1 2 3 4 6 Next
Topic: bible inconsistencies/ doesent mesh with the facts?
CowboyGH's photo
Fri 08/15/14 02:45 PM




For example, almost everything Jesus is quoted as saying in the Bible is in the Didache (in many cases word for word) Now the "Xian" version is from around 125 CE; but the original Jewish text is what Naomi taught Ruth from and is much older.


Point being? And it might quite possibly be in the Didache

Didache wikipedia -
The Didache (/ˈdɪdəkiː/; Koine Greek: Διδαχή) or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didachē means "Teaching"[1]) is a brief early Christian treatise, dated by most scholars to the late first or early 2nd century.


See, you prove the point- by claiming the book is solely a Xian text and pretending the original does not exist, you set the table for error. The point is everything he said was already written down centuries before (ex- turn the other cheek) and clearly the orientation is Jewish and not Xian. Once this is understood, the exgetes becomes clearer.


What in the world are you on about my friend? It's not a "Christian" thing. God doesn't see Christian, Catholic, or any other "label" you wish to place on it. People are people that have made different choices, we are all made by God white, black, Christian, other beliefs, ect. The things written in the bible were not written "for" the bible. They are different books and or epistles to certain people for certain specific reasoning that were all gathered into the cannon we call the bible.



The point is everything he said was already written down centuries before (ex- turn the other cheek) and clearly the orientation is Jewish and not Xian.


You are extremely interesting TB. Again the different labels "Christian, Jew, Catholic, ect" are ALL man made. God doesn't see us as a Christian, Catholic, ect. We are people, beings. That's it, the rest are made by ourselves for stereotyping and segregating. The ONLY reason there's a difference between Jews and Christians is that the Jews did not see Jesus as whom he claimed to be, they are still waiting for their savior. So of course some of the "older" text of the "Christian" faith would be in line with them. As it would technically be incorrect, because the Old Testament/covenant is not "Christian". Christianity didn't start till Jesus walked the world in the flesh and was crucified. Before that, there was no "Christ" therefore there was no Christianity. Christianity is PURELY the NewTestament, covenant. The old testament is basically just knowledge of the history.

So more directly in response to what you said, yes the orientation of Christianity is Jew. As mentioned time after time, the ONLY difference between Christians and Jews is that the Jews did/do not see Jesus to have been the promised messiah. So they are still living by the old covenant waiting for their savior. And Christianity is sitting over here having tea with their savior.

TBRich's photo
Fri 08/15/14 02:57 PM




For example, almost everything Jesus is quoted as saying in the Bible is in the Didache (in many cases word for word) Now the "Xian" version is from around 125 CE; but the original Jewish text is what Naomi taught Ruth from and is much older.


Point being? And it might quite possibly be in the Didache

Didache wikipedia -
The Didache (/ˈdɪdəkiː/; Koine Greek: Διδαχή) or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didachē means "Teaching"[1]) is a brief early Christian treatise, dated by most scholars to the late first or early 2nd century.


See, you prove the point- by claiming the book is solely a Xian text and pretending the original does not exist, you set the table for error. The point is everything he said was already written down centuries before (ex- turn the other cheek) and clearly the orientation is Jewish and not Xian. Once this is understood, the exgetes becomes clearer.


What in the world are you on about my friend? It's not a "Christian" thing. God doesn't see Christian, Catholic, or any other "label" you wish to place on it. People are people that have made different choices, we are all made by God white, black, Christian, other beliefs, ect. The things written in the bible were not written "for" the bible. They are different books and or epistles to certain people for certain specific reasoning that were all gathered into the cannon we call the bible.


The title of the thread is bible inconsistencies. I have been demonstrating these as well as the why for. As Spong points out the break between Xian and Jewish orientation took a long time to happen and was based on the incompatibility of the two to fit together- this is demonstrated by Marcione, who composed the first Xian canon; in an later attempt to "reconcile" the Church developed the modern canon to give it legitimacy. The theological inconsistencies ( we don't need to get into the scientific and historical errors) in the Bible are due to attempts to gloss over these incompatibilities.

HOWEVER, while I can point out these errors all day, the medium is not the message (aka Marshal Maculan (sp?). The point should be what is the message?

For example, the Church of the Almighty in China is considered a cult and just killed some people due to their theology. They believe the End of Times is near. Watch/listen to any American "preacher" and one gets basically the same message, from Harold Camping to preachers selling survival food, etc. The Church of the Almighty is not so far out of the mainstream. This is the error of biblical literalism; they miss the spiritual message.

CowboyGH's photo
Fri 08/15/14 03:04 PM





For example, almost everything Jesus is quoted as saying in the Bible is in the Didache (in many cases word for word) Now the "Xian" version is from around 125 CE; but the original Jewish text is what Naomi taught Ruth from and is much older.


Point being? And it might quite possibly be in the Didache

Didache wikipedia -
The Didache (/ˈdɪdəkiː/; Koine Greek: Διδαχή) or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didachē means "Teaching"[1]) is a brief early Christian treatise, dated by most scholars to the late first or early 2nd century.


See, you prove the point- by claiming the book is solely a Xian text and pretending the original does not exist, you set the table for error. The point is everything he said was already written down centuries before (ex- turn the other cheek) and clearly the orientation is Jewish and not Xian. Once this is understood, the exgetes becomes clearer.


What in the world are you on about my friend? It's not a "Christian" thing. God doesn't see Christian, Catholic, or any other "label" you wish to place on it. People are people that have made different choices, we are all made by God white, black, Christian, other beliefs, ect. The things written in the bible were not written "for" the bible. They are different books and or epistles to certain people for certain specific reasoning that were all gathered into the cannon we call the bible.


The title of the thread is bible inconsistencies. I have been demonstrating these as well as the why for. As Spong points out the break between Xian and Jewish orientation took a long time to happen and was based on the incompatibility of the two to fit together- this is demonstrated by Marcione, who composed the first Xian canon; in an later attempt to "reconcile" the Church developed the modern canon to give it legitimacy. The theological inconsistencies ( we don't need to get into the scientific and historical errors) in the Bible are due to attempts to gloss over these incompatibilities.

HOWEVER, while I can point out these errors all day, the medium is not the message (aka Marshal Maculan (sp?). The point should be what is the message?

For example, the Church of the Almighty in China is considered a cult and just killed some people due to their theology. They believe the End of Times is near. Watch/listen to any American "preacher" and one gets basically the same message, from Harold Camping to preachers selling survival food, etc. The Church of the Almighty is not so far out of the mainstream. This is the error of biblical literalism; they miss the spiritual message.



As Spong points out the break between Xian and Jewish orientation took a long time to happen and was based on the incompatibility of the two to fit together


Absolutely right. The Jews have been around forever, Christians only came about when Jesus CHRIST was crucified for us and died for our sins. We follow the new covenant God has made with us, Jews remain in the old covenant because they do not believe the first had been fulfilled as again they did not believe Jesus to be whom he claimed to be.

TBRich's photo
Fri 08/15/14 04:09 PM






For example, almost everything Jesus is quoted as saying in the Bible is in the Didache (in many cases word for word) Now the "Xian" version is from around 125 CE; but the original Jewish text is what Naomi taught Ruth from and is much older.


Point being? And it might quite possibly be in the Didache

Didache wikipedia -
The Didache (/ˈdɪdəkiː/; Koine Greek: Διδαχή) or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles (Didachē means "Teaching"[1]) is a brief early Christian treatise, dated by most scholars to the late first or early 2nd century.


See, you prove the point- by claiming the book is solely a Xian text and pretending the original does not exist, you set the table for error. The point is everything he said was already written down centuries before (ex- turn the other cheek) and clearly the orientation is Jewish and not Xian. Once this is understood, the exgetes becomes clearer.


What in the world are you on about my friend? It's not a "Christian" thing. God doesn't see Christian, Catholic, or any other "label" you wish to place on it. People are people that have made different choices, we are all made by God white, black, Christian, other beliefs, ect. The things written in the bible were not written "for" the bible. They are different books and or epistles to certain people for certain specific reasoning that were all gathered into the cannon we call the bible.


The title of the thread is bible inconsistencies. I have been demonstrating these as well as the why for. As Spong points out the break between Xian and Jewish orientation took a long time to happen and was based on the incompatibility of the two to fit together- this is demonstrated by Marcione, who composed the first Xian canon; in an later attempt to "reconcile" the Church developed the modern canon to give it legitimacy. The theological inconsistencies ( we don't need to get into the scientific and historical errors) in the Bible are due to attempts to gloss over these incompatibilities.

HOWEVER, while I can point out these errors all day, the medium is not the message (aka Marshal Maculan (sp?). The point should be what is the message?

For example, the Church of the Almighty in China is considered a cult and just killed some people due to their theology. They believe the End of Times is near. Watch/listen to any American "preacher" and one gets basically the same message, from Harold Camping to preachers selling survival food, etc. The Church of the Almighty is not so far out of the mainstream. This is the error of biblical literalism; they miss the spiritual message.



As Spong points out the break between Xian and Jewish orientation took a long time to happen and was based on the incompatibility of the two to fit together


Absolutely right. The Jews have been around forever, Christians only came about when Jesus CHRIST was crucified for us and died for our sins. We follow the new covenant God has made with us, Jews remain in the old covenant because they do not believe the first had been fulfilled as again they did not believe Jesus to be whom he claimed to be.


Oy, do you ever discuss anything beyond the minutiae? Or is that the whole of your theology?

no photo
Sat 08/16/14 07:36 AM
Edited by rambill79 on Sat 08/16/14 07:42 AM
tbr-- you keep quoting RELIGIOUS beliefs, and religious peoples works AS BIBLE FACT... why? everyone knows that religion is of man so of course it is wrong right out of the gate. This in no way nullifies the bible. it does, however obscure the facts as presented in the bible., assuming one doesent do thier own research that is... Name a religion and i will chew thier doctrine to shreds. (a big one for me this sunday worship,,, since saturady is the sabbath, and since not following the sabbath day has a death penalty attached to it, .... if they cant even get the sabbath day correct,, they have nothing that i want to hear. That sunday sabbath thing eliminates the credability of all but mabe two churches right out of the gate. ) Doctrine is Not relavent.

CowboyGH's photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:12 AM

tbr-- you keep quoting RELIGIOUS beliefs, and religious peoples works AS BIBLE FACT... why? everyone knows that religion is of man so of course it is wrong right out of the gate. This in no way nullifies the bible. it does, however obscure the facts as presented in the bible., assuming one doesent do thier own research that is... Name a religion and i will chew thier doctrine to shreds. (a big one for me this sunday worship,,, since saturady is the sabbath, and since not following the sabbath day has a death penalty attached to it, .... if they cant even get the sabbath day correct,, they have nothing that i want to hear. That sunday sabbath thing eliminates the credability of all but mabe two churches right out of the gate. ) Doctrine is Not relavent.


What's it matter what specific day the Sabbath is celebrated? And the 7th day adventists and or pentecostals do celebrate their sabbath on Saturday. The scriptures don't say the Sabbath is Saturday or Sunday, just merely says that God made the world in 6 and rested on the 7th blessing it. You think God was using our calender?

And no to the following -

not following the sabbath day has a death penalty attached to it


Unless you're going to tell me you know of a verse from the NEW TESTAMENT claiming this, and if you do I would truly love to see it. Because there was no Christianity before the New Testament, for there was no Christ before the New Testament.

no photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:29 AM
its in the top ten. the sabbath is from sundown saturday until suown sunday. "observe the sabbath and keep it holy.i think its the second commandment. yes there are two or three churches out there that actually practise the sabbath, the jewish faith comes to mind immediatly..., The penalty for any sin is always death, by the way. which is where jesus comes into the pic.

CowboyGH's photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:32 AM

its in the top ten. the sabbath is from sundown saturday until suown sunday. "observe the sabbath and keep it holy.i think its the second commandment. yes there are two or three churches out there that actually practise the sabbath, the jewish faith comes to mind immediatly..., The penalty for any sin is always death, by the way. which is where jesus comes into the pic.


Are you talking about culture or instruction? If you're speaking of culture, it's moot as that culture is no longer in existence, if you're speaking of God instruction please give that verses that state specifically as you said.

no photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:32 AM


tbr-- you keep quoting RELIGIOUS beliefs, and religious peoples works AS BIBLE FACT... why? everyone knows that religion is of man so of course it is wrong right out of the gate. This in no way nullifies the bible. it does, however obscure the facts as presented in the bible., assuming one doesent do thier own research that is... Name a religion and i will chew thier doctrine to shreds. (a big one for me this sunday worship,,, since saturady is the sabbath, and since not following the sabbath day has a death penalty attached to it, .... if they cant even get the sabbath day correct,, they have nothing that i want to hear. That sunday sabbath thing eliminates the credability of all but mabe two churches right out of the gate. ) Doctrine is Not relavent.


What's it matter what specific day the Sabbath is celebrated? And the 7th day adventists and or pentecostals do celebrate their sabbath on Saturday. The scriptures don't say the Sabbath is Saturday or Sunday, just merely says that God made the world in 6 and rested on the 7th blessing it. You think God was using our calender?

And no to the following -

not following the sabbath day has a death penalty attached to it


Unless you're going to tell me you know of a verse from the NEW TESTAMENT claiming this, and if you do I would truly love to see it. Because there was no Christianity before the New Testament, for there was no Christ before the New Testament.
new testament christian huh? u might better read acts.., Jesus observed the sabbath, he also said that the law is in full effect. Gods law never changes, mans law changes daily, like ones socks or underwear.

no photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:34 AM
this whole bit about the old testament being done away with is, you guessed it, another doctrine of man. its still wrong to murder, to rape, to worship other gods, to steal, not to tythe, the biblical food laws are still in effect, ad nauseum.

CowboyGH's photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:36 AM



tbr-- you keep quoting RELIGIOUS beliefs, and religious peoples works AS BIBLE FACT... why? everyone knows that religion is of man so of course it is wrong right out of the gate. This in no way nullifies the bible. it does, however obscure the facts as presented in the bible., assuming one doesent do thier own research that is... Name a religion and i will chew thier doctrine to shreds. (a big one for me this sunday worship,,, since saturady is the sabbath, and since not following the sabbath day has a death penalty attached to it, .... if they cant even get the sabbath day correct,, they have nothing that i want to hear. That sunday sabbath thing eliminates the credability of all but mabe two churches right out of the gate. ) Doctrine is Not relavent.


What's it matter what specific day the Sabbath is celebrated? And the 7th day adventists and or pentecostals do celebrate their sabbath on Saturday. The scriptures don't say the Sabbath is Saturday or Sunday, just merely says that God made the world in 6 and rested on the 7th blessing it. You think God was using our calender?

And no to the following -

not following the sabbath day has a death penalty attached to it


Unless you're going to tell me you know of a verse from the NEW TESTAMENT claiming this, and if you do I would truly love to see it. Because there was no Christianity before the New Testament, for there was no Christ before the New Testament.
new testament christian huh? u might better read acts.., Jesus observed the sabbath, he also said that the law is in full effect. Gods law never changes, mans law changes daily, like ones socks or underwear.


??? Ok please do give the verses that specifically say "Saturday" or "Sunday". And no, the being put to death is no in the new testament. "New Testament Christian"? What in the world is that suppose to mean? There are NO Christians in the old testament, nor any instruction for Christians from the old testament. As again "Christianity" didn't start till Jesus CHRIST walked the face of this Earth and was crucified for us all.

CowboyGH's photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:38 AM

this whole bit about the old testament being done away with is, you guessed it, another doctrine of man. its still wrong to murder, to rape, to worship other gods, to steal, not to tythe, the biblical food laws are still in effect, ad nauseum.


No it's not a document of man my friend lol. But it is still wrong to murder, to rape, to worship other Gods, to steal, and so forth. Jesus has told us all this, everyone of the above mention and more can be found in the New Testament.

Matthew 5:17

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.


John 19:30
30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.

no photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:43 AM
"it is finished".... his crusifiction is finihed. hs earthly life is finished, not the law.

no photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:43 AM
it is in acts, romans, and other places as well. are we now under grace? of course not! thats in romans, chapter 3 i believe. Paul is quite clear that we are still under the law, which is not grevious. the law is for our instruction, for our benefit, and the benefit of our society. step away at your own peril.
as an aside, who killed jesus? it was the senhedrin..,i.e., the religious rulers of the day. Jesus was pissing in thier pond by teaching bible truth, which was cutting into thier money changing action at the temple. he called them a den of thieves. snakes. They observed the sabbath as well, and tried to have him arrested for violating the sabbath because he ate a handful of grain... whic of course is not the intent of the law at all.

CowboyGH's photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:49 AM

"it is finished".... his crusifiction is finihed. hs earthly life is finished, not the law.


But his "life" wasn't finished. His life is eternal. And his death on the cross fulfilled all the remaining prophecies of the old covenant. So even if he was referring to his life, that would then also be referring to the last prophecy of the old covenant.


Luke 24

24 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.

2 And they found the stone rolled away from the sepulchre.

3 And they entered in, and found not the body of the Lord Jesus.

CowboyGH's photo
Sat 08/16/14 08:49 AM

it is in acts, romans, and other places as well. are we now under grace? of course not! thats in romans, chapter 3 i believe. Paul is quite clear that we are still under the law, which is not grevious. the law is for our instruction, for our benefit, and the benefit of our society. step away at your own peril.
as an aside, who killed jesus? it was the senhedrin..,i.e., the religious rulers of the day. Jesus was pissing in thier pond by teaching bible truth, which was cutting into thier money changing action at the temple. he called them a den of thieves. snakes. They observed the sabbath as well, and tried to have him arrested for violating the sabbath because he ate a handful of grain... whic of course is not the intent of the law at all.


Run that by me again please,

Ephesians 2:8

8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God

no photo
Sat 08/16/14 12:04 PM
actually it is romans 6 and 7 where paul covers the law,...

CowboyGH's photo
Sat 08/16/14 12:09 PM
Edited by CowboyGH on Sat 08/16/14 12:10 PM

actually it is romans 6 and 7 where paul covers the law,...


And he only repeats what Jesus has said bout being saved by faith and not by works.

Romans 6

1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life

1 2 3 4 6 Next