Something I don't understand...

That is what I meant

 

Can you see that by believing what you do about Adam and Eve, you are not asking the questions that would unlock the Bible for you?

Let’s see if I can help you out.
Let me ask you a couple of questions.

If Adam and Eve was true history and they had not eaten of the fruit of the tree;
Where would Adam and Eve be today?
What would be the condition of their children?
What would the earth be like?
Would there be a hell?
Would any humans ever have gone to heaven?
Would we have needed the Bible to be written?
I could go on but you should have the picture by now?

 

Why? The Bible points to someone who has a vested interest in misleading the entire inhabited Earth, could it be that he is behind scientists trying to discredit the bible accounts?

I agree that the in the Bible, the Bible writers, many times will rephrase something that has already been said but instead of believing that this shows two different sources, I tend to believe this is just the writer doing a quick summery as a teaching aid, so to speak.

These reveal Spiritual Truths, not historical and scientific? Well were history is concerned the Bible has always been extremely accurate and were some have said that it is inaccurate, when proof is found it is always in favor of the Bible.

As for scientific, the Bible was never meant to be a book of science but as you say a book of Spiritual Truths but where the Bible touches on what science has to say the Bible once again is always found to be correct.

Jesus was said to speak in parables but the writers of the Hebrew Scriptures were not given such a commission. So what they wrote is what happened although that doesn’t mean that what happened doesn’t have a message, it does.

 

I believe that the bible was meant to be (or at least the many translations and interpretations of IT) a project of purpose, of justification of teleological Cause, more than any Science was meant to be. In this way science explains thoroughly all the other ways for causality in the stories of people living the traditional or let us say modern life style. The final way of causality becomes a form of critical (as Hegel says it) Cunning to ease the pain in a sense.

But the Bible can and does relaize that cunning is only for the moment and that after-all it is Nature which deceives us in the end. In fact the use of objective values on passion and change is only to come out that the Object is not really the object God meant for Us. We are thereby understood what scientifically we always were: subjects for desire and change by which we can apporach nature practically and conclusively mystified in its meaning for the Spirit.

 

I think the God wants people to believe for the right reasons. He told us to be like children in our faith. But another thing about children, they question everything. They want to know why and how to every little thing. So why not question. If you blindly follow whatever you are told, you can easily be lead astray.
And I think that this "someone else" would benefit a whole lot more from the hate that is taught, using the bible as a reference. Growing up I couldn't understand how in Sunday School i was taught that the greatest commandment was about love, but there were so many out there saying that God "hated" queers and sinners and anything else that made people uncomfortable. Do you think it's God that benefits from that? I think that you give satan way too much credit. He is not behind every sin or dangerous thing out there. It's mostly just the plain ol' ways of the humans.

 

I don't think I said or implied that Satan was behind everything but you may be giving him too little credit, the Bible says he is misleading the entire Earth and he would benefit from spreading doubt about the Bible. Also if one wanted to get real picky one could say that sin entered into mankind though Adam and Satan was instrumental in causing that to happen and so then, in a way, Satan is behind every sin.

God does not mind questions, in fact God encourages questions but doubt about the Bible is something altogether different. (Acts 17:11)

As for God hating queers and sinners, do you think that's what the Bible says? If you do, please point it out to me because I’ve yet to read it. In fact some of the founding members of the Christian faith were, at one time, queers and sinners, so God couldn’t have hated them too much. (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)

 

I did not say that the bible says it. I said that people use the bible to back-up claims like that.
I don't doubt God. I don't doubt the teachings of Jesus. The thinks that I have a problem with, like I said before, is that most of the new testiment was written by Jesus' deciples. The same deciples that He is constantly telling them they don't get it. I have a problem with it being translated over and over again till we are not even sure that it is what was intended. I have a problem with King James changing the Bible to be what he thinks it should be. I have a problem with the way most of Christianity interperets the Bible. They use it to spread exlusion and hate. That is my problem. I have a problem with it being used to scare people into "salvation". Yes, those last ones are problems with man, but it changes the way I feel about the bible.

 

I know that you are just stating your opinion and I’m not sure you want me to answer but there goes.

As for the writers of the Bible not getting it, the Bible cites several cases where the writers just didn’t get it, Daniel for one and just wrote what they were told to write. Does that mean that we shouldn’t trust what they wrote or should we trust that God can have written what he wants written even if the writers don’t get it?

As for being translated over and over again, don’t forget that we have many ancient manuscripts in the original languages available to us and if a person wants to and has the time, he can learn those languages and read them for himself. In fact that is one of the reasons that the KJV has been found to be an untrustworthy translation to use, people reading the Bible in its original languages have found things like spurious scriptures in the KJV and yet the truth can still be found even in the KJV, because God will not allow the truth to be obscured.

As for, having a problem with the way most of “Christianity” “interprets” the Bible, I have to agree with you, for me it is a problem too. Although I don’t think it is so much a problem of interpretation, as it is a disregard for the Bible, that is the problem. How can you use the Bible to spread exclusion and hate unless you disregard what the Bible says.

The Bible says: “For a certainty I perceive that God is not partial, but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.” (Acts 10:34-35) and “YOU heard that it was said, ‘You must love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ However, I say to YOU: Continue to love YOUR enemies and to pray for those persecuting YOU” (Matthew 5:43-44) and “‘You must love your God with your whole heart and with your whole soul and with your whole mind.’ This is the greatest and first commandment. The second, like it, is this, ‘You must love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments the whole Law hangs, and the Prophets.” (Matthew 22:37-40) and I could go on.

But that begs the questions; why do these “Christians” “interpret” the Bible so that it spreads exclusion and hate? Is it what the Bible really says? If not God and the Bible, who is behind such “interpretations”? Should the Bible be found untrustworthy because of such “interpretations”?

As for fear, yes the Bible does say we should fear God but does that mean God wants us to be afraid of him? No, it does not! It simply means that we should stand in respect and awe of him. In fact God has no desire for people to worship him out of fear but only wants people to worship him because they love him and generally people do not love what they are afraid of.

 

double post i suck

 

because he hasn't and its called the New King James bible.

 

1. it does state that they would have eternal life but in heaven.
2. mmm they would grow old? and have children?....
3. peaceful.
4. nope
5. of course
6. i dnt think of due to the fact that by eating from the fruit released sins their for no.
7.?

 

i think christians who turn people off to christianity due to their hateful zealotry have done more harm than satan ever could.

 

You call the King James a Bible?

 

In heaven? Where does the Bible say they would have been in heaven? Nothing in Genesis says that they would live anywhere but on Earth. So they would be alive and well and still living among their happy children, right here on Earth.

Although they would stop ageing they would grow older and God did say to them to be fruitful and multiply, so yes they would have children.

correct

correct

There would have been no need for humans to go to heaven. After all when would humans go to heaven? Wouldn’t they have to die first? And if everyone lives forever, then they don’t go to heaven.

There would be no need for the Bible as we know it. Plus, we would still have direct access to God as Adam and Eve once had.

 

Who do you think is behind hateful zealotry, God? I don't think God or the Bible ever asks for hateful zealotry.

 

no wait i met to said the "new world translation" bible.

 

And you find it to be particularly egregious because?

 

why do you say these things? obviously i don't think that. jeez.

 

Sorry I didn't mean to offend you but you did say:

So my first thought was: Isn’t it Satan that is behind hateful zealotry, so isn’t it Satan that causing the harm from it?

Thus the question: If Satan isn’t behind hateful zealotry, then who, God or the Bible?

 

so apparently you don't believe in free choice at all? everything a human being thinks or does is caused directly by God or Satan or their agents? if we're just puppets in their war, why would God give a damn what we do?