Show me definitive proof your religious text isn't entirely made up.

[Etritonakin]

I have no idea where we come from. Creationists seem to have a pretty good grasp on the subject though, so I'm trying to learn definitely that creationism can be known.

We are creators. We were created by that which preceded us. The only question from there is whether or not that which preceded us is able to say "I AM".

As for who created the initial creator.... from all that I can gather from the bible about the creator spoken of therein, he is all things and self-created -one might even say -ironically -he self-evolved..... being both that which could act and that which could be acted upon.

Isa 33:10 Now will I rise, saith the LORD; now will I be exalted; now will I lift up myself.

Isa 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

That is not to say he had a beginning, as such -as there could never have been nothing.

I do not claim to know -but this is what I am considering at this point.

 

[dust1n]

House of Judah -not necessarily tribe. The tribe of Judah was only part of the house of Judah. That's a good start on your research.

Matthew 24:36 “But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."

So how do you know it is soon?

By not being concerned with the particular day or hour of that day.

It does not say we cannot know it is near. Other scriptures indicate we can know more certainly as it approaches....

Okay, so which ways say its soon. I mean, I'd still like to know about House of Judah, which I can still find no particular for anywhere, and also about lineages of various Israeli leaders being descendants of this particular house.

I take it prophesies like this validate the Bible as infallible, thus we can also trust Genesis and Exodus and the such, right?

The following concern the taking away of "the daily" by a "king of fierce countenance"/"king of the north", a "host" used by him against the daily...

Dan 12:11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
Dan 12:12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days

Dan 8:11 Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him the daily sacrifice was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down.
Dan 8:12 And an host was given him against the daily sacrifice by reason of transgression, and it cast down the truth to the ground; and it practised, and prospered.
Dan 8:13 Then I heard one saint speaking, and another saint said unto that certain saint which spake, How long shall be the vision concerning the daily sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?
Dan 8:14 And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.

Dan 11:31 And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.

To identify those, many other scriptures need to be referenced.

Okay, so where is the evidence that any of this happened?

Isa 28:9 Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts.
Isa 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:
Isa 28:11 For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

Things written in one place become more clear when other things are referenced.

Just looking for the definitive proof. If you could milk the breast for me, and I just take it from a sippy cup, that would be nice. I mean, the name of the thread is called '"Show me definitive proof" is sort of asking for you to show it, not for me to scanning the Bible for any semblance of reason for the next 10 years of my life. Have you taken an a class is evolutionary biology, perchance?

The following is addressed top the house of Israel (not the house of Judah)

Eze 17:1 And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,
Eze 17:2 Son of man, put forth a riddle, and speak a parable unto the house of Israel;
Eze 17:3 And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; A great eagle with great wings, longwinged, full of feathers, which had divers colours, came unto Lebanon, and took the highest branch of the cedar:

...and the identity of the cedar is given elswhere

Eze 31:3 Behold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon with fair branches, and with a shadowing shroud, and of an high stature; and his top was among the thick boughs.

So the prophesy and the account of the prophesy are both covered in the same book of Ezekiel. That's interesting. So is there any proof that a man Ezekiel actually wrote the book Ezekiel, or that any such person even existed, let alone experienced any interactions with God other the accounts he himself supposedly wrote?

 

[dust1n]

We are creators. We were created by that which preceded us.

The only question from there is whether or not that which preceded us is able to say "I AM".

As for who created the initial creator.... from all that I can gather from the bible about the creator spoken of therein, he is all things and self-created -one might even say -ironically -he self-evolved..... being both that which could act and that which could be acted upon.

I don't understand this. Why is it a given that every single thing stated in the Bible is just a given needing no other proof other than what the Bible says?

Isa 33:10 Now will I rise, saith the LORD; now will I be exalted; now will I lift up myself.

Isa 9:7 Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

All the prophets supposedly mediating the words of the God. Where is the proof? Words are like fossils, anyone can pick just anyone random words from the past and put them on paper and misrepresent what was there easily. No one can that this isn't the case definitively.

That is not to say he had a beginning, as such -as there could never have been nothing.

What definitive proof do you have that there could never have been nothing?

 

[Sees]

You make no sense. Ancient Catholicism is poly and partnered with pagans, henceforth not Christianity in true form.

I'd like to hear all about that in another thread, especially your comment earlier how anything claiming paganism is committing atrocities today.

 

[popsthebuilder]

I'd like to hear all about that in another thread, especially how anything claiming paganism is committing atrocities today.

Definitely not directly linked to new age paganism as far as I know but there are a whole lot of sects including lucifarianism and out right Satan worship so who knows for sure. Not me. Not yet.

 

[popsthebuilder]

I'd like to hear all about that in another thread, especially your comment earlier how anything claiming paganism is committing atrocities today.

Said ancient

 

[Etritonakin]

Okay, so which ways say its soon. I mean, I'd still like to know about House of Judah, which I can still find no particular for anywhere, and also about lineages of various Israeli leaders being descendants of this particular house.

I take it prophesies like this validate the Bible as infallible, thus we can also trust Genesis and Exodus and the such, right?



Okay, so where is the evidence that any of this happened?



Just looking for the definitive proof. If you could milk the breast for me, and I just take it from a sippy cup, that would be nice. I mean, the name of the thread is called '"Show me definitive proof" is sort of asking for you to show it, not for me to scanning the Bible for any semblance of reason for the next 10 years of my life. Have you taken an a class is evolutionary biology, perchance?



So the prophesy and the account of the prophesy are both covered in the same book of Ezekiel. That's interesting. So is there any proof that a man Ezekiel actually wrote the book Ezekiel, or that any such person even existed, let alone experienced any interactions with God other the accounts he himself supposedly wrote?

All excellent questions I hope you continue to consider.

"Have you taken an a class is evolutionary biology, perchance"

No -but I have considered many things on the subject with an open mind -appreciate the efforts of many -and have learned much from them....and saved a bunch of money.

Evolution is awesome -and has helped me understand God. As written, the things of God are apparent in what was made.

"Okay, so where is the evidence that any of this happened?"

It is happening now -and will continue. The daily is being done now and is about to be taken away. It is more important to your future than evolutionary biology -I hope you continue.

I have more free time than many -having been prevented from having what most would call "a life" -which has allowed much time for research and consideration -but I would estimate that you could prove these things with an open-minded study -without preconceptions -in far less time than ten years.

The greatest preparation is to understand that the commandments of God ought to be kept regardless of circumstance -but a study of prophecy would show it is not in vain.

 

[Etritonakin]

I don't understand this. Why is it a given that every single thing stated in the Bible is just a given needing no other proof other than what the Bible says?



All the prophets supposedly mediating the words of the God. Where is the proof? Words are like fossils, anyone can pick just anyone random words from the past and put them on paper and misrepresent what was there easily. No one can that this isn't the case definitively.



What definitive proof do you have that there could never have been nothing?

Bye for now -let that stuff do its thing all up in your brain -and see where you are in a few years

 

[David M]

Just expanding on this:

"We read, that this city was not only wasted by Joshua with fire and sword, but cursed also. "Cursed be he before the Lord, who shall rise up and build that city Jericho," Joshua 6:26. "Nor was another city to be built (says the Talmudists), which was to be called by the name of Jericho: nor was Jericho itself to be built, although to be called by another name."".

Which just establishes that that Bible contains a whole load of stuff that was made up. Jericho was a real place, as was Jerusalem and just as Pilate was a real person and was Prefect. So the Bible is not entirely made up.

 

[McBell]

Which just establishes that that Bible contains a whole load of stuff that was made up. Jericho was a real place, as was Jerusalem and just as Pilate was a real person and was Prefect. So the Bible is not entirely made up.

AH.
So the movie "Titanic" is not entirely made up because there was once a boat named Titanic?

 

[David M]

AH.
So the movie "Titanic" is not entirely made up because there was once a boat named Titanic?

I said I was being pedantic.

No its not entirely made up, it references things that are historic. To be entirely made up it would need to contain zero references to real places and events.

 

[McBell]

I said I was being pedantic.

No its not entirely made up, it references things that are historic. To be entirely made up it would need to contain zero references to real places and events.

Fair enough.
However, how is that not merely nit picking?

 

[dust1n]

Which just establishes that that Bible contains a whole load of stuff that was made up. Jericho was a real place, as was Jerusalem and just as Pilate was a real person and was Prefect. So the Bible is not entirely made up.

So can you prove this definitively to the be the case? I see no description of this place called Jericho in the Bible, or how any ruins have been confirmed to be definitive.

I mean, it seems likely to me such a place existed, but I can discount that both radiometric carbon dating has already been dismissed by creationism, as well as sort of fossil in the dirt.

Any village is only as trust worthy as the best fossil.

 

[dust1n]

I said I was being pedantic.

No its not entirely made up, it references things that are historic. To be entirely made up it would need to contain zero references to real places and events.

I'm not even sure I understand this argument either way.

Washington D.C. is located in the clouds because God was mad at them. Is there any truth to that statement because Washington D.C. is an actual place?

 

[allfoak]

No proof that we are the answer to all of our questions. Not even any evidence. Not at least on the scale of macro-evolution, and I know macro-evolution has to be wrong, so I need something more definitive than that when debating evolutionists.

If what you are looking for is fodder for a debate i am probably not the one to whom you should be listening.
If you want proof that you have your own answers then you simply need to seek them out.
Don't waste your time thinking that there is anyone else that can help you.

With all of the books that have been printed you would think that by now someone would have written down all of the answers for which we all search.

If it were even possible to write such a book it would be rejected as foolishness.
The reason being is because i nor anyone else has the answers for another.
The best someone can do for another is to be a living example of the truth.
We can't tell someone what is best for them or what they ought to be doing with their life.
We can't coerce or force someone to change because we would just turn them into another one of us or something worse.

I cannot show you definitive proof that any religious text is not entirely made up because from the perspective of some they are just a bunch of ridiculous hogwash.
Who am i to say their perspective is wrong?

If someone considers the Bible a history book and expects to prove it's validity through historical writings or archaeology they are in for a big surprise when they start looking for evidence.
The debate rages on because people refuse to accept that their perspective is incorrect.

When you approach a religious text from the perspective that it is an image of the mind of man then you can begin to understand what you are reading.

Carl Jung called the Gnostics that wrote many of the Nag Hammadi texts, the first psyhcologists.
You will never win a debate with the evolutionists because they would never accept what i just said to be true.
They see everything from a material perspective.
It has actually ruined our culture.

nuff said...

 

[dust1n]

All excellent questions I hope you continue to consider.

"Have you taken an a class is evolutionary biology, perchance"

No -but I have considered many things on the subject with an open mind -appreciate the efforts of many -and have learned much from them....and saved a bunch of money.

Evolution is awesome -and has helped me understand God. As written, the things of God are apparent in what was made.

So you believe in macro-evoution? Just for the sake of clarification?

"Okay, so where is the evidence that any of this happened?"

It is happening now -and will continue. The daily is being done now and is about to be taken away. It is more important to your future than evolutionary biology -I hope you continue.

I have more free time than many -having been prevented from having what most would call "a life" -which has allowed much time for research and consideration -but I would estimate that you could prove these things with an open-minded study -without preconceptions -in far less time than ten years.

The greatest preparation is to understand that the commandments of God ought to be kept regardless of circumstance -but a study of prophecy would show it is not in vain.

Right, you kept saying it is happening now, for instance, there governors of the House of Judah governing Israel, but ever time I ask for any specific evidence regarding this, you just keep ignoring it. I'm sorry to say, but I'm going to spend 10 years to research the Bible, under any circumstance.

 

[dust1n]

If what you are looking for is fodder for a debate i am probably not the one to whom you should be listening.

That's fine.

If you want proof that you have your own answers then you simply need to seek them out.
Don't waste your time thinking that there is anyone else that can help you.

Okay. No god, all religion is false, evolution is generally true. That was easy.

With all of the books that have been printed you would think that by now someone would have written down all of the answers for which we all search.

If it were even possible to write such a book it would be rejected as foolishness.
The reason being is because i nor anyone else has the answers for another.
The best someone can do for another is to be a living example of the truth.
We can't tell someone what is best for them or what they ought to be doing with their life.
We can't coerce or force someone to change because we would just turn them into another one of us or something worse.

I cannot show you definitive proof that any religious text is not entirely made up because from the perspective of some they are just a bunch of ridiculous hogwash.
Who am i to say their perspective is wrong?

If someone considers the Bible a history book and expects to prove it's validity through historical writings or archaeology they are in for a big surprise when they start looking for evidence.

I generally agree with all your sentiments here.

The debate rages on because people refuse to accept that their perspective is incorrect.

When you approach a religious text from the perspective that it is an image of the mind of man then you can begin to understand what you are reading.

Carl Jung called the Gnostics that wrote many of the Nag Hammadi texts, the first psyhcologists.
You will never win a debate with the evolutionists because they would never accept what i just said to be true.
They see everything from a material perspective.
It has actually ruined our culture.

nuff said...

http://gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html

I'll look into in when I have a chance. Thanks for the link.

 

[allfoak]

The debate rages on because people refuse to accept that their perspective is incorrect.

This statement i made is not correct.
What i should have said is that people refuse to accept that there perspective is only partially correct.
Every one's perspective is correct to the degree that they are able to understand the subject.
Some can see from multiple perspectives and others are more limited.
Those that are more limited in their perspective are not wrong just not complete in their understanding.

 

[allfoak]

Okay. No god, all religion is false, evolution is generally true. That was easy.

I'm sorry but i said none of those things.

 

[dust1n]

This statement i made is not correct.
What i should have said is that people refuse to accept that there perspective is only partially correct.
Every one's perspective is correct to the degree that they are able to understand the subject.
Some can see from multiple perspectives and others are more limited.
Those that are more limited in their perspective are not wrong just not complete in their understanding.

Ah, well that I can agree with you.

I'm sorry but i said none of those things.

I know you didn't. You said all answers lie within myself. I've answered the questions. My pursuit for ecclesiastic validation may be over.