[Hindsite]

Could be translated as............interpretation of the meaning again. Kinda knocks the feet from under it as the word of god.

Some people refer to the Holy Bible as the word of God, but they mean that men were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write it down. It is obvious that it is not all words directly from God. Adam said some things, Eve said some things, Satan said certain things, Abraham said certain things, Moses said some things, and many other people said certain things.

[Besoeker]

Could be translated as............interpretation of the meaning again. Kinda knocks the feet from under it as the word of god.

Some people refer to the Holy Bible as the word of God, but they mean that men were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write it down. It is obvious that it is not all words directly from God. Adam said some things, Eve said some things, Satan said certain things, Abraham said certain things, Moses said some things, and many other people said certain things.

The problem with that stance is that there is nothing, not even hearsay, that can confirm what Adam or Eve said. Or even if they actually existed. The bible version is that they were the only two huans in existence at the time of creation so there was no one to confirm even their existence far less what they reportedly said.

It's a story that some may choose to believe regardless of veracity - and that's fine.

[Hindsite]

Obviously one must have a certain amount of faith to believe what is written in the Holy Bible. But after some study there seems to me to be support for much that is written in the Holy Bible. There seems to be at least two non-human witnesses to the creation event and Moses allegedly met one and wrote down some of what he was told, according to him.

[Besoeker]

Obviously one must have a certain amount of faith to believe what is written in the Holy Bible. But after some study there seems to me to be support for much that is written in the Holy Bible. There seems to be at least two non-human witnesses to the creation event and Moses allegedly met one and wrote down some of what he was told, according to him.

From Wipedia:

The overwhelming modern scholarly consensus is, according to William Dever, that Moses is a figure of myth, not of history

[Hindsite]

From Wipedia:

The overwhelming modern scholarly consensus is, according to William Dever, that Moses is a figure of myth, not of history

[/quote]

The so-called biblical scholars have said that same thing about many other figures in the Holy Bible until proven wrong. That is enough for me to discount speculators that make claims about history that they can't prove, because I believe they could possibly be proven wrong again in the future.

[Rich]

I guess the word translated "adversary" could be translated as "Satan" since Satan means 'adversary of God and man"

No you've got it the wrong way round. the word was satan in the original. Note there are no Capital letters in Hebrew. Translators sometimes translate satan as Satan and sometimes as adversary.

Genesis 1 - 2:4 uses the name El normally translated as God. At 2:4 a second creation story begins. Its in a different order and God is referred to as Yahweh / Yahweh God or Jehovah depending on the translation. One doesn't have to be a great scholar to begin to be able to determine the four sources of the Pentatuech. Sometimes versions are interwoven like the Flood story. Two sources were recognised as early as the eighteenth century. in one source the name Yahweh is used from the beginning. In the other it is only used after it is revealed to Moses. This gave the J (sounds like a Y in German) source from Jehovah and the E source from El. J favours Judah, likes Aaron, dislikes Moses. E favours the northern tribes, like Moses and dislikes Aaron.

The 2 source was developed into the four source: J, E P (Priestly) D (Deuteronomy). Genesis begins with a P source, written hundreds of years after the J source. In P God is distant, in J God is anthropomorphised like the gods of Ancient Greece, Rome, the Norse or the Hindus.

[Besoeker]

From Wipedia:

The overwhelming modern scholarly consensus is, according to William Dever, that Moses is a figure of myth, not of history

The so-called biblical scholars have said that same thing about many other figures in the Holy Bible until proven wrong. That is enough for me to discount speculators that make claims about history that they can't prove, because I believe they could possibly be proven wrong again in the future.

People get things wrong all the time. About the bible (and much else). Their errors don't prove that the bible is right. Or that either you or I are right. Or wrong.

What you have shown, and accepted, in previous posts is that you can't take at least some of the bible literally at face value.
And some of it is beyond credibility - at least for most rational people.

[Hindsite]

What you have shown, and accepted, in previous posts is that you can't take at least some of the bible literally at face value.
And some of it is beyond credibility - at least for most rational people.

The Holy Bible is meant to present truth. However, one must be willing to search for it, a little here and a little there. I am not sure what you mean by face value. However, one should take the Holy Bible in the literary manner that it is written, such as history, prophecy, allegory, parable, proverb, peotry, and song. One must also consider the context and the culture of the time in understanding its true meaning.

Many things written in the Holy Bible are not crediblle without a belief in the God of miracles. However, even in our modern age we are sometimes confronted with things we would not ordinary believe unless we were an eye witness. Sometimes we put faith in other's testimony, like most rational people do when they hear and see the news reports on television every day.

[Besoeker]

No you've got it the wrong way round. the word was satan in the original. Note there are no Capital letters in Hebrew. Translators sometimes translate satan as Satan and sometimes as adversary.

It is obvious that you have been screwed up by being brainwashed with satanic propaganda. You need special help. i recommend you seek help from a professional as soon as possible.

And I recommend that you cease and desist from such ad hom attacks.

[Frollein]

Renounce the alien belief of the desert people and return to the true religion of your ancestors!

Hail Thor!



Hail Frigg!

[Rich]

No you've got it the wrong way round. the word was satan in the original. Note there are no Capital letters in Hebrew. Translators sometimes translate satan as Satan and sometimes as adversary.

It is obvious that you have been screwed up by being brainwashed with satanic propaganda. You need special help. i recommend you seek help from a professional as soon as possible.

I take it from your response that my remarks struck home and threatened your core beliefs. You see that's the thing about "The Bible": there is no "The Bible. What you have is a collection of English versions of the Bible, that have been translated from multiple ancient documents that have significant differences and are written in multiple ancient languages. We no longer are even certain what certain words or phrases me.

But the more you examine the Bible, the more it falls apart, the Bible contradicts itself over and over again. Where were Mary and Joseph living when Mary became pregnant with Jesus? In Matthew they were living in Bethlehem and then fled to Egypt. In Luke they were living in Nazareth and only went to Bethlehem for a census and never went to Egypt at all. The gospels can't even agree on what day Jesus was crucified. In John he died a day earlier. I mean really if the Bible is to be believed Jesus's disciples must have been some of the most dozy bastards in history. They must have all been in some sort of early onset Alzheimer's. they couldn't even remember if their last meal with Jesus was a passover meal or not.

[Besoeker]

What you have shown, and accepted, in previous posts is that you can't take at least some of the bible literally at face value.
And some of it is beyond credibility - at least for most rational people.

The Holy Bible is meant to present truth. However, one must be willing to search for it, a little here and a little there. I am not sure what you mean by face value.

I mean face value. Nothing more complicated than that.

[Hindsite]

I take it from your response that my remarks struck home and threatened your core beliefs. You see that's the thing about "The Bible": there is no "The Bible. What you have is a collection of English versions of the Bible, that have been translated from multiple ancient documents that have significant differences and are written in multiple ancient languages. We no longer are even certain what certain words or phrases me.

But the more you examine the Bible, the more it falls apart, the Bible contradicts itself over and over again.

You said nothing that threatened my core values or beliefs. I am simply wise enough to see your problem. But I am not a trained professional and don't believe I am able to help you get past you programming by satanic propaganda.

Not being able to be sure what certain words or phrases mean from the ancient languages does not mean we can't try to learn by investigating them. The idea that the Holy Bible contradicts itself is an allegation that has never been able to be proved. That idea in only a belief put forth as if it was fact, primarily by atheists. It is disingenuous to claim contradictions based on absence of information given by one party or the other.

[Albert]

Renounce the alien belief of the desert people and return to the true religion of your ancestors!

Desert hot wind, is a good healer I hear. Same with the crystals of the waterfall.

[Hindsite]

Genesis 1 - 2:4 uses the name El normally translated as God. At 2:4 a second creation story begins. Its in a different order and God is referred to as Yahweh / Yahweh God or Jehovah depending on the translation. One doesn't have to be a great scholar to begin to be able to determine the four sources of the Pentatuech. Sometimes versions are interwoven like the Flood story. Two sources were recognised as early as the eighteenth century. in one source the name Yahweh is used from the beginning. In the other it is only used after it is revealed to Moses. This gave the J (sounds like a Y in German) source from Jehovah and the E source from El. J favours Judah, likes Aaron, dislikes Moses. E favours the northern tribes, like Moses and dislikes Aaron.

The 2 source was developed into the four source: J, E P (Priestly) D (Deuteronomy). Genesis begins with a P source, written hundreds of years after the J source. In P God is distant, in J God is anthropomorphised like the gods of Ancient Greece, Rome, the Norse or the Hindus.

People make speculations on things they don't understand and seem to be contradictions to them. Let me explain. The first creation narrative is an overall view of the six creation days plus the following day that was to be a memorial for God's creation in six days and an example for man to follow in getting one complete day of rest after six days of work.

The second narrative appears to me to be only giving details of making mankind and about a limited creation of plants and animals for the man to care after. First God planted in a field a garden that needed cultivating by man before he made the man and placed him in the garden. After making Adam, God made some animals needed for the garden and some domestic animals for Adam's care and use. Adam saw these animals being made by God and even gave them each names. Eve never saw God making anything, so she was easy to deceive by the serpent that was possessed by Satan the devil.

Obviously, Moses knew both the names El and Yahweh for God. El was an earlier name and in Exodus, Moses gives his account of learning the name (I AM) Yah for the God of his forefathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

God replied to Moses, "I Am Who I Am. Say this to the people of Israel: I Am has sent me to you."
God also said to Moses, "Say this to the people of Israel: Yahweh, the God of your ancestors--the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob--has sent me to you. This is my eternal name, my name to remember for all generations."
(Exodus 3-14-15 New Living Translation)

Notice that Elohim (the plural) of El is used for God in the Hebrew indicating the God that we Christians refer to as the Trinity (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit).

[Hindsite]

But the more you examine the Bible, the more it falls apart, the Bible contradicts itself over and over again. Where were Mary and Joseph living when Mary became pregnant with Jesus? In Matthew they were living in Bethlehem and then fled to Egypt. In Luke they were living in Nazareth and only went to Bethlehem for a census and never went to Egypt at all. The gospels can't even agree on what day Jesus was crucified. In John he died a day earlier. I mean really if the Bible is to be believed Jesus's disciples must have been some of the most dozy bastards in history. They must have all been in some sort of early onset Alzheimer's. they couldn't even remember if their last meal with Jesus was a passover meal or not.

The Bible does not contradict itself. When Mary became pregnant she was living with her own family in Nazareth in Galilee (Luke 1:26). Before the marriage, a decree went out from Caesar Augustus for a census to be taken of all the inhabitants of his empire and each person had to be registered in his own city. This meant that Joseph had to leave Nazareth and travel to his family home city of Bethlehem in Judea because he was of the house and family of David (Luke 2:1-7) As you probably know the city of David is Bethlehem (Luke 2:11).

Obviously, Joseph and Mary got married and the baby was born in Bethlehem. It was at this time that the shepards in the field that were watching over their flock by night were informed by the angel that appeared to them of the birth of the Savior that very day.

Here is where Matthew picks up the story. While they had been living in bethlehem for one to two years, the magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem seeking the one born King of the Jews (Matthew 2:1).

Then Herod secretly called the magi and determined from them the exact time the star appeared. And he sent them to Bethlehem and said, "Go and search carefully for the Child; and when you have found Him, report to me, so that I too may come and worship Him."
(Matthew 2:7-8)

After coming into the house they saw the Child with Mary His mother; and they fell to the ground and worshiped Him. Then, opening their treasures, they presented to Him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. And having been warned by God in a dream not to return to Herod, the magi left for their own country by another way.

Now when they had gone, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, "Get up! Take the Child and His mother and flee to Egypt, and remain there until I tell you; for Herod is going to search for the Child to destroy Him."
(Matthew 2:11-13)

Then when Herod saw that he had been tricked by the magi, he became very enraged, and sent and slew all the male children who were in Bethlehem and all its vicinity, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had determined from the magi.
(Matthew 2:16)

[Besoeker]

Let me explain. The first creation narrative is an overall view of the six creation days plus the following day that was to be a memorial for God's creation in six days and an example for man to follow in getting one complete day of rest after six days of work.

It's your view and, no doubt, one shared by many of your faith. But that's what it is. Opinion with no independently verifiable evidence.

I have no problem with you seeing it that way.
But you ought to accept it your view and not state it as fact. Now you've had the benefit of my opinion.

[Hindsite]

It's your view and, no doubt, one shared by many of your faith. But that's what it is. Opinion with no independently verifiable evidence.

I have no problem with you seeing it that way.
But you ought to accept it your view and not state it as fact. Now you've had the benefit of my opinion.

Yes, it is my opinion, but it could also be fact. I have decided to believe my opinion is fact until proven otherwise.