is what I said.....notice the plural....
And I was still talking about the Ecumenical Councils of the 4th century because the Catholic Church did not exist before them.

 

[JunChosen]

Show me the phrase Original Sin in the scriptures or you are talking out your bottom.

The term "Original Sin" can't be found in Scripture, however the same idea can is found in 1 Corinthians 15:22: "As in Adam all die."

Be fruitful and multiple so sin will fill the world!…and babies will go to Hell! So saith the Lord….LOL…I don’t think so!

Babies that are NOT saved do go to hell!

Psalm 58:3 reads:

"The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies."

To God Be the Glory

 

[Nancy]

There seems to be a whole lot of "name calling" goin on here. It IS against the rules. Please refrain from this childish mudslinging, nobody is getting anywhere with it.

If it keeps going like this, I will lock the thread.