denying parts of the bible

Thread starter #22
And Fritz sorry for the Hijack, Madman asked I answered and if we need to continue Madman I propose that we make a separate thread somewhere.
No sweat my friend. I just hate that someone wrecked your faith though...
 

apoint

Senior Member
Well lets see my documentation is as follows:

How many gosples were considered for inclussion in the new Testament?

The Gospel of the Hebrews didn't make the cut. Why?
The Gospel of Thomas didn't make the cut either, Why?
The Gospel of Peter same situation
The Gospel of Judas same
The Coptic Gospel of Egyptians same question

A council of men sat and determined that only the 4 Gospels Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were needed.

That is the proof that some books were chosen and other left out it's common knowledge history of your religion yet you seem not to know anything about it.

The Gnostic Bibles were burned and destroyed or simply left to rot because they conflicted with the mainstream roman catholic at the time churches views.

Any simple google will lead you to documentation of this historic fact and the fact that a Gnostic bible scroll set was recovered by archeologists recently and yet these gospels were not included in the Roman Catholic Bible.


The Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Coptic Orthodox, Roman Catholic and Protestant versions of the New Testament are all different, some include books that others do not.

How much more proof do you need Madman or is this enough.
That is not news to me . Those books were left out for a reason, so would you like to tell us what that reason was?
Sounds like you dont believe any of it, so why do you believe what you believe? How do you have faith in nothing? How do you have faith in what others tell you is a fact? Looks like you are ready to believe the word of men you dont even know, but not Gods word.
As Iv said so many times before, nothing new under the sun.
 

Crubear

Senior Member
The Gospel of the Hebrews didn't make the cut.
Why? It is controversial because it casts doubt upon the Virgin Birth and other teachings of the Orthodox and Catholic Churches.

The Gospel of Thomas didn't make the cut either, Why?
may have been excluded because it was believed
- not to have been written close to the time of Jesus
- not to have been written by apostolic authority
or was forged in Thomas' name
- to be heretical or unorthodox[59]
- not to have been useful or comprehensible
- to be secret - or for adepts
as the first sentence of the gospel declares.

The Gospel of Peter same situation
- is widely thought to date from after Peter's death.
- Scholars generally agree on a date
'in the second half of the 2nd century.

The Gospel of Judas same
- is probably from no earlier than the second century
- it's theology is not represented before the 2nd half of the second century
- and since its introduction and epilogue assume the reader is familiar with the canonical Gospels.

The Coptic Gospel of Egyptians same question
Third-or fourth-century Gnostic writing; recounts a Gnostic myth in which Jesus is presented as a reincarnation of Seth, the third son of Adam and Eve.

No early Christian writer considered this document to have any authority for believers or any place among the canonical Scriptures.


Mostly because they're later writings of people trying to get their beliefs accepted as doctrine.
 

TTom

Senior Member
A point your reading of what I am and what I have faith in and what I don't is so off the mark.

I'm putting you in the ignore pile because you continue to try to put words in my mouth and thoughts in my head that have never been espoused by me.
 

TTom

Senior Member
Grubear and others I've opened the other thread to avoid the continued hijack of this thread.

I'll not continue it here in this man's thread, I'm trying to show basic respect here.
 

Crubear

Senior Member
Please show me where it's written that I have to believe the "Literal" interpretation of scripture to gain salvation?

I can't find in any of the Gospels or in Acts where people were saved using any kind of a text document :confused::confused::confused:
 
This just proves there are not near as many people saved as you think there are...i believe that when the church is raptured out of this world it will not even make a ripple...now a lot of people are saved and are going to heaven, i am one. most people cannot even tell you about when or where they got saved and why they did it. i for one hand can draw an x at the alter. You cannot prove that i am not saved that is between me and the lord. now your friend may or may not be saved, but if the bible says it i believe it. i dont understand how you could be truely saved and call god a liar...personal opinion.
just curious,
why do you think this will happen, not trying to be rude, but where does it say the word rapture in the bible.


about the part of knowing when you got saved, agian not being rude, why does this matter? Not that its a bad thing that somebody does know but is it relavant to one being saved?
 
Thread starter #32
..i believe that when the church is raptured out of this world
what makes you think that the saints will be raptured "out of the world"? if the saints are raptured out, wouldnt that leave the earth for the wicked? who are the co-heirs of the earth (everything), the saints or the wicked? just think about the premil pretrib position for a moment. if Jesus returns and takes his saints to heaven, then reigns on the earth for 1000 years... that wouldnt be much of reign... he would be here with all the wicked and the saints would be in heaven... ???
 

Inthegarge

Senior Member
My question is why people think God could create and maintain this world but couldn't make sure His Word wasn't "tainted" or " mistranslated", etc. by mere men ???
 

ted_BSR

Senior Member
So would you say anything to your friend who believes Genesis is a lie?
I would ask him to search his heart in prayerful consideration. I will not change his mind, only God can do that.

I think sometimes God uses us as "set up men" for His work. Plant the seed, ya know?
 
where is the word, "bible" in the bible? since "bible" is not in the bible, therefore the bible does not exist... :biggrin2:
There is something called the law of non-condradictory, you cant say "the word bible is not in the bible", the second part of that statement states the fact that there is a bible.
The fact is that the bible does not say that one day christians will all disappear and its called the rapture.:)
 
There is something called the law of non-condradictory, you cant say "the word bible is not in the bible", the second part of that statement states the fact that there is a bible.
The fact is that the bible does not say that one day christians will all disappear and its called the rapture.:)
Semantics. For your benefit we'll call it the catching up. 1Thes 4:17.
 

Ronnie T

Ol' Retired Mod
Is there any record in the bible of anyone calling God a liar? if so, what was the significance? I have a "Christian" friend that basically said God is a liar. he said he is a Christian yet does not believe the bible. can you be a heaven bound Christian while telling God that what He wrote in His bible, is not true? He believes most of the bible but goes to a church where they deny much of the bible, thus he thinks much of the bible is not true.
If one denies part of the Bible, they obviously don't believe any of the rest of it.

.
 
Top