RevTestament Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 6 hours ago, mfbukowski said: WOW. That's cool! Well, just an observation Isa 66:1 Thus saith the Lord, The heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool: where is the house that ye build unto me? and where is the place of my rest?
RevTestament Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 4 hours ago, mnn727 said: Thats your opinion, its not mine It is a shame you do not appreciate His word... If you were to actually study it, instead of looking for reasons not to believe it, you might find how wonderfully intricate it is, and that it could not have been written by man...
RevTestament Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 7 hours ago, snowflake said: In the Catholic bible Daniel has 14 chapters. Chapter 14 is The history of Bel, and the great serpent worshipped by the Babylonians. Daniel kills the dragon by feeding it pitch, fat and hair boiled together. Very interesting http://drbo.org/chapter/32014.htm Daniel lived in the time of Nebuchadnazzer, the greatest King of ancient Babylon. Interrestingly enough the gate of Ishtar has images of a "dragon" still today that was worshipped as a god. https://traveltoeat.com/ishtar-gate-and-processional-way-istanbul-archaeology-museum-turkey/ Not sure why you bring this up. I do not follow the Catholic Bible. That chapter was not found in the original Hebrew nor Aramaic of Daniel, but only in Greek. It is a specious work imho. It is kind of like adding the "Book of Enoch" to the Bible. While one day we may get a true book of Enoch, that one ain't it. If you study your Bible, you will find that Isaiah introduces the fiery serpent, which comes after the cockatrice of Assyria. In other words the fiery serpent is Babylon. Babylon was destroyed as prophesied, but is picked back up in Revelation as the ensign of the red dragon of Revelation. If you look at Daniel 7 you will find that various beasts are used to represent countries. Babylon, the destroyer of Jerusalem, is refigured into Rome, as the destroyer in Daniel 9. So in Revelation, Mystery Babylon is ROME. Still think I am going to believe that chapter added to the Bible by the Roman Catholic Church? If you think the devil flies around in his big red dragon, well, I just can't help you.
Robert F. Smith Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 9 hours ago, snowflake said: Some of these (Isa 13:22) appear to be literal creatures. Others (Isa 27:1 ) appear to be future events, similar to the red dragon in Revelation. It's interesting how my LDS friends will always point out metaphors as evidence that God has a body. In Genesis we are made in the image of God, so that must mean God has a body. However, In Ezekiel 1 my LDS friends will toss out also that God has the appearance of a four living creatures with four faces and wings. Actually, snowflake, it is the non-Mormon scholars who insist that God has a body: Based on the anthropomorphic descriptions of God in the Bible, Jewish scholar Yohanan Muffs insists that A[T]he biblical God is anthropomorphic. Whoever strips God of his personal quality distorts the true meaning of Scripture.@[1] However, it must be added, Aonly the most holy people are spared death in the presence of God.@[2] Just so, the Book of Mormon speaks of God with the same sort of flesh and blood anthropomorphisms (Ether 2:4-5,14, 3:4-19). [1] Muffs, Bible Review, 18/6 (Dec 2002)𐐛23; cf. Ronald Hendel, AAniconism and Anthropomorphism in Ancient Israel,@ in K. van der Toorn, ed., The Image and the Book (Leuven: Peeters, 1997), 205-228; Benjamin Sommer, The Bodies of God and the World of Ancient Israel (Cambridge University Press, 2009); Esther J. Hamori, "When Gods Were Men": The Embodied God in Biblical and Near Eastern Literature (de Gruyter, 2008), reviewed in RBL, Feb 2012, online at http://www.bookreviews.org/bookdetail.asp?TitleId=8190 . [2] R. Hendel, AAniconism,@ in van der Toorn, ed., The Image and the Book, 222. Non-Mormon scholar Ernst Benz has said of the Mormon doctrine of apotheosis: Regardless of how one feels about the doctrine of progressive deification, one thing is certain: Joseph Smith=s anthropology of man is closer to the concept of man in the primitive church than that of the proponents of the Augustinian doctrine of original sin, who considered the idea of such a fundamental and corporeal relationship between God and man as the quintessential heresy.[1] [1] ADer Mensch als Imago Dei,@ in Eranos Jahrbuch 40 (1971), and also published in Urbild und Abbild: Der Mensch und die mythische Welt: gesammelte Eranos-Beitrage (Leiden: Brill, 1974), 326, Man mag zu dieser Lehre von der progressiven Vergottung stehen wie man will, eines ist sicher, Joseph Smith steht mit dieser seiner Anthropologie der altkirchlichen Anschauung vom Menschen näher als die Vorkämpfer der augustinischen Erbsündenlehre, die den Gedanken an einen so wesenhaften Zusammenhang zwischen Gott und Mensch als die eigentliche Haeresie betrachtet haben. English version in Benz, AImagio Dei: Man in the Image of God,@ in T. Madsen, ed., Reflections on Mormonism (Provo, 1978), 201-219. 1
strappinglad Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 Is it just me , or does Greece get short shrift in Biblical prophecy? Is it because it didn't conquer Israel? It certainly had a large influence on world affairs and it was an important influence in the area culturally. Sure Rome was the big military power at the time of the NT but Alexander was no slouch when it came to expanding Greek power. Greek Biblical manuscripts were/are a major resource. Am I missing something? Also, do we not have some of the Book of Enoch in LDS scripture? Maybe I am thinking of the sealed portion of the BoM.
Robert F. Smith Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 6 minutes ago, strappinglad said: ........................................................ do we not have some of the Book of Enoch in LDS scripture? Maybe I am thinking of the sealed portion of the BoM. Yes, we have the (or a) Book of Enoch inside the Book of Moses of the Pearl of Great Price. However, the Book of Enoch used for nearly two thousand years in Ethiopia, which is known as I Enoch, is part of the Christian Canon there. The rest of Christianity had long since jettisoned that book, but Ethiopia was so remote and cut off from the mainstream that they didn't get the word. Moreover, the NT and the book of Daniel are filled with that Enoch material, demonstrating that it was once considered Holy Writ.
RevTestament Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 3 hours ago, strappinglad said: Is it just me , or does Greece get short shrift in Biblical prophecy? Is it because it didn't conquer Israel? It certainly had a large influence on world affairs and it was an important influence in the area culturally. Sure Rome was the big military power at the time of the NT but Alexander was no slouch when it came to expanding Greek power. Greek Biblical manuscripts were/are a major resource. Am I missing something? Also, do we not have some of the Book of Enoch in LDS scripture? Maybe I am thinking of the sealed portion of the BoM. Greece is the brass torso of the figure of Daniel 2. The third beast of Daniel 7, by which it is also incorporated into the first beast of Revelation. Alexander the Great figures large in the prophecies of Daniel 8, and Daniel 11, and is the great king of 11:3 whose kingdom is spread to the four winds of his four generals including Seleucus and Ptolemy. So there is plenty of Greece in there We don't have near all the book of Enoch. I think Enoch was a semi-gnostic text which used material from Daniel, etc. It is possible it contains a true vision or two, but I don't believe this book is otherwise inspired. It will have to be restored.
Teancum Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 16 hours ago, mfbukowski said: No it doesn't It is all symbolic. Prove that either your position or that position is "true". So are you claiming the LDS church does not teach things like a literal Adam and Eve, a literal fall, no death before the fall, a global flood, that all humans are descendants of Adam and Eve through Noah so that all 7 billion humans have 8 common ancestors some 4000 years ago? Further that many religions teach that the Genesis account is literal and that the earth was created perhaps 7000 to 10,000 years ago and that life on earth did not evolve as science has most certainly demonstrated? if it is all symbolic what else is symbolic? Jesus atonement and resurrection? Joseph Smith's first vision?
snowflake Posted September 16, 2016 Author Posted September 16, 2016 10 hours ago, RevTestament said: Not sure why you bring this up. I do not follow the Catholic Bible. That chapter was not found in the original Hebrew nor Aramaic of Daniel, but only in Greek. It is a specious work imho. It is kind of like adding the "Book of Enoch" to the Bible. While one day we may get a true book of Enoch, that one ain't it. If you study your Bible, you will find that Isaiah introduces the fiery serpent, which comes after the cockatrice of Assyria. In other words the fiery serpent is Babylon. Babylon was destroyed as prophesied, but is picked back up in Revelation as the ensign of the red dragon of Revelation. If you look at Daniel 7 you will find that various beasts are used to represent countries. Babylon, the destroyer of Jerusalem, is refigured into Rome, as the destroyer in Daniel 9. So in Revelation, Mystery Babylon is ROME. Still think I am going to believe that chapter added to the Bible by the Roman Catholic Church? If you think the devil flies around in his big red dragon, well, I just can't help you. No, my point was that there are ancient documents, (and I agree not inspired scripture Daniel 14) of an ancient culture worshipping a dragon. Daniel was in babylon at this time. We know the culture existed, and the ancient gate of Ishtar has images of dragons along with bulls, and lions that constructed around 575 B.C. The Ishtar gate dedication plaque speaks of wild bulls and fierce dragons. All I am saying is that this is evidence that these dragons probably existed. http://www.ancient.eu/Ishtar_Gate/
thesometimesaint Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 22 hours ago, RevTestament said: You really like them Neanderthals. Maybe you missed your calling in life Be glad that you live now after God introduced His covenant and His word to Adam. We have no evidence that God lived in the Neanderthals. I'm not saying they were bad. They were just part of God's creation... the sixth day. But apparently the spiritual creation had not been impregnated into the physical yet...or something like that... haven't fully comprehended that yet I guess. Their biological designation is Homo Sapiens Neanderthalenis. While we Homo Sapiens Sapiens. We could/did interbreed. I am glad. We have no evidence that God ever lived in our species. Everything including us are part of Gods' creation. Our two species did impregnate each other.
thesometimesaint Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 22 hours ago, snowflake said: soft tissue found in dinosaur bones in Montana discovered 1 foot below the ground surface. Dr.Mark H Armitage on (peer reviewed research) found a dinosaur with soft tissue in Montana buried only 1 foot below the surface of ground. How could soft tissue survive 90 million years? Simple it can't. High concentrations of iron in the soil.
thesometimesaint Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 21 hours ago, mfbukowski said: VIEWED PROPERLY religion makes no such claims Perhaps you need a hearing aid? Does a little louder help? I repeat myself. Huh? Religionists including those that believe the Bible is literal have nothing remotely scientific to base their beliefs on. The Saints have an escape clause. I think you mean corrective lenses(IE; glasses). I've worn them for over 50 years now.
thesometimesaint Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 19 hours ago, snowflake said: 2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour: 3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. 2 Peter 3 Robert, it appears that you are willingly ignorant of the creation and the flood as warned by Peter. Are you denying that there was a global flood? There was no global flood some 4000 BCE.
thesometimesaint Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 19 hours ago, snowflake said: I think the point is that there are many scientists around the country getting the same results, soft tissue in these dinosaur fossils. Come to your own conclusions. You are attacking the messenger instead of the data. How is it possible for these results to be happening? Science isn't based on coming to your own conclusions.
JLHPROF Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 (edited) 5 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: There was no global flood some 4000 BCE. There was no DETECTABLE global flood some 4000 BCE. Fixed it. Edited September 16, 2016 by JLHPROF
RevTestament Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 4 hours ago, snowflake said: No, my point was that there are ancient documents, (and I agree not inspired scripture Daniel 14) of an ancient culture worshipping a dragon. Daniel was in babylon at this time. We know the culture existed, and the ancient gate of Ishtar has images of dragons along with bulls, and lions that constructed around 575 B.C. The Ishtar gate dedication plaque speaks of wild bulls and fierce dragons. All I am saying is that this is evidence that these dragons probably existed. http://www.ancient.eu/Ishtar_Gate/ Dinosaurs, yes. "Dragons" no. No physical evidence they ever existed. They are a creature of fable. They are being used in the Bible because of the imagery they conjured up. So they were evidently a part of the cultural traditions, like elsewhere. God uses our language to try to communicate with us. So while Hebrew used elohim, the English uses the less adequate/descriptive "gods." To really understand what "gods" is referring to one must understand the Hebrew. People get all bent out of shape about "Allah" but that is really just the Arab equivalent of "God." God is derived from the Germanic "Gott" which may have at one time referred to a pagan god. So if people are going to get upset about "Allah" they might need to throw out "God," which wouldn't hurt my feelings one bit, since I believe the Hebrew words are more descriptive, and would help Gentiles understand "God" better. Well the imagery of dragons was in the Roman/Greek and earlier cultures, so there were words used for the imagery which found their way into scripture. It doesn't mean fire-breathing flying dragons ever existed.
mnn727 Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 15 hours ago, RevTestament said: It is a shame you do not appreciate His word... If you were to actually study it, instead of looking for reasons not to believe it, you might find how wonderfully intricate it is, and that it could not have been written by man... I appreciate the Bible, I don't however worship it. I have read and studied it for decades. It was written by man. God did not write it and not everything contained in it was inspired. All you have to do is read the history of the Bible to know that. Many Christians go through mental gymnastics to try to make it all fit together and make sense as compared to the real world - when it was never meant to 1
RevTestament Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 5 minutes ago, mnn727 said: I appreciate the Bible, I don't however worship it. I have read and studied it for decades. It was written by man. God did not write it and not everything contained in it was inspired. All you have to do is read the history of the Bible to know that. Many Christians go through mental gymnastics to try to make it all fit together and make sense as compared to the real world - when it was never meant to It is correct that it was never meant to help us "make sense as compared to the real world." It references the "real world" to teach. It is to help us make sense of the things of God... not of the "real" or temporal world. It can be likened in some ways to going to a law library and reading a set of statutes. The purpose of doing so would not be to teach us about the "real world." I do not worship the Bible, However, it is so extremely intricate, that it could have only been written by God. Unless you believe man knows the future... God does because He planned it. It will continue to be fulfilled despite doubters such as yourself.
thesometimesaint Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 1 hour ago, JLHPROF said: Fixed it. No you did not. At best we can do have some evidence for a massive albeit regional flood some 10,000 years ago(Well outside the 4,000 BCE time frame). Massive albeit regional floods have many examples. SEE http://talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html
waveslider Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 40 minutes ago, RevTestament said: "Dragons" no. No physical evidence they ever existed. Have you ever heard of the giant lizards from the island of Komodo?
thesometimesaint Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 16 minutes ago, RevTestament said: It is correct that it was never meant to help us "make sense as compared to the real world." It references the "real world" to teach. It is to help us make sense of the things of God... not of the "real" or temporal world. It can be likened in some ways to going to a law library and reading a set of statutes. The purpose of doing so would not be to teach us about the "real world." I do not worship the Bible, However, it is so extremely intricate, that it could have only been written by God. Unless you believe man knows the future... God does because He planned it. It will continue to be fulfilled despite doubters such as yourself. Heck we're still waiting for Christ to come back some 2000 years later. 1
JLHPROF Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 3 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: No you did not. At best we can do have some evidence for a massive albeit regional flood some 10,000 years ago(Well outside the 4,000 BCE time frame). Massive albeit regional floods have many examples. SEE http://talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html Sure I did. You stated an absolute, as if there was an eyewitness recording of what happened/did not happen 5000 years ago. I simply corrected it to show that we can find no detectable scientific evidence. Because that is the truth. We cannot find evidence. That conclusively proves/disproves nothing. I mean come on, Science is still finding new elements. Does that mean they didn't exist before science "discovered" them? I mean Oxygen wasn't discovered until the 1770s. Who know what science might "discover" about a global flood in the future.
RevTestament Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 10 minutes ago, waveslider said: Have you ever heard of the giant lizards from the island of Komodo? I didn't know they breath fire and fly.... Personally I find Nile crocodiles a more impressive creature, but they haven't seemed to learn those tricks either.
thesometimesaint Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 (edited) 41 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Sure I did. You stated an absolute, as if there was an eyewitness recording of what happened/did not happen 5000 years ago. I simply corrected it to show that we can find no detectable scientific evidence. Because that is the truth. We cannot find evidence. That conclusively proves/disproves nothing. I mean come on, Science is still finding new elements. Does that mean they didn't exist before science "discovered" them? I mean Oxygen wasn't discovered until the 1770s. Who know what science might "discover" about a global flood in the future. Were you an "eyewitness" to your mothers' birth? Not really; we're inventing new elements, but that is not the discovery them in any meaningful sense of the word. That is like saying François Isaac de Rivaz discovered the automobile. Sure that "COULD" happen, but it would violate every known law of physics, biochemistry, genetics, animal distribution, etc., etc., etc.. . Edited September 16, 2016 by thesometimesaint
waveslider Posted September 16, 2016 Posted September 16, 2016 (edited) 45 minutes ago, RevTestament said: I didn't know they breath fire and fly.... Personally I find Nile crocodiles a more impressive creature, but they haven't seemed to learn those tricks either. They can't fly, but they can appear on other islands that they are more than capable of swimming to. I'm quite certain that primitive people may have assumed they flew there if they didn't see them swim there. Also if a primitive person were ever bit by one, I'm quite certain that it would seem like there were some magical properties in it's breath that cause such severe burning sensations as the wound festers and causes an extremely high temperature as the body goes septic. Just a few thoughts anyway. I'm not saying they were certainly what is meant by dragons in the bible and other ancient writings and depictions, only that it is possible that these creatures may have existed outside of the island of Komodo at some earlier period, before they were killed off since there were no taboos, as are found on Komodo, against killing them. P.S. As a side note, I find the images, I saw of that gate, in the link from another poster, uncannily similar to Komodo Dragons, except that the legs seemed a bit longer. Edited September 16, 2016 by waveslider Had to correct the tense of a word.
Recommended Posts