The Bible

[RedeZra]

Posted by starninja (here)

Posted by RedeZra (here)


this Book has stood the test of time for almost two millennia

and has been the bedrock of western civilisation

Oh yes, especially when this Book was changed without our knowledge.
To sort out what is true and what is a lie is the biggest challenge. Think about King James and his connection with Francis Bacon.

According to AMORC Francis Bacon was Rosicrucian but William R. Denslow's "10,000 Famous Freemasons" listed him as a Freemason.

---

Can we trust King James and The Authorized King James Version.?

It would be unwise.

problem solved


we can just check the English translation called the King James version

up against the Greek Septuagint or the Hebrew Tanakh itself


this is not a problem

there is nothing wrong with the translation


why would anyone insinuate that there is a translation problem when we can check this for ourselves ?

because they trust we have become stupid

[kreagle]

Posted by panopticon (here)

Posted by kreagle (here)
RedeZra,

It's been awhile since I have posted here, or commented to this OP, by you. I see that you have "changed" the "original title" from.......let the Bible speak,......to......the Bible,.....since I posted last in March. That's interesting.

I'll have to say that even I am left somewhat confused as to what your personal beliefs are. I can understand the confusion that others are experiencing.

Perhaps it would help "clear up" a lot of confusion if you would be specific and relate to us all exactly what a person needs to do in order to be saved,......in a "complete" and "simple" Bible-based explanation.

If you would rather converse about this in a PM, I understand, and am perfectly OK with that.

I await your reply.

Love and Peace,.......kreagle

G'day kreagle,

This thread has always been called "the Bible"... The reference you made in one of your earlier responses to me was about the opening posts first line which says 'let the Bible speak'.

This thread was started by RedeZra following a number of discussions in other threads which critiqued some notable apologists scholars.

As for RedeZra's philosophy. I have a great amount of respect for his knowledge of early Christian Church history and while he tends to "colour" it with his perspective he stays fairly well with the creationist/apologist beliefs. While I don't believe anywhere near the same as he does (I am not a theist) his knowledge in this area has assisted me by supplying additional references and points of research in related fields (to which I have thanked him a number of times). The trouble that I have had, over the many discussions that I've had with Red, is that when I present evidence that is contrary to his understanding he simply says that it is a lie made up by the establishment/cabal/"insert name here" (this is why I often use creationist/apologist sources in discussions with him).

I haven't been back to this thread since you asked me to honour RedeZra's opening posts request and 'let the Bible speak'. I had been supplying evidence that showed there were obvious problems with the presented material (any of Ron Wyatt's material for example) until then. As this thread is about the Bible it should be open to critiques of the Bible. As an example I would say that there is no evidence, outside of the Bible and tradition (baring a short unrelated inscription), that the entire "Exodus" account ever occurred. This doesn't mean there weren't some Israelites in Egypt at the time in question, rather that the view of them all being slaves and the rest of the story is based on tradition and not fact.

The same goes for the New Testament. There is little evidence that an historical Jesus existed (though I view there was probably a "roaming preacher" who went by this name as it was common in the period) in any historical documentation (the Jospehus quote is a notable exception but is generally accepted as a later addition around the time of Eusebius [4th Century CE]) and there is amply archaeological evidence that Nazareth didn't exist until late in the 1st Century CE. I've presented evidence to back up what I've said throughout this thread and I don't feel the need to repeat myself.

From my various discussions with RedeZra my understanding of his philosophy, it being so closely associated with the fundamentalist one, to be "saved" a person would need:

• to follow the various Bible commandments to the letter,
• be "born again" (ie accept Jesus as your personal saviour),
• believe in the resurrection and ascension of Jesus and finally
• believe that the Bible, in its entirety (ie OT and NT), is the true and inspired word of God.

Maybe he has additional personal beliefs regarding dietary and hygiene requirements (some fundamentalists do) but his beliefs seem fairly creationist/orthodox to me.
Kind Regards,
Panopticon

panopticon,

Long time,.....no see!,....or hear from!

1) I have no problem, whatsoever, in carrying on discussions with you. Our "opinions" are, indeed, almost "polar opposites",....but I have found you to be cordial and civil in most of your responses.

2) I really do consider you to be "highly intelligent" and well versed,....just misguided in many,.....and most,....of your "religious undertakings". I say "undertakings" because I have seen and observed a keen desire in you,....to the point of being a "quest",...... to seek out,.....disprove,.....denounce,.....and destroy anything associated with "the recorded Sacred Scriptures". Intellectualism is a wonderful thing to be in possession of,....."if",....it does not come at the expense of excluding God and His Word.

1 Corinthians 1:20-22
King James Version (KJV)

20 Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?

21 For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.

22 For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:

panopticon,......."if" you are really as "intelligent as I think you are, I believe you will one day, very soon, be re-thinking some of your "current positions". As things begin to escalate in our current world,....economy,.....etc.,.....I think you are going to begin to start to see the "big picture",.....as to what is "really going on".

The "Truth" is going to come out,.....you can rest assured of that!

And finally,......

3) Why, in the world, are you being a "spokesman" for RedeZra? Surely he is capable of "speaking for himself"!!!

Good to hear from you, again!

Love and Peace,.......kreagle

[starninja]

Posted by RedeZra (here)

Posted by starninja (here)

Posted by RedeZra (here)


this Book has stood the test of time for almost two millennia

and has been the bedrock of western civilisation

Oh yes, especially when this Book was changed without our knowledge.
To sort out what is true and what is a lie is the biggest challenge. Think about King James and his connection with Francis Bacon.

According to AMORC Francis Bacon was Rosicrucian but William R. Denslow's "10,000 Famous Freemasons" listed him as a Freemason.

---

Can we trust King James and The Authorized King James Version.?

It would be unwise.

problem solved


we can just check the English translation called the King James version

up against the Greek Septuagint or the Hebrew Tanakh itself


this is not a problem

there is nothing wrong with the translation


why would anyone insinuate that there is a translation problem when we can check this for ourselves ?

because they trust we have become stupid

Well, I don’t speak Greek so the problem is not solved yet. Second, we need to ask why the Bible has been changed over the years. Who is doing it and why? Kings James Bible differs from later versions. Furthermore, The Jehovah Witness Bible has been altered. We also have The Vulgate Bible that differs from King James Version.
So which book is the bedrock of western civilization? Catholic Vulgate Bible? King James Version, New International Version, to name a few? I don’t even want to mention Jehovah Witness Version.

But it is only a part of the problem as I have many questions regarding the Old Testament. I also need to dig deeper why Christians refused the Old Testament.

[RedeZra]

Posted by gripreaper (here)

Posted by RedeZra (here)
i have been trying to find out if the doctrine of reincarnation is true, for if true then the Bible is false

How can you say this? There is ample evidence in the bible of reincarnation.

there is just one passage where Jesus asks the apostles

who do the people say that i am ?


the people had only heard about the old prophets

and so since Jesus acted like a prophet

they simply thought He was somone like one of them

old prophets they had heard about

Posted by gripreaper (here)
The underlying idea of reincarnation and karma is very simple. Human perfection ("salvation") is the assured destiny of the spiritual self of everyone. Reincarnation, as the evolutionary method, provides the necessary time and opportunity for self-perfecting.

in the Bible salvation is only to those who accept Jesus as the Saviour of their souls

and obey His commands

Posted by gripreaper (here)
The law of action and constantly modified reaction ensures justice to all. "God cannot be mocked. A man reaps what he sows." (Gal 6:7b – NIV) The attainment of perfection is rendered certain by the interior presence of an infinite, divine power ceaselessly at work within the spiritual self of every human being.

in the Bible this is not karma but God's justice

Posted by gripreaper (here)
When Jesus said: "You must be born again" (Jn 3:7b – NIV), he was talking about reincarnation. When Jesus said: ".... before Abraham was born, I am!" (Jn 8:58b – NIV), he was talking about reincarnation. When Jesus, perhaps with Malachi 4:5 in mind, explained to the crowd that John the Baptist was the reincarnation of Elijah (Mt 11:7-15), he was talking about just that.

in the Bible to be born again means to receive the Holy spirit

and has nothing to do with the doctrine of reincarnation


and when Jesus said before Abraham was born I AM

He was alluding to His divinity for those with ears to hear


when Jesus says that John the Baptist is Elijah

then he must be

and he can be

since Elijah like Enoch

never underwent physical death

like all the rest of us

Posted by gripreaper (here)
On another occasion, Jesus and his group encountered a man who was congenitally blind. The disciples asked Jesus: "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?" "Neither this man nor his parents sinned," said Jesus, "but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life...." (Jn 9:2b-3 - NIV)

The question as to whether the man himself had sinned and in consequence had been sightless shows the clear thought that justice demanded that the transgression should have occurred in a physical body. As this could only have happened in a former life on Earth, belief in reincarnation is implicit in the question. In the disciples' minds the man might have been born blind because of events in one of his previous lives.

God simply blinded this man so He could heal him

and turn him back to Him

and so used him as an example for all the people to see

the healing powers of God

so they would turn to Him too

[RedeZra]

Posted by starninja (here)
Well, I don’t speak Greek so the problem is not solved yet. Second, we need to ask why the Bible has been changed over the years. Who is doing it and why? Kings James Bible differs from later versions. Furthermore, The Jehovah Witness Bible has been altered. We also have The Vulgate Bible that differs from King James Version.
So which book is the bedrock of western civilization? Catholic Vulgate Bible? King James Version, New International Version, to name a few? I don’t even want to mention Jehovah Witness Version.

stick to the old ones


for today even satan publishes bibles

and so some new versions

are missing spiritual warfare verses


what a snake

Posted by starninja (here)
But it is only a part of the problem as I have many questions regarding the Old Testament. I also need to dig deeper why Christians refused the Old Testament.

not Christians but Gnostics

they refuse God of the Old Testament


and so do the illuminati

well they refuse God of the New Testament as well


and the Holy spirit would you believe

[starninja]

Posted by RedeZra (here)

Posted by starninja (here)
Well, I don’t speak Greek so the problem is not solved yet. Second, we need to ask why the Bible has been changed over the years. Who is doing it and why? Kings James Bible differs from later versions. Furthermore, The Jehovah Witness Bible has been altered. We also have The Vulgate Bible that differs from King James Version.
So which book is the bedrock of western civilization? Catholic Vulgate Bible? King James Version, New International Version, to name a few? I don’t even want to mention Jehovah Witness Version.

stick to the old ones


for today even satan publishes bibles

and so some new versions

are missing spiritual warfare verses


what a snake

Posted by starninja (here)
But it is only a part of the problem as I have many questions regarding the Old Testament. I also need to dig deeper why Christians refused the Old Testament.

not Christians but Gnostics

they refuse God of the Old Testament


and so do the illuminati

well they refuse God of the New Testament as well


and the Holy spirit would you believe

I don’t stick to any version but I ask questions and research. I have lot’s of questions.

No. I didn’t talk about Gnostics. Don’t mix two different issues.

[panopticon]

Posted by starninja (here)
Well, I don’t speak Greek so the problem is not solved yet. Second, we need to ask why the Bible has been changed over the years. Who is doing it and why? Kings James Bible differs from later versions. Furthermore, The Jehovah Witness Bible has been altered. We also have The Vulgate Bible that differs from King James Version.
So which book is the bedrock of western civilization? Catholic Vulgate Bible? King James Version, New International Version, to name a few? I don’t even want to mention Jehovah Witness Version.

But it is only a part of the problem as I have many questions regarding the Old Testament. I also need to dig deeper why Christians refused the Old Testament.

G'day Starninja,

Earlier in this thread Observer presented this talk by Ehrman which might answer some of you questions in regards to alterations of the Bibles text:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=O-1hdqNDQ9E

@ kreagle:

I have been very busy with other research/threads and I didn't feel I could add more to this discussion. I appreciate that you have decided to adopted a civil tone towards me.

As for 'being a "spokesman" for RedeZra' I was putting forward my understanding of this threads origin (I've been a participant since its beginning and in some of the ones that came before it) and how I saw Red's beliefs in relation to orthodox Christianity. I most assuredly know that Red is able to speak for himself... It's shutting him up that's the problem (and I wouldn't dream of trying because I believe that his perspective is equally valid as anyone elses).

@ RedeZra -- A belated welcome back from "holiday" mate.
Kind Regards,
Panopticon

[RedeZra]

Posted by starninja (here)

Posted by RedeZra (here)

Posted by starninja (here)
But it is only a part of the problem as I have many questions regarding the Old Testament. I also need to dig deeper why Christians refused the Old Testament.

not Christians but Gnostics

they refuse God of the Old Testament

No. I didn’t talk about Gnostics. Don’t mix two different issues.

how shall i say this


no Christians refused or refuses God of the OT

but Gnostics did and do

[kreagle]

Posted by RedeZra (here)

Posted by kreagle (here)
RedeZra,

It's been awhile since I have posted here, or commented to this OP, by you. I see that you have "changed" the "original title" from.......let the Bible speak,......to......the Bible,.....since I posted last in March. That's interesting.

I'll have to say that even I am left somewhat confused as to what your personal beliefs are. I can understand the confusion that others are experiencing.

Perhaps it would help "clear up" a lot of confusion if you would be specific and relate to us all exactly what a person needs to do in order to be saved,......in a "complete" and "simple" Bible-based explanation.

hi Kreagle

the thread title has always been the Bible

but in my first post here i wrote let the Bible speak


this thread was ment to explore what the Bible says about our origin history and destiny

and look for facts artifacts and testimonies that back the Bible up


this Book has stood the test of time for almost two millennia

and has been the bedrock of western civilisation


but today governments have rejected this cornerstone

and are doing things in direct opposition to what is written there


the Bible has obviously become too radical for the State

and so it ridicules and rejects what is supposed to be the inspired word of the Creator


so i wanted to find out

if the Bible is the written word of God

for myself


and that is why i made this thread




about being saved

people say saved from what


what did Jesus save those who accept Him from ?


you tell me Kreagle ; )

RedeZra,

You are correct in your statement about the "title" of the thread always being "the Bible",.....and I was in error.

My error came as a result of a response I had with panopticon in post #770 of this thread. I had asked, and reminded him, to reflect back on your "opening remark",....which does,....as you also pointed out,.....say "let the Bible speak". I had "highlighted" this opening remark,....that stuck in my mind,.....and consequently caused my error.

I'm sorry. No disrespect intended!

There is some "common ground" that we share, on "many" topics covered here and on "other" threads, also.

You are correct about our "differences" on a topic called the "trinity". As such, I feel that our "differences" probably go even deeper, in that, I equally have a problem, and cannot accept Catholicism, for the same reason.

I, equally sense, that you have Catholic ties,.....whether strong or not,....I don't know.

Let it be said, here, that I fully respect what you are endeavoring to do here. You have literally caught "mortal Hell" for many of your views. Even to the point of "getting to go on vacation" on a few occasions!!

You basically have "avoided the question" I have asked in being saved, or attaining salvation,.....and thrown the ball "back in my court", ......by saying, and concluding with,.......you tell me, kreagle.

As for the moment,......I intend to "chew on this",....for a short period of time. An "answer", in depth, is forthcoming.

I have no intentions of being inflammatory to anyone,.....ANYONE!,....here at Avalon,...or any "visitor" who may read this.

Truth be told,......."we" are all "brothers",......and I mean that in every possible way!!!

I have a "Revelation" that "few in life" get to experience.

I want to share that "Revelation",......every single last precious Word of It!!!

There is,.......

Ephesians 4:5
King James Version (KJV)

5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

An "answer", in depth, is coming!

Your "friend" and "brother",........kreagle

[starninja]

Posted by panopticon (here)



G'day Starninja,

Earlier in this thread Observer presented this talk by Ehrman which might answer some of you questions in regards to alterations of the Bibles text:

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=O-1hdqNDQ9E

Thank you. I will look at this video but I have to finish Egyptian Book of Dead first. Very heavy subject and I have noticed that it affected me emotionally not in a positive way but I need to finish it.

Anyway, the Bible, religions, and mythology is quite interesting subject.

I am leaving this forum for good. I have returned here to get my answer and I can happily move on.

On my last note, I want to post an art. An interesting paintings by Rubens for a member of Medici family who established 4 Popes.



The Medici produced four Popes of the Catholic Church—Pope Leo X (1513–1521),Pope Clement VII (1523–1534), Pope Pius IV (1559–1565), and Pope Leo XI (1605); two regent queens of France—Catherine de' Medici (1547–1559) and Marie de' Medici(1600–1610); and, in 1531, the family became hereditary Dukes of Florence. In 1569, the duchy was elevated to a grand duchy after territorial expansion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Medici

Marie de Médicis (1575 – 4 July 1642), Italian Maria de' Medici, was Queen consort of France, as the second wife of King Henry IV of France, of the House of Bourbon. A series of twenty-four triumphant canvases were commissioned from Peter Paul Rubens. Quite interesting paintings from a member of Medici family who established 4 Popes.


The first painting of the narrative cycle, The Destiny of Marie de' Medici, is a twisting composition of the three Fates on clouds beneath the celestial figures of Juno and Jupiter.








The Education of Marie de' Medici. We see Apollo, Athena, and Hermes










Rubens, Marie de Médicis as Bellona ( goddess Athena)









Rubens, The Apotheosis of Henry IV and the Proclamation of the Regency of Marie de Médicis on May 14, 1610 (detail)








And the most interesting titled Paintings for Maria de Medici, Queen of France, scene the government of the queen.

[panopticon]

G'day Kreagle,

Posted by kreagle (here)
I have no intentions of being inflammatory to anyone,.....ANYONE!,....here at Avalon,...or any "visitor" who may read this.

Truth be told,......."we" are all "brothers",......and I mean that in every possible way!!!

I'm not a theist so every time you imply/state that Jesus is "the only truth" from my perspective you are being inflammatory. This thread is about the Bible and as such I expect a bit of "Bible bashing" but please remember that many members of Avalon are not Christian, nor wish to be "preached at" and that every time you declare your version of "absolute truth" you are being inflammatory.

A case in point:

Posted by kreagle (here)
I have a "Revelation" that "few in life" get to experience.

I want to share that "Revelation",......every single last precious Word of It!!!

There is,.......

Ephesians 4:5
King James Version (KJV)

5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

I don't believe there is any personified deity, nor a describable faith (we can not describe the indescribable) and hence no need for a baptism (unless I've been working all day and need a bath).

My interest in the Bible relates to the control structures that formed around it as a means of consolidating power.

I'll buggar off now and leave all you monotheists to "duke it out" over who knows "the truth" best and whose dogma barks the loudest.
Kind Regards,
Panopticon

[kreagle]

Posted by panopticon (here)
G'day Kreagle,

Posted by kreagle (here)
I have no intentions of being inflammatory to anyone,.....ANYONE!,....here at Avalon,...or any "visitor" who may read this.

Truth be told,......."we" are all "brothers",......and I mean that in every possible way!!!

I'm not a theist so every time you imply/state that Jesus is "the only truth" from my perspective you are being inflammatory. This thread is about the Bible and as such I expect a bit of "Bible bashing" but please remember that many members of Avalon are not Christian, nor wish to be "preached at" and that every time you declare your version of "absolute truth" you are being inflammatory.

A case in point:

Posted by kreagle (here)
I have a "Revelation" that "few in life" get to experience.

I want to share that "Revelation",......every single last precious Word of It!!!

There is,.......

Ephesians 4:5
King James Version (KJV)

5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

I don't believe there is any personified deity, nor a describable faith (we can not describe the indescribable) and hence no need for a baptism (unless I've been working all day and need a bath).

My interest in the Bible relates to the control structures that formed around it as a means of consolidating power.

I'll buggar off now and leave all you monotheists to "duke it out" over who knows "the truth" best and whose dogma barks the loudest.
Kind Regards,
Panopticon

panopticon,

What you are saying is the "equivalent" to a large group of baseball fans electing to discuss the long and illustrious record and history of the "New York Yankees",......and having an "individual" make up the "following ground rule",......."It is hereby prohibited to bring up,....in any way,......the name of "Babe Ruth",.....or relate to his accomplishments,.....or his overall worth to the team franchise, etc.,...during this discussion!

-OR-

Conducting a "national survey" on the history of "Country Western Cowboy Classics",......but the name of "John Wayne" cannot be mentioned,.....anywhere!

(point)

There are "certain things" that just simply cannot be excluded!!!

You cannot "exclude" Jesus Christ,......His role,.......His Deity,......His position,.....from "the Bible"

You take "Jesus" out of the Bible,........and all you have left,.....is "just a meaningless book"!!!,......that I, personally, wouldn't give 5 cents for!!

You state that,....."please remember that many members of Avalon are not Christian",.....to which I reply,....."why, then, would they "click on a thread" titled "the Bible"?? You see,.....I "personally" don't like "hunting", as a sport,.....so I don't read magazines about "hunting". It's really simple!

On top of this,.....you haven't heard the "full story" yet,......

Don't you think you are being a little hasty with your criticism?

Patience,.....my friend.........kreagle

[RedeZra]

does Jesus exist ?

is Jesus alive ?


if you have not met Him then you may think He is not alive

if you have met Him then you may think He is alive


so many say they have met Jesus and been healed and helped by Him

they take the time and effort to testify about their meeting with Him


so it seems many have met Jesus


does that mean He is alive ?

could it be that Jesus exists even though you have not met Him

or does His existence depend on your observation of Him ?


do you think that Jesus does not exist just because you have not seen Him ?

then you must think that the millions who have seen and met Him are delusional or lying


i don't understand how intelligent people can ignore the many testimonies about Jesus

and keep on denying His existence when they never met Him


have you been drinking too much tap water ?

[gripreaper]

Sorry Red, but you can’t just interpret the scrolls to fit your agenda. You can’t have it both ways.

You can’t have free will on the one hand, and manifest destiny on the other. Either there is free will or there is not.

You can’t interpret the scrolls subjectively when you want, and literally when you want.

You cannot say Jesus meant ‘this or that” when it is inconsistent with the true history of the texts.

You cannot say that the bible is the unadulterated and unmitigated protected and fully inspired word of god, when history shows us it has been altered many times.

You cannot say reincarnation is not in the bible, and that many of the texts which referenced reincarnation were not removed, because they were.

You cannot say that god has human emotions of anger and such, since to “emote" requires a body, and the Old Testament is full of god’s angst with his creation.

You can’t say god is omniscient and omnipresent, and knew all things before creation, because he apparently made some egregious errors with the Nephilim and his inability to eradicate such of his own failed creations.

You can’t say god is all loving when you read Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and Numbers and all the absolutely inhumane and atrocious acts done by god referenced there.

You can’t say the god of the bible is the supreme creator god and not an alien Achron when the facts are clear about this in regards to the age of the planet and the many civilizations prior to Adam and Eve.

You can’t say monotheism is not a creation of the elite of Egypt, when Elohim is “many gods” and it is historical fact that there are many gods.


I can go on and on and on and on, with many references and FACTS from history, and many references from this thread alone.

What you can say, is YOU have a subjective belief based on subjective interpretations of subjective information.

That would at least be honest and true, but your approach is NOT honest and true, but patronizing, disrespectful and dismissive of others points of view. I find your subjectivity quite alarming and utterly patronizing, to say the least.

I’m throwing my hands up and wondering why I even bother. You don’t hear a single word I say. You’re incorrigible.

Once again, I'm done.

[RedeZra]

Posted by kreagle (here)
You are correct about our "differences" on a topic called the "trinity". As such, I feel that our "differences" probably go even deeper, in that, I equally have a problem, and cannot accept Catholicism, for the same reason.

I, equally sense, that you have Catholic ties,.....whether strong or not,....I don't know.

Let it be said, here, that I fully respect what you are endeavoring to do here. You have literally caught "mortal Hell" for many of your views. Even to the point of "getting to go on vacation" on a few occasions!!

tnx i just love vacations ; )


i have no Catholic ties

but i believe the Catholic foundation is sound


and that satan has struggled with the Church for a long time

trying to corrupt and subvert it


and that he has been successful

but the Catholic foundation is still sound

[RedeZra]

Posted by gripreaper (here)
You can’t have free will on the one hand, and manifest destiny on the other. Either there is free will or there is not.

only God is Absolute

and God gave humanity 6000 years to do away with sin

and for satan to play himself out

after that Judgement

Posted by gripreaper (here)
You cannot say that the bible is the unadulterated and unmitigated protected and fully inspired word of god, when history shows us it has been altered many times.

God knows how to preserve and protect His words

and history has shown that satan has been busy

inspiring people to make counterfeits to the Gospels

Posted by gripreaper (here)
You cannot say reincarnation is not in the bible, and that many of the texts which referenced reincarnation were not removed, because they were.

there is no doctrine of reincarnation in the Bible

we just got this one life on earth

to stay away from the snares of satan

and not succumb to him nor our own sinful desires

Posted by gripreaper (here)
You cannot say that god has human emotions of anger and such, since to “emote" requires a body, and the Old Testament is full of god’s angst with his creation.

why can't God have emotions ?

God is trying to raise a family fit for the Kingdom of God

and satan is a stumbling block to us

as well as our carnal mind and flesh

Posted by gripreaper (here)
You can’t say god is omniscient and omnipresent, and knew all things before creation, because he apparently made some egregious errors with the Nephilim and his inability to eradicate such of his own failed creations.

God knew that some of His angels would rebel and meddle in the affairs of mankind

so He could stop them before they did that

but then again God don't create robots

Posted by gripreaper (here)
You can’t say god is all loving when you read Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and Numbers and all the absolutely inhumane and atrocious acts done by god referenced there.

God is Holy

and do not tolerate sin

just ask Sodom and Gomorrah

Posted by gripreaper (here)
You can’t say the god of the bible is the supreme creator god and not an alien Achron when the facts are clear about this in regards to the age of the planet and the many civilizations prior to Adam and Eve.

there was a worldwide Flood which wiped out everything except those in the Ark

the official age of the planet must back up the theory of evolution

so question is if you believe them or not

Posted by gripreaper (here)
You can’t say monotheism is not a creation of the elite of Egypt, when Elohim is “many gods” and it is historical fact that there are many gods.

elohim in the Bible means God god or gods

i'm sure i tried to explain this to you before


God also created gods or angels

[cloud9]

Hello Red,
I wanted to ask you if you have seen the video posted in this page, Bart D. Ehrman and his findings and what is your opinion about it.

[observer]

Posted by RedeZra (here)
[....snip]

not Christians but Gnostics

they refuse God of the Old Testament


and so do the illuminati

well they refuse God of the New Testament as well


and the Holy spirit would you believe

This, Red, from my perspective, is among the most obscene statements you've made on this thread, an attempt to connect the Gnostic Christians to the illuminati.

This all reflects your convoluted fundamentalist version of Christianity - Trinity Christianity.

The evidence indicates that the Gnostic Christians were the evolution of the message of Yeshua ben Joseph. This Gnostic Christian understanding is the true interpretation of John 8:44, where Yeshua was speaking directly to the Pharisees in the temple.

Yeshua ben Joseph was a Nazarene Essene. The archeological record indicates these particular Essenes denounced the God of the Old Testament, Yahweh.

It's all part of the evidential trail discovered, unmolested, after being buried in the Egyptian desert nearly 2000 years after it was all spirited-away by the direct followers of Yeshua - the true Christians who were unmercifully massacred by the Roman Empire in an agenda to create Trinity Christianity, and the Holy Roman Empire.

It saddens my heart to read this fundamentalist drivel that you continue to espouse as the 'True Word of God'.

• You refuse to look at the evidence.
  
• You continue to preach a failed dogma.
  
• Your persistence to sell this failed theology, here in this forum, is an insult to the hundreds of millions of hallowed souls that have been unmercifully slaughtered in the name of this unholy Trinity.

John 8:44
King James Version (KJV)
"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it."

[gripreaper]

Posted by observer (here)
The evidence indicates that the Gnostic Christians were the evolution of the message of Yeshua ben Joseph. This Gnostic Christian understanding is the true interpretation of John 8:44, where Yeshua was speaking directly to the Pharisees in the temple.

Yeshua ben Joseph was a Nazarene Essene. The archeological record indicates these particular Essenes denounced the God of the Old Testament, Yahweh.

Absolutely. The gnostic teachings (gnostic just means knowledge) of the ancients from Atlantis (pre-deluge)was preserved by the Essene's and practiced along side the Jewish and Hebrew sects at the time of Yeshua. What remained was still taught in the Egyptian temples, which Yeshua studied these teachings in those temples during the lost years from age 12 to 30. Yeshua also went to India where he tutored under the immortal Babaji and learned the ancient India teachings of the east.

Posted by observer (here)
It's all part of the evidential trail discovered, unmolested, after being buried in the Egyptian desert nearly 2000 years after it was all spirited-away by the direct followers of Yeshua - the true Christians who were unmercifully massacred by the Roman Empire in an agenda to create Trinity Christianity, and the Holy Roman Empire.

Yes, the Nag Hammadi scrolls, for those who have taken the time to study them, are very revealing about how the truth was altered and destroyed by the Roman elite and the christian churches in the last 2000 years. How timely that these scrolls were found, to open up the gnostic truths once again, showing the divine feminine, and the fallacy of Trinity Christianity. Yeshua's consort, Mary Magdalene, who represented the feminine aspect of the godhead and consummated this sacred union with Yeshua and bore a child with him named Sara, her gospel was also found at Nag Hammadhi. The wedding at Canan where Yeshua changed water into wine was his own wedding to Magdalene.

I have a piece of stone pottery which came from this cave, and was given to me when the scrolls made their tour of the United States, in Seattle. The ignoble truths and the energy of these truths are in that piece of stone, which sits on my desk in front of me as I type this. To know this truth brings the greatest joy, without condemnation, fear, torture, and the savage slaughter of all the gnostics, which exemplifies the history embedded and sold in the bible.

Posted by observer (here)
It saddens my heart to read this fundamentalist drivel that you continue to espouse as the 'True Word of God'.
[*]You refuse to look at the evidence.
[*]You continue to preach a failed dogma.
[*]Your persistence to sell this failed theology, here in this forum, is an insult to the hundreds of millions of hallowed souls that have been unmercifully slaughtered in the name of this unholy Trinity.

It saddens me to no end as well. The fundamentalist dogma proselytized and parroted, bastardized from the truth, yet so keenly packaged as truth, that so many have succumbed to... this audacious slavery fear mongering control system, and not even know it...is utterly astounding to me.

[crested-duck]

Posted by gripreaper (here)

Posted by observer (here)
The evidence indicates that the Gnostic Christians were the evolution of the message of Yeshua ben Joseph. This Gnostic Christian understanding is the true interpretation of John 8:44, where Yeshua was speaking directly to the Pharisees in the temple.

Yeshua ben Joseph was a Nazarene Essene. The archeological record indicates these particular Essenes denounced the God of the Old Testament, Yahweh.

Absolutely. The gnostic teachings (gnostic just means knowledge) of the ancients from Atlantis (pre-deluge)was preserved by the Essene's and practiced along side the Jewish and Hebrew sects at the time of Yeshua. What remained was still taught in the Egyptian temples, which Yeshua studied these teachings in those temples during the lost years from age 12 to 30. Yeshua also went to India where he tutored under the immortal Babaji and learned the ancient India teachings of the east.

Posted by observer (here)
It's all part of the evidential trail discovered, unmolested, after being buried in the Egyptian desert nearly 2000 years after it was all spirited-away by the direct followers of Yeshua - the true Christians who were unmercifully massacred by the Roman Empire in an agenda to create Trinity Christianity, and the Holy Roman Empire.

Yes, the Nag Hammadi scrolls, for those who have taken the time to study them, are very revealing about how the truth was altered and destroyed by the Roman elite and the christian churches in the last 2000 years. How timely that these scrolls were found, to open up the gnostic truths once again, showing the divine feminine, and the fallacy of Trinity Christianity. Yeshua's consort, Mary Magdalene, who represented the feminine aspect of the godhead and consummated this sacred union with Yeshua and bore a child with him named Sara, her gospel was also found at Nag Hammadhi. The wedding at Canan where Yeshua changed water into wine was his own wedding to Magdalene.

Posted by observer (here)
It saddens my heart to read this fundamentalist drivel that you continue to espouse as the 'True Word of God'.
[*]You refuse to look at the evidence.
[*]You continue to preach a failed dogma.
[*]Your persistence to sell this failed theology, here in this forum, is an insult to the hundreds of millions of hallowed souls that have been unmercifully slaughtered in the name of this unholy Trinity.

It saddens me to no end as well. The fundamentalist dogma proselytized and parroted, bastardized from the truth, yet so keenly packaged as truth, that so many have succumbed to... this audacious slavery fear mongering control system, and not even know it...is utterly astounding to me.

I agree with this post totally!-Don't waste your time trying to educate or convert Red Ezra, he has chosen his path and made his bed. Now he must walk it and lay in it himself, and eventually find out the truth for himself.-Rob- Just remember-what you sow you reap, more than you sowed and later than you originally sowed it.