Anti-christ

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

No. Actually, if I could speak with God, I would say "Please tell me you didn't go to all that trouble to inspire hundreds of pages of nonsense. If you did, then please explain why you wanted people to struggle and argue over it endlessly. Better yet, please just talk to me directly, OK?

You've apparently misunderstood me when I've indicated that I do not understand. I have no problem understanding and comprehending the words in the scriptures themselves. They indicate, however, things that I do find irrational and/or unbelievable. Some scriptures are even shocking in their instructions to perform acts that I consider ignorant, depraved, cruel and primitive.

I have trouble understanding why any present-day, probably reasonably well-educated and rational person would believe everything that is written in the Bible. I do not understand how anyone with a rational mind can convince themselves that the Bible was inspired by god... whether you call "god" - YHWH or Jehovah or whomever.

How very clever that the scriptures themselves include a statement to the effect that normal ordinary people (natural man?) will often find the scriptures unbelievable ("foolishness") - and that if they do, it means they just don't understand the mind of "YHWH". I don't understand why you don't recognize how ridiculous that is.

Here is a quote from Matthew Henry on the subject and is how I would interpret "natural man." He gives a very good definition here. You may find this to be rediculous, but YHWH does not. Normal ordinary people is not what this passage is referring to as you will see by Henry's commentary on the subject. Some normal ordinary people understand Scripture very well because the Holy Spirit indwells them and enlightens them to the truth of YHWH's word. They are no longer wordly minded, but Spirit minded. Henry seems to understand very well what YHWH meant.

1. The natural man receiveth not the things of God, for they are foolishness to him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned, I Cor 2:14. The natural man, the animal man. Either, (1.) The man under the power of corruption, and never yet illuminated by the Spirit of God, such as Jude calls sensual, not having the Spirit, Jude 1:19. Men unsanctified receive not the things of God. The understanding, through the corruption of nature by the fall, and through the confirmation of this disorder by customary sin, is utterly unapt to receive the rays of divine light; it is prejudiced against them. The truths of God are foolishness to such a mind. The man looks on them as trifling and impertinent things, not worth his minding. The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not, John 1:5. Not that the natural faculty of discerning is lost, but evil inclinations and wicked principles render the man unwilling to enter into the mind of God, in the spiritual matters of his kingdom, and yield to their force and power. It is the quickening beams of the Spirit of truth and holiness that must help the mind to discern their excellency, and to so thorough a conviction of their truth as heartily to receive and embrace them. Thus the natural man, the man destitute of the Spirit of God, cannot know them, because they are spiritually discerned. Or, (2.) The natural man, that is, the wise man of the world (I Cor 1:19, 20), the wise man after the flesh, or according to the flesh (I Cor 1:26), one who hath the wisdom of the world, man's wisdom (I Cor 2:4-6), a man, as some of the ancients, that would learn all truth by his own ratiocinations, receive nothing by faith, nor own any need of supernatural assistance. This was very much the character of the pretenders to philosophy and the Grecian learning and wisdom in that day. Such a man receives not the things of the Spirit of God. Revelation is not with him a principle of science; he looks upon it as delirium and dotage, the extravagant thought of some deluded dreamer. It is no way to wisdom among the famous masters of the world; and for that reason he can have no knowledge of things revealed, because they are only spiritually discerned, or made known by the revelation of the Spirit, which is a principle of science or knowledge that he will not admit.

Here is a quote from Matthew Henry on the subject and is how I would interpret "natural man." He gives a very good definition here. You may find this to be rediculous, but YHWH does not.

In other words, you are warning me that if I do not agree with you and your religious guru, Matthew Henry, “God” will punish and or reject me.

Normal ordinary people is not what this passage is referring to as you will see by Henry's commentary on the subject.

So you automatically agree with this man’s interpretation of this scripture, and the meaning of the translated words in it?

Some normal ordinary people understand Scripture very well because the Holy Spirit indwells them and enlightens them to the truth of YHWH's word. They are no longer wordly minded, but Spirit minded. Henry seems to understand very well what YHWH meant.

I submit that in your opinion Mr Henry seems to understand what “God” meant because you happen to agree with Mr Henry. And I think you agree with Mr Henry because he rationalizes your determination to believe things in the Bible that other people often find unbelievable for various reasons – including ongoing scientific discoveries about the nature of the universe, and ordinary common sense.

1. The natural man receiveth not the things of God, for they are foolishness to him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned, I Cor 2:14. The natural man, the animal man. Either, (1.) The man under the power of corruption, and never yet illuminated by the Spirit of God, such as Jude calls sensual, not having the Spirit, Jude 1:19. Men unsanctified receive not the things of God.

This right here is the very foundation of religious persecution. I will not mince words here. This issue is fundamental to any hope of mankind’s ability to grow spiritually and intellectually into a species capable of peace and brotherly love. As soon as you characterize other people who do not share your religious beliefs as people who are somehow “unsanctified”, “animal men”, “sensual” (interpreting a person’s enjoyment of physical pleasure as somehow unholy), and “corrupt”, you set the stage for the kind of self-righteous, holier-than-thou attitude toward other people which can lead to religious persecution. Such attitudes have led to horrific religious persecution throughout history. Persecution like the “Holy” crusades. Persecution like the Spanish Inquisition. Persecution like Islamic terrorism. Persecution like the bombings in Belfast Northern Ireland. As soon as you tell yourself that anybody who chooses not to share your religious beliefs is unacceptable in the eyes of your version of god you set yourself above those other people in your own mind; probably thinking in your heart of hearts that “those” people are damned because your version of god tells you to think so.

The understanding, through the corruption of nature by the fall, and through the confirmation of this disorder by customary sin, is utterly unapt to receive the rays of divine light; it is prejudiced against them.

OH! “The fall”. Henry must mean that anyone who refuses to take that Bible story seriously about the talking snake who convinces a woman to eat an apple will never be acceptable to your version of god. Remember… this is your version of god. There are other versions of god followed by other equally religious people who are just as convinced that you are going to their version of hell as you are convinced that they are going to your version of hell. Your ancestors have probably already killed each other on some historic battlefield because of those very beliefs.

The truths of God are foolishness to such a mind. The man looks on them as trifling and impertinent things, not worth his minding. The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not, John 1:5. Not that the natural faculty of discerning is lost, but evil inclinations and wicked principles render the man unwilling to enter into the mind of God, in the spiritual matters of his kingdom, and yield to their force and power.

So there you are. Anyone who doesn’t share your beliefs is unenlightened, uncomprehending, inclined to be evil, and wicked for being unwilling to believe the same religious doctrine that you believe. That is exactly the rationale that has been used for centuries as an excuse to murder other people.

It is the quickening beams of the Spirit of truth and holiness that must help the mind to discern their excellency, and to so thorough a conviction of their truth as heartily to receive and embrace them.

So you and Mr. Henry and all others of like mind must be enlightened, righteous and holy because you believe that a book which contains stories that some other people find mythological and unbelievable is the infallible word of your version of god.

Thus the natural man, the man destitute of the Spirit of God, cannot know them, because they are spiritually discerned. Or, (2.) The natural man, that is, the wise man of the world (I Cor 1:19, 20), the wise man after the flesh, or according to the flesh (I Cor 1:27), one who hath the wisdom of the world, man's wisdom (I Cor 2:4-6), a man, as some of the ancients, that would learn all truth by his own ratiocinations, receive nothing by faith, nor own any need of supernatural assistance.

I think this is the very attitude which caused the catholic church to excommunicate Galileo for disagreeing with the Biblical scriptures which describe the world as flat or the sun as moving across the sky.

This was very much the character of the pretenders to philosophy and the Grecian learning and wisdom in that day. Such a man receives not the things of the Spirit of God. Revelation is not with him a principle of science; he looks upon it as delirium and dotage, the extravagant thought of some deluded dreamer.

Have you ever read the Scopes monkey trial? Take a look at the questioning of William Jennings Bryan by Clarence Darrow sometime. I, too, believe that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution is just that – a theory – which needs to be refined and augmented by additional knowledge and scientific discovery before it can ever fully explain the origin of the species on this planet. But religion historically stands in the way of any quest for greater knowledge… rejecting any new information that would contradict Biblical scripture. For that reason alone I cannot subscribe to any organized religion.

It is no way to wisdom among the famous masters of the world; and for that reason he can have no knowledge of things revealed, because they are only spiritually discerned, or made known by the revelation of the Spirit, which is a principle of science or knowledge that he will not admit.

Interestingly enough I do believe in the sort of guidance which appears to come from “somewhere out there“ - which is "revealed" - because I have received it many many times. If I were really so separated from any spiritual indwelling because of my refusal to believe in the Bible I should never be able to receive any such spiritual assistance. But I do. So I’m not afraid that your version of god will consign me to a “ lake of fire” . I think that is absolute nonsense. And despite that fact I continue to be blessed and to be guided and embraced by a loving and encouraging creative intelligence.

I believe that this Creator… this intelligence which has expressed itself throughout the universe … is part of everything which lives and breathes and has its being in this cosmos. Therefore, neither Mr. Henry, nor any other religious zealot, can possibly convince me that my rational recognition of Biblical scripture as human historical information and religious mythology will in any way separate me from the ubiquitous, omnipresent Mind of the Creator.

*

How can you understand Lewis Carrol and not the Bible?

I quoted Lewis Carroll's Jabberwockey because it is nonsense... and then I said, for satirical effect, that anyone who fails to understand the Jabberwockey (obvious nonsense) fails to comprehend the mind of Lewis Carroll.

This was deliberately ironic humor. It was intended to make the point that the argument that anyone who fails to understand something which is obvious nonsense is incapable of understanding the mind of the writer is, in and of itself, nonsense. That argument amounts to using more nonsense to defend nonsense.

So if I find it unbelievable that a talking snake convinced a woman to eat an apple, or that a woman was turned into a pillar of salt, or that the sun was stopped in the sky when I know that the Earth actually orbits around the sun, it is not because I do not possess the key... the "holy spirit" ... that would change my mind for me and convince me to accept such myths as reality. The overarching nonsense here is that argument which claims that the writers and believers of the mythology are divinely inspired, while the rational skeptics are somehow corrupted by their own inborn intelligence and common sense.

I was created with the intelligence to recognize nonsense when I see it, or hear it, or read it. And I am especially leary of the kind of religious dogma that tries to prevent me or anyone else from using that intelligence in the pursuit of knowledge.

*

[iamfreeru2]

Heidi, please see may responses below in bold.

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

In other words, you are warning me that if I do not agree with you and your religious guru, Matthew Henry, “God” will punish and or reject me. "No that is not what I am saying at all" There does come a time whern YHWH hardens the hearts of those that continually hearden their hearts towards Him. Case in point Pharoah, when he would not listen to YHWH's messenger Moses. Whe YHWH hardened Pharoah's heart at that point it was too late for him. I just do not want to see the same thing happen to you. It is out of love for my fellow man/woman that I share. If I did not and the Bible is true then I would be held much more accountable for my actions or my non-actions.


So you automatically agree with this man’s interpretation of this scripture, and the meaning of the translated words in it? No, I believe what the Bible says and Matthew Henry just happens to believe what I believe


I submit that in your opinion Mr Henry seems to understand what “God” meant because you happen to agree with Mr Henry. And I think you agree with Mr Henry because he rationalizes your determination to believe things in the Bible that other people often find unbelievable for various reasons – including ongoing scientific discoveries about the nature of the universe, and ordinary common sense.Sorry Heidi if you feel threatened by me. That is not my intention. I did not write the Bible, but I know the author. It is not my opinion. The Bible is being proven all the time by real science. I do not agree with Mathew Henry. He and I both agree with YHWH.


This right here is the very foundation of religious persecution. I will not mince words here. This issue is fundamental to any hope of mankind’s ability to grow spiritually and intellectually into a species capable of peace and brotherly love. As soon as you characterize other people who do not share your religious beliefs as people who are somehow “unsanctified”, “animal men”, “sensual” (interpreting a person’s enjoyment of physical pleasure as somehow unholy), and “corrupt”, you set the stage for the kind of self-righteous, holier-than-thou attitude toward other people which can lead to religious persecution. Such attitudes have led to horrific religious persecution throughout history. Persecution like the “Holy” crusades. Persecution like the Spanish Inquisition. Persecution like Islamic terrorism. Persecution like the bombings in Belfast Northern Ireland. As soon as you tell yourself that anybody who chooses not to share your religious beliefs is unacceptable in the eyes of your version of god you set yourself above those other people in your own mind; probably thinking in your heart of hearts that “those” people are damned because your version of god tells you to think so.I am sharing what YHWHs word says and you attack me, but that is okay. I am just as much a sinner as you Heidi. The only difference is I have been saved by YHWH's grace (unmerited favor), through faith (Eph 2:8,9). I am not perfect. There is only one that is perfect. The words I share with you from Scripture are YHWH's words not my own and I backup everything with Scripture. YHWH wants us to follow Him and not call Him a liar (1 John 1:8-9). You use logic and your finite mind to understand the things of YHWH, which is an impossibility with out the Spirit to guide you. You seem to think and know better than He does. You pick and choose what you want to believe and blame everyone else for your shortcomings. Just becasue you do not understand a passage of Scripture, because you put your wordly view on it, you say YHWH could not write such garbage (paraphrase). I can only pray that one day you will be enlightened, just as I was at age 38.




OH! “The fall”. Henry must mean that anyone who refuses to take that Bible story seriously about the talking snake who convinces a woman to eat an apple will never be acceptable to your version of god. Remember… this is your version of god. There are other versions of god followed by other equally religious people who are just as convinced that you are going to their version of hell as you are convinced that they are going to your version of hell. Your ancestors have probably already killed each other on some historic battlefield because of those very beliefs.Wll Heidi, all I can say is that there be only one truth and one day we will all know what that truth is.




So there you are. Anyone who doesn’t share your beliefs is unenlightened, uncomprehending, inclined to be evil, and wicked for being unwilling to believe the same religious doctrine that you believe. That is exactly the rationale that has been used for centuries as an excuse to murder other people.I shared what YHWH's word says Heidi. I did not write the Bible, He did. Why do you blame me for His writings? It is not my words I share, but His.




So you and Mr. Henry and all others of like mind must be enlightened, righteous and holy because you believe that a book which contains stories that some other people find mythological and unbelievable is the infallible word of your version of god.I believe the Bible, correctly translated from the manuscripts, to be His word yes, not mine. Why do you continue to call it my version? Did I write it? The only righteousness I have is because of Yeshua and what He did for me, not because of anything I have done. I am but filthy rags (Isaiah 64:6 also see Isaiah 46:12) and appart from Christ and His shed blood I am deserving of hell. It is because of Christ's shed blood that I am frogiven and my home is not of this world, but with Him in heaven (see John 14:2-3).




I think this is the very attitude which caused the catholic church to excommunicate Galileo for disagreeing with the Biblical scriptures which describe the world as flat or the sun as moving across the sky.




Have you ever read the Scopes monkey trial? Take a look at the questioning of William Jennings Bryan by Clarence Darrow sometime. I, too, believe that Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution is just that – a theory – which needs to be refined and augmented by additional knowledge and scientific discovery before it can ever fully explain the origin of the species on this planet. But religion historically stands in the way of any quest for greater knowledge… rejecting any new information that would contradict Biblical scripture. For that reason alone I cannot subscribe to any organized religion.




Interestingly enough I do believe in the sort of guidance which appears to come from “somewhere out there“ - which is "revealed" - because I have received it many many times. If I were really so separated from any spiritual indwelling because of my refusal to believe in the Bible I should never be able to receive any such spiritual assistance. But I do. So I’m not afraid that your version of god will consign me to a “ lake of fire” . I think that is absolute nonsense. And despite that fact I continue to be blessed and to be guided and embraced by a loving and encouraging creative intelligence.

I believe that this Creator… this intelligence which has expressed itself throughout the universe … is part of everything which lives and breathes and has its being in this cosmos. Therefore, neither Mr. Henry, nor any other religious zealot, can possibly convince me that my rational recognition of Biblical scripture as human historical information and religious mythology will in any way separate me from the ubiquitous, omnipresent Mind of the Creator.I will pray for you if you do not mind.

*

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

I quoted Lewis Carroll's Jabberwockey because it is nonsense... and then I said, for satirical effect, that anyone who fails to understand the Jabberwockey (obvious nonsense) fails to comprehend the mind of Lewis Carroll.

This was deliberately ironic humor. It was intended to make the point that the argument that anyone who fails to understand something which is obvious nonsense is incapable of understanding the mind of the writer is, in and of itself, nonsense. That argument amounts to using more nonsense to defend nonsense.

So if I find it unbelievable that a talking snake convinced a woman to eat an apple, or that a woman was turned into a pillar of salt, or that the sun was stopped in the sky when I know that the Earth actually orbits around the sun, it is not because I do not possess the key... the "holy spirit" ... that would change my mind for me and convince me to accept such myths as reality. The overarching nonsense here is that argument which claims that the writers and believers of the mythology are divinely inspired, while the rational skeptics are somehow corrupted by their own inborn intelligence and common sense.

I was created with the intelligence to recognize nonsense when I see it, or hear it, or read it. And I am especially leary of the kind of religious dogma that tries to prevent me or anyone else from using that intelligence in the pursuit of knowledge.

*

This post does not deserve a response. I do not put Lewis Carroll on the same level as YHWH. That is total nonsense!!

This post does not deserve a response. I do not put Lewis Carroll on the same level as YHWH. That is total nonsense!!

I am sorry, but you miss the point. I must not have explained it adequately.

I will try again.

I was equating the idea that anyone should be able to understand Lewis Carroll's deliberate nonsense on the same level with the expectation that anyone should be able to comprehend nonsensical scriptures, many of which defy common sense and rational thought.

Again, it is important to remember that I do not accept the dogma that YHWH or God or Jehovah (whatever you want to call the Creator) wrote any such nonsense. I absolutely believe that the entire Bible was written by mere human beings. Therefore, I was not equating any nonsense whatsoever, with God. Please do keep that in mind. People write unbelievable nonsense... not God.

*

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by Heidi Guedel

I am sorry, but you miss the point. I must not have explained it adequately.

I will try again.

I was equating the idea that anyone should be able to understand Lewis Carroll's deliberate nonsense on the same level with the expectation that anyone should be able to comprehend nonsensical scriptures, many of which defy common sense and rational thought.

Again, it is important to remember that I do not accept the dogma that YHWH or God or Jehovah (whatever you want to call the Creator) wrote any such nonsense. I absolutely believe that the entire Bible was written by mere human beings. Therefore, I was not equating any nonsense whatsoever, with God. Please do keep that in mind. People write unbelievable nonsense... not God.

*

Heidi, there are many thousands of believers that rightly understand the Scriptures. There are many people that claim to be believers, but are not. Not every denomination believes the same as you have already pointed out. So which one has the truth? I contend the ones that take YHWH at His word and do not try to pervert it. YHWH said what He meant and meant whet He said. YHWH buy His words has said that not everyone will understand. Many people think they know and believe they are spiritual, when they are following a counterfeit. Are you so positive you are following the right path? Do you know without any doubt? Is YHWH the God of confusion and doubt? Think about that Heidi.

I share with you because I care, not because I want to attack you. I call YHWH a loving Father. He sacrificed His Son for me. It was my sin that nailed Him to that cross. He died for me and that is what I call the ultimate sacrifice. To love your creation that much to know if the sacrifice was not made that no one would be able to enter His kingdom because He is holy and cannot be in the presence of sin. If we could save ourselves Heidi, His death was for nothing.

The illistration of Abraham willing to sacrifice his only son because of his love for the Father was very evident and this is the point you miss. It is exactly what was done on our behalf from a loving Father when He gave His only Son for us. Abraham by faith knew that YHWH would not allow him to sacrifice Isaac and would provide another sacrificial lamb, which is what took place. Abraham's devotion and love for the Father was so great that He showed he would do whatever the Father asked of him.

Faith is dead without works and our works prove our faith. First comes the faith and then the works. Do you have that kind of faith Heidi that you would do anything your creator asked you to do? I would hope that I do when the time comes. Heb 11:1 "Now faith is the 'assurance' of things hoped for, the 'conviction' of things not seen." This is the kind of faith Abraham had. If he did not he would have said to YHWH, NO WAY. He did though and was obedient and YHWH blessed him greatly. That account is one of the greatest showings of faith in the Scriptures. You see it another way, a perverted way from a wordly viewpoint.

What do you think would happen Heidi if YHWH allowed sin into heaven? Would it be any better there than here? Our world is so full of hate, strife, wars, lies, deceipt, etc. I am sorry, but I want no part of it and if this what the after life is like I want no part of that either.

Now you call YHWH's word garbage, rediculous, nonsense. Who made you God that you can make that judgment? If you fully understood the Scriptures from a Godly perspective you would not make those statements. I choose not to tell Him He is wrong and I am right. I am His creature and He has the right to do with me as He pleases. I gladly follow Him.

This is sad... and I hope we can at least grow to understand each other, even if we disagree. To that end I will always participate in an honest discussion.

Heidi, there are many thousands of believers that rightly understand the Scriptures. There are many people that claim to be believers, but are not. Not every denomination believes the same as you have already pointed out. So which one has the truth? I contend the ones that take YHWH at His word and do not try to pervert it. YHWH said what He meant and meant whet He said. YHWH buy His words has said that not everyone will understand.

IMHO there are many thousands of believers in several different religions - three of which predicate their beliefs upon the same "God of Abraham" - Judiasm, Islam, and Christianity. They each have their "holy" books that they each believe with all their hearts were inspired by their version of God. These people are still killing each other over it.

You believe that the Bible is God's word. I do not. I do not believe that the Torah or the Koran are God's word, either. Believers in those faiths would be just as displeased with me for saying that as you are... and just as convinced that you and I are not going to their version of heaven because you and I do not believe their holy book and their verison of God. This is all nonsense, superstition and dogma, and it has lead to misery and death and holy wars all over this planet.

The men who wrote the Old Testament wrote that not everyone will understand. This is an obvious ploy to counter any arguments which were bound to arise concerning the believability of the stories that these men wrote. Their only defense was to say that if you do not understand their particular dogmatic nonsense, you must not be in touch with God. How can you argue with that? I go back to the believability of the scriptures themselves, written by men. They do not strike me as either believable or divinely inspired.

Sadly, I do believe that Jesus of Nazareth was persecuted and killed for both religious and political reasons. The religious reasons arose out of ancient blood sacrifice practices that took place in the Middle East for centuries before Jesus ever walked the Earth. The political reasons were particular to Rome, and also to the the Sanhedron, who resented Jesus' teachings and influence upon other Jews at the time. I believe that Jesus was scapegoated and victimized because of organized religion and politics. The resurrection has never been corroborated beyond the New Testament scriptures, and I believe that those scriptures, which were written many years after the crucifixion, were all written by religious men who were merely substantiating their beliefs in writing. Since they were not written by God, but only by men, I take them for their historical significance only.

*

[iamfreeru2]

This is the last I will post in this thread.

2 Timothy 3:16-17 "All Scripture is inspired by YHWH and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of YHWH may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

I Peter 1:20-21 "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from YHWH."

I have never seen any contradiction or falsehood come out of Scripture. The above quotes tell me the Bible is from YHWH and not from men. You can believe what you will, but for me that settles it.

Perhaps you can point me to where I might find Yeshua's body as well, since He was just a scapegoat and the resurrection never occured. No, even science proves the Bible accounts to be accurate. Peace

2 Timothy 3:16-17 "All Scripture is inspired by YHWH and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of YHWH may be adequate, equipped for every good work."

This is the writer claiming to have been inspired by God. I have absolutely no rational reason to believe that this was true.

I Peter 1:20-21 "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from YHWH."

I find no believable reason to accept the idea that the Bible was written by divine inspiration. As I have repeated previously, there are several other religious books that are also presumed to be inspired by some version of god followed by each of those other major religions. How do you know they're not right? Probably because, if you read those religious books, you will find some unbelievable and illogical mythology. They are all just people who have decided to worship a book that was written by other people.

Interestingly enough, I tend to believe in prophecy because I have received guidance myself. Accurate guidance from the Universal Mind has actually been experienced by many people. I don't have to struggle to believe this because I have experienced it myself.

I have never seen any contradiction or falsehood come out of Scripture. The above quotes tell me the Bible is from YHWH and not from men. You can believe what you will, but for me that settles it.

Several very obvious contradictions have already been posted. Here's a large collection of them:

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.co...a/by_name.html

Perhaps you can point me to where I might find Yeshua's body as well, since He was just a scapegoat and the resurrection never occured. No, even science proves the Bible accounts to be accurate. Peace

In whose universe has science proven the Bible accounts to be correct? Genesis was written by men who didn't realize the anatomy of the solar system! The scientific inaccuracies are numerous.

StU posted an interesting thesis about Christianity and the resurrection that was written by Lysander Spooner. Spooner came up with some plausible explanations for the accounts of the resurrection. We really have no way of knowing if one of Spooner's theories is correct, but they are all far more plausible than the biblical accounts. So far, there has been no proof of the resurrection besides the NT scriptures... and those were written by a few men many years after the crucifixion occurred. These accounts vary and are therefore imperfect... just like the accounts of any four different reporters would be. Human error... nothing more.

I do thank you for your prayer. I believe in the power of prayer, and I appreciate the thought behind it. Peace to you too.

*