Was Paul a self proclaimed/false Apostle? (praying, sin, Holy Ghost)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Rev 22:18-19 "I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues which are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katzpur
Well, as I said before, I don't think the Bible is perfect. It's definitely not complete. Heck, we can find references to "books" and "epistles" in the Bible that are mentioned by name and that evidently were considered scripture at one time but which aren't in our Bibles today. Anybody who had studied the development of the Christian canon over the years knows better than to think it has always existed in the form in which we have it today. The canon of the 2nd century is vastly different than the canon of the 15th century. I look to the Bible as an important source of information as to what God has revealed to mankind and what He wants us to know. I don't stress out over what it's not.
LOL. Well, I'm sure most people would agree with you about that.
You do realize Revelation was a LETTER. There was no "book" around at that time.
Luther, the guy that started the Protestant Reformation, didnt even want Revelation in the scriptures. Without Luther you would still be a part of the Catholic church.
Have you checked out the guy named Muhammad 1,000 years later? Check out what he started.
The Jesus movement simply met the good fortune of having the eventual backing of an empire that went on to shape the empires (Spain, France, England) that went on conquer much of the rest of the world and push the Jesus religion on them. That's how you keep such an itinerant preacher relevant.
Nah....You build religions on thunder-bolt throwing gods and fear, not on a JEWISH carpenter who says he came to save the world. The Restoration of All Things (basically, a big fat reset button) clears up a lot of the oddities in the Bible for me.
The people that were there when Jesus showed up knew they had something, or rather HE had something. They were going to run with this new power (as was predicted) and poison it and blend it in with a big heaping of paganism and scare the hel** out of people, and it works, because the people on this planet have some kind of built-in wiring that "knows" something is out there. It is very unlike the animal kingdom. It can be used and abused in the most horrendous ways.
Jesus said LOVE your enemies. Not a single church has done that in 2000 years. It went the direction the disciples said it would. The whor* has used it's power and has ridden the political machine, loving every minute of it. I believe that this is all happening for a reason. It won't be cleared up for anybody still in the system, though.
He concludeth ALL in unbelief (so he may have MERCY on all). NOBODY truly believes, do they? (People SAY they believe, but the fruit of religion shows otherwise)
Anyhow, I said MANY itinerant preachers. Mohammad is really the only other one that I know of, and if what the SDA church says about him is true(shrug), then I suspect some strange things going on behind him. The Muslim religion has a LOT of strange similarities to the Catholic church; it's rituals and beliefs. And, the myths and legend of old are wound up in ALL religions. So, I believe there is something more going on here than we realize.
To wrap this all up, I think Jesus was who they said he was and that he rose from the dead. I don't think that is any harder to believe than humanity rising from nothing, or the miracle of birth. Something had to have given life in the universe, at least SOME energy. Did Jesus seriously have control over those things? Was he really divine? Is there something out there that is going to raise us all back up? If it can create life it certainly can re-create us.
Last edited by herefornow; 05-28-2010 at 06:54 PM..
Okay, well, here's what I mean... In 1740, a list of the canonical books compiled in Rome just prior to 200 A.D. was discovered in the Ambrosian Libary in Milan, Italy. Missing from the accepted canon in 200 A.D. were Hebrews, James, 1 Peter and 2 Peter. Only two of John's letters were considered canonical, not three, but we don't know for sure which two. The Apocalypse of Peter and the Wisdom of Solomon, however, were included.
Eusebius of Caesara, one of the most notable Church historians to have ever lived, described (in about 300 A.D.) a canon which included only twenty-seven of the books in today's New Testament. Hebrews, James, and 2 Peter where described as questionable, as were Jude and Revelation. In the fourth century, St. Gregory of Nazianzus continued to reject Revelation and states, "You have all. If there is any any besides these, it is not among the genuine [books]." The canon he set forth was ratified some three centuries later.
The Greek Codex Claromontanus, one of the most significant New Testament manuscripts, contains a list of the canonical books of the fourth century. (The manuscript itself originates in the sixth century, however most scholars believe that the actual list dates back to the Alexandrian Church from two centuries earlier.) That list did not exclude Philippians, 1 and 2 Thessalonians or Hebrews. But guess what? It does include the Epistle of Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas.
Other books that are mentioned by name in today's Bibles cannot be found there at all. One example is Paul's epistle to the Laodiceans. Why was it less authoritative than his other epistles? It's mentioned in Colossians 4:16. Obviously, it was considered authoritative at the time it was written. Paul also wrote an additional epistle to the Ephesians and another to the Corinthians. When did his "apostolic authorship" come into question? Jude, too, wrote another epistle. What reason is there to believe it was so unreliable as to have been intentionally omitted from the today's canon? Or maybe it was just lost.
If we go to the Old Testament, there are even more books that are missing. These were written by "Samuel the seer," "Nathan the prophet," "Shemaiah the prophet" and others. 2 Chronicles mentions many of these by name. Why haven't we gotten rid of 2 Chronicles by now, since it references so many prophets whose work was apparently not the word of God after all?
So, no, I don't believe the Bible is either complete or perfect. I think any legitimate Bible scholar would attest to that. Don't misunderstand me. I believe the Bible to be the word of God and I value it highly. I just recognize that it was transcribed, translated and compiled by human beings, and human beings are fallible. That shouldn't come as much of a surprise to anybody.
Why don't you answer my question? What do you think Rev 22:18-19 means? What book do you think it's referring to?
Revelation. I thought you understood what I was saying......If John wrote that in his LETTER then I guess that means he was talking about that letter, as there was no BOOK written at that time. The scriptures were not in a book. The letters that had been written were all over the place.
If somebody ADDED that part into his letter (and they would have to have, really, as it couldn't have said "in this book"), well, I guess they will answer for that, if that is what you mean.
Revelation. I thought you understood what I was saying......If John wrote that in his LETTER then I guess that means he was talking about that letter, as there was no BOOK written at that time. The scriptures were not in a book. The letters that had been written were all over the place.
If somebody ADDED that part into his letter (and they would have to have, really, as it couldn't have said "in this book"), well, I guess they will answer for that, if that is what you mean.
I understand that it's a letter, but this same warning is given in Deut. 4: 2, Prov. 30: 6, 2 John 1:9-11. God has never allowed men to change his message (Gal 1:6-9)
I understand that it's a letter, but this same warning is given in Deut. 4: 2, Prov. 30: 6, 2 John 1:9-11. God has never allowed men to change his message (Gal 1:6-9)
He most certainly has! That is why we are in BABYLON (confusion). And you might want to re-read what meerkat2 has been trying to say.
I LOVE reading the Bible. I have the Good News version, which is pretty good. And I keep the KJV around, still. But, there are most definitely some fouled up things going on. It is just that simple. The versions have many contradictions in them and info that just DOESN'T add up.
You already know my stance on hell, I guess. That was an Old English/Germanic word that just meant to cover. It truly is sad what the churches have done to the people. It is ridiculous. It has happened before (Jews) and it has happened again (Christians).
The FRUITS of religion testify to this!
And, Galations 1 6-9 has most definitely happened. The GOOD NEWS was tainted the moment it left the gate. You can find SCRIPTURE that says so! Those MEN that have done this (not believing in the TRUE power of God) will answer for it!
Last edited by herefornow; 05-28-2010 at 07:26 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I thought you understood what I was saying......If John wrote that in his LETTER then I guess that means he was talking about that letter, as there was no BOOK written at that time. The scriptures were not in a book. The letters that had been written were all over the place. 
