Religion III - Friday the 13th

[mardi gras skin]

"the Romans had no claim to the Jewish texts!" You can be damn sure the Romans destroyed every Jewish text they could get their hands on, besides killing Jews.

And that, folks, is why we don't have any Jewish scriptures besides the ones the Romans wanted you to know about.

[inmate running the asylum]

Hey, I am not here to defend the Gnostics, whether they were underdogs are not. So little survives of their writings, who really knows how many sects there were, or where they all originated from?

The point I am trying to make, is that some of their sects

reportedly had Christian beliefs and the early church fathers vehemently opposed them and went after them. And the church fathers incited other Christians to go after them and destroy their texts. Some bishops such as Clement, as early as 90 A.D., if not before, began to develop a Christian orthodox party line, as to what the main tenets of Christianity were going to be.

Organized religion claims God "inspired" the Bible, and the books that were to be included or later canonized. Thats a joke.

Somehow I would not call threats and coercion coming from the early church fathers and bishops, as being what I would call God's "inspiration," when it came down to which books survived and were canonized into the Bible. :laugh:

[inmate running the asylum]

Posted by Mardi,

And that, folks, is why we don't have any Jewish scriptures besides the ones the Romans wanted you to know about.

The Romans destroyed the Jewish Temple in 66-70 A.D. The Jews do not canonize their Bible -- which they did in secret -- until approximately 90 A.D. The Romans obviously could not find every Jewish OT text. But then they probably didn't need to, when there is nothing in the Jewish OT that is derogatory against the Romans anyway. The Romans are only concerned about what is being PUBLICLY taught in worship, especially if it incites the general populace to riot. The Roman emperors and legions are looking at this from a political standpoint, not a religious standpoint.

[mardi gras skin]

But then they probably didn't need to, when there is nothing in the Jewish OT that is derogatory against the Romans anyway.

So you are assuming that the Jews, who were beaten down by the Romans almost as hard as the Christians (who they saw as a Jewish sect) were, would not include anti-Roman literature, but that Christianity would. And you are assuming that this is the case because...?

[inmate running the asylum]

Posted by Mardi

So you are assuming that the Jews, who were beaten down by the Romans almost as hard as the Christians (who they saw as a Jewish sect) were, would not include anti-Roman literature, but that Christianity would. And you are assuming that this is the case because...?

Mardi, I don't ASSUME the NT writers slanted the Bible away from Roman blame and wrote anti-Semitic verses into the New Testament, falsely accusing the Jews of deicide, I KNOW it.

17-1 - Many years ago when I was doing research on the Bibles, I discovered quite a few verses in the New Testament which I felt were anti-Semitic. Only now am I starting to discover that I am not alone, and other people are in agreement with my findings. You Mardi previously stated, however, that you do not think the New Testament is anti-Semitic. So then Mardi, read these verses and tell me honestly now, if you think these verses are anti-Semitic or not? I claim they are. So what I propose is for any other person reading this post -- especially Jewish individuals -- to post their opinion.

17-2 - I also claim the NT writers slanted the Biblical verses against the Jews rather than the Romans, thereby blaming the Jews for deicide -- killing Jesus, a god -- and absolving the Romans of any blame. When this anti-Semitism in the Bible was followed up later in history, by the anti-Semitic bent of St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther, it resulted in hundreds of thousands of innocent Jews being harmed and murdered in the name of Christianity.

17-3 - “Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus which is called Christ? They all say unto him, Let him be crucified. And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified. When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us and on our children.” [Matt. 27: 22-25 - KJB]

17-4 - Does anyone today really believe Jewish people or any people for that matter, would have been stupid enough to publicly proclaim “His blood be on us and ON OUR CHILDREN?!!!! Like the Jews in the crowd are really going to condemn their children and future generations of their children to death! This is one of the most appalling, racist, anti-Semitic statements written in the NT, and it is still in Catholic and Protestant Bibles today!

17-5 - Here is another anti-Semitic passage, where Luke writes that Stephen said the following: “Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One [Jesus]; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels and have not kept it. [Acts 7: 51-53]

17-6 - Another anti-Semitic passage, this time Paul is talking:

“For ye, brethren, became followers of the churches of God which in Judea are in Christ Jesus: for ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost. [i Thess. 2: 14-16]

17-7 - Another anti-Semitic passage, this time Luke says Peter -- the founder of the Catholic church -- said this: Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: Him [Jesus] being delivered by the determinate counsel and knowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: [Acts 2: 22-23]

17-8 - In the book Constantine’s Sword, the Church and the Jews (2001) by James Carroll, Carroll who is an ex-Catholic priest, who writes for the Boston Globe says this: Carroll points out the watershed events that led to institutionalized hatred. The New Testament gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John all separate out “the Jews” as opponents of Jesus. Carroll quotes from the book of [John 8:44] “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning.” That is Jesus speaking to his Jewish opponents. Carroll contests the passage, based on current scholarship that accounts of Jesus’ life were composed decades after his death.” At times, the writers put words in his [Jesus'] mouth. Carroll says: “Priests have to be compulsive about preaching against these anti-Jewish texts.” Carroll says. “We hear them read, unchallenged.”

In the last chapter, Carroll proposes a Vatican Council that would outline programs for reform. His agenda calls for a repeal of anti-Jewish language from the New Testament.

17-9 - Then in the book, Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit (2000) by Garry Wills, we read the following. Wills is a Roman Catholic scholar who has written 20 books, and as a practicing Catholic, even he admits: The first four chapters of Papal Sin are scathing attacks on the church, dealing with historical and doctrinal dishonesties not just for its past anti-Semitism and its horrendous pogroms on the Jews but for its continued efforts to cover up this awful history. Not until 1985 did Rome officially repudiate the claim that Jews are under a special curse from God for having executed and denied their own Messiah. “Seminaries taught it,” Wills writes, “and Biblical commentaries explained it, and persecutions were based on it.”

17-10 - Then the Jewish historian and writer, Howard Fast, had this to say in his book The Jews: Story of a People. “Thousands of Jews who opposed Rome were crucified as Jesus was -- and always by the Romans. The malignant charge, set down in the Gospel and used through the centuries that Jews killed Jesus is as puerile and sick as any part of the anti-Semitic philosophy.”

17-11 - “Paul defined the Jews as “vessels of wrath, fit for destruction” and thereby embarked the Christian religion upon its ultimate obsession -- the hatred and destruction of the Jew -- a program of mass murder and hate under the GUISE OF RELIGION that had never appeared before on earth, that was to last for almost two thousand years, that is still with us, that has provoked the murder of untold millions of human lives in a manner so fierce, so senseless, so malignantly cruel that it will brand mankind with shame so long as it exists on earth.”

17-12 - In addition to the above anti-Semitic passages in the NT -- there are others -- but you will not find one single derogatory statement against the hated Romans, by Jesus, Paul or any of the New Testament writers. No wonder emperor Constantine didn't have to censor or edit the first 50 Bibles he ordered, when they were produced in 325 A.D. For the NT writers had absolved the Roman Christians of all blame and written and blamed the killing of Jesus on the Jews, and that had been taken care of centuries before!

17-13 - Now the Catholics apologized somewhat in 1985, but have the Protestants? I think not. And both Catholic and Protestant Bibles still have this anti-Semitism in them today. When I discovered these verses many years ago, it made me ashamed to have once been associated with Christianity and their Bible. And that is why I no longer am. But I guess when only 1 out of 1000 laymen and 1 out of 10 pastors have read their entire Christian Bibles, they can always fall back and claim ignorance.

[mardi gras skin]

17-4 - Does anyone today really believe Jewish people or any people for that matter, would have been stupid enough to publicly proclaim “His blood be on us and ON OUR CHILDREN?!!!! Like the Jews in the crowd are really going to condemn their children and future generations of their children to death! This is one of the most appalling, racist, anti-Semitic statements written in the NT, and it is still in Catholic and Protestant Bibles today!

Does anyone who claims to have read the whole Bible really miss the Old Testament connection here? The activity of a person was understood by Israelites, either good or bad, to have repercussions for generations. In an Honor Shame society, an exchange such as this would elevate or lower the honor of the entire family depending on whether the event was perceived to be honorable or shameful. Any act would be attributed to them and to their children. Honor mentioned in Deuteronomy 20:6, shame in Exodus 34:7, honor in Deuteronomy 7:9, etc. They all carried consequences for generations.

From the perspective of the writer, the crowd’s actions were shameful, but from the perspective of the crowd, their actions were honorable. The sharing of the shame or honor was understood and expected in the society. If you don't get this, you need to bulk up on the social science aspect of the passage you are quoting. Reading and comprehending aren't the same, sport. THEIR culture determines the comon sense of the statement, not yours.

BTW. Here's the editorial review of the book I linked:

When readers are separated from the social world of the author, miscommunication occurs. Historical methods of Biblical interpretation have been helpful in narrowing the gap between the modern reader and ancient authors but have concentrated only on distinctive events and ideas. The social-scientific approach employed in this commentary focuses on social phenomena that have persisted for centuries.

Even for the borader perspective of social interaction beyond the Bible, this book and books like it are a treasure. Bruce Malina and Richard Rohrbaugh are among the leaders in the social sciences of 1st century Medetarian culture. Terry, I'd think you'd love most anything they've written.

[mardi gras skin]

17-5 - Here is another anti-Semitic passage, where Luke writes that Stephen said the following: “Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted? and they have slain them which shewed before of the coming of the Just One [Jesus]; of whom ye have been now the betrayers and murderers: Who have received the law by the disposition of angels and have not kept it. [Acts 7: 51-53]

Funny that these JEWISH New Testament writers were anti-Semitic. I know, I know...you think the Romans edited it. So did the Romans edit the Jewish texts, too?

Your wickedness will punish you. You will see what an evil, bitter think it is to forsake the Lord your God, having no fear of him. I, the Lord, the Lord Almighty, have spoken!"

Jeremiah 2:19

Why would Jeremiah blame the Jews for their own destruction by Babylon in 586 BCE? Using your same logic, shouldn't they have blamed the Babylonians for their destruction instead of their own sin? Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, et. all are as "anti-Semitic" as the New Testament writers.

Both in the NT and the OT, the writers were concerned with the sins of those "stiff-necked" (Exodus 32:9) people who called themselves followers of God, not with the external elements that carried out the acts. The Romans were viewed as tools just as the Babylonians were. Not the CAUSE of the events.

[mardi gras skin]

[John 8:44] “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning.”

Context, context, context. Carroll should have read the rest of the passage.

"We are not illegitimate children," (a dig at Jesus) they protested. "The only Father we have is God himself."

42Jesus said to them, "If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and now am here. I have not come on my own; but he sent me. 43Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don't you believe me? 47He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God."

So they, the spiritual leaders, took a shot at Jesus and then said they were sons of God. Jesus called them liars and sons of the Devil...the father of lies. Definitley a heated exchange but having nothing to do with hating an entire race of people.

[mardi gras skin]

“Paul defined the Jews as “vessels of wrath, fit for destruction” and thereby embarked the Christian religion upon its ultimate obsession --

-- a program of mass murder and hate under the GUISE OF RELIGION.

No he didn't. Paul, in his letter to Romans (kind of ironic) said this in chapter 9:

19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man , to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' " 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

22What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? 23What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory-- 24even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

Where in there does he define JEWS as "vessels of wrath, fit for destruction?" Nowhere. Anti-Sematic? What a load! This passage says all of us are vessels of wrath, fit for destruction. God's pursuit of us (both Jew and Gentile) is a result of God's mercy, not our worth. Far from segregating Jews and others, this passage states just the opposite. Paul talks about "us", both Jew and Gentile. This was radically inclusive language.

"Hatred and destruction of the Jews" is what you read into this passage?! Whatever. :doh:

[MD Daniel]

Hey, sorry to be the new guy butting in, but oh well. Very interesting reading you guys have put up here.

I'll offer another perspective if you don't mind.

Inmate, there is more going on with you than questions and logic stuff. What's your story with organized religion? How has it affected your life? You can spit arguments all day long, but unless we can see how it has affected your life you just look a little narrow minded and mad.

For me this isn't an issue of trying to spend all day proving the bible right or wrong. It's a matter of my personal experience. I know from my experience that God is real, I know Jesus still lives and works among mankind. I've met Him.

Our current culture has entered another age of faith not unlike the dark ages. Except our priests that we believe blindly aren't involved in organized religion, but in science. Doctors and scientists can tell people anything today and have them believe it. The reason these things are bad is because people just believe those "priests" and never look into things for themselves.

So let me tell you about this God I've met. You ever experienced love? Has someone really loved you, not carnally speaking, but unconditionally just because they decide to? It's amazing. The love my parents have shown me is nothing compared to the love I've experienced from God. How about wisdom? Since I've given up living for myself and just trusting Him things have been so much better in my life. I'm marrying an awesome girl who I only met in a totally God arranged situation. Wouldn't the God of the Universe know what is best for my life? I've seen in my life is that He does. I could talk about how powerful He is, of how just, or a lot of His other attributes for a long, long time. This God of mine, He deserves all my love and affection. He deserves my worship. And guess what inmate, the bible doesn't teach that the earth or man in the center of the universe, it teaches that God is the center.

So, where does this leave us? If you see this God of my for who He is, turn away from your own way and look into His. You've been running from Him. Stop running and turn around, and start walking towards Him. Check Him out, no one else compares. Certainly not those who claim to speak for Him, certainly not me, certainly not you. Quit trusting other people's opinion's about God and find out for yourself.

Alright, I'm done...

Daniel

[OrangeSkin]

Agreed Daniel. Seems like Inmate is afraid of God, using small discrepencies in the Bible which support his opinion. I don't want to sound like a televangelist or anything, but if you follow God, then everything you do will be fulfilled.

I'm not a born again Christian or anything, because I've basically been one all my life, except I didn't really believe hardcore until a few years ago. My outlook on life has totally completely changed. Everything is better now.

[Terry]

I think that sums it up.

Some people go looking for god, and for some reason they find him.

Others go looking, and for some reason don't.

[MD Daniel]

Well, that may have summed it... but I feel I would be doing you guys a disservice if I left it at that.

Jesus said "seek and you will find." If you have been seeking for God and haven't found Him I suggest that you need to keep looking, and maybe look in a different place. Jesus also said "I am the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father except through me." So if you are searching, look to Jesus. It took me reading the Gospels in my room by myself for me to get a taste of God. I suggest giving that a try.

Also if you want to know if God is real, come on up to Maryland and hang out with me and my friends. God has really shown himself to be real to us lately. It's been pretty amazing!

Anyways, back to work...

God Bless,

Daniel

[inmate running the asylum]

MD Daniel,

Glad to see someone else’s participation and perspective, besides Mardi and I. Well MD, I realize I am a minority here on this board, but the last time I read any figures, there were at least a few million declared agnostics and atheists residing in the U.S. At least you acknowledged “very interesting reading you guys have put up here.” I wonder what you find interesting though, if you are so sure of your religious convictions?

MD how can I be narrow-minded when I was formerly a Baptist fundamentalist; then spent 5 years researching the Bibles and Koran; compared the Catholic, Jewish and KJB word for word; and then realized we have ALL been conned and became an agnostic. Have you even read the ENTIRE Bible you profess to believe in? If so, you are 1 in 1000. You are obviously new here, so I don’t expect that you have read every single post on religion -- which would now take many hours to catch up -- but the regulars here know that I am not claiming that god does not exist. I am claiming that the “God as portrayed in the Bible” is false and has never existed, because the Bible was written by superstitious men, involved as much in politics as in religion.

You say you have met Jesus. Hmm. I assume you don’t mean that literally. You equate love, wisdom, etc with God. That’s fine. But if god exists, which god? By your definition of God and Jesus, I suppose that Hindus, Moslems, Buddhists, etc., lack love and wisdom, because after all they don’t believe in the same Christian god as you? And therein lies the biggest problem in my opinion, and what separates all humanity, which is the exclusivity of most religious beliefs. Everyone professes they are for “freedom of religion” for everyone, but that has become a self-serving platitude. The reality is quite different when push comes to shove and the bullets start to fly. More people have been killed in the name of religion in history, then any other cause.

For Jesus the so-called god of love, says “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” [Mark 16:16] Then Jesus goes on to state in many places in the Bible, that you will NEVER be forgiven if you do not believe in him, but will burn forever in everlasting fire. And of course organized religion followed this plan laid out in the Christian Bible by God and Jesus, which at times was nothing but legalized murder for centuries, for heretics and people of other faiths. Then when the Bible was used to JUSTIFY the enslavement, first of the Jews, then the Indians, and then the blacks, that was all right, because it was in the name of Christian love too. For after all the Christian colonial powers were not really colonizing the world, but “Christianizing the colored heathens” in the name of God. Yes, other faiths were guilty of this too, but two wrongs don’t make a right. So I don’t see all this love you profess to see MD, where 4 out of 5 people living on earth now of different religious beliefs, are condemned to everlasting fire in hell. Where is the forgiveness here? For Jesus said that death was final.

MD you profess a certain amount of faith. Fine. But I have heard all these words before. By comparison the Buddhist monks who I saw in Vietnam who set themselves aflame -- in an act of self immolation -- now there were men who truly believed in something. I would be more interested if you told us how you arrived at your faith. Were you indoctrinated in your parent’s religion and beliefs for 18 years growing up?

MD Daniel: “The Bible doesn’t teach that the earth was the center of the universe.” Hmm. I am sure Galileo will be glad to hear that admission now, but its about 500 years too late. Then I wonder what the Vatican bothered to apologize for in 1991? You see the Bible by itself doesn’t teach anything to my way of thinking. Its simply a book. But organizations like the Vatican and guys like David Koresh, Jim Jones, and “Do” of Heaven’s Gate fame, who interpret the Bible each in their own different ways, these are the people who you have to watch.

Posted by MD Daniel

Jesus also said "I am the way, the truth and the life and no one comes to the Father except through me."

Well we know that the above isn't true -- according to the Bible below.

"And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him." [Gen. 5: 25]

"1:1 And it came to pass, when the Lord would take up Elijah into heaven by a whirlwind, that Elijah went with Elisha from Gilgal. 1:11 And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven." [iI Kings 1:1, 11-KJB]

Orangeskin,

So according to you, I am afraid of God. That’s funny. :laugh: You sure are a superstitious guy for the 21st century. What would I be afraid of Orangeskin? A lightning bolt from heaven? I have never been afraid of Zeus or Amon-Re, and they are just as likely to exist as the Christian God. :laugh:

I am glad to hear that God has singled you out personally from among 6 billion people now on earth, and everything you do is now being fulfilled. I guess God must have got in a new Dell super computer, so that he can keep track of the daily exploits of you and the 6 billion other people on earth. But if God has so blessed you Orangeskin, I wonder what he had against those little children I saw living in the gutter and starving to death in Bangladesh, during my travels there. I guess because their family couldn’t afford to buy a Christian Bible to read -- and they didn’t receive the word of God or Jesus -- that’s just too damn bad for those kids. Then if its simply a matter of correct religious belief as you claim, I wonder why God blessed me too when I don’t believe in him, but yet condemned those children to misery and death? So I guess when I wonder and research these things, that is wrong according to you, because I shouldn’t be using the brain that God gave me to reason and think with. So consider yourself lucky, Orangeskin, that you were born on this side of the Pacific Ocean instead of the other side, otherwise you might have had the misfortune to wind up in the gutter like those children.

[NavyDave]

Growing up I thought I was the holy one.

Because every time my mom and dad addressed me it by a holy name.

Like when I brought home a report card, "Jesus Christ" why cant you be less talkative in class.

Or drawing pics on the refrigerator, "God" d@mn it what has gotten in to you?

Then I discovered that everything doesnt revolve around planet ND when I ran into the universe Mrs ND.

Religion is a great thing if taken in moderation.

We need to have a moral base (standards) that isnt based on individual desires among other things.

[Terry]

Daniel:

Since I've given up living for myself and just trusting Him things have been so much better in my life. I'm marrying an awesome girl who I only met in a totally God arranged situation. Wouldn't the God of the Universe know what is best for my life? I've seen in my life is that He does. I could talk about how powerful He is, of how just, or a lot of His other attributes for a long, long time. This God of mine, He deserves all my love and affection. He deserves my worship.

I guess the difference between us is that I don't understand a god that sends you out into the world, and if you do it his way and with him guiding you then everything is ok, but if you don't then you screw up.

What kind of a trip is that?

Why does he force us to need him? Why should he be the only one that knows what's best for us? Why does he treat us like children?

He loves us so much, but only wants us as Stepford beings following his will.

I couldn't love him unconditionally like that, and I'd hate to have to fake it all the time

[MD Daniel]

Hey guys,

I'll try to respond to one person at a time...

You first inmate.

The interesting reading is the debate you guys were having. And yes, I'm very sure of my faith, but that doesn't mean I'm not interested in hearing other people's opinions and ideas. I'm interested in your story. You used to be a baptist? Having also spent some years in my past at a fundamentalist baptist church I feel for you. After that you took 5 years to look into religions and compare? As far as comparing bibles, I wouldn't bet a dime on the accuracy of the KJV of the bible(which I can't even understand for the most part), or the koran(read it, kinda boring), or the catholic bible(no background with it). Will you please tell me more about you? It seems that a lot of your concerns are about the Justice of God. The how can innocent people suffer while wicked people live large. Correct? Anyways, I'll give you a short rundown of my story.

I was raised going to church some. Most of the time growing up my mom dragged us boys to church and my dad stayed home. I didn't like what I heard, it was all a lot of rules and regulations, etc. We moved when I was 14 and I went into a depression. I was the suicidal teen who didn't have the guts to kill himself. Pretty pathetic, I know. Well, I got arrested for shop lifting at 15 and got grounded for like 9 months(parents were not happy to say the least). I used that time to see what I believed. I read the Koran, I read the Hebrew Bible, I read the Gita. I didn't run to read the New Testament because of my experience at church. But when I had read the others and didn't find God there I read the gospels. The life of Jesus blew me away. He touched lepers and healed them, he forgave prostitutes, he hung out with "sinners" like me. He was also hard on the religious establishment which appealed to me. I started praying "you healed them, can you heal me?" "are you real?" "do you still care?" I asked for a sign and got it. I started spending time praying and developing my relationship with Him. And that was the beginning of what has been a great ride... about 10 years. That's the basic story of me.

As for the Jesus being the only way to the Father... well, if He is who He said He is, then He's the Son of God who sits at the right hand of the Father. Kinda makes sense to me that you have to go through Him to get to the Father.

Ok, Terry time... Ok, think about God for a second. If He really is God, then He knows what's best, correct? I didn't say He punished everyone who goes there own ways, because He obviously doesn't. He seems to very much respect the freedom that He's given people and let them do their own thing. I was just saying that, being God, He knows the best way, and I want to live my life the best way. But you know what? He does deserve to be loved unconditionally. Even if I got some awful disease and was gonna die a horrible death from it that doesn't change at all that He deserves all the love I could give Him. As for not being able to love Him unconditionally... it's more of a goal than an accomplishment. And yeah, if you don't, don't fake it. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't try to kindle more love for Him...

Alright, got a birthday party to go to, and I want to eat dinner first...

God Bless,

Daniel

[mardi gras skin]

You see the Bible by itself doesn’t teach anything to my way of thinking. Its simply a book. But organizations like the Vatican and guys like David Koresh, Jim Jones, and “Do” of Heaven’s Gate fame, who interpret the Bible each in their own different ways, these are the people who you have to watch.

I can not believe you wrote this, inmate. You have said that the Bible supports slavey. It was a poor argument, but one you should never have made at all if you believe that the Bible teaches nothing.

I guess the difference between us is that I don't understand a god that sends you out into the world, and if you do it his way and with him guiding you then everything is ok, but if you don't then you screw up.

Not to jump on MD's reply, but I think that he was saying something different than you are in the quote if this is in response to MD's saying that he's "given up living for himself." At least, when I say that I am not living for myself, I mean something very different than your quote above.

You are a dad and a husband. You've stated that you love your family very much. I bet that you have made some changes in your life since the time you were single. You are now living your life in a way that demonstrates love for your family...making dad decisions, husband decisions. Decisions that say, "I love you, and I'm willing to make some sacrifices for you." Not just willing, but WANT to. In that, you are no longer "living for yourself." You're living for those that you love.

BTW. I've read/studied about the guys that followed God in the Bible. "Stepford" definitely doesn't come to mind.

[inmate running the asylum]

MD Daniel I am really glad you straightened your life out. Good luck in the future.

18-1 - I'll say it again Mardi..... the Bible doesn't teach anything, its the people behind it who do the erroneous teaching. The Bible is just a book of information, some things true, some false, some erroneous, etc., but certainly not the "word of God."

18-2 - Its because you can twist it around anyway you want too, that I am also against the Bible The Bible did condone slavery -- according to the people who wanted to use it that way. The Bible said to burn witches so people did. The Bible says the Jews were guilty of deicide, so people believed it and acted on it. God in the Bible says to kill gays, so people do. The Neo-Nazis now use the Bible to recruit young people, and they can do so because of the racism in the OT and the anti-Semitism in the NT. The KKK use the Bible to recruit young people, and slant racism in the Bible the way they want to interpret it, against the blacks and Jews.

18-3 - Protestant cult leaders, David Koresh, Jim Jones and Marshall Applegate, aka "Do," used the Bible to brain-wash naive people and then wound up getting them killed or murdered. If you don't believe me, then read what "Do" --of Heaven's Gate fame --says below on his website, about Jesus, John the Baptist and the gospel Luke 3:22. To naive, unsuspecting young adults, "Do" was apparently very convincing, getting 39 to commit suicide with him. Jim Jones was really not the leader of a cult, but the leader of a mainstream Christian religion, having a Methodist - Pentecostal background. Jones had over 900 Christians murdered, when they were forced to take cyanide poison at gun point.

Cult leaders use the Bible to recruit:

http://www.heavensgate.com/misc/intro.htm

http://www.fsmitha.com/h2/ch30.htm

Neo-Nazis use the Bible to recruit:

The skinheads are organized under various "Christian identity" groups, teaching and believing that "Jews are spawns of Eve and the serpent"

http://home.inreach.com/dov/cdlbible.htm

http://www.lvrj.com/lvrj_home/1998/Jul-08-Wed-1998/news/7811966.html

Even the revival of the Ku Klux Klan in 1915 was brought about by a former Methodist preacher, named William J. Simmons, who was able to use the Bible for recruitment and convince a number of Southern churches to join.

Today the Ku Klux Klan still uses the Bible to recruit:

http://www.americanknights.com/info.htm

18-4 - And the Bible does condone slavery.

Originally posted by Mardi

Ironic how the same verses you tried to use to demonstrate that the God of the Bible was a proponent of slavery in effect elevates slaves to a status of equal human rights. You get less distortion in facts when you take things in context.

18-5 - A poor argument? Somehow Mardi I respect Bruce Metzger's opinion more than yours, in that he is a recognized Protestant Biblical scholar. You say you speak Greek, so I don't understand Mardi why you have so much trouble in English comprehension. Protestant Biblical scholars say below that the Bible was used on both sides of the slavery issue in the 17th to 19th centuries. Pastors twisted the Biblical verses around to mean whatever they wanted them to mean and people on both sides of the slavery issue, believed this b.s.

:read: 18-6 - Quote: “Slavery in the New World produced one of the great biblical controversies of early modern times. Especially in 16th century Spain and in the United States between 1730 and 1860, biblical texts were used on both sides of the protracted debates over the institution of slavery.

18-7 - Meanwhile, a new kind of slavery -- the importation and ownership of Africans as property -- spread quickly in the 17th century to Portuguese, Dutch, French, and British colonies in the New World. The Church of England was the legally established religion in the British colonies of Virginia, Barbados, and the Carolinas, but planter elites there guaranteed that Anglican priests neither opposed slavery nor missionized the slaves. INSTEAD THE CHURCH USED BIBLICAL AUTHORITY to depict Africans as bearers of the mark of Cain [Gen. 4:10-15] and as children of Ham, cursed by Noah to be the “servants of servants” [Gen. 9:25]. Or as one of your favorite Bibles, Mardi -- the NRSV refers to them: “lowest of slaves.” Anglican support for slavery went largely unquestioned until the 1730’s, when Evangelicals in Britain and America launched a new biblical critique of slavery.

18-8 - By 1825, however, thriving cotton plantations had revived American slavery, and southern evangelicals, both Methodist and Calvinist, began to construct new biblical arguments justifying Christian slaveholding. A classic example is “A Scriptural View of Slavery” [1856], a sermon by Thornton Stringfellow, a Virginia Baptist, who held that God had sanctioned slavery through Noah, Abraham, and Joseph........ .........and that Jesus and the apostles recognized slavery as a “lawful institution among men.” [2 Cor. 11:20] [Eph. 6:5] [Col. 3:22].

18-9 - Britain abolished slavery peacefully in 1833, but in the United States these disputes over slavery brought Presbyterian, Methodists and Baptists to schism by 1845, and encouraged the fratricidal Civil War that finally resolved the crisis. One of the chief ironies of the conflict over slavery was the confrontation of America’s largest Protestant denominations with the hitherto unthinkable idea that the Bible could be divided against itself." End of quote. -- Source: pg 701-702 - The Oxford Companion to the Bible edited by Bruce Metzger [a noted Protestant biblical scholar]

18-10 - So we see that a charismatic, religious fruitcake who comes along, is potentially capable of persuading naive or ignorant people, to believe in anything he wants from the Bible. And it has been proven time and time again by leaders of cults. Mardi, you are a nice guy, but you are naive and have had no experience with criminals or the criminal mindset. :doh:

[mardi gras skin]

Protestant Biblical scholars say below that the Bible was used on both sides of the slavery issue in the 17th to 19th centuries.

That's right, Inmate, the Bible was USED. Just like the Constitution of the United States of America was used by Amrican terroroists to justify the Oklahoma City Bombing. If a document being USED improperly means that the document's intent and purpose was to be used in that way, then society as we know it, under the constitution, is a sham. The constitution condones American Terrorism to the same extent that the Bible condones slavery.

People with hate in their heart will find justification for their views in the most noble of documents.

[mardi gras skin]

18-9 - Britain abolished slavery peacefully in 1833, but in the United States these disputes over slavery brought Presbyterian, Methodists and Baptists to schism by 1845, and encouraged the fratricidal Civil War that finally resolved the crisis. One of the chief ironies of the conflict over slavery was the confrontation of America’s largest Protestant denominations with the hitherto unthinkable idea that the Bible could be divided against itself."

Inmate, this statement has to demonstrate to you how little the Bible had to do with this debate. Ask yourself: Did Biblical scholars honestly build radically different views on slavery from the Bible (that just happened to be radically different from North to South) or based on the economy of their area? If you really believe it was theologically based, then you are the naive one, my friend.

Slavery was driven by economics pure and simple. Inmate, you are making a better case for the weaknesses of our Constitution and government, actually. If economics so drive our country that even books that people hold sacred can be warped by it; even people of a different color can be looked at as property; even war against brothers can be started over it, then our consumeristic society must be fatally flawed. You are, in effect, building a case against capitalism, because it apparently has too much power...even the "hitherto unthinkable idea that the Bible could be divided against itself," was driven by it.

[mardi gras skin]

BTW, Terry. Can you please give me some information on the Hittite cylinders you were talking about? I still haven't found anything.

[Terry]

Soitenly (Curly voice)

Try this link for a start.

Here's another site with some background on their decipherment.

They are mentioned here , here , and here .

In addition, I found J.G. Macqueen's 'The Hittites and their Contemporaries in Asia Minor' [iSBN 0-500-27887-3 James And Hudson publ.] provides an excellent introduction to the subject, and many good sources can be found in his bibliography and notes.

I hope this helps.

[mardi gras skin]

Thanks Curley. I've bookmarked them and I'll read them today. I couldn't get the second link (decipher) to work though. I'm getting a free server error page.

[mardi gras skin]

inmate said:

More people have been killed in the name of religion in history, then any other cause.

I wonder if that's true. I wonder if the political leaders that used religion to kill people were more effective than the political leaders who used socialism, etc. to kill people. Religious indifference was definitely not a limiting factor for Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler and Pol Pot. They have, what, 100 million deaths to their combined credit?