nigel99 143 #76 February 17, 2011 QuoteQuoteThere are some extremely educated Christian scholars. There are indeed but nonsense, no matter how well articulated, or how well hidden beneath layers of psuedo-philosophical waffle, remains nonsense. QuoteThe problem is that they get drowned out by a lot of the idiots that manage to get themselves on television and wander around handing out tracts. You can't argue with belief. I grew up in a Christian family. My step-father was a minister in a born again modern church for much of my life. My biological father is a "free thinker" and while I have never lived with him (he left when I was 4 years old) I am very similar to him. At the age of about 14 or 15 I was told that I had just enough christianity to make me unhappy by someone. I have actually come to highly respect that person because while I now have diametrically opposing views, he was honest enough state the truth. To be truly christian, muslim, hindu etc you have to disregard rational thought and have blind faith. I could never do that and after 10 or 15 years of deeply questioning my faith I came to the ultimate realisation that I simply cannot accept that there is a god. I am profoundly amazed by the wonders of the universe and feel that there is alot we don't understand, but having childlike faith in "Father Christmas for grown-ups" is not my way of dealing with it. My hardened views have alienated my from every single member of my mothers side of the family (it is them, not me who have set the distance), my wife is an ardent believer and with each passing year the gap between our ideologies grows. Try bringing kids up with THAT difference! One thing that I will not do is to try and make christians "see the light" as I strongly believe that some people need to believe in a god. I know for me the act of letting god go was extremely challenging, at some points in the journey. My mother became religious/converted when my kid sister was dying of cancer and a priest prayed for her. She recovered with no relapse and my mother gives the credit to god, personally it falls into the category of the wonders of the universe and shows just how much we still have to learn.Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites davjohns 1 #77 February 17, 2011 QuoteThe more I think about the way religion works, the more disgusting it really becomes. And despite these oppressive, anti-exploration, keep your eyes ahead and don't look elsewhere tactics- Atheists are usually the ones called closed minded- oh the irony. I can't recall ever seeing the term "closed minded" used to mean anything other than 'doesn't agree with my opinion'. I'm one of the few people I have ever known to actually attempt being open minded. I'm not even particularly ardent in my support of my own existance as an absolute fact. Sure, I believe all you other people exist, but you can't really prove it to me. It could all be a dream, induced by drugs, etc.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Coreece 190 #78 February 17, 2011 Quote The way people become believers is typically the same way children become believers, they get so scared that Christians may be right that they are willing to go out on a limb and be religious in the hopes that they don't burn in this hell of fire for eternity and then the church brainwashing can be begin, because it just makes the thought of death that little bit easier. Speak for yourself... Stop projecting your childhood onto everybody else. Quote "You'll see that in most cases" "The way people become believers" "And you'll find most people" Ok, whatever your crystal ball tells you...Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Southern_Man 0 #79 February 17, 2011 Quote Agreed. I think the NIV relies heavily on Sinaiticus and others. It's explained in the introduction. I haven't read the modern translations straight through in a while. I take some issue with the whole area of apocryphal writings since they were all apocryphal or Torah until the Council of Nicea (with later adjustments). That is when men decided what was the 'word of god'...then changed their minds a few times. My understanding on the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they matched later copies of the books from later (where such artifacts coincided) with great accuracy (98% sticks in my head). Early transcribers were very fastidious about accuracy. In the King James era, however, unified church and state weighed heavily on the translation. Witness: there is no James in the historical writings. Yeshua's (Jesus's) brother was named Yakob (Jacob). The priests who translated the documents decided to re-name the brother after King James. There are a wealth of other examples that make it clear the translations went downhill...starting at least at the Council. Well, this is all a side tangent but it is interesting to me (and Davjohns apparently) so others can ignore. I'm not terribly familiar with the details of each modern translation but NIV definitely tends towards the paraphrase end of the spectrum--it sacrifices literal fidelity for readability. Translation is an art not a science, so all of them do this to some degree. Much better to go back to the greek text, with some language tools like a large Kittel and look at that--a good Greek text will have some notes on the textual variants as well. That takes time and effort most people aren't willing to put in. The Tanakh (Torah--law, navaiim--prophets, and kataviim--wrirtings) was codified by somewhere around 200 B.C. and at the very, very latest has minor revisions up until the council of Jamnia in ~70A.D. Nicea really didn't have anything to do with that. Although I would note that OT Apocrapha are still a disputed status in the Christian Church today with catholics accpeting them and protestants generally disregarding them. These are books that were never, as far as we know, canonized or even widely circulated in Judaism but were in the Septuagint (Greek version of OT) and therefore accepted as authentic by many Christians. (Many early Christians used the Septuagint as their Old Testament while generally Christian translators today go back to the Jewish Masoretic text). Jewish scriptures had a very rigid system for copying and certifying. The oldest complete copies of the Masoretic Text we have are from the 1008 or 1009 AD in the Leningrad Codex, which is much younger than the Christian Texts we have. The Jewish scribe had to count the number of letters in the copy he made and if it dd not match the prescribed number the entire copy had to be destroyed. Such a system led to a Masoretic text that is very consistent from copy to copy. I would note that consistency is not entirely the same thing as accuracy. There are, for example, a couple of obvious places in the MT that letters were recorded wrongly but these mistakes were then copied into all copies instead of sometimes corrected, sometimes not. I have read that some of the Dead Sea scrolls were close matches to the MT but I have not really studied them in any detail. The New Testament was canonized somewhere in the 4th century between councils at Nicea (325) and Constantinople (381), The NT has a much more varied textual history as there was not as certralized an authority overseeing copying. These has led to a process of translating and editing that is much, much more open to interpretation and judgment calls. There are a huge number of variants which are merely scribal typographical erros but there are also places where entire sections of text have been inserted. For example, the longer ending of Mark (the last eight verses) and the story of the woman caught in Adultery in John (somewhere around 7:53-8:7 or so) are later additions. The verses in Mark are just missing from the text entirely. The story of the woman caught in adultery are sometimes missing, sometimes in Luke, and sometimes in other parts of John. Of course all of these textual problems are well known among scholars and even included in a good annotated English translation even if not everybody in your Sunday school class knows about them. I do think sometimes people overestimate the idea that such changes are based on overt political ideaologies when they are simply the result of a very chaotic textual tradition. This is making me use parts of my brain and think about things I haven't thought about for a long time."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RonD1120 58 #80 February 17, 2011 The lyrics have a lot of meaning for me. I started my search in 1972 and it ended in 1981. My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skygypsie 2 #81 February 17, 2011 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Coreece 190 #82 February 17, 2011 Quote The lyrics have a lot of meaning for me. I started my search in 1972 and it ended in 1981. My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. Rock on brother... Your posts and testimony have not gone in vain. Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites winsor 186 #83 February 17, 2011 "I used to be all messed up on drugs. Then I found th'Lord. Now I'm all messed up on th'Lord." Cheech Marin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites nigel99 143 #84 February 17, 2011 Quote "I used to be all messed up on drugs. Then I found th'Lord. Now I'm all messed up on th'Lord." Cheech Marin At least the Lord only takes 10% of your paycheckExperienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites davjohns 1 #85 February 17, 2011 You're making me pull up old knowledge as well, but it's fun. Agreed and agreed as far as my memory goes. I note that the changes between Nicea and Constantinople are questionable in my view and the canonization was purely by men. God was not invited to my knowledge. Revelations? In and out. Apocrypha? Jesus quoted apocryphal writings. Why were those left out? Ruth? Does not mention God at all. Why is that one in there? My greatest concern continues to be modern misinterpretations of a Jewish text written mostly for Jews, by Jews and in a culture that was lost and resurrected. Thereafter claiming everything arrived in modern times unadulterated is wild.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites freethefly 6 #86 February 17, 2011 QuoteThe lyrics have a lot of meaning for me. I started my search in 1972 and it ended in 1981. My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. The song ask, what is probably the oldest question, who is the real God(?). Of course, there is no answer to that question. I am all for what works for another. It's all personal. I cannot tell another that my belief trumps theirs. The same goes in the opposite direction. It seems that when the two opposites collide, wars break out, families split, and worst in us is exposed. Yup, another cut in paste. What can I say, Lennon said it best. It is worth repeating. Imagine By John Lennon Imagine there's no Heaven It's easy if you try No hell below us Above us only sky Imagine all the people Living for today Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people Living life in peace You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man Imagine all the people Sharing all the world You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will live as one"...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skygypsie 2 #87 February 17, 2011 Imagine By John Lennon Imagine there's no Heaven It's easy if you try No hell below us Above us only sky Imagine all the people Living for today Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people Living life in peace You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man Imagine all the people Sharing all the world You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will live as one ----------------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Channman 2 #88 February 17, 2011 Quote Quote yea, just what i'm saying, my jewels! Matthew 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. I like the New American Standard version, it doesn't confuse me as much. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites dreamdancer 0 #89 February 18, 2011 QuoteAnd, the answer to my question is? in the words i have written. you must read again until you understand...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 212 #90 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteAnd, the answer to my question is? in the words i have written. you must read again until you understand... He has yet to answer many of the questions I have posed in the past. Modus Operandi . . . it's how he rolls. He's too ****** to answer because he knows his point is so invalid, you cannot argue it reasonably. (word removed to avoid reality based, truth based, banning)I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Southern_Man 0 #91 February 18, 2011 QuoteYou're making me pull up old knowledge as well, but it's fun. Agreed and agreed as far as my memory goes. I note that the changes between Nicea and Constantinople are questionable in my view and the canonization was purely by men. God was not invited to my knowledge. Revelations? In and out. Apocrypha? Jesus quoted apocryphal writings. Why were those left out? Ruth? Does not mention God at all. Why is that one in there? My greatest concern continues to be modern misinterpretations of a Jewish text written mostly for Jews, by Jews and in a culture that was lost and resurrected. Thereafter claiming everything arrived in modern times unadulterated is wild. I'm actually always impressed with how non-controversial and quiet the adoption of the canon was, actually. I guess that is in contrast to some popular claims, as in Dan Browne's Davinci Code, but also other places, which claimed some sort of vast early conspiracy to suppress the Gnostic Gospels, like those found at Nag Hammadi. In fact, there were only a few disputed entries, Jude, Hebrews, Revelation which got in, and Shepherd of Hermes, the Diatessera, and the Didache which were ultimately left out. I'm sure there were minor debates about other books as well. Revelation is an interesting case, as the Eastern Orthodox churches have always viewed it as part of the canon and valuable for personal reading and reflection but not suitable for reading from the pulpit or preaching. Of course Luther wanted to take out James, calling it "an epistle of straw." Anyway, from the stuff I've read from the era it appears the settling of the canon was relatively non-controversial and certainly took a back seat to the Homoousious/homoiousious thingy. The truth about the gnostic gospels is that they were never considered for inclusion in the canon and don't appear in any of the various lists that various bishops made. The process of "inviting God" isn't really part of my thought process, personally, but as a philosophical matter I find it hard to say that God could be involved in the writing and editing of scripture through the agency of men but then could not be involved through the agency of men in the compiling of the canon. Not sure why one of those actions could be inspired but not the other. Of course you also see later controversies over things like this such as if the vowel pointings in the Hebrew text were inspired or just the original unpointed Hebrew. John Owen argued the pointings were also inspired. To me the biggest qualm, as far as internal consistency in the canon, is why the protestants went back to the Masoretic Text instead of using the Septuagint. After all, the writers in the New Testament, when they quote from the OT, use the Septuagint as their source. It is assumed that Jesus read from a Hebrew or Aramaic text in the temple but when he is quoted in John as saying, "You must be born again [or born from above]" he is clearly using a double entendre that exists in Greek but not in Hebrew. The Septuagint was accepted as authoritative by Augustine among other early fathers. And, as you state, it sort of solves any issues with the Apocrapha, as all of that was in the Septuagint and parts are quoted in the NT. Interpreting Jewish scriptures in context is definitely extremely difficult. Heck, it's difficult just to translate the things. Perhaps that's another advantage to the Septuagint, Greek is much, much easier."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RonD1120 58 #92 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteAnd, the answer to my question is? in the words i have written. you must read again until you understand... He has yet to answer many of the questions I have posed in the past. Modus Operandi . . . it's how he rolls. He's too ****** to answer because he knows his point is so invalid, you cannot argue it reasonably. (word removed to avoid reality based, truth based, banning) That is what I thought. Thanks for the confirmation.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SivaGanesha 2 #93 February 18, 2011 QuoteMy God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. It's ironic. He could save others from death...but not himself."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 212 #94 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. It's ironic. He could save others from death...but not himself. Could have - chose not to, according to the scriptures. Seems to me that coming back to life might be a stronger message.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #95 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Quote My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. It's ironic. He could save others from death...but not himself. Could have - chose not to, according to the scriptures. Seems to me that coming back to life might be a stronger message. Yeah .... and I am guessing that a lot of so called "christians" are in for a VERY rude awakening when he does. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 212 #96 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. It's ironic. He could save others from death...but not himself. Could have - chose not to, according to the scriptures. Seems to me that coming back to life might be a stronger message. Yeah .... and I am guessing that a lot of so called "christians" are in for a VERY rude awakening when he does. I expect you are right.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SivaGanesha 2 #97 February 18, 2011 Quote Seems to me that coming back to life might be a stronger message. Not really because he'd already shown that any bozo (even Lazarus) could come back from the dead. Face it--scripture provides very clear job reqs for the Jewish Moshiach--things like rebuilding the Temple and establishing world peace. Jesus wouldn't have even gotten a phone interview for that job."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 212 #98 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Seems to me that coming back to life might be a stronger message. Not really because he'd already shown that any bozo (even Lazarus) could come back from the dead. Face it--scripture provides very clear job reqs for the Jewish Moshiach--things like rebuilding the Temple and establishing world peace. Jesus wouldn't have even gotten a phone interview for that job. Not considering the Jews hated him, no i expect he wouldn't. But then again - they didn't have phones or internet. The media could have easily made him into a Barry Obama and he might have gotten the Nobel peace prize.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SivaGanesha 2 #99 February 18, 2011 QuoteNot considering the Jews hated him, no i expect he wouldn't. He was Jewish. If his own tribe hated him, that says something about him...and it's not good."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites turtlespeed 212 #100 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteNot considering the Jews hated him, no i expect he wouldn't. He was Jewish. If his own tribe hated him, that says something about him...and it's not good. You mean like the Imams that are persecuted for speaking out against the extremist views of their own religion?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next Page 4 of 8 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
davjohns 1 #77 February 17, 2011 QuoteThe more I think about the way religion works, the more disgusting it really becomes. And despite these oppressive, anti-exploration, keep your eyes ahead and don't look elsewhere tactics- Atheists are usually the ones called closed minded- oh the irony. I can't recall ever seeing the term "closed minded" used to mean anything other than 'doesn't agree with my opinion'. I'm one of the few people I have ever known to actually attempt being open minded. I'm not even particularly ardent in my support of my own existance as an absolute fact. Sure, I believe all you other people exist, but you can't really prove it to me. It could all be a dream, induced by drugs, etc.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #78 February 17, 2011 Quote The way people become believers is typically the same way children become believers, they get so scared that Christians may be right that they are willing to go out on a limb and be religious in the hopes that they don't burn in this hell of fire for eternity and then the church brainwashing can be begin, because it just makes the thought of death that little bit easier. Speak for yourself... Stop projecting your childhood onto everybody else. Quote "You'll see that in most cases" "The way people become believers" "And you'll find most people" Ok, whatever your crystal ball tells you...Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #79 February 17, 2011 Quote Agreed. I think the NIV relies heavily on Sinaiticus and others. It's explained in the introduction. I haven't read the modern translations straight through in a while. I take some issue with the whole area of apocryphal writings since they were all apocryphal or Torah until the Council of Nicea (with later adjustments). That is when men decided what was the 'word of god'...then changed their minds a few times. My understanding on the Dead Sea Scrolls is that they matched later copies of the books from later (where such artifacts coincided) with great accuracy (98% sticks in my head). Early transcribers were very fastidious about accuracy. In the King James era, however, unified church and state weighed heavily on the translation. Witness: there is no James in the historical writings. Yeshua's (Jesus's) brother was named Yakob (Jacob). The priests who translated the documents decided to re-name the brother after King James. There are a wealth of other examples that make it clear the translations went downhill...starting at least at the Council. Well, this is all a side tangent but it is interesting to me (and Davjohns apparently) so others can ignore. I'm not terribly familiar with the details of each modern translation but NIV definitely tends towards the paraphrase end of the spectrum--it sacrifices literal fidelity for readability. Translation is an art not a science, so all of them do this to some degree. Much better to go back to the greek text, with some language tools like a large Kittel and look at that--a good Greek text will have some notes on the textual variants as well. That takes time and effort most people aren't willing to put in. The Tanakh (Torah--law, navaiim--prophets, and kataviim--wrirtings) was codified by somewhere around 200 B.C. and at the very, very latest has minor revisions up until the council of Jamnia in ~70A.D. Nicea really didn't have anything to do with that. Although I would note that OT Apocrapha are still a disputed status in the Christian Church today with catholics accpeting them and protestants generally disregarding them. These are books that were never, as far as we know, canonized or even widely circulated in Judaism but were in the Septuagint (Greek version of OT) and therefore accepted as authentic by many Christians. (Many early Christians used the Septuagint as their Old Testament while generally Christian translators today go back to the Jewish Masoretic text). Jewish scriptures had a very rigid system for copying and certifying. The oldest complete copies of the Masoretic Text we have are from the 1008 or 1009 AD in the Leningrad Codex, which is much younger than the Christian Texts we have. The Jewish scribe had to count the number of letters in the copy he made and if it dd not match the prescribed number the entire copy had to be destroyed. Such a system led to a Masoretic text that is very consistent from copy to copy. I would note that consistency is not entirely the same thing as accuracy. There are, for example, a couple of obvious places in the MT that letters were recorded wrongly but these mistakes were then copied into all copies instead of sometimes corrected, sometimes not. I have read that some of the Dead Sea scrolls were close matches to the MT but I have not really studied them in any detail. The New Testament was canonized somewhere in the 4th century between councils at Nicea (325) and Constantinople (381), The NT has a much more varied textual history as there was not as certralized an authority overseeing copying. These has led to a process of translating and editing that is much, much more open to interpretation and judgment calls. There are a huge number of variants which are merely scribal typographical erros but there are also places where entire sections of text have been inserted. For example, the longer ending of Mark (the last eight verses) and the story of the woman caught in Adultery in John (somewhere around 7:53-8:7 or so) are later additions. The verses in Mark are just missing from the text entirely. The story of the woman caught in adultery are sometimes missing, sometimes in Luke, and sometimes in other parts of John. Of course all of these textual problems are well known among scholars and even included in a good annotated English translation even if not everybody in your Sunday school class knows about them. I do think sometimes people overestimate the idea that such changes are based on overt political ideaologies when they are simply the result of a very chaotic textual tradition. This is making me use parts of my brain and think about things I haven't thought about for a long time."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #80 February 17, 2011 The lyrics have a lot of meaning for me. I started my search in 1972 and it ended in 1981. My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #82 February 17, 2011 Quote The lyrics have a lot of meaning for me. I started my search in 1972 and it ended in 1981. My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. Rock on brother... Your posts and testimony have not gone in vain. Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 186 #83 February 17, 2011 "I used to be all messed up on drugs. Then I found th'Lord. Now I'm all messed up on th'Lord." Cheech Marin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nigel99 143 #84 February 17, 2011 Quote "I used to be all messed up on drugs. Then I found th'Lord. Now I'm all messed up on th'Lord." Cheech Marin At least the Lord only takes 10% of your paycheckExperienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
davjohns 1 #85 February 17, 2011 You're making me pull up old knowledge as well, but it's fun. Agreed and agreed as far as my memory goes. I note that the changes between Nicea and Constantinople are questionable in my view and the canonization was purely by men. God was not invited to my knowledge. Revelations? In and out. Apocrypha? Jesus quoted apocryphal writings. Why were those left out? Ruth? Does not mention God at all. Why is that one in there? My greatest concern continues to be modern misinterpretations of a Jewish text written mostly for Jews, by Jews and in a culture that was lost and resurrected. Thereafter claiming everything arrived in modern times unadulterated is wild.I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet.. But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freethefly 6 #86 February 17, 2011 QuoteThe lyrics have a lot of meaning for me. I started my search in 1972 and it ended in 1981. My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. The song ask, what is probably the oldest question, who is the real God(?). Of course, there is no answer to that question. I am all for what works for another. It's all personal. I cannot tell another that my belief trumps theirs. The same goes in the opposite direction. It seems that when the two opposites collide, wars break out, families split, and worst in us is exposed. Yup, another cut in paste. What can I say, Lennon said it best. It is worth repeating. Imagine By John Lennon Imagine there's no Heaven It's easy if you try No hell below us Above us only sky Imagine all the people Living for today Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people Living life in peace You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man Imagine all the people Sharing all the world You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will live as one"...And once you're gone, you can't come back When you're out of the blue and into the black." Neil Young Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skygypsie 2 #87 February 17, 2011 Imagine By John Lennon Imagine there's no Heaven It's easy if you try No hell below us Above us only sky Imagine all the people Living for today Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people Living life in peace You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will be as one Imagine no possessions I wonder if you can No need for greed or hunger A brotherhood of man Imagine all the people Sharing all the world You may say that I'm a dreamer But I'm not the only one I hope someday you'll join us And the world will live as one ----------------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Channman 2 #88 February 17, 2011 Quote Quote yea, just what i'm saying, my jewels! Matthew 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. I like the New American Standard version, it doesn't confuse me as much. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #89 February 18, 2011 QuoteAnd, the answer to my question is? in the words i have written. you must read again until you understand...stay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #90 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteAnd, the answer to my question is? in the words i have written. you must read again until you understand... He has yet to answer many of the questions I have posed in the past. Modus Operandi . . . it's how he rolls. He's too ****** to answer because he knows his point is so invalid, you cannot argue it reasonably. (word removed to avoid reality based, truth based, banning)I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #91 February 18, 2011 QuoteYou're making me pull up old knowledge as well, but it's fun. Agreed and agreed as far as my memory goes. I note that the changes between Nicea and Constantinople are questionable in my view and the canonization was purely by men. God was not invited to my knowledge. Revelations? In and out. Apocrypha? Jesus quoted apocryphal writings. Why were those left out? Ruth? Does not mention God at all. Why is that one in there? My greatest concern continues to be modern misinterpretations of a Jewish text written mostly for Jews, by Jews and in a culture that was lost and resurrected. Thereafter claiming everything arrived in modern times unadulterated is wild. I'm actually always impressed with how non-controversial and quiet the adoption of the canon was, actually. I guess that is in contrast to some popular claims, as in Dan Browne's Davinci Code, but also other places, which claimed some sort of vast early conspiracy to suppress the Gnostic Gospels, like those found at Nag Hammadi. In fact, there were only a few disputed entries, Jude, Hebrews, Revelation which got in, and Shepherd of Hermes, the Diatessera, and the Didache which were ultimately left out. I'm sure there were minor debates about other books as well. Revelation is an interesting case, as the Eastern Orthodox churches have always viewed it as part of the canon and valuable for personal reading and reflection but not suitable for reading from the pulpit or preaching. Of course Luther wanted to take out James, calling it "an epistle of straw." Anyway, from the stuff I've read from the era it appears the settling of the canon was relatively non-controversial and certainly took a back seat to the Homoousious/homoiousious thingy. The truth about the gnostic gospels is that they were never considered for inclusion in the canon and don't appear in any of the various lists that various bishops made. The process of "inviting God" isn't really part of my thought process, personally, but as a philosophical matter I find it hard to say that God could be involved in the writing and editing of scripture through the agency of men but then could not be involved through the agency of men in the compiling of the canon. Not sure why one of those actions could be inspired but not the other. Of course you also see later controversies over things like this such as if the vowel pointings in the Hebrew text were inspired or just the original unpointed Hebrew. John Owen argued the pointings were also inspired. To me the biggest qualm, as far as internal consistency in the canon, is why the protestants went back to the Masoretic Text instead of using the Septuagint. After all, the writers in the New Testament, when they quote from the OT, use the Septuagint as their source. It is assumed that Jesus read from a Hebrew or Aramaic text in the temple but when he is quoted in John as saying, "You must be born again [or born from above]" he is clearly using a double entendre that exists in Greek but not in Hebrew. The Septuagint was accepted as authoritative by Augustine among other early fathers. And, as you state, it sort of solves any issues with the Apocrapha, as all of that was in the Septuagint and parts are quoted in the NT. Interpreting Jewish scriptures in context is definitely extremely difficult. Heck, it's difficult just to translate the things. Perhaps that's another advantage to the Septuagint, Greek is much, much easier."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #92 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteAnd, the answer to my question is? in the words i have written. you must read again until you understand... He has yet to answer many of the questions I have posed in the past. Modus Operandi . . . it's how he rolls. He's too ****** to answer because he knows his point is so invalid, you cannot argue it reasonably. (word removed to avoid reality based, truth based, banning) That is what I thought. Thanks for the confirmation.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SivaGanesha 2 #93 February 18, 2011 QuoteMy God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. It's ironic. He could save others from death...but not himself."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #94 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. It's ironic. He could save others from death...but not himself. Could have - chose not to, according to the scriptures. Seems to me that coming back to life might be a stronger message.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #95 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Quote My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. It's ironic. He could save others from death...but not himself. Could have - chose not to, according to the scriptures. Seems to me that coming back to life might be a stronger message. Yeah .... and I am guessing that a lot of so called "christians" are in for a VERY rude awakening when he does. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #96 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote My God delivered me from mental illness, alcoholism and gave me a professional career until I retired in 2009. His name is Jesus. It's ironic. He could save others from death...but not himself. Could have - chose not to, according to the scriptures. Seems to me that coming back to life might be a stronger message. Yeah .... and I am guessing that a lot of so called "christians" are in for a VERY rude awakening when he does. I expect you are right.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SivaGanesha 2 #97 February 18, 2011 Quote Seems to me that coming back to life might be a stronger message. Not really because he'd already shown that any bozo (even Lazarus) could come back from the dead. Face it--scripture provides very clear job reqs for the Jewish Moshiach--things like rebuilding the Temple and establishing world peace. Jesus wouldn't have even gotten a phone interview for that job."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #98 February 18, 2011 Quote Quote Seems to me that coming back to life might be a stronger message. Not really because he'd already shown that any bozo (even Lazarus) could come back from the dead. Face it--scripture provides very clear job reqs for the Jewish Moshiach--things like rebuilding the Temple and establishing world peace. Jesus wouldn't have even gotten a phone interview for that job. Not considering the Jews hated him, no i expect he wouldn't. But then again - they didn't have phones or internet. The media could have easily made him into a Barry Obama and he might have gotten the Nobel peace prize.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SivaGanesha 2 #99 February 18, 2011 QuoteNot considering the Jews hated him, no i expect he wouldn't. He was Jewish. If his own tribe hated him, that says something about him...and it's not good."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #100 February 18, 2011 QuoteQuoteNot considering the Jews hated him, no i expect he wouldn't. He was Jewish. If his own tribe hated him, that says something about him...and it's not good. You mean like the Imams that are persecuted for speaking out against the extremist views of their own religion?I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
