I Believe (to address the complaints of last week)

pmiller · 28 Aug 2008, 21:25

I'm a little rusty on my biblical studies, but I believe the Old Testament was largely Aramaic, which is a proto-Hebrew language and predates Greek and Latin.

Alan Fraser · 28 Aug 2008, 21:42

Paul's right. It's utterly pointless arguing about small points of semantics in a document that has been imperfectly translated from Aramaic to Greek and then into English...possibly via Latin.
Heck, scholars can't even agree on the precise significance of the term "Virgin"...as in Virgin Mary...as used in Aramaic at that time. Many claim it simply meant unmarried; rather like the older English use of the term "maiden". Trying to score points about whether a pronoun is singular, plural or both is really pretty desperate stuff.

cornel · 25 Sept 2008, 18:56

Sorry, guys,
I was on vacation…!

THE TRINITY IS NOT A HUMAN INVENTION…!

There is a real GOD - 3 UNITARY Person: The Father, The Son and The Holly Spirit.

Humans, inspired by Trinity, combined those 3 ‘Powers’: Judicial, Legislative and Executive.

Initially, I mentioned: “The TRINITY is remarked even in the first chaptre of the Bible”.
I was expecting you to read The Bible, to see hundreds of verses refering to these 3 ‘CONSTITUENTS’…, but…

My conclusion: you weren't interested!

Cornel

Alan Fraser · 25 Sept 2008, 21:12

Apparently it's you who aren't interested, Cornel. If you actually read what I wrote, it was that the terms father, son and holy spirit are mentioned ...even sequentially...in the Bible, but nowhere, NOWHERE, does it mention a Trinity. Here's a text version...run a word search. I'm not interested in what you or anyone else may infer...that's merely your assessment. I repeat; the Trinity is not mentiond in the Bible, it's a human invention.

cornel · 25 Sept 2008, 21:47

Alan,
Humans established only a concise, explicative term...!
"TRINITY" was a proper proposed name, not an "invention"!

"BIBLE" term is not included in The Bible...
but The Bible isn't a "human invention"!

Cornel

Paris · 28 Sept 2008, 16:22

I love it when some crazy runs into a school and blows away fifty kids, or a school bus gets hit by a train and the parents of the surviving kid thank 'god' for saving 'their little Billy or Betty'. It's also nice that God takes the time to help athletes win basketball games. God hates losers and infidels and loves me.

Paris · 28 Sept 2008, 17:10

I asked God for help when I was learning SketchUp, but he only knew how to use the 'follow me' tool.

bellwells · 28 Sept 2008, 17:18

You seem to get a big kick out making fun of those who believe in God. Do you also mock those who believe in Allah or are you a single religion hater?

remus · 28 Sept 2008, 18:16

Is their anything wrong with believing that someone of a particular religious bent is wrong?

JuanV.Soler · 28 Sept 2008, 18:30

How could it be wrong, Remus ?

JuanV.Soler · 28 Sept 2008, 18:42

@unknownuser said:

Humans established only a concise, explicative term...!
"TRINITY" was a proper proposed name, not an "invention"!

SO, *** , NEVER TELLS HUMAN ABOUT TRINITY and human comes and establish a concise, explicative term , in terms that it is a proposed name, , and it is not an invention.

Come on Cornel,
it was all about trying to grasp, *** s identity so that it could not be comprehended but by those who proposed it.

A GREAT SIN, in my view.
I am not saying that it was done on purpose, I am saying that, that was and is, the result of that thinking. And, because the result of that has been the confussion and the need to get an explanation by the Church who holds that believe AND that makes the path to *** to have to get the Church´s approval, wich is nonsense, and, since it has not been changed yet, it is a sin. A BIG ONE.
IS NOT IT ?

*** , is for everyone and is easy
and heart catches without the need of rational puzzle thinking.

I THINK YOU SHOULD LET YOURSELF FEEL RATHER THAN READ TO GET WHAT SUITS YOU BEST.

written with care for you, indeed.
honest.

remus · 28 Sept 2008, 18:46

My point exactly.

EDIT: i just re read what i wrote and it makes little to no sense, please ignore it

bellwells · 28 Sept 2008, 21:24

@remus said:

Is their anything wrong with believing that someone of a particular religious bent is wrong?

Actually, I think I know what you mean. I have a problem with Islam, so I would have to answer your question with a "no".

remus · 28 Sept 2008, 21:25

Could i ask what that problem is? im intrigued.

bellwells · 28 Sept 2008, 21:34

For me, it started in 1979 with the Iran hostage crisis and then 9/11. I have not seen "moderate" Muslims condemn what happened and I don't think I ever will. I believe Islam aims for dominance.

Edit: They seem to be getting their way in Europe, don't you think?

remus · 28 Sept 2008, 21:42

I've heard quite a few Muslims condemn those terrorist events, one of them (the one doing the condemning) was even a good friend of mine.

In the least offensive way possible, i wonder, have you spoken to many muslims about it?

bellwells · 28 Sept 2008, 21:52

No, I have not spoken with any Muslims about this. I think many people are looking for a more public denunciation. And it has not happened. Ask your friends if they believe in taqiyya, the Muslim form of deception meant to conceal their true beliefs and feelings (among other things).

cornel · 28 Sept 2008, 22:22

J.V.S.,

Here are a few direct verses (there are many others):

“I and my Father are one.” (John 10:30)

“Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'? Don't you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work. 11 Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the works themselves.” (John14:9-11)

Cornel

remus · 28 Sept 2008, 22:27

Unfortunately im no longer in contact with my friend, but he was always fairly open about his beliefs and feelings, and from my brief research on Taqiyya it seems it is only allowed in situations that could cause mental or physical harm to the believer. Personally i think thats fair.

I think the root of this disagreement we're having is that it is all about belief. I believe that the majority of Muslims have good intentions and do not wish to hurt lots of people, whereas you believe that the majority of Muslims "aim for dominance." We will both be able to find points to back up our arguments, as their are Muslims on both sides of the argument, but neither of us will ever be proved right or wrong. Its the nature of belief.

solo · 28 Sept 2008, 22:35

Personally I believe any radical or fundemetal belief is dangerous, any religion that requires one to convert others is scary.

You don't see many athiests knocking on your door trying to show you the light do you?

As for quoting the Bible in an attempt to make a point to people that do not believe in it is pretty futile.