God vs. Religion

[Cheri]

Well, no offense to those whom read the "New" bibles, I would never trust any translated or "new" or any kind of that bible, I'd rather to have both untranslated bible and translated bible so that I can read both and have more good understanding.

You can understand ancient writing? Latin language? Geek language? Hebrew Language?

The reason for it's translation is to fit in people's languages.

 

[Hwy99]

You can understand ancient writing? Latin language? Geek language? Hebrew Language?

No, that's not what I mean, I mean those bibles that translate the older version of the bible, but not about the language..

The reason for it's translation is to fit in people's languages.

Yupp as I said, while I read both translated and untranslated bibles, it helps me to get better understanding about what the bible said. Let me make it clear, I read the NRsV and KJV both so that I can understand the bible better, but it's just that I am more trust to the untranslated bible more than translated bible.

 

[Secretblend]

No, that's not what I mean, I mean those bibles that translate the older version of the bible, but not about the language..



Yupp as I said, while I read both translated and untranslated bibles, it helps me to get better understanding about what the bible said. Let me make it clear, I read the NRsV and KJV both so that I can understand the bible better, but it's just that I am more trust to the untranslated bible more than translated bible.

If you don't know the ancient language then you are unable to read untranslated Bible.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Thank you for share interesting posts here.

Angel for provided the link of your Bible.

Cheri, don't you have computer anymore?

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Not correct. Jesus was accused of blasphemy by the Jewish religious leaders. He was condemned to death by the Roman political leader, Pontius Pilate. You have confused them together.

Yes, that's right. I said in other thread that Jesus was sentenced to death by Roman's religious leaders (Roman authorities) for commit blasphemy.

Sorry to confuse you with my post over Jesus's miracle things. I do feel that Jesus's miracle things are also reason as well because Roman's relgious leaders were jealous of him.

I think you better check your "facts."

Yeah, I living with my theory on anything what I agree or disagree like what I agree with link author. It's not just Religious issues, but Evolution, histories, etc. as well. I would not use my theory if they have proof to the fact.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

The truths of the Bible apply to every human being, past, present, and future. You are a human being, so you are included.

Yes but not my feeling and mind.

If you aren't a Christian, then I wouldn't expect you to follow the Bible, so why would you teach your children to follow the Bible? That would be hypocritical, would it not?

I think you didn't get what I am trying to say. I am not interest either you are Christian or not but yourself as person. Let me play hypocritical games with you bit... Do you let your Bible to discipline your child into good path without you? Would you do the Bible tell you to not go work because work is bad for you as woman or not eat or drink something what you like? Did the Bible tell you to choose what you like to wear? Do what the bible, not for yourself?

My hubby & I discipline our children to obey our house rules, not the bible because the bible don't know what kind of rules we have in our house. I choose kind of job myself, I like to work. I choose to eat and drink what I like myself. I choose the taste of clothes myself. I do for myself and my family, not the book.

The bible is a history book, we like to read and learn how and where come from...

The Bible teaches the truth. It's up to you to decide whether or not to obey. If a parent believes and obeys the Bible, then there is nothing in it that would contradict parental limits.

It's not my place to judge the parents for make their children to obey bible's rules, not parental's rules. I respect each parents have different form of disicpline to expose their children as long as there're no abuse.

I'm not sure what you mean. You can take the Gideon's one out of your hotel room if you want.

Is it your own word?

I don't know where you get your misinformation.

The Holy Bible of Christians and Jews does NOT teach that God allows men to marry more than one woman. The Bible proves time and again that polygamy is against God's will. The Bible does NOT teach that parents have to arrange weddings for their children. Arranged marriages were the cultural norm of the time but they weren't commanded by God. Jewish priests were married (the tribe of Levites would probably die out pretty quickly if they weren't allowed to procreate :roll.

wow, I thought you know a lot about the bible story. I think we should talk about the example story over Jacob who have many children by wives and maid servants. Did you know that?

Did you know that Jacob want Rachel but Laban gave him 2 wives instead of Rachel that Jacob have to work for years to marry Rachel... The parents arrange the marriage for their children, not the children themselves. They have other wife to bear children because their wife can't bear children.

I know those story that Jacob is not alone...

Why did God allow polygamy / bigamy in the Bible?

Polygamy in the Bible. Jesus allowed Polygamy!

That's why many different relgious in Islam countries allow to have more wives and also marriage arrangement as well.

It look like that their "bible" says so.

Truthfully, do you really want to know?

Why not?

 

[Cheri]

If you don't know the ancient language then you are unable to read untranslated Bible.

 

[Reba]

Yes, that's right. I said in other thread that Jesus was sentenced to death by Roman's religious leaders (Roman authorities) for commit blasphemy.

You are incorrect.

The religious leaders were Jews. The political leaders were Romans.

Romans were not allowed to be religious leaders of the Jews. Romans were NOT allowed in the Temple.

The Romans and the Jews followed two totally separate religions.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

You are incorrect.

The religious leaders were Jews. The political leaders were Romans.

Romans were not allowed to be religious leaders of the Jews. Romans were NOT allowed in the Temple.

The Romans and the Jews followed two totally separate religions.

I know the history about Relgious and political are separated but still is Relious leaders work under Roman authorities which mean that they have to follow Roman's rules, not Jew's rules. I would call Roman's Relgious leaders. Got it?

If Relgious leaders consider themselves Jewish and don't like Roman's rules then leave Rome to go back to Isreal or follow Jesus.

Example: I am British and live in Germany and have to follow German law. I would leave Germany to go back to England if I don't like German's rules.

 

[Reba]

I think you didn't get what I am trying to say. I am not interest either you are Christian or not but yourself as person. Let me play hypocritical games with you bit...

I'm not interested in playing "hypocritical" games with you.

Is it your own word?

Whatever. :roll:

wow, I thought you know a lot about the bible story. I think we should talk about the example story over Jacob who have many children by wives and maid servants. Did you know that?

Did you know that Jacob want Rachel but Laban gave him 2 wives instead of Rachel that Jacob have to work for years to marry Rachel... The parents arrange the marriage for their children, not the children themselves. They have other wife to bear children because their wife can't bear children.

I know those story that Jacob is not alone...

The Bible records what happened, the good, the bad, and the ugly. That doesn't mean that God approved of all the actions in the Bible. Read the story of Jacob again. Where does it say God sanctions their actions? No where. Where does it say that God ordered all marriages be arranged by parents? No where. You are confusing cultural traditions with God's laws. They aren't the same thing.

Why not?

You tell me.

 

[Reba]

... I would call Roman's Relgious leaders. Got it?

You can call a cow a horse for all I care, but it doesn't make it so.

 

[Secretblend]

You can call a cow a horse for all I care, but it doesn't make it so.

ditto!

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I'm not interested in playing "hypocritical" games with you.

You started hyocritical so I don't mind to play hypocritical games with you bit to ask question. You don't have to answer my questions if you dont' want to.

The Bible records what happened, the good, the bad, and the ugly. That doesn't mean that God approved of all the actions in the Bible. Read the story of Jacob again. Where does it say God sanctions their actions? No where. Where does it say that God ordered all marriages be arranged by parents? No where. You are confusing cultural traditions with God's laws. They aren't the same thing.

How do we know about those story? Of course thru the bible...

You tell me.

Why should I repeat when you know my past posts then?

 

[Liebling:-)))]

You can call a cow a horse for all I care, but it doesn't make it so.

Where is your respect..? Would you like to hear my accusation against your belief and said your belief kill Jesus? I bet you would deny or upset to end hot debated... I would not do that.

Don't you want to see the links, I provided in other thread explaining the reason why I call Roman's relgiious leaders without name which race they have due the respect of people's different beleifs because they work under Roman's authorities and follow Roman's rules. I would get the problem if I name which race they have because the links said that Jews did not kill Jesus.

I respect that. Where's your respect... I would say the same about you, Secretblend as well.

It's not my problem if Jew ADers read your post and upset with you... What I do is stick Alex's rules, period.

 

[Secretblend]

Where is your respect..? Would you like to hear my accusation against your belief and said your belief kill Jesus? I would not do that.

Don't you want to see the links, I provided in other thread explaining the reason why I call Roman's relgiious leaders due the respect of people's different beleifs. I would get the problem if I name which race they have because the links said that Jews did not kill Jesus.

I respect that. Where's your respect... I would say the same about you, Secretblend as well.

It's not my problem if Jew ADers read your post and upset with you... What I do is stick Alex's rules, period.

number one! Who cares what the Jews think! The truth is the truth. There is no changing that..

Number 2 , Roman empire covered where the Jews lived which is present day Isreal and beyond.

Since you said that you are from England. I'll use your history to help you understand..

Please correct me if I am wrong..

Did the British empire cover Africa, China, India and other places at one time?

Were the poeple of other countries) allowed to worship how ever they believed?

What law did they follow while under British rule?

If there was two different laws ( their own law) and Britsh Law are in conflict, Who would be one in authority?

Same goes for Roman and Jews, Roman conqured all the lands and including Isreal. Roman authorities allowed the Jews to follow their traditions and their beliefs with exception of executing their people. The Jews leaders wanted Jesus crucified but the Romans had to do that since it was the Roman's Law. So the Jewish leaders went and demanded the Roman leader of that area which is the Pilate (not Caesar) (I'll explain the different in a moment) and Pilate at the end allowed the Jewish leaders to get what they wanted and crucified Jesus for them.

Back to Pilate and Caesar I am from America so I will not claim to totally understand your government but I think I understand enough that i'm willing to explain..

Consider your country empire of the past..

Caesar would be the King of Empire..

Pilate would be the governor of a certain area.

I hope this clears things up..

 

[Cheri]

number one! Who cares what the Jews think! The truth is the truth. There is no changing that..

Number 2 , Roman empire covered where the Jews lived which is present day Isreal and beyond.

Since you said that you are from England. I'll use your history to help you understand..

Please correct me if I am wrong..

Did the British empire cover Africa, China, India and other places at one time?

Were the poeple of other countries) allowed to worship how ever they believed?

What law did they follow while under British rule?

If there was two different laws ( their own law) and Britsh Law are in conflict, Who would be one in authority?

Same goes for Roman and Jews, Roman conqured all the lands and including Isreal. Roman authorities allowed the Jews to follow their traditions and their beliefs with exception of executing their people. The Jews leaders wanted Jesus crucified but the Romans had to do that since it was the Roman's Law. So the Jewish leaders went and demanded the Roman leader of that area which is the Pilate (not Caesar) (I'll explain the different in a moment) and Pilate at the end allowed the Jewish leaders to get what they wanted and crucified Jesus for them.

Back to Pilate and Caesar I am from America so I will not claim to totally understand your government but I think I understand enough that i'm willing to explain..

Consider your country empire of the past..

Caesar would be the King of Empire..

Pilate would be the governor of a certain area.

I hope this clears things up..

That's correct! The truth is the Jewish Leaders initiated the deed, and the Romans carried it out.

 

[fredfam1]

You started hyocritical so I don't mind to play hypocritical games with you bit to ask question. You don't have to answer my questions if you dont' want to.




How do we know about those story? Of course thru the bible...



Why should I repeat when you know my past posts then?

Just curious? Did you mean to say, "Hypocritical games" or did
you mean, "Hypothetical"? There is also another English phrase
that is, "Devils advocate", which means, "just for the sake of
the argument" or "not that I agree with this position but what if"..
Is one of these what you meant?

 

[fredfam1]

Back to the topic...

I have been hearing some of people's different opinion, some people said that God dislike the religion, some of people said that God think the religion is important for people in earth so I don't know for sure...

PuyoPiyo this is a very interesting topic. Have you read the
part in Revelations where Christ writes "letters" to the 7
churches? Each of the churches had started out on the
right track and gone astray. Some of them he spoke to
very harshly. It is very interesting to see where Jesus
thought they had gotten of track.

 

[Reba]

Where is your respect..? Would you like to hear my accusation against your belief and said your belief kill Jesus? I bet you would deny or upset to end hot debated... I would not do that.

It has nothing to do with "belief". The Romans were Romans, and the Jews were Jews. Those are the facts of history. Why should you be allowed to change history? Just because you call the religious leaders of the Jews "Roman" doesn't magically change them into Romans.

If you wanted to call the French people Germans would that change them? Of course not. If you wanted to call dogs cats would that change them? Of course not. So why would you call Jews Romans? There is no point to that other than to try to confuse the issue.

I'm not attacking your "beliefs". You surely don't believe that the Jewish religious leaders were actually Romans.

Don't you want to see the links, I provided in other thread explaining the reason why I call Roman's relgiious leaders without name which race they have due the respect of people's different beleifs because they work under Roman's authorities and follow Roman's rules. I would get the problem if I name which race they have because the links said that Jews did not kill Jesus.

You can post whatever links you want; it doesn't matter if I want to see them. If you think they have value, go ahead a post them.

Calling the Jewish religious leaders "Roman" is not respect for their people. It's very offensive. The Jews hated their Roman governors, and considered them dirty. The Jews didn't want to touch the Roman palace, and the Jews would not let the Romans touch the Jewish Temple. Why on earth would you think it less offensive to call a Jew a Roman?

I respect that. Where's your respect... I would say the same about you, Secretblend as well.

Where is your respect for historical accuracy?

It's not my problem if Jew ADers read your post and upset with you... What I do is stick Alex's rules, period.

Why should Jews be upset with me? I respect and defend them. I think it's disgusting to call them other names, like "Roman". I honor the Jews and see no reason to call them other names.

Which one of Alex's rules says we aren't allowed to call Jews "Jews"?

 

[Hwy99]

If you don't know the ancient language then you are unable to read untranslated Bible.

*sigh* again, trying put YOUR word in my mouth with whole of misunderstanding! Plus re-read your own signature!

First of all, re-read my post, I was NOT talking about the languages!

I already said that I read the New Revised Standard Version (NRsV), which was translating the KJV into easier reading English, and also I read the King James Version (KJV) which never change anything since the bible was translated into English from other language.

Got it clear?

Thanking him for what? I already told you that I was not talking about the language, read my post FIRST before him, I am sure you know better than that.