YOU BELIEVE IN THE BIBLE DON'T YOU ????

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 2:49 AM GMT
    Well for the purposes of this discussion just pretend you believe in the bible stories OK !!!! Have you heard or read of the story where Jesus was supposed to have healed the Roman Centurians Servant boy? (its in both Matthew and Luke of the bible) According to the story the Centurian came to Jesus and requested that he please heal his beloved servant, the Centurian even suggested that he was unworthy to entertain Jesus in his home, and that Jesus could just speak the word from where he was and that his servant would be healed. Jesus was said to have then turned to those near him and exclaimed that he had never seen such faith before, then turned back to the Centurian and said, let your servant be healed according to your faith, and the story tells that at that moment the servant boy was healed. OK, here is the PROBLEM, christian preachers repeatedly tell this story as an example of the faith their parishioners should have. What they don't tell is that according to custom in those days and according to translations of the words used, its probable that the servant boy was the Centurians young lover. Jesus didn't asked if they were homosexual lovers before he healed the boy. Doesn't this shoot holes in christianity's theory that the bible and God is against homosexuality? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Just for the heck of it I recently did a search (Roman Centurian and his servant lover) both at Google, and Wikipedia, and there are all kinds of professional writings about the probability of this being a homosexual relationship. What do you think !!! is it likely that the Roman Centurian and his Servant were lovers?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 3:27 AM GMT
    themanjesusloved.jpg-

    In the Greek version of this story in Matthew, the word used for the "servant boy" is pais, which is the world use for a "boyfriend" in a same-sex relationship. It doesnt mean "servant boy." But it doesnt necessarily mean that the "boyfriend" was a boy, just like we dont mean that if we say a guy is a boyfriend.

    In Luke, the centurion himself never makes an appearance. Friends are sent to Jesus. The person being healed is referred as by jewish speakers as doulos which means "slave" and pais by non-jewish friends and might mean "servant boy."

    In John, the story is related as a royal official and the "servant boy" becomes his son (uios).

    Why the discrepencies in the stories? Each author was writing for a different audience and purpose.

    Matthew was writing to emphasize Jesus' message that those outside of official Judaism were going to heaven even before the observant jews. Matthew makes this point is several places in his gospel. So he played up the homosexual aspect of the relationship to press the message home that these werent observant jews he was talking about.

    Luke, however, was writing about "god-fearing" gentile...that is, those who were moving to accept the rules of Judaism, if they hadnt already made the full conversion. Therefore, any homosexual relationship between the centurion and the "boy" is being played down.

    John tends to conflate stories (the centurion and boy with the ruler and dying daughter) so as to keep the story focused on the resurrection after death and not let pesky details muddy the message.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 4:00 AM GMT
    The story I really like in the gospels is the one about the women taken in adultery*. That's the story when Jesus says "Let him without sin cast the first stone."

    The interesting factoid about that story is that it wasnt in any of the original gospels, not even John where it now stands. None of the earliest versions of the gospels have that story or anything like it in them. The story was not originally in John or written by John. The style of the story is different as well as the words used from the rest of the Gospel of John . It was written into the Gospel of John at a much later date.

    So is it part of the gospels? Can someone at a later date add material to the scriptures?

    Can I add material to the gospels now?

    *Interesting asides: Where was the man in this adultery? He too should have been stoned to death by Mosaic law. And what was Jesus writing in the dirt during this event?


    Oh another discrepency in the gospels. Mark didnt originally end where it does today. It originally ended 12 verses sooner....when only Mary Magdalene and two other women had visited the empty tomb, saw the angel, and fled and didnt say anything to anybody about it for they were afraid.

    Oops. What kind of an ending is that? The women told nobody. The discipines never knew. Jesus never appeared. WTF? So the final 12 verses were added....again different style and vocabulary give them away as unoriginal....plus they arent in the earlies version of the Gospel of Mark in existence.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 4:28 AM GMT
    As educated Theologists will tell you, reading the modern version of the Bible is like reading a gossip column. One of these days, something I wouldn't mind doing in retirement, it would be nice if a person without bias - an agnostic would do - could actually translate the Bible, not churches or governments with motivation to alter the interpretation. Only then will you read the truth. Until then, we have King James, the Vatican, and a congress of multi-denominations to thank for our modern versions. I think we can all agree, these are the least of people we should entrust our souls.

    For other "WTF"s...just look at the early struggles for text in the church. If I recall correctly, Peter and Thomas both struggled with each others teachings of the faith. If it begins with followers that cant agree, then how can we think it's just as simple as "well it's what I was given to read so it must be true." This is why I'm not a fan of Peter's teachings. He did turn his back on Christ when he saw the wonder for himself, didn't he? To think that Paul of all people, the head of early Christian ethnic cleansing who experienced Jesus in a blinding vision, would be my favorite of Christ's early followers...it's amazing.

    And yes, even in early discussions, as Caslon points out, Mary Magdalene is portrayed as a whore or adulterer when the truth is that we don't know much about her. She honored Christ and he held her in esteem. As such, she must have been a recovering whore? Otherwise, that would change the idea of man holding a place above women. Keeping Mary an equal with his other Apostles was too much for early church leaders...so they made her a harlot.

    The best thing to believe in the Bible is Jesus' principles and parables. It doesn't matter who is involved, but what the message is - in particular his message of love and charity towards all. As for other details...you'll need to learn Ancient Aramaic, Ancient Greek, and a slough of other ancient texts to figure that out. Or...just trust a stranger.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 4:41 AM GMT
    political_teachings_of_jesus.jpg

    This is the best book I know for understanding how Jesus wanted us to live. It ignores all the theological...son of god....heaven stuff....and just interprets what kind of society we would have if we followed Jesus' guidance.

    It has the most awesome explanation of the Beatitudes I have ever heard. The Beatitudes never made any sense to me before. "The meek shall inherit the earth" ...WTF does that mean?
  • junknemesis

    Posts: 682

    Mar 29, 2009 5:01 AM GMT
    I am taking a risk here, but I have simple knowledge, and I think I can share some here.

    I know that the Savior loves us all. The fact that the two mentioned in the story may have been lovers doesn't matter. Jesus saw what Faith the man had. That is what he was here for. It is said that whatever you ask, if you ask in real faith, and in the name of Jesus Christ, it will be granted unto you. That is what happened there. I can't say I know what the situation was. Maybe he was a simple servant, maybe they were lovers. Jesus didn't care. Someone was asking for his help with real faith. The other details didn't matter.

    Remember the woman taken in adultery? Others said that by the Law of Moses, such a woman was to be stoned to death. Jesus replied
    "Whoever among you who is without sin, let him first cast a stone at her."
    Everyone walked away. The woman looked up and saw that nobody had cast a stone at her. Jesus then to her said,
    "Woman, where are thou thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee?"
    "No man, Lord!" She said in amazement.
    "Nor do I condemn thee, Go and Sin No More."

    He knew of her guilt, but with love and mercy, he did not condemn her. I know that the situations weren't exactly the same, and that my knowledge isn't enough to convince everyone here that the Savior is real, and loves us all the same. But I don't want to change what you believe. That's not the point. The point is... something else.

    I'm not a missionary. I may never be.

    And no, I don't know the true details on how homosexual love fits into the gospel... or even if it does.

    I do know that I get sad whenever I see forums bashing on people with faith. I get sad when I see that senseless accusations fly about sacred things. I tend not to post to any forums relating to spiritual things anymore, because honestly, most aren't worth replying to. Some things we don't understand, some things we never will understand in this life, and some things... we just aren't meant to understand yet. I do know that like many things in life, one has to be prepared before they can partake in something. Some knowledge is like that. You have to be prepared before you can learn something, otherwise the knowledge is wasted, or you can even be hurt by knowing it.

    Please don't flame me or this post. If you feel offended or upset by what I have said, maybe you weren't prepared to hear it. If so I am sorry.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:07 AM GMT
    I have a faith, but this has nothing to do with the bible, ot religion.

    No I don't belive the Bible is a true history book! I also belive with all the evil that comes out of religions. They are the house of the devil.....
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:10 AM GMT
    "παiσ-" or with a terminal sigma is a tough word to translate for all scholars. Look at my pic below from my "great scott" Lexicon (the primary source for all English classical research" and notice, if you can, the multiple uses and prevalence the word has in Greek literature. It is crazy! As greek beginners you learn the word means "child" and you read a bunch of fables with children. Then you get into more political treatises and see it used differently. Obviously classical Greek and Koine Greek are far apart and thus the world had its application smoothed out and it became to mean a much more broader term. While 99% of the time, when I tried to translate the word I got it wrong, I can infer the meaning. In a male-male relationship, one male takes a dominant societal or hierarchical relationship, the other becomes the "pais". So the hermeneutic work done in the first author's book fits in perfect since the Septuagint would have automatically placed Jesus on the upper position (I avoided saying top) and all other males become "παiσ-"

    Quick tidbit: The "famous" saying "Et tu Brute?" was never said by Cesar, his court spoke Greek. He actually said, "kαi σu παiσ" (You too my child? or with our better knowledge of "παiσ" "And you too my beloved")


    ND: to all those who can read Greek, I apologize for non-terminal sigmas, there isn't an alt-code for it.

    http://www.amazon.com/Greek-English-Lexicon-Ninth-Revised-Supplement/dp/0198642261/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1238303411&sr=8-1

    PICT0026-1.jpg

    Ref:
    PICT0027-1.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:16 AM GMT
    looknrnd said
    And yes, even in early discussions, as Caslon points out, Mary Magdalene is portrayed as a whore or adulterer when the truth is that we don't know much about her.

    In no text is the adulterous woman ever named Mary Magdalene. People have a misconception because Mary was said to have been "with demons" that were cast out from her. MM has been cast in a bad light, but it isn't the Gospels that link the two.
  • junknemesis

    Posts: 682

    Mar 29, 2009 5:16 AM GMT
    Oh_God saidI have a faith, but this has nothing to do with the bible, ot religion.

    No I don't belive the Bible is a true history book! I also belive with all the evil that comes out of religions. They are the house of the devil.....


    The bible has been mistranslated somewhat in its many centuries as it's been translated again and again many times. Essential truths, some quite simple, had been lost by these mistranslations.

    Religion is not the source of Jesus or Lucifer, religion came about because of them. Evil comes from anywhere you look. Religion is only there to teach Faith. Faith is the weapon with which you can fight against that Evil.

    There's a whole lot more to it. Some of it I can't say here. Well... not can't but shouldn't. It's not my place. Again, I'm sorry. I'm not a religion scholar. I feel so inadequate here.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:18 AM GMT
    junknemesis saidRemember the woman taken in adultery? Others said that by the Law of Moses, such a woman was to be stoned to death. Jesus replied
    "Whoever among you who is without sin, let him first cast a stone at her."
    Everyone walked away. The woman looked up and saw that nobody had cast a stone at her. Jesus then to her said,
    "Woman, where are thou thine accusers? Hath no man condemned thee?"
    "No man, Lord!" She said in amazement.
    "Nor do I condemn thee, Go and Sin No More."

    He knew of her guilt, but with love and mercy, he did not condemn her. I know that the situations weren't exactly the same, and that my knowledge isn't enough to convince everyone here that the Savior is real, and loves us all the same.

    You missed my point, I think. That story of the woman taken in adultery wasnt in the Bible was the apostles wrote it. That whole story didnt happen according to the original gospels. According to John, that didnt happen and Jesus didnt say that. So christians are basing their religion on something that somebody made up and stuck in there probably hundreds of years after the gospels were written. If one is living his life based on the scriptures as the word of God, then this should cause a big "whoops." What do you do with text that was added by unknown scribes somewhere along in history? And if you say "well, the scribes were inspired by God" Then what about anybody who wants to add to the gospels? How can you say they aren't inspired by God? As I posited above, can I add to the gospels today? Can I decide that I have some inspiration from God and need to add it to the gospels? Cuz I will tell you, God is plainly telling me to correct the erroneous interpretation about homosexuals.

    Check out:

    misquoting.jpg

    Ehrman is a scholar and was a devote christian.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:23 AM GMT
    Caslon9000 said As I posited above, can I add to the gospels today? Can I decide that I have some inspiration from God and need to add it to the gospels? Cuz I will tell you, God is plainly telling me to correct the erroneous interpretation about homosexuals.

    Yes you can. The Gospels are incomplete in a sense that there could always be more "inspired by God" moments. It is just that you will need to prove to the powers-at-that you had the Word of God breathed into you.

    It is just that the Church holds that nothing they have seen to this date is of "Godly" quality.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:24 AM GMT
    Pinny said
    looknrnd said
    And yes, even in early discussions, as Caslon points out, Mary Magdalene is portrayed as a whore or adulterer when the truth is that we don't know much about her.

    In no text is the adulterous woman ever named Mary Magdalene. People have a misconception because Mary was said to have been "with demons" that were cast out from her. MM has been cast in a bad light, but it isn't the Gospels that link the two.

    And I never pointed that out....just to set the record straight
  • junknemesis

    Posts: 682

    Mar 29, 2009 5:25 AM GMT
    Caslon, I found the story of the Woman taken in adultery, follow this link.

    http://scriptures.lds.org/john/8/4#4

    It's in John. Hmmm... copy paste? the link doesn't seem to work.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:29 AM GMT
    Pinny said"παiσ-" ... and notice, if you can, the multiple uses and prevalence the word has in Greek literature.

    Actually, the book The Man Jesus Loved goes into a much greater discussion of the word than I put on here. I was just giving the barest sense necessary for this discussion's purposes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:31 AM GMT
    junknemesis said Religion is only there to teach Faith. Faith is the weapon with which you can fight against that Evil.

    Faith in what? ...and based on what if you scriptures are corrupt? How are you supposed to know what to believe in and what to have faith in? This should be a mighty concern of yours, I would think
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:33 AM GMT
    junknemesis saidCaslon, I found the story of the Woman taken in adultery, follow this link.

    http://scriptures.lds.org/john/8/4#4


    Currently, the "adulterous woman" story is in John, but Caslon's point is that the papyri manuscripts we have that are dated the closest to Johannine writings do not have this story:

    http://itsee.bham.ac.uk/iohannes/majuscule/index.html
    The International Greek New Testament Project is a world authority.
    http://www.igntp.org/
  • junknemesis

    Posts: 682

    Mar 29, 2009 5:33 AM GMT
    Caslon9000 said
    junknemesis saidblockquote>
    Faith in what? ...and based on what if you scriptures are corrupt? How are you supposed to know what to believe in and what to have faith in? This should be a mighty concern of yours, I would think.


    Well... before I go to work, I don't just read the Bible. Remember how I said that Plain and Simple truths were missing from it? Well they HAVE been restored. There has been, and continues to be, revelation from God. That bad time when there was no priesthood authority, and no revelation, only some inspiration to key people here and there, it is over. It has been for quite some time now.

    The scriptures that can really help you understand Christ is The Book of Mormon. I doubt you will take me seriously about this, but I can honestly say that no other book on earth will help you understand The Savior, and WHY he came here to live, and die, for us better then the Book of Mormon. It exists along side the Bible, but has only been translated once, and that time was by the gift and power of God.

    I guess you have to trust me on that, cause I have to go to work. If the computer at work is operational (it was broken before) I can get back online. If not then I wish you all a good night.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:34 AM GMT
    junknemesis saidCaslon, I found the story of the Woman taken in adultery, follow this link.

    http://scriptures.lds.org/john/8/4#4

    It's in John. Hmmm... copy paste? the link doesn't seem to work.

    Yes I know the story is there now. But it wasn't there in the earliest versions of the Gospel of John. Therefore, it had to have been added later. And going by the dates of the copies of the Bible when it does appear, it was inserted hundreds of years after John was written.

    Oh, btw, it also appears sometimes in the Gospel of Luke, showing how even when it did start to be inserted in the gospels, it wasnt inserted consistently.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:36 AM GMT
    junknemesis said
    The scriptures that can really help you understand Christ is The Book of Mormon.

    summonflamewar.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:43 AM GMT
    I'll be checking these books out, thanks for the reading list Caslon icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:55 AM GMT
    What I'd like to know is why, 2000+ years later, anybody cares? Shouldn't we worry about our current problems, not bronze age mythology?

    "The religion of one age is the literary entertainment of the next."
    -Ralph Waldo Emerson
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 5:57 AM GMT
    junknemesis saidThe scriptures that can really help you understand Christ is The Book of Mormon. I doubt you will take me seriously about this, but I can honestly say that no other book on earth will help you understand The Savior, and WHY he came here to live, and die, for us better then the Book of Mormon. It exists along side the Bible, but has only been translated once, and that time was by the gift and power of God.


    Oh right, the talking rock and the golden plates that no one has ever seen. Give me break.

    jstranslatingbom.jpg

    Anybody want to buy a bridge?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 6:03 AM GMT
    m59254 saidI'll be checking these books out, thanks for the reading list Caslon icon_smile.gif

    Two other good books are:

    whowrotethebible.jpg

    The author dissects the first five books of the Old Testament...the Torah...and comes to some very interesting discoveries.

    thebibleunearthed.jpg
    The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts

    This book examines the archaeological evidence that pertains to the stories of the Old Testament: the kingdoms of Isreal and Judah, Jerusalem, David, Solomon, etc. Very interesting to put the archaeological discoveries with the stories.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 29, 2009 6:10 AM GMT
    southlakejock said
    junknemesis saidThe scriptures that can really help you understand Christ is The Book of Mormon. I doubt you will take me seriously about this, but I can honestly say that no other book on earth will help you understand The Savior, and WHY he came here to live, and die, for us better then the Book of Mormon. It exists along side the Bible, but has only been translated once, and that time was by the gift and power of God.


    Oh right, the talking rock and the golden plates that no one has ever seen. Give me break.


    Here you go, chum.

    kitkat-original-235x155.jpg


    What is God's personal name?