I believe in God but I'm very skeptical of the bible (myths, New Testament)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What you are referring to are not my words (readers refer to post #3), but are the words of the person who posted to YouTube the video of Dan Wallace's presentation which he gave at Heights Baptist Church in 2013 on the reliability of the New Testament. Dr. Wallace never even mentioned the Mormons in his presentation. Nor did I post the comment for the purpose of bashing or focusing any attention on the Mormon's, or out of some 'obsession' with them. As with the second video, I simply posted the comment that was posted to the YouTube page along with the video in which Dr. Wallace speaks of New Testament reliability.
Fair enough, you're touting the opinions of an obsessive Mormon-hater. Still, it's good to know it isn't your words. But why even quote the Mormon obsessed part of his rant? Clearly you have a very high opinion of a man who is hopelessly blinded by religious bigotry.
It just seemed very odd. The OP said they are skeptical of the Bible. A healthy amount of skepticism about the absolute purity of the Bible is commonplace in the Christian world today. It is common among many very traditionalist sects, just as it is common among newer less orthodox sects. The issue of textual inaccuracy (or the lack thereof) of the Bible is an issue debated through the whole of Christianity. So it seemed very irregular for one of the first respondents to say/quote, "Yes, Mormonism is false and contradictory because ..." The OP wasn't bringing up Mormonism. You bringing Mormons into the discussion for no apparent reason comes across as somebody with an overpowering need to bash their religion at even the barest of opportunities. Leaving the Mormon-focused parts out what you decided to quote would have made a huge difference there.
If you encounter someone who questions or doubts the accuracy and reliability of our New Testament, such as a Mormon, the information Dr. Daniel Wallace provides in this presentation at Heights Baptist Church in 2013 will address those issues directly.
Mormon apologists must admit that the staggering majority of the textual variants are merely minor in nature. Dr. R. L. Anderson, a Mormon scholar and authority in the LDS Church on Biblical manuscripts, recognizes that the variations in the New Testament manuscripts are essentially insignificant. Dr. Anderson notes the overwhelming agreement between the thousands of manuscripts; he explains that "...all manuscripts agree on the essential correctness of 99% of the verses in the New Testament." R.L. Anderson, Fourteenth Annual Symposium of the Archaeology of the Scriptures, Brigham Young University, 1963, 52-59
Dr. Daniel B. Wallace has been Professor of New Testament Studies at Dallas Seminary for over 25 years and is an internationally known Greek New Testament scholar. He has been a consultant for five Bible translations and founded the Center for the study of New Testament Manuscripts.
In the Appendix of the paperback edition of Bart Ehrman's Misquoting Jesus, Ehrman quoting Ehrman actually admits...
"Essential Christian beliefs are not affected by textual variants in the manuscript tradition of the New Testament."
This is the skeptic on whose works Muslims, Mormons, other cultists & atheists are basing their wild & whacky claims.'
August 03, 2014 - Best Sermon Ever Series - Mars Hill Church
Dr. Daniel Wallace is one of the foremost New Testament scholars in the world today. In his Best Sermon Ever, he shares with Mars Hill important teaching on the origin of the New Testament and whether or not what we read in our Bible translations today is the same as what was written in the original manuscripts. If you or a friend have ever had doubts or questions about the validity of the New Testament, or the Bible in general, this is the sermon to watch.'
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
Good grief Mike555 why are you so obsessed with Mormons? They preach Christ and they do it from the Bible. You seem to be painting them as anti-Biblical atheists. Whatever the source of their view of the Bible, it is a realistic view. For any Mormon I have ever known, the Bible isn't perfect but it is good and came from God.
Their founder obviously came to the same conclusion that so many others have before and since: The Bible just plain isn't infallible, sufficient and pure. Clearly more is needed than the paper and ink of the Bible. Now from your all-or-nothing view of the Bible, that may sound like a rejection of the Bible. It isn't. I think we both know perfectly well that the Bible is a huge part of the Mormon religion.
Mormonism's rejection of both Trinity and Biblical purism seems to bother you far more than makes any sense. Why is that? Why the obsession Mike555??
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike555
What you are referring to are not my words (readers refer to post #3), but are the words of the person who posted to YouTube the video of Dan Wallace's presentation which he gave at Heights Baptist Church in 2013 on the reliability of the New Testament. Dr. Wallace never even mentioned the Mormons in his presentation. Nor did I post the comment for the purpose of bashing or focusing any attention on the Mormon's, or out of some 'obsession' with them. As with the second video, I simply posted the comment that was posted to the YouTube page along with the video in which Dr. Wallace speaks of New Testament reliability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
Fair enough, you're touting the opinions of an obsessive Mormon-hater. Still, it's good to know it isn't your words. But why even quote the Mormon obsessed part of his rant? Clearly you have a very high opinion of a man who is hopelessly blinded by religious bigotry.
It just seemed very odd. The OP said they are skeptical of the Bible. A healthy amount of skepticism about the absolute purity of the Bible is commonplace in the Christian world today. It is common among many very traditionalist sects, just as it is common among newer less orthodox sects. The issue of textual inaccuracy (or the lack thereof) of the Bible is an issue debated through the whole of Christianity. So it seemed very irregular for one of the first respondents to say/quote, "Yes, Mormonism is false and contradictory because ..." The OP wasn't bringing up Mormonism. You bringing Mormons into the discussion for no apparent reason comes across as somebody with an overpowering need to bash their religion at even the barest of opportunities. Leaving the Mormon-focused parts out what you decided to quote would have made a huge difference there.
I didn't 'tout' anything concerning the opinion of the person who posted the statement. To blazes with your accusations. Again, and for the last time, I didn't post the statement for the purpose of bringing Mormons into it. The statements provided with both videos concern the reliability of the New Testament. That, and only that is why I posted the statements.
Now, you will excuse me because I am not through taking my break from this ridiculous forum which so far has only been a couple of weeks.
When you walk in love you walk in God and God in you, so whether you know it or not Matadora when you cultivate love and compassion for others you are cultivating godliness.
If that's how you want to see it...fine.
Humans have created and horribly distorted the meaning of god.
By attributing your innate human abilities of love and compassion towards yourself and others as anything other than qualities that come from within you, is simply a deception that religion teaches.
Walking in the spirit of love and compassion is simply walking in your very own self generated conscious framework for love and compassion.
Religiosity, in its broadest sense, is a comprehensive sociological term used to refer to the numerous aspects of religious activity, dedication, and belief (religious doctrine). Another term that would work equally well, though less often used, is religiousness.
Thank you, pneuma and Jerwade for trying to explain what I have been unable to about the mistake of conflating faith and religion.
A Quaker blogger also did a better job than I can of defining faith: "commitment to agapē as supreme value and trust in its continuing guidance."
Now, you will excuse me because I am not through taking my break from this ridiculous forum which so far has only been a couple of weeks.
Apparently, it is ridiculous or absurd - because you fail to see things beyond your concept of selling or publicizing a certain commodity, according to your belief system.
Humans have created and horribly distorted the meaning of god.
By attributing your innate human abilities of love and compassion towards yourself and others as anything other than qualities that come from within you, is simply a deception that religion teaches.
Walking in the spirit of love and compassion is simply walking in your very own self generated conscious framework for love and compassion.
If love comes from within you and
if God is love,
then God is within you.
Do you hold everything in the realm of Religiosity?
[i]Faith is not merely believing, it's innately knowing.
Not at all.
Faith is merely believing in something or being faithful to someone.
Quote:
Definition of FAITH
1.
a : allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty
b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) sincerity of intentions
2.
a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion
b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3. Something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs <the Protestant faith>
Cultivating love and compassion for yourself and others has not one single thing to do with faith.
It takes an aware disciplined mind as well as a very consciously aware person to to practice cultivating these traits. It takes takes practice and effort not just merely believing in it or showing loyalty.
There are many examples of loyalty that do not coincide with love or compassion.
If love comes from within you and
if God is love,
then God is within you.
I know it sounds woo woo to you guys who want to attribute it to these man created gods.
We are born with these traits...which are not only unique to humans.
The man created gods that I have read about especially the Christian created god are not about love. Only about control and conditions.
The Christian God as presented in the Bible has got to be the most unpleasant characters in ALL FICTION writings…this fictitious God is Jealous and proud of it. Petty, vindictive unjust, unforgiving, racist and an ethnic cleanser urging his people on to acts of genocide.
This man created god is not about love at all.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
