A disturbing moment at Target last night

[Wolfman]

Rack 88 for attempting to make sense of the Bible. There certainly are a lot of at the least strange things in it. Some of it may be due to the difficulties in making translations. On the other hand I've found that it does contain some pretty good observations and ideas for a happier life. In particular the Book of Sirach which has some useful thoughts. Believe what you wish, ignore what you wish.
One other thing. If there is a God, there also is Satan and Evil. Sadly, Satan seems to get the upper hand sometimes.

[Jay in Phoenix]

I've found that it does contain some pretty good observations and ideas for a happier life. In particular the Book of Sirach which has some useful thoughts. Believe what you wish, ignore what you wish. One other thing. If there is a God, there also is Satan and Evil. Sadly, Satan seems to get the upper hand sometimes.

Pretty much the point for those that miss it by taking the Bible too literally. There are plenty of useful thoughts and philosophies contained therein, and being able to use intelligent discretion to separate the wheat from the chaff is tantamount to having an open mind. I'm still not convinced of the whole God vs. Satan thing, though good and evil do exist. As I implied before, I think that collectively, we all represent "God", and the Bible reflects this, though as to what that actually means is anyone's guess.

[War Wagon]

Some good discussion here.

I have come to the conclusion that there IS a God and that I'm not him nor will I ever be. I don't believe in heaven (unless the Chiefs win the SB) but I'm pretty damn sure there is a Hell... mostly what we create for ourselves in our short time here. I don't believe in an afterlife, but that doesn't mean I can't be spiritual. I believe you get what you give and that the Bible (King James version) holds some eternal truths that if not held to will result in bad things. It really boils down to just one verse and maybe I'm a bad apple.

By their fruits, ye shall know them.

[poptart]

There are many comments and takes I would like to respond to, but it would get too tangled.
In person, we could speak freely with no constraints.
In this kind of on-line forum, we are limited.
Each reply leads to a new question, new objection, new tangent, new "Yeah, but what about..."

But I've seen what has been posted.


I do want to reply to 88, however, since we began a dialogue.
And also to what Mgo and Scott posted about.

You do realize that none of the four aforementioned biographies of Jesus (now collectively called the Gospels of...) was written by their namesake, and certainly not during the time when Jesus Christ would have been alive. In truth, no one knows for certain when any of them were written. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel Furthermore, they are very inconsistent in their descriptions of the life and times of Mr. Christ. They are anything but historically reliable: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicit ... al_Gospels And Paul was mostly a rival and outcast to the "apostles" who survived Jesus. His letters attempt to persuade his supporters to buy into an entirely different program than Jesus was selling before he got croaked.

Since you are a conservative lawyer who respects the Constitution, I will put this in a way that might hit home with you.
Maybe. lol

We've seen the way, in our modern time, liberals (who say they believe in the Constitution) have butchered it.
They have undercut liberty with their butchering.

Very similarly, modern liberal theologians (who say they believe in Christ) have steadily sought to undercut The Liberator.
They have sought (wittingly or not) to diminish Christ, diminish the necessity of Christ, and diminish the Bible itself.

One such way they have sought to do this is by saying, as you spoke of, that the Gospels were not really written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

I very much disagree with their assertion.
Evidence and common sense says the Gospels were in fact written by those four men.
And there are many reasons why I say that -- but won't go into them unless asked to explain further, due to "forum" constraints I noted earlier.

Matthew - written by Matthew, one of the 12 apostles
Mark - written by Mark, a friend of Peter, who was one of the 12 apostles
Luke - written by Luke, a physician and friend of Paul
John - written by John, one of the 12 apostles


The Gospels surely were "booked" decades after Jesus died and resurrected.
This is true.
There are very logical and understandable reasons why (imo) it went this way - and I again won't pursue explaining it further unless asked to do so.
Further, it is logical (and perhaps a surety?) that some written accounts of Jesus' life and Ministry (parts of it) were occurring as He was living, and in the years following His death and resurrection -- but they were not put into one "book" account until later, when the four writers did their separate work.


Contradictions in the Gospels?
Long story short, no.
In fact, they are remarkably consistent.

One can go through and find minor surface differences in accounts given, but I promise you that any differences found can easily be reconciled by simply considering that each account was written by a different author who had his own view of what went down.

Each Gospel author gave his account in the way he did because he saw some things as more "important" to note than others, or because they made an impression on him, or because it is what HE saw at that particular time and place, or because he was trying to relay the account to a PARTICULAR AUDIENCE -- as authors have always done.

Matthew, for example, was clearly writing his account with the Jews as his audience.
Mark, Luke, and John also had a target audience in mind.

The vital points of the life, deeds, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ were relayed consistently by each independent man.


For Mgo and Scott...

First, the fact that we don't think an omnipotent God is operating as He ought to ---> does not necessarily mean that He does not exit.


Second, back in the day, your scenario(s) is one I was very curious about, also.
God's method didn't appear correct to my sensibilities, either.

Understand (if you might try and play along with what I am relaying) that God is perfect, holy, and incapable of sin.
He is perfect Light.

We humans are something much different.
We are corrupt, and the sensibilities we have don't come close to approaching those of God.
Not even in the same realm.

We are the ones who are fucked, trust me.

What we might imagine God should be doing, is, to put it bluntly... foolish.
We don't come anywhere near approaching His level of understanding.


How did we become this way, disconnected from a natural understanding of God -- and disconnect from His way of "thinking," such that we imagine that the Almighty God is not acting... right?

If you care to know how I think that happened, pick a thread or two that I started in the theology forum.
Read the opening post.
Think about the message that is given there and think about it in relation to your own life.


But know that Jesus responded to your point(s) in this thread.
If you sincerely want to know the answer to your question(s), carefully read Matthew 20:1-16.

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv ... te=4380943


Jesus responded to your concern in a parable.
And He spoke other parables.
He said that some could not (would not) understand what He was saying (Matthew 10:10-13).

If you've read Matthew 20:1-16, and you don't get it, I say with all sincerity, love, and humility, you should seriously consider where it is you are standing, and who it is you are standing with.

[poptart]

It took P & T five minutes of yappin' about BULLSHIT in the Bible before they actually began to tell us what the BULLSHIT supposedly is.

Then at the 5:00 mark (approx.) they produced their supposed first bit of Bible BULLSHIT -- and it is a laffable *FAIL*.

They claim that there are two creation stories given in the Bible.
One in Genesis 1 and then an altered creation story in Genesis 2.

Sadly for them, just making that ridiculous claim fully unmasks their total ignorance about the Book they are so eager to trash.

It is the accusation a Bible novice would make.


Genesis 1 gives a blow by blow account of God's TOTAL creation.
First He did this, then this, then this... until it is all finished in verse 31.

Genesis 2 doesn't give a different creation account.
Beginning in verse 4 of Genesis 2, it merely takes the creation of MAN and explains in greater detail about that particular aspect of God's creation.
That is what Genesis 2 is clearly doing.



Are these comedians going to get better? :)

[jiminphilly]

Is it that God is a sham or organized religion that has historically pushed those notions of salvation that is a sham?

Well, both. But are you suggesting that God doesn't purportedly offer forgiveness to sinners who repent?

I truly have no idea but I've stopped trying to pretend or act like I do know. I don't rely on scripture because it's been manipulated and rewritten and reinterpreted so many times, how in the hell can ANYONE take those words and make them out to be some sort of living, breathing person? I kinda like what the new guy in the white hat said recently.

As letters to the editor go, it was certainly out of the ordinary, stretching to more than 2,500 words and not one of them veering on the irate or indignant. But the missive received by Eugenio Scalfari, co-founder and former editor of the Italian newspaper La Repubblica, nonetheless made it into print on Wednesday – on the front page and under the impressively brief byline of "Francesco".

Responding to a series of questions asked in the summer by Scalfari, who describes himself as an interested "non-believer", Pope Francis used his trademark conciliatory tone to discuss the Catholic church's attitude to atheists, urging those who do not share his faith to "abide by their own conscience" and reminding them God's mercy "has no limits".

Expressing the belief that it was important for Christians to engage in "a sincere and rigorous dialogue" with atheists, Francis recalled Scalfari had asked him whether God forgave those "who do not believe and do not seek to believe".

"Given – and this is the fundamental thing – that God's mercy has no limits, if He is approached with a sincere and repentant heart," the pope wrote, "the question for those who do not believe in God is to abide by their own conscience. There is sin, also for those who have no faith, in going against one's conscience. Listening to it and abiding by it means making up one's mind about what is good and evil."

[Smackie Chan]

I've been guilty of perpetuating this type of moronic thread before, but have vowed to myself to no longer do so. I will not try to sway anyone's belief because I know it won't work and if faith works for you, I want you to have it. However, I couldn't ignore this...

A Christian friend of mine posted this on fb:


His sister, who is a pastor, replied with, "Not sure where that is in the bible, did I miss something? I picked many flowers as that was my profession...He's an eastern religion cultist."

My tard meter hit the peg harder than it does when reading a Derron post. I wanted to just ignore it, really I did. But I couldn't resist. I replied by saying, "Where in the bible does it say that a bear shits in the woods or that 2+2=4? The fact that they're not in the bible doesn't make them any less true. Did any of those flowers you picked not die? Are you saying that love really is about possession? Is any statement made by an "eastern religion cultist" or any other non-Christian inherently untrue? Even the kiddie pool thinks you're shallow."

Faith is one thing, but abject stupidity is quite another (although I won't go so far as to say they're mutually exclusive). There's also a difference between believing everything in the bible is true, and believing all truth is found in the bible. While, in my opinion, both beliefs contain elements of retardation, the latter is off-the-charts ignorant. I seriously hope none of my Christian fliends who post here believe that if it ain't in the bible, it ain't true.

[Jay in Phoenix]

A second major rack for Smackie. Everything you said in the reply to that idiotic fb posting was spot on. That's why I mentioned faith versus blind faith. Saying all truth is found in the Bible is profoundly stupid. The Book is rife with re-writes and edits and misinterpretations. Revelations alone is the most ridiculously misunderstood book in the Bible. Ask most Christians what the meaning of the word apocalypse is. Guaranteed to a one, they will sing and dance about the end of the world by great destruction and fire and the rising of the dead. Nonsense.

The true meaning of that word is just the opposite. It literally translates to "revelation", or an opening of the eye and mind, to uncover, disclose or reveal.

And that is just one single word out of thousands.

Anyone ever seen this image?



That would be a statue of Moses sporting devil horns. The image of Moses with horns was based on a mistaken translation of a description of Moses as having a "shining face", which the scribes at that time interpreted as "having horns". Politics of the time insisted that their transcription was accurate, though it was horribly wrong.

Just two examples of trickle down religious ignorance.

[L45B]

I'm not a religious person, but if I had to choose one I think I'd go with Judaism. Just based on Mel Brooks movies, alone.

[Screw_Michigan]

I'm not a religious person, but if I had to choose one I think I'd go with Judaism. Just based on Mel Brooks movies, alone.

Larry David.

[mvscal]

Larry David.

Should be scalded to death in a vat of boiling bacon grease. Cancer is funnier than anything he has ever done.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Oh great...

:x

...here it comes...

What's next, assholes? The joke about how my people invented copper wire? How many of us you can fit in a Volkswagen?

:x

..and the (literal) icing-on-the-cake? I found this in the lunchroom at work earlier this week:



I am sickened by your passion plays.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

I am shaking with so much rage right now, I can barely keep down tonight's gribenes and kishke...

:|

[Screw_Michigan]

Should be scalded to death in a vat of boiling bacon grease. Cancer is funnier than anything he has ever done.

Lighten up, Sally. No surprise a tedious fuck like you wouldn't understand the greatness of LD. Die listening to one thousand Shrubber phone calls.

[Goober McTuber]

In particular the Book of Sirach

Not found in many Bibles I've ever read. Part of the Apocrypha.

[Smackie Chan]

Sirach & Apocrypha

Pray for them

[poptart]

It's most important to note that the Apocrypha was never accepted as Scripture by the Jews, and they never placed it on par with the Old Testament Canon.
There is no evidence that Jesus, the apostles, or the New Testament writers considered it Scripture.

Yes, it was placed within the 1611 King James Bible, but was clearly and repeatedly marked as being separate from Holy Scripture.

In the original 1611, the last Book of the Old Testament, Malachi, ends with the words, "The End of the Prophets."
Then the Apocrypha is inserted and marked on every page as being just that.
The Apocrypha then ends with the words, "The End of the Apocrypha."
Then the New Testament begins with the words, "The New Testament of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Understand (if you might try and play along with what I am relaying) that God is perfect, holy, and incapable of sin.
He is perfect Light.

We humans are something much different.
We are corrupt, and the sensibilities we have don't come close to approaching those of God.
Not even in the same realm.

We are the ones who are fucked, trust me.

That is not an acceptable answer. If anything, it fills me with even more RAGE.

[MgoBlue-LightSpecial]

Book of Sirach

I'll bet that's got some tasty recipes.

[Dinsdale]

Matthew - written by Matthew, one of the 12 apostles
Mark - written by Mark, a friend of Peter, who was one of the 12 apostles
Luke - written by Luke, a physician and friend of Paul
John - written by John, one of the 12 apostles

First, my thoughts on the matter as the same as always -- I couldn't care any less what you believe if I tried (until you show up at my door with your pamphlets). Keep on keepin on, more power to ya.

I'm merely pointing out that stories that a bunch of friends allegedly claimed (since there's no evidence these people even wrote what was attributed to them) to have happened, doesn't belong anywhere in the same fucking paragraph as the word "proof."

Unless my high school buddies "proved" that a car can get 50 feet of air and still ran, and they "proved" a dude could take down 2 grams in a single bonghit... in 2000 years, it'll probably be a full 2 oscars.

Why is it so important to you to twist words? A "lack of faith," maybe? Because it sure looks that way to anyone with a brain. Since long before Jesus walked the earth, anecdotal evidence has nevereverevereverever been considered "proof" of anything... unless you're willing to grant that visits from UFO's have been "proven."

If you believe in it, more power to you, bro. Carry on, Wayward Son. All I ask is that you stop lying to try and prove your righteousness.

Proof... you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[poptart]

Understand (if you might try and play along with what I am relaying) that God is perfect, holy, and incapable of sin.
He is perfect Light.

We humans are something much different.
We are corrupt, and the sensibilities we have don't come close to approaching those of God.
Not even in the same realm.

We are the ones who are fucked, trust me.

That is not an acceptable answer. If anything, it fills me with even more RAGE.

Doesn't just reading this board on any given day solidify in your mind the truth that ---> we are fucked?


:)

[Dinsdale]

Doesn't just reading this board on any given day solidify in your mind the truth that ---> we are fucked?

If AP and The Midget are part of God's Grand Vision, I'd hate to see what his beta-version looked like. I'll take Screwey's predecessor's job in Gomorrah over that mess.

[War Wagon]

People hypothesize about a Big Bang that supposedly occurred 6 billion years ago and speak of it not as a theory, but as fact.

These same people cast doubt on writings from 2,000 or some years ago, calling them frauds and fairy tales.

People believe what they want to believe.

[Diego in Seattle]

People hypothesize about a Big Bang that supposedly occurred 6 billion years ago and speak of it not as a theory, but as fact.

These same people cast doubt on writings from 2,000 or some years ago, calling them frauds and fairy tales.

People believe what they want to believe.

I'm guessing you're against teaching science in school.

It is, after all, a liberal conspiracy....

[poptart]

since there's no evidence these people even wrote what was attributed to them

- Dins



:?

Trolling?

Of course there is evidence that Matthew wrote the Book of Matthew, Luke the Book of Luke, etc.

There is no question that there is evidence of it.



Regarding "evidence" and "proof," in a court of law, people bring evidence in order to make their case.
It is called an admission of evidence.

The words evidence and proof are similar -- and can be said to be the same, but in my understanding, proof is a stronger word.

Perhaps you see that differently.


I've never said there is "proof" of God, and have repeatedly said just what Wagon and Jsc said.
Belief in God requires faith.
The Bible repeatedly stresses that and it is clear that God has made it that way.

But if someone wants to say there is no evidence for the God of the Bible, I consider it to be among the silliest things I've ever heard.

Is there really nothing which could be brought forth in (hypothetically) a court of law as evidence that the God of the Bible exists?

[poptart]

http://www.mycrandall.ca/courses/NTIntro/Luke.htm

If you're interested -- it's a page on Luke's authorship of the Gospel of Luke.


There are endless weeds to get tangled in.
Personally, if a person is really interested, I recommend they do two things to stay out of the weeds.

1) Read the Bible.
2) Since Christianity hangs on the resurrection event, do your own independent, open-minded research on the resurrection, and whether or not it happened.


Angels and demons continue to be active to this very day.

To give a short answer to your question, the crucifixion of Christ signified the closing of one age and the beginning of... the last days.
The entirety of the Old Testament pointed toward ---> The Christ, the final blood sacrifice.
When it was accomplished, Jesus gave His last Words: It is finished.

Things have changed.

In the Old Testament, there were three offices -- Prophet, Priest, and King.
Prophet = shows the way to God.
Priest = using blood, forgives sin.
King = has all authority.

Many things percolated around these three offices.
And many things percolated around Jesus when He walked the earth, obviously, as He became the most famous and followed figure in human history.
At the end, Christ finished it all.
All three titles are found within Him.
So in that sense, it is more "quiet" now.

Christ freaking resurrected, yet people still demand some more signs from God.
Please see:
Matthew 16:4 - http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv ... te=4380943
1 Corinthians 1:22-24 - http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv ... te=5072031


People sometimes say, "Where is God?"

I say, take Christ.
He is the Prophet and He will ABSOLUTELY show you God.

I am chief sinner, but I testify to it.
Take it for what it's worth to you.

[Dr_Phibes]

Don't get Target myself, it just opened here to much hurrah, I thought it would be like Bass Pro. It's terrible, they're a Wal-Mart store but without stocks. They opened all the shops with empty shelves and got themselveves into desperate trouble.

[Dinsdale]

they're a Wal-Mart store but without stocks.

I avoid both like a Moving Sale/AP exchange, but no. I recently was dragged into a Target (pronounced tar-jay, all frenchie and shit), and it was all middle aged women in the middle of the day. The small handful of times I've been in a Walmart (only when I was working and it was the only thing to get emergency shit around... and they're building one down the street from me, which I'll never enter), there's puffycoated FATFUCKINGRETARDS in every isle.

Subtle distinctions between suck, sure. But distinctions nonetheless.

[Dr_Phibes]

They bought up an old discount chain that goes back to the fifties, God knows what they spent. I remember reading the numbers, it was fantastic. The big countdown, everyone lined up and nothing on the shelf. Someone will hang for it.

[BSmack]

Larry David.

Should be scalded to death in a vat of boiling bacon grease. Cancer is funnier than anything he has ever done.

Concur. His contributions to humor could be packed in a thimble.

[Moving Sale]

The Midget.

Moving Sale

Twice in one thread? You are fucking creepy.