Where did life begin? (Merged)

Do you believe we have a creator, aka "God"?

  • Total voters
    0
  • Poll closed .
#2,776
#2,776
Orange_Crush said:
Have you done any study in the historicity of the numerous original autographs? It seems to me, as opposed to a single copy that could be horded and secretly changed by the powerful elite, we have thousands of manuscripts that can be dated and compared to judge what was originally there and what wasn't.

More to the point, what happened to change you from the atheist I used to know and love, to the... spiritualist? deist? super-naturalist? quasi-orthodox Christian? that is discussing some divine to have inspired some % of the Bible?
Click to expand...

I've done some studying. As in, I took a required class at Maryville in the Old Testament and through my own curiousity I've done some reading on the identity of authors, the time frame of certain events being written, etc

The issue I see are we sure the "original text" is the original and not simply the oldest version we have? Also, are we certain nothing was added to them by the men who wrote them? We already have proof of previous additions.

To your third point, I can't point to one single defining moment. I can say some of my previous issues with religion were more so related to being raised in the cult that calls themselves Pentecostals
 
Last edited:
#2,777
#2,777
Vol8188 said:
Dude, I'm not watching an hour long video that's part of an 8 part series on why the King James Bible is perfect. If you've already seen it, feel free to summarize
Click to expand...
the video I posted should help you with this.
 
#2,778
#2,778
BigO95 said:
the video I posted should help you with this.
Click to expand...

I'm giving you factual evidence that the King James Version has multiple holes and all you're doing is posting an hour long YouTube video about why it's awesome.

Do you believe nothing was added to the king James that shouldn't have been there?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,779
#2,779
Vol8188 said:
To your third point, I can't point to one single defining moment. I can say some of my previous issues with religion were more so related to being raised in the cult that calls themselves Pentecostals
Click to expand...

Dude! Growing up, my parents put the "Holiness" in "Pentecostal Holiness"! I completely understand. I had my years of rejection and wanting NOTHING to do with God or Christianity.

Anyway... It's a blessing to watch your journey.

(PS: I'm not throwing shade on all Pentecostals--just the version of useless, self-righteous legalism in the brand I grew up with.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,780
#2,780
Vol8188 said:
Dude, I'm not watching an hour long video that's part of an 8 part series on why the King James Bible is perfect. If you've already seen it, feel free to summarize
Click to expand...

It summarizes the differences of the different greek text to which our bible translations come from. it also exposes some of the heresies of Westcot and Hort. It explains some of the Catholic influence on the new versions as well and how the Catholics tried to keep the word of God from the English speaking people and out of the hands of the common man.
The Nestles text is indeed a corrupt text.
 
#2,781
#2,781
Orange_Crush said:
Sorry to double up...

If by chance the "go and sin no more" section wasn't original, does its absence change any Christian doctrine?

We're pretty sure it was written down while the players were still alive. If you haven't read it "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" is a pretty interesting read.

Not sure why the line about Him sweating blood is in dispute, or prayer.

I'd take eye witness testimony over a lack of it. In any event, it seems those that witnessed it, as well as the 40 days after, were certain enough to die for their witness.

Why wouldn't the "give unto Caesar" teaching fit the narrative of someone who said their Kingdom is Spiritual and not Physical? For the guy who said that carnality and materialism was to be exchanged for spiritual discipleship?

Especially considering the later teaching by his disciples to respect earthly governing authorities so as not to undermine the ministry?

If you're discounting verses based on personal preference or sensibilities, I'm not sure this will help, but Jesus talked more about Hell than heaven, and seemed to think it was a real place where the eternal soul was thrown, and where there was consciousness and gnashing of teeth.

Call it fear-mongering. Jesus said it was something to be feared more than physical suffering or physical death.

If it were "known" that many things were added, we'd all, well, "KNOW" that they were added as opposed to debating whether those few things were added. We debate it--i.e. some suspect it--because there are so many different manuscripts to compare.

The very thing that makes you doubt authenticity should (as I see it) help establish the gross authenticity.
Click to expand...

My argument isn't that it changes the doctrine. My argument is that it creates a Pandora's box. If you can show some things were added, it really makes a literal word of god view of the text a lot more difficult to justify.

You mentioned the sweating blood part specifically, here's the wiki page to it. Essentially it just isn't in the oldest versions of the text that are available.

Luke 22:43–44 - Wikipedia
 
#2,782
#2,782
Vol8188 said:
I'm giving you factual evidence that the King James Version has multiple holes and all you're doing is posting an hour long YouTube video about why it's awesome.

Do you believe nothing was added to the king James that shouldn't have been there?
Click to expand...

I believe that it is indeed the perfect preserved word of God.
 
#2,783
#2,783
Orange_Crush said:
Dude! Growing up, my parents put the "Holiness" in "Pentecostal Holiness"! I completely understand. I had my years of rejection and wanting NOTHING to do with God or Christianity.

Anyway... It's a blessing to watch your journey.

(PS: I'm not throwing shade on all Pentecostals--just the version of useless, self-righteous legalism in the brand I grew up with.)
Click to expand...

I'm throwing shade their way. Perhaps this isn't all Pentecostals but every service I've been to featured a crazy preacher who would make false prophecies about the people in the congregation. It was creepy. On top of that, "speaking in tongues" wasn't speaking in a made up language as they seem to believe. It was people speaking their own languages to people who spoke foreign tongues, but understanding each other still.
 
#2,784
#2,784
Vol8188 said:
My argument isn't that it changes the doctrine. My argument is that it creates a Pandora's box. If you can show some things were added, it really makes a literal word of god view of the text a lot more difficult to justify.

You mentioned the sweating blood part specifically, here's the wiki page to it. Essentially it just isn't in the oldest versions of the text that are available.

Luke 22:43–44 - Wikipedia
Click to expand...

I certainly would not trust Wikipedia as a resource for my bible doctrine.
 
#2,788
#2,788
BigO95 said:
I certainly don't use you tube to get my doctrine from either although there are some good videos on it.
Click to expand...

You're avoiding the point. The verse I referenced is not in the older manuscripts, but is in the KJV. So can you simply admit what the rest of American already understands:

The King James Bible is not even close to perfect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,791
#2,791
Vol8188 said:
Why are they faulty?

More importantly which text is not faulty?
Click to expand...

Study the received text from which the KJV was translated from and you will find your answer. watch the video I posted and you will find out why the text you are studying cannot be trusted.
 
Last edited:
#2,798
#2,798
BigO95 said:
Study the received text from which the KJV was translated from and you will find your answer. watch the video I posted and you will find out why the text you are studying cannot be trusted.
Click to expand...

Or you could simply state it. But why would those versions of Mark or any other account, be more creditable than older versions?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top