I need help.

[Jeff Wolf]

I am dyslexic so give me spelling credet.

explain to me why did god put the tree of life in the garden to begin with. he know the out cume any way, but even then dosen't the bible preach all about frogivness any way, way did he not forgive us. i know it was there to test our fath, but death, pain, sarow, sickness, and damnation are harsh for 1 frute. if a chiled did some thing wrong we dont make them spend all there life makeing up for it, we get over it and love them any way. so way do we have to suffer all our lifes for 1 mastake. and by no means does this mean you dont punish the child you do, we teach them right from wrong and punish them for doing wrong, but not for life. tell me why, teach me i wont to know.

[Jeff Wolf]

please some one tell me or try to.

[xshady121]

To allow free will.

You could argue from a scholarly standpoint that he didn't know, as when he kicks them out he says somethig to the effect of "let me kick you out before you eat from the tree of life and become no different than Gods". An argument can (and has) been made that (in the Eden story atleast) the only difference between God and Humans is knowledge and eternal life.

Also, he forgives them. He just curses mankind, womankind, and serpents. He doesn't curse them as individiuals. If he didn't forgive them their offspring wouldn't have eventually recieved the covenant.

[Burn That Shit]

First time the bible got pwned was when we figured out that the world was actually round, and then it got pwned again when we found dinosaur bones.

[Jeff Wolf]

can you tell me me, i cant read the bible because it is to hard to coprehend but if you keep it simpel like you did then that works fine. please continu. and thanks for your respnce.

[Jeff Wolf]

oooo. some one not a christ fan this will get intersting, this is what i wonted now please argew both sides.

[theguilt engine]

lol wut

[boykosaurus]

Well, there are threads about Christianity and religion where there are arguments.

Someone want to dig them up for him?

[Burn That Shit]

Well, there are threads about Christianity and religion where there are arguments.

Someone want to dig them up for him?

I could just sum it up for him really quick

Christians: We believe there is a god and that the Bible is the holy book.

Non-Christians: Why?

Christians: Faith, duh!

Non-Christians: What about evolution? Astronomy? Doesn't that disprove a lot of ideas and beliefs in the bible?

Christians: No shut up.

[xshady121]

I could just sum it up for him really quick

Christians: We believe there is a god and that the Bible is the holy book.

Non-Christians: Why?

Christians: Faith, duh!

Non-Christians: What about evolution? Astronomy? Doesn't that disprove a lot of ideas and beliefs in the bible?

Christians: No shut up.

I don't know why everyone assumes religion equals christians. He said Garden of Eden; it was originally Jewish.

Just saying.

[Burn That Shit]

I don't know why everyone assumes religion equals christians. He said Garden of Eden; it was originally Jewish.

Just saying.

I don't actually know that much about religion, just having fun with him.

[OldJersey]

Because the bible is just a fairy tale.

[saysmydoctor]

Step 1: Never read that book.

Book of Revelations = fall of Rome

[Jeff Wolf]

this is all interesting but there is meor to what i a wonting to get at, but i dont have the time to get into it. can we all meat back here at some time tomarow, lets say 6:00pm east standered time. i can be avalible then, i have high-fucking-school, and after school practis as well, but i do wont to talk about it. i just need free time, you can under stand that. please and thanks.

jeff

[open mind]

i don't interpret the tree and fruit as a literal tree and fruit....i believe it's just a metaphor for sin.....and we're capable of sinning because we have free will.

[silentstar1134]

To allow free will.

You could argue from a scholarly standpoint that he didn't know, as when he kicks them out he says somethig to the effect of "let me kick you out before you eat from the tree of life and become no different than Gods". An argument can (and has) been made that (in the Eden story atleast) the only difference between God and Humans is knowledge and eternal life.

Also, he forgives them. He just curses mankind, womankind, and serpents. He doesn't curse them as individiuals. If he didn't forgive them their offspring wouldn't have eventually recieved the covenant.

pretty much. I'm sure a better christian who attends church on the reg might put it more in perspective but I see it like this. In the begining Adam was made, and Eve was made from his flesh. Since the sin of the fruit came into play, the women originally made the first sin and the man followed. This banished both Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden. Sin and plagues were rampant in the old testament and only a glimmer of light was at the end of the old testament. Jesus dying on the cross was a way of connecting god to the people, and showing that the relationship when Adam and Eve were banished was erased and that God can be connected to his people again. If you look at the gospels of John and others you will notice how Jesus would want his followers to act in the way of morals and ethics. Read John 3:16-21 . Yes the original sin was hard to pay, but have faith and hold out hope.

[Burn That Shit]

pretty much. I'm sure a better christian who attends church on the reg might put it more in perspective but I see it like this. In the begining Adam was made, and Eve was made from his flesh. Since the sin of the fruit came into play, the women originally made the first sin and the man followed. This banished both Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden. Sin and plagues were rampant in the old testament and only a glimmer of light was at the end of the old testament. Jesus dying on the cross was a way of connecting god to the people, and showing that the relationship when Adam and Eve were banished was erased and that God can be connected to his people again. If you look at the gospels of John and others you will notice how Jesus would want his followers to act in the way of morals and ethics. Read John 3:16-21 . Yes the original sin was hard to pay, but have faith and hold out hope.

That's a neat story. Did Jesus own slaves?

[silentstar1134]

That's a neat story. Did Jesus own slaves?

haha, no but in the old testament the Jews were the slaves to the Egyptians and that was about Moses and Abraham and leaving Egypt to go to the promise land and the death of the first born and stuff. Also the Romans had slaves (hence the movie gladiator).

I have slaves but its all white people to get back at the man for his years of oppression......and i'm collecting my check for reparations so im gonna go buy rims soon.....BALLLIN!!!! j/k XP

[xshady121]

Because the bible is just a fairy tale.

Not true, well atleast parts.

Hezekiah (2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, etc...) is seen all throughout Assyrian records. The story in the bible about Israel (and Judah for that matter)'s fall is accurate according to various "historical" sources from the same time.

[saysmydoctor]

Not true, well atleast parts.

Hezekiah (2 Kings, 2 Chronicles, etc...) is seen all throughout Assyrian records. The story in the bible about Israel (and Judah for that matter)'s fall is accurate according to various "historical" sources from the same time.
Well, to be honest, the parts of the Bible are only what the Catholic Church wanted us to believe to be true to indoctrinate us. There are other gospels who give a less biased and altered story. So, he was right.

[xshady121]

Well, to be honest, the parts of the Bible are only what the Catholic Church wanted us to believe to be true to indoctrinate us. There are other gospels who give a less biased and altered story. So, he was right.

"bible" does not always mean Catholic Church. I don't think anyone mentioned catholicism.

The original poster is talking eden. Old testament. The catholic scholars didn't touch the creation stories (like they did many things in the middle ages), so I don't know why you'd bring that nugget of info up.

Now, if you want to talk about the Catholic Church and the gospels it didn't canonize, sure, lets. That doesn't mean that just because the Gospel of Mary or the Gospel of Thomas wasn't included in the canon that the canon is now "a fairy tale". To label it as such is a lie. I don't know of any scholar that wouldn't agree there was an actual guy named Jesus from Galilee in the first half of the first century that preached to Jews as the Messiah and died on the cross via Pontious Pilate.

And Thomas, Mary (and even Judas for that matter), and all of the Coptic and Hebrew gospels all have their own agendas in mind too. To call them "less biased and altered" is wrong. Unless you're talking about some non-canonical gospel I've never heard of before.

[saysmydoctor]

"bible" does not always mean Catholic Church. I don't think anyone mentioned catholicism.

The original poster is talking eden. Old testament. The catholic scholars didn't touch the creation stories (like they did many things in the middle ages), so I don't know why you'd bring that nugget of info up.

Now, if you want to talk about the Catholic Church and the gospels it didn't canonize, sure, lets. That doesn't mean that just because the Gospel of Mary or the Gospel of Thomas wasn't included in the canon that the canon is now "a fairy tale". To label it as such is a lie. I don't know of any scholar that wouldn't agree there was an actual guy named Jesus from Galilee in the first half of the first century that preached to Jews as the Messiah and died on the cross via Pontious Pilate.

And Thomas, Mary (and even Judas for that matter), and all of the Coptic and Hebrew gospels all have their own agendas in mind too. To call them "less biased and altered" is wrong. Unless you're talking about some non-canonical gospel I've never heard of before.
No, it's pretty true. The image of Jesus is that of divine son of God, when in reality his divinity was decided on by a vote.

Yes, they all had an agenda. At least the agendas of others was the truth. While I don't buy into the conspiracy theory of a Jesus bloodline, I find it impossible for him not to be married. I also find other 'facts' to be strange. Mary was married but was a virgin? How does that even occur--especially in those days. It's a fairy tale.

Also the original poster doesn't know what he is talking about. That's the premise. Also, you said the Bible, I carried on with it.

[xshady121]

No, it's pretty true. The image of Jesus is that of divine son of God .
wrong. Only one of the four gospels says he is the son of god, and that is Luke. Matthew regards him as a prophet, the "son of God" in Mark 1:1 was added around 2-3 centuries after Mark was written, John regards him as the messiah that the Jews rejected.

Yes, they all had an agenda. At least the agendas of others was the truth.

Nope. The agenda of the Gospel of Thomas, Mary, Judas, ect... was to promote Gnosticism. The Hebrew Gospels promoted Jews that followed Jesus and the Covenant after Christianity broke off in the second century. To say that neither of these gospels had an "agenda" proves your complete ignorance to gnosticism and the religious world at the time.

Name one non canonical gospel that wasn't written with an agenda. Show me one with "truth" as their agenda.
Mary was married but was a virgin?
Only in matthew's version.

Infact the majority of them reference Jesus' siblings...

Bottom line is a "gospel" is written to spread the word and not the truth. It's not meant to be taken as completely historically accurate, although there are some facts you can get out of it, just like any other piece of ancient historical artifacts.

Also the original poster doesn't know what he is talking about. That's the premise. Also, you said the Bible, I carried on with it.[/QUOTE]

[saysmydoctor]

And we come full circle by you proving my own point in your first little rebuttal. Thank you.

Even your usage of the word messiah.

[xshady121]

And we come full circle by you proving my own point in your first little rebuttal. Thank you.

Even your usage of the word messiah.

I am eagerly awaiting you proving me wrong.

[Burn That Shit]

Let's talk about how christian's killed a shit ton of people in the crusades.

[saysmydoctor]

That the Church has chosen text that conforms to their beliefs and if it doesn't, it was manipulated.

Also, there is the Spanish Inquisition, the Papal State armies, papal infallibility, its hand in the slave trade.

[boykosaurus]

Let's talk about how christian's killed a shit ton of people in the crusades.

Nu-uh!

[xshady121]

That the Church has chosen text that conforms to their beliefs and if it doesn't, it was manipulated.

Also, there is the Spanish Inquisition, the Papal State armies, papal infallibility, its hand in the slave trade.

You said twice there were other gospels that were written with truth in mind.

I'm waiting.

[saysmydoctor]

You said twice there were other gospels that were written with truth in mind.

I'm waiting.
Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Mary, Gospel of Thomas. These gospels showed Jesus as married with Mary. It offers a more detailed description of the persona of Jesus.

[xshady121]

Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Mary, Gospel of Thomas. These gospels showed Jesus as married with Mary. It offers a more detailed description of the persona of Jesus.

Thanks for proving my point. Mary and Thomas were both written to promote Gnosticism, thus they had an agenda. Nice try though.

Peter's promoted a form of christianity that believed docetism. His text was meant to appeal to them.

[Burn That Shit]

Peter Pan?

[saysmydoctor]

Thanks for proving my point. Mary and Thomas were both written to promote Gnosticism, thus they had an agenda. Nice try though.

Peter's promoted a form of christianity that believed docetism. His text was meant to appeal to them.
I already admitted they all had an agenda. Read the thread.

[TK]

I really don't understand why people waste their time with this anymore...

[xshady121]

I already admitted they all had an agenda. Read the thread.

Yes. You said the agenda was "truth". That is false. They were promoting their own purposes. There is no more "truth" in Mary than in John.

[open mind]

That the Church has chosen text that conforms to their beliefs and if it doesn't, it was manipulated.

Also, there is the Spanish Inquisition, the Papal State armies, papal infallibility, its hand in the slave trade.

of course the church chose texts that fit the beliefs of the church....there were gospels popping up all over the place that weren't in fact christian in teaching so the most respected theological experts in the world gathered together to straighten it all out.....i don't know why this is taken as a bad thing or pointed to as proof that christianity is b.s.....would you say science or democracy is all a sham because some people tried to distort it and the leading experts of the world on those subjects got together to clear things up once and for all?

not every church has had a pope or was involved in the spanish inquisition....the great schism occurred in large part over the disagreement of whether or not the church should have a pope.

[saysmydoctor]

It's the revisionist history that the Vatican has always performed.

[open mind]

It's the revisionist history that the Vatican has always performed.

i'm not a big defender of the catholic church really.....but could you get more specific?....and why apply what the catholic church has done to the whole of christianity?