Matthew 24:35
QuoteHeaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
Mark 13:31
QuoteHeaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
Luke 21:33
QuoteHeaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.
If Heaven is to "pass away", what does that mean for all those Christians who are expecting to live eternally - in Heaven? How can Heaven be eternal if God says it will cease to exist sometime in the inderterminate future? Where will the saved spend eternity, if not in Heaven?
Notice also that the Bible says nothing at all about Hell ever passing away, which means infinite torture for the unsaved, but eternal bliss in Heaven will not be available to the saved.
Why are you curious, about Christian theology, that even Christians don't agree about?
We don't even agree on what "forever" means.
Don't be silly....heaven is not "heaven". Heaven is the clouds above us....that is where god peeks at us from as told in the old book. This is he shows us his face...heaven is not "heaven".....no, no,no,no....HEAVEN is the real heaven and it lasts forever and day....so be it.....
silly atheist.
Didn't Jews believe in the multiple levels of the heavens or something?
@Baruch, do you have any light to shine on this, given you're probably the only one here who can read these scriptures in their original languages?
Quote from: Blackleaf on March 07, 2019, 11:49:28 PM
Didn't Jews believe in the multiple levels of the heavens or something? @Baruch, do you have any light to shine on this, given you're probably the only one here who can read these scriptures in their original languages?
Yes, this was a common belief. 3 heavens or maybe 7 heavens depending. Apostle Paul talks about 3 heavens. Kabbalists of 2000 years ago have been mentioned in passing. But it didn't get published much (in manuscript) until 1000 years ago.
So is this some intellectual exercise? No, it was kabbalah aka gnosticism aka shamanism. Which may or may not have been assisted by pharmaceuticals. The origins of this are very ancient indeed. The term is ambiguous in the Hebrew, starting with the first verse of Genesis. Heavens aka "Shamayim", not Heaven. What is called a collective noun. There are countable nouns like "dog", there are mass nouns like "water". A mass noun is associated with ambiguous continuous quantity. In Hebrew, "water" aka "mayim" is always plural just like "heaven". So proper translation is always "waters" never "water". A collective noun is like a mass noun, but for a discrete plurality. For example "crowd" refers to more than one, but doesn't tell you how many. "crowds" is doubly plural. Poetically, "heavens" and "waters" are mutually suggestive. Because of course we get precipitation out of the sky.
Paul says in 2 Corinthians 12:2, "I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knows;) such as one caught up to the third heaven."
Daniel says in Daniel 10:7-9, "I, Daniel, was the only one who saw the vision; those who were with me did not see it, but such terror overwhelmed them that they fled and hid themselves. So I was left alone, gazing at this great vision; I had no strength left, my face turned deathly pale and I was helpless. Then I heard him speaking, and as I listened to him, I fell into a deep sleep, my face to the ground."
We are hearing "trance" described. Which has been around since the Stone Age. In early Kabbalah, Genesis and Ezekiel were taken as objects of contemplation while in trance. People trying to re-experience what it was like to be Moses or Ezekiel. The Genesis contemplation was called "the way of beginnings" and the Ezekiel contemplation was called "the way of the chariot". The courts of Egypt and Babylon had professional dream interpreters.
"The Talmud recounts how four scholars, Rabbi Akiva, Ben Zoma, Ben Azzai and Elisha ben Avuya entered the PaRDeS, meaning that together they delved into the most hidden secrets of the Torah. As a result, Ben Azzai lost his life, Ben Zoma lost his mind and Elisha ben Avuya lost his faith. Of the four scholars, only Rabbi Akiva emerged unscathed." But this is partisan, Rabbi Elisha ben Avuya is like Jesus or Paul, he was antinomian. Avuya means "G-d is my father". Elisha vs Jesus matched Elijah vs John the Baptist. Rabbi Akiva endorsed the false messiah Bar Kochbah "Son of a star" during the third revolt of the Jews against the Romans (Jerusalem was destroyed in the first revolt). The Talmud is filled with trans-Biblical stories, called Midrashim, though Orthodox Jews concern themselves with only the legalistic discussions. These stories however were grist for the Kabbalist mill.
The Gospel of Mary is a story about such a seance, by the Disciples. They have experienced a spiritual Jesus, not a flesh and blood one. And Mary Magdalene is the most adept. Paul on the road to Damascus, experienced a spiritual Jesus too, in a vision that left him temporarily blind (Sun trance?). These were Hellenistic Jews, Greek speakers rather than Hebrew speakers. Pro-Greco-Roman often, as Paul was, and anti-Persian. The Hebrew-Aramaic Jews were anti-Greco-Roman, and pro-Persian
Complicated stories of divine cosmology go back to Egypt and Babylonia ... particularly the Egyptian "Book of the Dead". The more recent (1000 years ago) Kabbalah theology involves 10 heavens (the sephirot). The sephirot are connected together by the 22 letters of Hebrew, aka the Logos of John's Gospel. The figure of the sephirot makes up the "Tree of Life" from Genesis, or the "Primordial Adam" aka Jesus. Seems to me that this method of trance goes back 2000 years at least, because this is partly where the Gospels and theology of the Epistles arose from. And need we even mention the Dead Sea Scrolls? There you have an entire community of kohanim/leviim in exile from the Temple, who are engaged in "orthodox" aka "non-hellenistic" Kabbalah.
Recent Jewish review of Dead Sea Scrolls scholarship ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92hyhBXLaWE
Catholic control of them, and casuistry to justify Catholic dogma, has spread a lot of nonsense.
If you can imagine that there were smaller Hellenistic gnostic groups in Antioch, Damascus and Alexandria, then you can imagine what the production of the New Testament books was like.
The general reason for the burial of the scrolls, was because of wear, and sacredness of the word of G-d. This still applies to Torah scrolls. The other great deposit of Jewish writings, are from the Cairo Genizah ... the Medieval ritual deposit of holy writings in the attic of the oldest synagogue in Cairo.
Here is the Gentile version of the Dead Sea Scrolls ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvkWOsxi-u8
Which is also good stuff, but secular.
Audiobook Gospel of Mary ... not very long ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af2XbRRY2bQ
Of course there are many other gnostic writings, such as the Gospel of Thomas, that the Church disputes, to its disgrace.
A documentary on Kabbalah ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CyQQ4xU8Pik
Did I mention I am a student of Kabbalah and of the Book of the Dead, and the un-canonical Gospels? I have mentioned it years ago.
Quote from: Baruch on March 08, 2019, 02:34:08 AM
Yes, this was a common belief. 3 heavens or maybe 7 heavens depending. Apostle Paul talks about 3 heavens. Kabbalists of 2000 years ago have been mentioned in passing. But it didn't get published much (in manuscript) until 1000 years ago.
So is this some intellectual exercise? No, it was kabbalah aka gnosticism aka shamanism. Which may or may not have been assisted by pharmaceuticals. The origins of this are very ancient indeed. The term is ambiguous in the Hebrew, starting with the first verse of Genesis. Heavens aka "Shamayim", not Heaven. What is called a collective noun. There are countable nouns like "dog", there are mass nouns like "water". A mass noun is associated with ambiguous continuous quantity. In Hebrew, "water" aka "mayim" is always plural just like "heaven". So proper translation is always "waters" never "water". A collective noun is like a mass noun, but for a discrete plurality. For example "crowd" refers to more than one, but doesn't tell you how many. "crowds" is doubly plural. Poetically, "heavens" and "waters" are mutually suggestive. Because of course we get precipitation out of the sky.
Paul says in 2 Corinthians 12:2, "I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knows;) such as one caught up to the third heaven."
Daniel says in Daniel 10:7-9, "I, Daniel, was the only one who saw the vision; those who were with me did not see it, but such terror overwhelmed them that they fled and hid themselves. So I was left alone, gazing at this great vision; I had no strength left, my face turned deathly pale and I was helpless. Then I heard him speaking, and as I listened to him, I fell into a deep sleep, my face to the ground."
We are hearing "trance" described. Which has been around since the Stone Age. In early Kabbalah, Genesis and Ezekiel were taken as objects of contemplation while in trance. People trying to re-experience what it was like to be Moses or Ezekiel. The Genesis contemplation was called "the way of beginnings" and the Ezekiel contemplation was called "the way of the chariot". The courts of Egypt and Babylon had professional dream interpreters.
"The Talmud recounts how four scholars, Rabbi Akiva, Ben Zoma, Ben Azzai and Elisha ben Avuya entered the PaRDeS, meaning that together they delved into the most hidden secrets of the Torah. As a result, Ben Azzai lost his life, Ben Zoma lost his mind and Elisha ben Avuya lost his faith. Of the four scholars, only Rabbi Akiva emerged unscathed." But this is partisan, Rabbi Elisha ben Avuya is like Jesus or Paul, he was antinomian. Avuya means "G-d is my father". Elisha vs Jesus matched Elijah vs John the Baptist. Rabbi Akiva endorsed the false messiah Bar Kochbah "Son of a star" during the third revolt of the Jews against the Romans (Jerusalem was destroyed in the first revolt). The Talmud is filled with trans-Biblical stories, called Midrashim, though Orthodox Jews concern themselves with only the legalistic discussions. These stories however were grist for the Kabbalist mill.
The Gospel of Mary is a story about such a seance, by the Disciples. They have experienced a spiritual Jesus, not a flesh and blood one. And Mary Magdalene is the most adept. Paul on the road to Damascus, experienced a spiritual Jesus too, in a vision that left him temporarily blind (Sun trance?). These were Hellenistic Jews, Greek speakers rather than Hebrew speakers. Pro-Greco-Roman often, as Paul was, and anti-Persian. The Hebrew-Aramaic Jews were anti-Greco-Roman, and pro-Persian
Complicated stories of divine cosmology go back to Egypt and Babylonia ... particularly the Egyptian "Book of the Dead". The more recent (1000 years ago) Kabbalah theology involves 10 heavens (the sephirot). The sephirot are connected together by the 22 letters of Hebrew, aka the Logos of John's Gospel. The figure of the sephirot makes up the "Tree of Life" from Genesis, or the "Primordial Adam" aka Jesus. Seems to me that this method of trance goes back 2000 years at least, because this is partly where the Gospels and theology of the Epistles arose from. And need we even mention the Dead Sea Scrolls? There you have an entire community of kohanim/leviim in exile from the Temple, who are engaged in "orthodox" aka "non-hellenistic" Kabbalah.
So when these passages say the "heavens" will pass away, it is referring to all of the whatever number of heavens there are as a whole? So even the heaven that God lives in will go away? It seems like such an odd thing to promise Heaven as a reward, and then say that God will destroy it like everything else.
Quote from: Unbeliever on March 07, 2019, 08:00:15 PMNotice also that the Bible says nothing at all about Hell ever passing away, which means infinite torture for the unsaved, but eternal bliss in Heaven will not be available to the saved.
If I'm not mistaken, the concept of Hell didn't really exist back then the same way it does now. The Jews referred to the afterlife as Sheol, or "the grave." So to the Christians writing that the "Heavens and the earth will pass away," they were probably including "Hell" as part of the Earth. I think.
Quote from: Blackleaf on March 08, 2019, 11:32:15 AM
So when these passages say the "heavens" will pass away, it is referring to all of the whatever number of heavens there are as a whole? So even the heaven that God lives in will go away? It seems like such an odd thing to promise Heaven as a reward, and then say that God will destroy it like everything else.
Not in Hinduism. Heaven and Hell are the final illusions, as I recently posted under Arik's intro. Also Heaven isn't always up and Hell down ... that was an Aristotelian (Greek) spin on the idea. In the Talmud, Heaven and Hell are the same place, but Heaven is the good neighborhood and Hell is the bad neighborhood. Only appropriate that all Gentiles end up in a ghetto run by Jews ;-)
Quote from: Blackleaf on March 08, 2019, 11:34:56 AM
If I'm not mistaken, the concept of Hell didn't really exist back then the same way it does now. The Jews referred to the afterlife as Sheol, or "the grave." So to the Christians writing that the "Heavens and the earth will pass away," they were probably including "Hell" as part of the Earth. I think.
In the old old Testament ... yes, Sheol = grave or dust. Same afterlife as old Mesopotamia. Only Noah and his wife got the Elysian Fields (aka Dilmun). Not like the afterlife of old Egypt which was quite nice, if you weren't damned first. And afterlife theory had greatly changed in the time 900 BCE to 100 CE. Egyptian and Persian (Zoroastrian) influence, as well as from places farther East.
There never was just one Jewish opinion, or just one Christian opinion anyway. Christians, who were Greco-Roman, called it Hades, not Hell. They were partial converts from Greco-Roman paganism. Christian converts from Egyptian paganism weren't the same. Hell = Viking afterlife ... a cold place. Dante didn't use the word Hell either, he was Italian. He used "inferno". The infernal regions weren't necessarily hot. His long poem reads much like the Hades adventures of Aeneas from Virgil's Aeneid.
So when Revelation 12:7 says "And there was war in heaven" which heaven is being referenced? The clouds above, or heaven the abode of God? Maybe it was like Star Wars?
Quote from: Unbeliever on March 08, 2019, 01:32:40 PM
So when Revelation 12:7 says "And there was war in heaven" which heaven is being referenced? The clouds above, or heaven the abode of God? Maybe it was like Star Wars?
Borrowed from Zoroastrianism. As above, so below ... is an old magical nostrum. So yes, there is a celestial battle between angels and demons. But in Hinduism this is between asuras and devas. The asuras being anti-gods. The devas being gods. But Zoroastrianism reversed that naming, devas are the bad guys. And from the Zoroastrians ... devas become devils.
But the real war is on Earth, between the saved and the damned. See the War Scroll of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Literal supernatural war on Earth, not just in Heaven.
Revelations is a modified Jewish apocalypse, slightly adapted to a Christian Gentile audience.
From 250 BCE, Indian influence extended as far West as Athens and Alexandria ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxJk4KHZxi8
Greek culture was decisive in the further development of Buddhist culture.
One theory of Jesus, is that he was a Jewish Buddhist monk, who retired to Kashmir. His tomb can be seen there (as Isa) even today.
Heaven will pass away, but God is going to create a new heaven and a new earth. The reason is because sin has tainted this creation, but when God creates the new heaven and earth, it will be sinless.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jonathan on April 02, 2019, 10:57:52 PM
Heaven will pass away, but God is going to create a new heaven and a new earth. The reason is because sin has tainted this creation, but when God creates the new heaven and earth, it will be sinless.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Really? His track record is not good--it is piss poor, actually. He has not created anything or anyone yet that is perfect. Or sinless as you put it. In fact he created all the sin that is and he created everything--right?? Your fictional god has screwed up from the start--but since he is fictional, I guess you can write this story anyway you want.
It’s not Gods fault that Satan rebelled and that man sinned.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jonathan on April 02, 2019, 11:32:00 PM
It’s not Gods fault that Satan rebelled and that man sinned.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nope, man's fault We are Satan, humans being dirty Earth angels.
We are Satan like in that we took on his nature. That’s why Christ came, to deliver us from sin and our adamic, sinful nature.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jonathan on April 02, 2019, 11:32:00 PM
It’s not Gods fault that Satan rebelled and that man sinned.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yeah, it is. God created satan and mankind. He created everything else. So, if god is perfect then satan was perfect. If satan was not perfect it is because god wanted it that way---at least to theists. Of course, since your god (and all others) are fiction, one can write whatever they wish about their god.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 02, 2019, 11:32:00 PM
It’s not Gods fault that Satan rebelled and that man sinned.
Then how do you explain Isaiah 45:7?
QuoteI form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
Doesn't sound to me like it's
Satan's fault that evil exists.
Quote from: Mike Cl on April 03, 2019, 09:16:26 AM
Yeah, it is. God created satan and mankind. He created everything else. So, if god is perfect then satan was perfect. If satan was not perfect it is because god wanted it that way---at least to theists. Of course, since your god (and all others) are fiction, one can write whatever they wish about their god.
Exactly ... Satan is perfect ... but both atheists and theists just can't get-with the program. Two left feet at a jitterbug contest.
Eze 28:14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
Eze 28:15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
God created Satan perfect, but He was the originator of rebellion and God cast him out of Heaven.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Um, you do understand that the bible is a preposterous pile of shit, right?
Quote from: Minimalist on April 04, 2019, 01:54:54 AM
Um, you do understand that the bible is a preposterous pile of shit, right?
Um, you do understand that Avengers: Infinity War is a preposterous pile of shit, right?
Do people use Avengers movie for legislation? SJWs will.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 03, 2019, 11:56:06 PM
Eze 28:14 Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire.
Eze 28:15 Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
God created Satan perfect, but He was the originator of rebellion and God cast him out of Heaven.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Your god is like trump. Trump proclaims all kinds of things, extols himself as the best of everything; yet on a daily, if not hourly, basis, proves himself wrong in his boasting. Perfect is perfect--there cannot be imperfection in a perfect thing; it is either perfect or not perfect. I understand your perfect, fictional, god to be not that--perfect. He created all; Earth, humans, angels, satan, the bible, nature, etc--until iniquity showed up--and it did in everything that god created. He fucked up creating humans, eden, his angels, nature, and all else. He has demonstrated time and again that he is not perfect--yet you and your type are so blind that you don't see it and believe those who tell you god is perfect. And even when it is evident what the imperfections were/are, he fucked up the fix. How many times has he destroyed mankind? And all because he is so inept he cannot get it right no matter how many tries he has.
There's no heaven or hell or satan or sin or anything else. These are control mechanisms meant to keep the dolts in line.
One does have to admit that it has been a successful scam for a very long time.
Quote from: Minimalist on April 04, 2019, 11:57:13 AM
There's no heaven or hell or satan or sin or anything else. These are control mechanisms meant to keep the dolts in line.
One does have to admit that it has been a successful scam for a very long time.
We are all dolts ... except moi' ;-)
God is real, and He has promised to reveal Himself to every individual. Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, The time will come that every person will face the reality of God, and will make a conscience choice as to whether to accept him or not. Don’t make the wrong choice.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jonathan on April 04, 2019, 04:27:02 PM
God is real, and He has promised to reveal Himself to every individual.
As long as he doesn't reveal himself to little kids, that's fine.
QuoteThe time will come that every person will face the reality of God, and will make a conscience choice as to whether to accept him or not. Don’t make the wrong choice.
Mitchel: "Nothing yet, you?"
Daniel: "Drawing a blank...little thirsty."
Mitchel: "That doesn't count.
Daniel: "No, it doesn't"
No offense intended, but wouldn’t it be something if God is real, and He cares about you?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jonathan on April 04, 2019, 04:50:16 PM
No offense intended, but wouldn’t it be something if God is real, and He cares about you?
Sounds like quite the fantasy. Someone should get right on the novelization.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 04, 2019, 04:50:16 PM
No offense intended, but wouldn’t it be something if God is real, and He cares about you?
Does your God care about all those millions of children dying of horrible cancers and other terrible diseases?
Quote from: Hydra009 on April 04, 2019, 04:53:21 PM
Sounds like quite the fantasy. Someone should get right on the novelization.
they already have--it's call the bible.
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 04, 2019, 04:59:56 PM
Does your God care about all those millions of children dying of horrible cancers and other terrible diseases?
Shit no. Keep it up, he will enjoy frying you forever too ;-)
Reality is sado-masochist. All other opinions derive from delusion or being high.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 04, 2019, 04:27:02 PM
God is real, and He has promised to reveal Himself to every individual. Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, The time will come that every person will face the reality of God, and will make a conscience choice as to whether to accept him or not. Don’t make the wrong choice.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you haven't met G-d face to face yet ... keep looking. G-d is right in front of you.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 04, 2019, 04:50:16 PM
No offense intended, but wouldn’t it be something if God is real, and He cares about you?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I am a theist. The Book of Job says ... no, G-d doesn't care. Jesus shows the same thing.
I have met God, He is real, and He will communicate with you too, just ask him to reveal himself to you, but you have to be brave :/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jonathan on April 04, 2019, 07:01:14 PM
I have met God, He is real, and He will communicate with you too, just ask him to reveal himself to you, but you have to be brave :/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I have too. As all humans are the image of G-d, you meet G-d indirectly every day. Even meeting yourself in the mirror while shaving. I am an image of G-d, communicating with you now (as you are doing the same with me). And even if G-d doesn't care, I do.
That’s true, we are made in His image. But God also reveals Himself to us.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jonathan on April 04, 2019, 07:36:39 PM
That’s true, we are made in His image. But God also reveals Himself to us.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
G-d should keep his trench coat on, or only do that at adult bookstores ;-)
Quote from: Jonathan on April 04, 2019, 07:01:14 PM
I have met God, He is real, and He will communicate with you too, just ask him to reveal himself to you, but you have to be brave :/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Brave? Really? How about a little psychotic? Or a little stoned? Or a little crazy? However, if your fictional god could manifest itself in front of me, I ask why he is such an evil bastard!
Quote from: Mike Cl on April 04, 2019, 08:10:48 PM
Brave? Really? How about a little psychotic? Or a little stoned? Or a little crazy? However, if your fictional god could manifest itself in front of me, I ask why he is such an evil bastard!
If I were G-d and any human appeared to me, and talked to me that way ... I would say "Takes one to know one!" ... snare drum sound.
Quote from: Baruch on April 04, 2019, 08:12:16 PM
If I were G-d and any human appeared to me, and talked to me that way ... I would say "Takes one to know one!" ... snare drum sound.
but then you are much more clever than I.
He is patient, and He is kind, and he will let us bash our heads against the wall until we are tired of it, but at the right moment, He will speak to our hearts. Even if we doubt Him, He is faithful.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Mike Cl on April 04, 2019, 08:13:28 PM
but then you are much more clever than I.
No, better sense of humor ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on April 05, 2019, 02:40:10 AM
No, better sense of humor ;-)
Too often you confuse snide remarks with humor.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 05, 2019, 01:12:42 AM
He is patient, and He is kind, and he will let us bash our heads against the wall until we are tired of it, but at the right moment, He will speak to our hearts. Even if we doubt Him, He is faithful.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That statement is just too stupid to comment on.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 04, 2019, 07:36:39 PM
That’s true, we are made in His image. But God also reveals Himself to us.
Some image!
(https://static1.squarespace.com/static/564792f7e4b0389db09584f4/5c219840032be478967850f6/5c2198f94d7a9c6cf87f6a4c/1545705722648/Trump-Supporter-720.jpg)
Quote from: Jonathan on April 02, 2019, 11:32:00 PM
It’s not Gods fault that Satan rebelled and that man sinned.
I'm going to infer from this that you believe that free will is an excuse for the problem of evil. So assuming God's creation does have free will, which is a big assumption, then what you're saying is that evil is a natural consequence of free will. Man had free will, they sinned. Angels had free will, Satan and other angels sinned. So what about God? Does he have free will? If so, then doesn't that make him capable of evil? What makes you so sure that he is the exception to the rule?
Actually, if you read the Bible, God does a lot of things we would call evil if anyone other than him did it. But because God is the one who gets to define what is sin and what isn't, of course he's going to be good by his own standards. Most people are good by their own standards. So what makes you think your God isn't evil?
Then there are the problems omniscience and omnipotence throw into the system. If free will exists, and God has these omni traits, then he is the only one with free will. As the prime mover, with complete knowledge of the consequences of his design, then the fall of man and the fall of Satan were both part of his design. God knew every single detail about every single possible universe, and he chose this one. So logically speaking, it was his fault that sin existed. He could have chosen a universe where Adam didn't go for the tree, or where no Satans existed to tempt others, but he didn't. He created this world with the plan of making every single human being dependent on him. He offered a way to be forgiven for not living up to his impossible standards, but only if we kiss his ass enough. He's jealous, he's wrathful, he's petty, and you think he's the good guy?
Quote from: Mike Cl on April 05, 2019, 09:21:48 AM
That statement is just too stupid to comment on.
And yet, you did anyway? LOL
Quote from: Blackleaf on April 05, 2019, 11:40:25 AM
So what about God? Does he have free will?
If God is omniscient, then he cannot have free will:
If God is omniscient, then he has always known everything he would ever do and everything he would not do. So he can't change a thing about what he's always known he would do. He can never do anything that he's always known he would not do.
So either he has free will or his omniscience is very much limited, which would mean he is not omniscient.
Quote from: Minimalist on April 05, 2019, 11:16:08 AM
Some image!
(https://static1.squarespace.com/static/564792f7e4b0389db09584f4/5c219840032be478967850f6/5c2198f94d7a9c6cf87f6a4c/1545705722648/Trump-Supporter-720.jpg)
Please show a Democrat carrying a Russian flag, or some other communist emblem.
Quote from: Mike Cl on April 05, 2019, 09:20:29 AM
Too often you confuse snide remarks with humor.
Snidely Whiplash was my ancestor ;-)
There are a lot of people here, and everywhere, who take themselves too seriously.
Actually, God has set up this world as it is. He did know that man would fall, but He also had a plan to save man before He even made the earth; Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Gods plan included Jesus dying on the cross to save fallen man. God is using the unique conditions that now exist upon earth to get Himself a companion. He doesn’t want a companion that is forced to serve Him, but He has arranged things so that we have a choice. We choose whether to accept Jesus as our personal Savior, or to reject Him. It’s up to us. Same as our own companions, we romance them, but they choose whether to accept us or not, so it is between us and God.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jonathan on April 06, 2019, 12:33:37 AM
Actually, God has set up this world as it is. He did know that man would fall, but He also had a plan to save man before He even made the earth; Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Gods plan included Jesus dying on the cross to save fallen man. God is using the unique conditions that now exist upon earth to get Himself a companion. He doesn’t want a companion that is forced to serve Him, but He has arranged things so that we have a choice. We choose whether to accept Jesus as our personal Savior, or to reject Him. It’s up to us. Same as our own companions, we romance them, but they choose whether to accept us or not, so it is between us and God.
You're contradicting yourself. First, you said that it wasn't God's fault that man fell, and now you're saying that God planned it. Which is it? As I said before, if God had complete knowledge of every possible universe he could have created, then the fall of man was the result of God's choice, not Adam's.
The lengths Christians go through to try to romanticize the fucked up story of the Bible is astonishing. God didn't give us a choice. He gave us an ultimatum. Either worship him or be tortured in Hell for all of eternity. What you're saying would be like if a thief held someone at gun point and said, "Give me your wallet, or I'll shoot!" Then when the cops arrest him, he says, "I didn't make them give me their wallet. I gave them a choice to give it to me or reject my offer." It's bullshit. There's nothing romantic about God's plan of salvation. He created imperfect beings, blamed them for being imperfect, forced them to pointlessly kill animals on a regular basis to appease God's bloodlust, sent his son to be tortured and killed to appease his bloodlust, and said that the only way to escape eternal torture in Hell is to believe in him while he plays hide-and-seek, all the while demanding everyone to tell him how perfect and wonderful he is. If the God of the Bible exists, he is the most evil being who has ever or could ever exist.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 06, 2019, 12:33:37 AM
Actually, God has set up this world as it is. He did know that man would fall, but He also had a plan to save man before He even made the earth; Rev 13:8 And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Gods plan included Jesus dying on the cross to save fallen man. God is using the unique conditions that now exist upon earth to get Himself a companion. He doesn’t want a companion that is forced to serve Him, but He has arranged things so that we have a choice. We choose whether to accept Jesus as our personal Savior, or to reject Him. It’s up to us. Same as our own companions, we romance them, but they choose whether to accept us or not, so it is between us and God.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Wrong verbal tense. Not "as it is" but "as it is becoming". The act of Creation isn't a one time thing, but an ongoing thing. But even so, this is unfair to G-d. G-d delegated free will. So Creation is a joint activity, not a soul (sarc) activity.
Quote from: Blackleaf on April 06, 2019, 01:26:09 AM
You're contradicting yourself. First, you said that it wasn't God's fault that man fell, and now you're saying that God planned it. Which is it? As I said before, if God had complete knowledge of every possible universe he could have created, then the fall of man was the result of God's choice, not Adam's.
The lengths Christians go through to try to romanticize the fucked up story of the Bible is astonishing. God didn't give us a choice. He gave us an ultimatum. Either worship him or be tortured in Hell for all of eternity. What you're saying would be like if a thief held someone at gun point and said, "Give me your wallet, or I'll shoot!" Then when the cops arrest him, he says, "I didn't make them give me their wallet. I gave them a choice to give it to me or reject my offer." It's bullshit. There's nothing romantic about God's plan of salvation. He created imperfect beings, blamed them for being imperfect, forced them to pointlessly kill animals on a regular basis to appease God's bloodlust, sent his son to be tortured and killed to appease his bloodlust, and said that the only way to escape eternal torture in Hell is to believe in him while he plays hide-and-seek, all the while demanding everyone to tell him how perfect and wonderful he is. If the God of the Bible exists, he is the most evil being who has ever or could ever exist.
Too bad I couldn't 'like' this twice. :))
Classicists don't like the Romantics ... that is true. If one is pure Mozart, one can't stand Beethoven. To be religious at all, one has to be somewhat of a Romantic. This is why I can't imagine Vulcans (from TV) having any religion. They are all IQ, no EQ.
Black leaf, me thinks you are bitter that God exists, and that you are not your own god.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Baruch on April 06, 2019, 09:27:37 AM
Creation is a joint activity,
I had some joint activity this morning, and now I feel much better!
Dark matter seems kind of like God - people claim they have evidence for God's existence, but he's really good at hiding from us. :-D
He is not hiding, you may just not want to see Him
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
At least the Invisible Man left footprints, God doesn't eve do that.
No, but he leaves His handi-work for all to see. Psalm 19:1 The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The heavens declare nothing other than the laws of physics, no God needed.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 06, 2019, 10:29:23 AM
Black leaf, me thinks you are bitter that God exists, and that you are not your own god.
Typical. When in doubt, ignore all your opponent's good points and questions and make baseless assumptions about them and why they don't "get it."
To blame God for evil is to deny ones own culpability. God has created the world as it is and that includes free will for us. He has set before us the way of life, and the way of death. Why did God do it? As I have stated earlier, he is giving everyone a choice. Accept the great salvation He has provided by giving His own Son Jesus, or reject Him and be damned.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote from: Jonathan on April 06, 2019, 02:34:09 PM
He is not hiding, you may just not want to see Him
Oh give me a break. You Christians love to project your own weaknesses onto others. Atheists aren't the ones who see what they want to see. There are theists of many kinds. Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus. They all think they've got the right religion. Christians and Muslims especially love to pretend everyone else knows they worship the right god, and everyone else is too stubbon to accept the truth. In reality, you're the ones who refuse to accept reality. You go to church on a regular basis to be programmed, you mischaracterize people outside your narrow minded belief system so you can dismiss what they say without a thought. You don't even realize how much religion limits your ability to think until you break free of it.
I was a devout believer until a few years ago. Now, I know how you people always respond to that. You're immediately going to assume that I wasn't the right kind of Christian, that I didn't understand it, or something like that. Because the moment you accept that a "true Christian" can become an unbeliever, you accept that you are vulnerable too.
I didn't become an atheist because somebody hurt me. If I was just mad at God, I'd be a misotheist, not an atheist. I didn't become an atheist because I wanted to sin. If I really wanted to sin without consequence, I'd be a Christian and pray for forgiveness afterwards. I became an atheist because I couldn't go on believing in something that was evidently not true.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 06, 2019, 04:02:04 PM
To blame God for evil is to deny ones own culpability. God has created the world as it is and that includes free will for us. He has set before us the way of life, and the way of death. Why did God do it? As I have stated earlier, he is giving everyone a choice. Accept the great salvation He has provided by giving His own Son Jesus, or reject Him and be damned.
Are you going to respond to a single thing we say, or are you just here proselytize? If you're not capable of intelligent debate, please let yourself out.
He said he was just here to have "an honest conversation" but I pointed out that he was lying, he's just here to try to convert us to his stupid cult.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 04, 2019, 04:50:16 PM
wouldn’t it be something if God is real, and He cares about you?
yes it would....but alas.....no evidence of that.....unless you think that piece of toast with the image of Jebus saved that little girl in Kentucky from that awful disease that kills everyone else.....god is GREAT!!!! well at least consistent...saving 1 out of 5,324,895 is pretty good.
Oh...sorry about the delay guys....good bye Johnny boy.
Another one bites the dust?
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 06, 2019, 02:44:44 PM
The heavens declare nothing other than the laws of physics, no God needed.
That is a pagan anthropomorphism. Minus the interesting mythological bits. There is quantitative and qualitative regularity, which under controlled conditions, can be verified by observation or controlled experiment. No laws (that is political aka G-d's holy legislature), no declaration. If you can use poetic language, so can everyone else. Physics is a particular division of regularity that is conventional vs say chemistry.
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 06, 2019, 01:58:15 PM
Dark matter seems kind of like God - people claim they have evidence for God's existence, but he's really good at hiding from us. :-D
The god you expect, is an idol. That is never ever a true G-d. Even in ancient paganism, the idea that Zeus or Hermes might appear among ordinary people, looking like any other human, was a meme.
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 06, 2019, 01:15:07 PM
I had some joint activity this morning, and now I feel much better!
Joint as in "grower" and "smoker". Unless of course they are the same person.
Quote from: Jonathan on April 06, 2019, 04:02:04 PM
To blame God for evil is to deny ones own culpability. God has created the world as it is and that includes free will for us. He has set before us the way of life, and the way of death. Why did God do it? As I have stated earlier, he is giving everyone a choice. Accept the great salvation He has provided by giving His own Son Jesus, or reject Him and be damned.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not true. G-d clearly admits being the source of everything, both good and bad. The theologians simply can't accept scripture, no more than atheists can.
Quote from: Baruch on April 06, 2019, 07:06:00 PM
The god you expect, is an idol. That is never ever a true G-d. Even in ancient paganism, the idea that Zeus or Hermes might appear among ordinary people, looking like any other human, was a meme.
They didn't have memes in those long ago days - we didn't have memes until Dawkins invented them! :-D
Quote from: Baruch on April 06, 2019, 07:08:13 PM
Not true. G-d clearly admits being the source of everything, both good and bad. The theologians simply can't accept scripture, no more than atheists can.
Of course! The Bible doesn't mean what it says, it means exactly what a Christian says it means.
I try to avoid arguments about theistic writings, but sometimes I just can't help mentioning some things.
When I started my career, there was a person who was so religious it would make your head hurt. One day I asked her who Cain and Able married (as there was no mention of any woman other that Eve). She gave me the most evil look I've ever seen. She said God created other women. I told her one would think that such an event would have been mentioned in the bible. She started repeating Genesis from memory as if that answered everything.
We didn't get along very well after that...
My point is that, when you mention contradictory things in the christian texts to literalists, they go completely whacky. It is amusing in a way, but it really gets "some people" nuts (and rightly so). If only they could just make the next step to realize the whole theistic idea is false...
Quote from: Cavebear on April 07, 2019, 04:10:32 AM
I try to avoid arguments about theistic writings, but sometimes I just can't help mentioning some things.
When I started my career, there was a person who was so religious it would make your head hurt. One day I asked her who Cain and Able married (as there was no mention of any woman other that Eve). She gave me the most evil look I've ever seen. She said God created other women. I told her one would think that such an event would have been mentioned in the bible. She started repeating Genesis from memory as if that answered everything.
We didn't get along very well after that...
My point is that, when you mention contradictory things in the christian texts to literalists, they go completely whacky. It is amusing in a way, but it really gets "some people" nuts (and rightly so). If only they could just make the next step to realize the whole theistic idea is false...
Like my coworker, who argued with an Israeli, that the original Bible was in King James English.
Read any political tract ... it is easy to see it is rubbish also, but most people still believe in the superstition of government ;-))
Quote from: Baruch on April 07, 2019, 04:24:36 AM
Like my coworker, who argued with an Israeli, that the original Bible was in King James English.
Read any political tract ... it is easy to see it is rubbish also, but most people still believe in the superstition of government ;-))
OMG! ;) But yes, people ARE that stupid.
But don't try to sneakily switch that to political discussions. Go directly at it.
Quote from: Cavebear on April 07, 2019, 04:36:40 AM
OMG! ;) But yes, people ARE that stupid.
But don't try to sneakily switch that to political discussions. Go directly at it.
I support government, because I support the superstition that it is necessary ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on April 07, 2019, 08:37:40 AM
I support government, because I support the superstition that it is necessary ;-)
Build any roads yourself lately? Or get a few friends to help? There are some things it takes an organized group to do. Tghat's called "gummint"
My favorite anti-gummint situation is some Big Farmer from Iowa who complains about gummint as he cashes a gummint check for not growing corn... Complaining about "wehfare queens" trying to raise 2 kids on $1000 a month.
Quote from: Baruch on April 07, 2019, 04:24:36 AM
Like my coworker, who argued with an Israeli, that the original Bible was in King James English.
Read any political tract ... it is easy to see it is rubbish also, but most people still believe in the superstition of government ;-))
I think this has been attributed to everyone short of King James himself:
"If English was good enough for Jesus when he wrote the Bible it should be good enough for Coke."
- attributed to Michele Bachman, but politifact says it ain't so
"If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it ought to be good enough for the children of Texas."
- Miriam "Ma" Ferguson, former governor of Texas. [This is the most frequently cited one. the same quote is occasionally attributed to her husband who was governor before her, to Texas Governor Pappy O'Daniel, and to all sorts of Texas politicians.]
"If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for you."
-a priest in Little Rock, Arkansas; regarding the teaching of Spanish as a second language in public schools
"If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for me."
- Unattributed Representative speaking to Dr. David Edwards, head of the Joint National Committee on Language.
"If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for my Automation clients."
- Sean Baxter, offical COM programmer of the 2000 Summer Olympics.
"If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for me."
- satirist H. L. Mencken
"If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, then it is good enough for me"
- Dan Quayle (attributed)
Who knows if anyone has actually said it, but it wouldn't surprise me.
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 07, 2019, 05:43:58 PM
I think this has been attributed to everyone short of King James himself:
"If English was good enough for Jesus when he wrote the Bible it should be good enough for Coke."
- attributed to Michele Bachman, but politifact says it ain't so
"If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it ought to be good enough for the children of Texas."
- Miriam "Ma" Ferguson, former governor of Texas. [This is the most frequently cited one. the same quote is occasionally attributed to her husband who was governor before her, to Texas Governor Pappy O'Daniel, and to all sorts of Texas politicians.]
"If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for you."
-a priest in Little Rock, Arkansas; regarding the teaching of Spanish as a second language in public schools
"If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for me."
- Unattributed Representative speaking to Dr. David Edwards, head of the Joint National Committee on Language.
"If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for my Automation clients."
- Sean Baxter, offical COM programmer of the 2000 Summer Olympics.
"If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for me."
- satirist H. L. Mencken
"If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, then it is good enough for me"
- Dan Quayle (attributed)
Who knows if anyone has actually said it, but it wouldn't surprise me.
That is altogether too scary if ANY attribution is real...
I can imagine Mencken saying it, with his tongue in his cheek! But if anyone really believes it? Yeah, scary indeed!
Quote from: Unbeliever on April 07, 2019, 05:57:08 PM
I can imagine Mencken saying it, with his tongue in his cheek! But if anyone really believes it? Yeah, scary indeed!
Yeah, when I saw Mencken's name I was "curious". And I could see Quayle quoting him in turn. LOL! After all, as Yogi Berra once said about a popular club "No one goes there anymore; its too crowded"...
Heaven on earth is utopian fancy.
Nothing lasts forever.
Quote from: Baruch on March 07, 2019, 08:45:37 PM
Why are you curious, about Christian theology, that even Christians don't agree about?
We don't even agree on what "forever" means.
Especially when we realize the Hebrew word Olam often translated forever literally means 'hidden or concealed time.' Our 1884 edition of NW translates this word as "time indefinite) but renders Hebrew adh as forever. Olam can mean forever - it actually refers to any period of time of which the beginning or end is unknown. Since eternal/forever has no end, olam applies since we cannot know the end of forever. But it also applies to other periods of time whose beginning or end is unknown.
Quote from: Unbeliever on March 07, 2019, 08:00:15 PM
Matthew 24:35
Mark 13:31
Luke 21:33
If Heaven is to "pass away", what does that mean for all those Christians who are expecting to live eternally - in Heaven? How can Heaven be eternal if God says it will cease to exist sometime in the inderterminate future? Where will the saved spend eternity, if not in Heaven?
Notice also that the Bible says nothing at all about Hell ever passing away, which means infinite torture for the unsaved, but eternal bliss in Heaven will not be available to the saved.
Excellent point/question. In order to understand what the Bible teaches on any given subject, you would have to study the Bible by subject - in this case the time of existence of heaven and earth.
Before going into that I should mention that most of Jehovah's Witnesses hope to live on planet Earth forever even as Jesus quoted the 37th Psalm (vs.10,11) when he said 'The meek shall inherit the earth" - Matthew 5:5 KJV.
That Psalm goes on the say:
Psalm 37:29 (NW)
The righteous will possess the earth, And they will live forever on it.
The verses you quoted appear to contradict other verses in the Bible that show heaven and earth will remain forever. There are two basic reasons for this.
1. Definitions. For example, heavens can refer to those called 'higher ups' - e.g. governmental authorities. This is a figurative meaning (like sunrise and sunset in English) aka symbolic. When the Bible refers to earth it often means the people on the earth.
2. Literal heaven(s) and earth (singular - see Genesis 1:1) - perish = change. For example, astronomers often refer to the death of the sun - but actually they do not mean the sun will no longer exist but rather that it will no longer be a main sequence star. [Our sun will not go supernova and hence will always exist as a cooling heavenly mass - unless....
Here is one quote by the apostle Paul of the 102nd Psalm here:
Hebrews 1:10-12 (NW)
10 And: “At the beginning, O Lord, you laid the foundations of the earth, and the heavens are the works of your hands. 11 They will perish, but you will remain; and just like a garment, they will all wear out, 12 and you will wrap them up just as a cloak, as a garment, and they will be changed. But you are the same, and your years will never come to an end.â€+
Notice that perish=changed. In what way? "Wrapped up" is a scientific clue concerning the heavens - I am still researching that myself.
Our galaxy will merge with Andromeda in c. 5 billion years - if a fine tuned brown dwarf from Andromeda were to merge with our sun (stellar collisions/mergers increase during galactic mergers/collisions) then our sun will be returned to early main sequence. God could easily fine tune such a merger. In fact, man may be able to do this given we have 5 billion years to do it!
Even further wrapping up with possibly thousands of other galaxies on Milky Way's journey to the Great attractor and still another gravitational 'attractor' beyond that - in the Shapley supercluster - likely involving many trillions of years from now.
Bottom line - Milky Way will perish as to its current state but will actually always exist but in changing form.
Quote from: Gregory on March 05, 2020, 11:19:35 PM
Nothing lasts forever.
Did you realize you are contradicting the law of conservation of matter and energy? [e.g. E=MC^2]
At one time many astronomers thought our universe would eventually collapse on itself - called the "Big Crunch." With the discovery of dark/invisible energy, astro-physicists realize our universe will expand forever. It is interesting that Isaiah 40:22 not only says earth is round, but also that the heavens are being 'stretched out' by God. Verse 26 links the existence of stars to God's dynamic energy (Hebrew plural ohnim = plural forms of God's energy [God is invisible - it is logical to assume some of these forms of energy are invisible). [Is.40:26 also refers to God's power (Hebrew singular koach)].
I'll respond to other posts later back to sleep for me!
Quote from: Newtonian on March 16, 2020, 05:45:14 AM
Especially when we realize the Hebrew word Olam often translated forever literally means 'hidden or concealed time.' Our 1884 edition of NW translates this word as "time indefinite) but renders Hebrew adh as forever. Olam can mean forever - it actually refers to any period of time of which the beginning or end is unknown. Since eternal/forever has no end, olam applies since we cannot know the end of forever. But it also applies to other periods of time whose beginning or end is unknown.
Getting down to brass tacks. Good. The thought that any Bible other than the original languages, is authoritative, is a circus.
Quote from: Newtonian on March 16, 2020, 06:42:35 AM
Did you realize you are contradicting the law of conservation of matter and energy? [e.g. E=MC^2]
At one time many astronomers thought our universe would eventually collapse on itself - called the "Big Crunch." With the discovery of dark/invisible energy, astro-physicists realize our universe will expand forever. It is interesting that Isaiah 40:22 not only says earth is round, but also that the heavens are being 'stretched out' by God. Verse 26 links the existence of stars to God's dynamic energy (Hebrew plural ohnim = plural forms of God's energy [God is invisible - it is logical to assume some of these forms of energy are invisible). [Is.40:26 also refers to God's power (Hebrew singular koach)].
I'll respond to other posts later back to sleep for me!
The current model suggests that the universe will continue to expand, as it has been since the beginning. The expansion has even been accelerating since the beginning, so it's doubtful it will ever stop or slow down. Eventually, all matter will be pulled apart, each particle being so far away that no more interactions will happen. At that point, the universe will essentially be dead and empty. Even if we assume that humans eventually learn to control the universe with technology, the best we could do is delay the inevitable. We can harvest energy from the sun, but when the starts are all gone, the only thing left will be black holes. And if we use black holes as a source of energy (there is actually a theoretical way to get a net positive of energy from one, which is pretty interesting), eventually those will cease to exist too. Based on what we know now, the universe will be around for a very long time, but it will die like everything else.
"God is a little more than everything."
-- e. e. cummings
Said in all seriousness, apparently.
Quote from: Gregory on March 18, 2020, 12:28:40 AM
"God is a little more than everything."
-- e. e. cummings
Said in all seriousness, apparently.
You forgot to lowercase g in G-d.
Quote from: Baruch on March 16, 2020, 06:44:58 AM
Getting down to brass tacks. Good. The thought that any Bible other than the original languages, is authoritative, is a circus.
True - and almost all apparent contradictions in the Bible are due to inaccurate translations. This is true of the eternal existence of our universe.
NW ref. (1984 edition) is better because it is a literal, fresh translation from the original Hebrew and Greek (and Aramaic). Sometimes more than one definition of a word fits the context - we normally footnote important examples of this.
Also, out of context quotes do not help. On topic, Hebrews 1:11 starts with "perish" but the context (Hebrews 1:10-12) uses other Greek words and phrases which modify what is meant by "perish." For example. verse 11 also says "wear out" using the illustration of a garment. Wearing out is one way of describing "entropy" which is a facet of the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Verse 12 says of heaven and earth: "they will be changed." This will happen - though precisely how drastic the changes will be is not stated - but clearly "perish" does involve drastic change. Vs. 12 also refers to "wrapping up" (like a garment and cloak)
What this means involves scientific research. The merger of Andromeda with Milky Way is one example - but exactly how will these two galaxies be "wrapped up?" Certainly these verses invite scientific research (Romans 1:20). In future trillions of years our changed galaxy will be wrapped up with the Shapley Supercluster - but, again, how? Job 38:31-33 invites scientific research into whether our changed galaxy will end up gravitationally bound - and if so - to how many of the galaxies in this supercluster?
Translation is an art, not a science. There are words in the Bible that no modern person knows the true definition of (Hapax Legomenon), not even rabbis.
Poor ole almighty powerful god. Made a atom to the universe......can’t get his own book straight. LOL...What a joke.
Quote from: aitm on March 21, 2020, 06:09:11 PM
Poor ole almighty powerful god. Made a atom to the universe......can’t get his own book straight. LOL...What a joke.
Correct. G-d doesn't speak or write in any language, monkeys do.
Quote from: Baruch on March 21, 2020, 06:04:59 PM
Translation is an art, not a science. There are words in the Bible that no modern person knows the true definition of (Hapax Legomenon), not even rabbis.
ax
language is a legitimate scientific study.
All Bible words are defined in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of KJV in its Hebrew and Greek dictionaries. The more recent BDB (Brown-Driver-Briggs) for Hebrew and Thayer's for Greek are in virtual agreement with Strong's.
Most words in English, Hebrew and Greek have more than one definition - context generally seals which definition is meant by God - sometimes more than one definition fits the context. To respond better I need to know which words you are referring to.
Sometimes two words are used in conjunction - thus we know Psalms 104:5 is referring to the earth lasting forever:
Psalm 104:5
New World Translation of the Holy Scripturesâ€"With References
5 He has founded the earth upon its established places;+
It will not be made to totter to time indefinite, or forever.
Both Olam and adh are used. These Hebrew words overlap in definition as forever. Note, however, that olam literally means hidden or concealed time. Of course, we cannot see the end of forever - therefore olam applies as well.
To bad your impotent god who created the entire universe was ignorant of the language he created..
LOL....what a god.... you
Language is a legitimate "scholarly" study (fixed it for you). Scholarship isn't science. Most people here don't accept scholarship (as epistemology).
I am different. An amateur scholar of comparative religion, languages and other subjects. We can discuss as scholars in a separate thread, but it won't make any impression on the others here. Strongs is a useful resource, but with limitations.
PRDS aka Pardes (Paradise) method of scriptural interpretation, but can apply to other writings as well. This was used by pagan scholars in Alexandria to study the classic pagan works as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardes_(Jewish_exegesis)
This is accepted by scholars, not by scientists (or secular folks). Each level is increasingly theistic.
Peshat - denotation
Remez - connotation
Derash - homily
Sod - mysticism
This was used in a secular form to make up the Deconstruct of texts (and signs) by Derrida.
Surely an Omni potent god could for see the befuddlement..unless he couldn’t. Hmmm.
Quote from: aitm on March 21, 2020, 09:19:50 PM
Surely an Omni potent god could for see the befuddlement..unless he couldn’t. Hmmm.
He didn't even like looking at Adam's and Eve's junk ;-)
As long as fairy tales are accepted “heaven†will exist.
For some, the mere concept is enough.
Quote from: aitm on March 21, 2020, 09:19:50 PM
Surely an Omni potent god could for see the befuddlement..unless he couldn’t. Hmmm.
I assume you mean confusion over which way to translate a specific Hebrew or Greek word. So, which word do you wish to discuss?
Quote from: Newtonian on March 23, 2020, 08:30:48 AM
I assume you mean confusion over which way to translate a specific Hebrew or Greek word. So, which word do you wish to discuss?
All translations are somewhat "wrong". King James Bible isn't "the Bible".
Quote from: Baruch on March 23, 2020, 09:12:52 AM
All translations are somewhat "wrong". King James Bible isn't "the Bible".
Why HOW DARE YOU!!!!
Quote from: Newtonian on March 23, 2020, 08:30:48 AM
I assume you mean confusion over which way to translate ... So, which word do you wish to discuss?
LOL...so...he will tell you what it SHOULD say if it as written to mean what he wants it to say. We used to say Bitches be crazy....but.....
Quote from: Newtonian on March 21, 2020, 05:11:19 PM
NW ref. (1984 edition) is better because it is a literal, fresh translation from the original Hebrew and Greek (and Aramaic). Sometimes more than one definition of a word fits the context - we normally footnote important examples of this.
No, it's not. It may well be a fresh translation of early
copies and early
translations, but it can not possibly be more than that. There are
no original documents, and we have no way of knowing what was included or excluded. Even the earliest copies of copies of copies have transcription problems -- recall the marginal note along Hebrews 1:3 in the
Codex Vaticanus: "ἀμαθÎσÏ,,αÏ,,ε καὶ κακÎ, á¼,,φεÏ, Ï,,ὸν παλαιόν, μὴ μεÏ,,αποίει" ("Knave and fool, leave the old reading and do not change it") â€" scribes were definitely introducing textual changes, either deliberately or accidentally.
Three easy things to avoid:
Church leadership - do as I say aka tyranny
Church membership - do as we say aka tradition or group think
Bible - do as the book says aka bibliolatry
Of course there is the interpretation problem even if you read the Bible for yourself ;-)
As an individualist, I have tended to avoid the above. Though I have had my own interpretation of the Jesus Seminar version of the quotations of Jesus and acts of Jesus. Cross-checked it against John Dominic Crossan's books. And compared that to prior and contemporary religions. The NT is a literary composition (Gospels and Epistles). It is an edited collection of several related Mystery cults, of Jewish origin with Gentile influences (pagan and Indian).
The empirical evidence:
Encounter human experience ... if you find it impersonal you are a non-theist, if you find it personal you are a theist. An anti-theist is someone who is impervious to the irony of being dependent on the existence of "theism". Just as LeVey Satanism (and Protestantism) is dependent on the existence of Roman Catholicism.
Quote from: Baruch on March 23, 2020, 09:12:52 AM
All translations are somewhat "wrong". King James Bible isn't "the Bible".
Certainly that is true - even the NW translation is not infallible!
[Note: I have a sense of humor - there are actually a number of revisions of NW - my favorite Bible translation is the 1984 edition = NW ref]
However, with the glaring exception of the removal of the Divine Name, most translations are in agreement in most verses.
On topic (heaven(s)): the first verse in the Bible varies in Bible translations as to whether heaven should be translated in the singular or the plural. Genesis 1:1 in some translations here:
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/dx/r1/lp-e/1001070105/0
Notice that KJV reads singular "heaven" while NW and AS read plural "heavens." This is especially of interest to me since I am into science and this begs the question as to whether there is more than one universe - some scientists think so btw.
At the moment of your death, you find yourself in Heaven (or Hell). At least it will seem that way, because when you die, your biological clock stops. So even if you lie in the ground for a million years, and people evolve brains as big as prize winning pumpkins, you wake up in heaven with no sense of lost time, but this does not address the question at hand. Does Heaven last forever? I have it on good authority that it does, as long as forever lasts forever, but that second condition is not addressed in the Bible.
Quote from: SGOS on March 25, 2020, 06:24:12 AM
At the moment of your death, you find yourself in Heaven (or Hell). At least it will seem that way, because when you die, your biological clock stops. So even if you lie in the ground for a million years, and people evolve brains as big as prize winning pumpkins, you wake up in heaven with no sense of lost time, but this does not address the question at hand. Does Heaven last forever? I have it on good authority that it does, as long as forever lasts forever, but that second condition is not addressed in the Bible.
So Christian-parochial! Not in Buddhism. Being reincarnated as a god, is worse than being reincarnated as a human. Humans are the only state-of-living where you can reach Nirvana, and stop reincarnating. Gods (and anti-Gods) have very long lives of bliss, because of prior good deeds, but the store of good deeds eventually runs out. In Amida Buddhism, you get reincarnated as a human spirit, in Amida Heaven (multiple heavens) so you have a better chance of learning and practicing Buddhism, so you can reach Nirvana from there (Amida Buddhists are pessimistic about the Kali Yuga we live in now, as far as reaching Nirvana as an Earth-based human)). In Amida Heaven you are basically a monk/nun. In Orthodox Judaism, being in Heaven is basically Yeshiva like in Yentl. You spend eternity studying Jewish law. Great Jews have Moses as their rabbi ;-)
Quote from: Newtonian on March 25, 2020, 01:57:50 AM
Certainly that is true - even the NW translation is not infallible!
[Note: I have a sense of humor - there are actually a number of revisions of NW - my favorite Bible translation is the 1984 edition = NW ref]
However, with the glaring exception of the removal of the Divine Name, most translations are in agreement in most verses.
On topic (heaven(s)): the first verse in the Bible varies in Bible translations as to whether heaven should be translated in the singular or the plural. Genesis 1:1 in some translations here:
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/dx/r1/lp-e/1001070105/0
Notice that KJV reads singular "heaven" while NW and AS read plural "heavens." This is especially of interest to me since I am into science and this begs the question as to whether there is more than one universe - some scientists think so btw.
Apostle Paul refers to a "third heaven" ;-) Popular parlance refers to "7th heaven". In Orthodox Judaism, there is one heaven, but there is better neighborhoods and worser ones. The bad neighborhood is Hell (where most of the Gentiles live forever). Jesus refers to the judged as sheep vs goats. Usually sheep and goats are herded together (they herd better as a team). When they are separated, the good sheep are sheered, and the bad goats are tomorrow's lunch.
Which version of fiction do you prefer with your cereal? "I'll take that one please, it gets rid of the nasty parts that makes milk taste icky while drinking it during breakfast".
Very good sir, version 124 coming up.
I made up a few variations of religion of my own. Most were kind of based on Christianity, because where I lived everyone was Judaeo-Christian, but as the years went by, they became less and less related to my birth religion, as I realized that various aspects of the Christian god were not worthy of worship. Then I took a brief look at other religions, but by that time, I had figured out that all religions were variations of what different people wanted, and of course the big rub, ever since I was a young child, was that there was no credible evidence for any of them.
Now enter the guy that says, "No, no. There is plenty of evidence, the Bible being the actual word of God." But if that is all that one requires, there is evidence for any cockamamie thought you can imagine . In a courtroom, evidence is offered and accepted. Some even approaches the definition of credible, but actual proof never is, and a god worthy of worship should at a bare minimum, offer proof beyond a shadow of doubt. Hell, I'd even settle for credible evidence. But none of the evidence for God that I've seen during my life even rises to the level of "credible." And agreement on the details is sorely lacking.
Some people will settle for a sign from God that he is real. My father told me a lovely story about his personal sign from God. He was fishing in a small brook on a vacation, and he was thinking about God and asked for a sign. There was a brief afternoon thunder shower followed by a rainbow when he hooked a small trout. As he removed the hook, a stream of blood oozed form the trout's gill which reminded him of the blood shed by Jesus on the cross. And there, under a brilliant rainbow while holding the trout in his hand as it expired, he knew that God was real.
I wasn't with him. He told me about it when I was in my early teens. I remember not being impressed, but I could see that my father had been deeply affected. I remember thinking that a lot of this religion stuff sounded pretty damn hokey, highly emotional, and filled with non-sequitur. Although I had never heard the word, "non-sequitur" before. It was only later when I learned they actually had a word for such lazy slap happy thinking.
Every believer makes up their own religion (and language etc), individuality. They then pretend that they share the same religion, group by group. This is how politics works too. Basically we are united by our shared memes, and divided by reality. TDS for example.
I accept people's anecdotal evidence just to be polite and modest. Unless they are potentially misquoting Trump, in which case I ask them for proof (and they often have it). I find paranormal evidence to be interesting but not decisive. Ordinary life is decisive evidence of "life" whatever that may be.
Quote from: Newtonian on March 21, 2020, 05:11:19 PMTrue - and almost all apparent contradictions in the Bible are due to inaccurate translations.
Then compare those translations to the original Bible and show how they are inaccurate.
;)
Quote from: Hydra009 on March 26, 2020, 11:01:57 AM
Then compare those translations to the original Bible and show how they are inaccurate.
;)
Here is a problem with translation ... the old words meant X in the original culture. Usually multiple overlapping meanings. The new words mean Y in the new culture. Usually multiple overlapping meanings. This is why Islam says, the translated Quran isn't the Quran. You have to master Arabic (aka the actual native Arabs are the natural masters of this religion).
This is why scholarly Hebrew survived the move to colloquial Aramaic, to Quranic Arabic, and countless other languages used by the Diaspora. Biblical Hebrew ceased as a colloquial language in the 1st century CE (that is why the rabbis started "chederim" aka elementary schools, which taught Biblical Hebrew by immersion (they start the boys in Leviticus).
Later European yehivot had Yiddish or Ladino as colloquial languages, and even had to teach scholarly Aramaic (Talmud is a commentary on the Five Books of Moses). Israelis think they are speaking Hebrew now, but they have a false sense of confidence. Like Greeks who think they can easily read the NT in the original. Greek has changed in 2000 years. Israeli is an artificial language developed by Jewish geeks (like the invention of movie Klingon).