| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"ZenIsWhen" |
| Date: |
30 Jan 2004 02:37:50 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
.
|
|
| User: "Raymond" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
30 Jan 2004 07:47:45 AM |
|
|
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
You just keep telling yourself that till the judgment day, and find you are
too late to enjoy the joy of the Lord. Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
The real fables is the collection of books on Evolution. You just go on
believing you family was from the Apes, then the Apes are still with us, so
we can see how they act, and their mental state, we know right off you
problems with the Bible. The real Bible, so you have the false bible, a
make believe bible, a spirit bible, a hunters bible, the Gun Bible, and on
and on...... Your teacher was the fraud!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Vestal" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
02 Feb 2004 10:54:26 AM |
|
|
"Raymond" <NOSPAM-rwknapp@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:401a6149_1@rain.i-cable.com:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it
is related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
You just keep telling yourself that till the judgment day, and find
you are too late to enjoy the joy of the Lord. Adam is, was and
always will be the first man or human on earth.
The real fables is the collection of books on Evolution. You just go
on believing you family was from the Apes,
Evolution doesn't teach that we descended from apes.
then the Apes are still
with us,
That's as irrelevant as the fact that dogs are still with us. Or
bacteria, for that matter.
so we can see how they act, and their mental state, we know
right off you problems with the Bible.
Non sequitur.
The real Bible, so you have
the false bible,
Huh?
a make believe bible, a spirit bible, a hunters
bible, the Gun Bible, and on and on...... Your teacher was the
fraud!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Last Church" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
02 Feb 2004 10:31:38 PM |
|
|
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Next the Bible tells of the creation of men in the plural. In Genesis
1:26-28 is says "Male and female created He THEM" and God told these
people "Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth" (1:28).
"Plenish" is an obsolete English word meaning "to fill" and you
cannot
RE-plenish what was never plenished, or filled before.
Yet when Cain killed Abel, and in punishment
was driven out of the land he complained to God that "any one that
findeth me shall slay me." (4:14)
Upon being sent away Cain found many other people. Genesis 4:17
records
that Cain not only married a wife, but built a city. These were the
pre-Adamite races mentioned in the latter part of Genesis. The Garden
of
Eden was not a plantation of ordinary trees and shrubs. God did
nothing
so foolish as to make a special creation just to have a man to wield
shovel and pruning shears when He already had millions of pre-Adamite
peoples available for that sort of work.
Obviously, the trees in the Garden of
God in Eden were "family trees" of races and nations who admired and
envied the early Assyrian Empire. These made up the "garden" that
Adam
was to cultivate.
..
**************************
A preacher is the blind
leading the blind...
The Last Church
http://www.thelastchurch.org
michael@thelastchurch.org
alt.religion.thelastchurch
alt.religion.the-last-church
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
03 Feb 2004 04:22:28 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 04:31:38 GMT, The Last Church
<bleahcim49@frontiernet.net> spake thusly:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Next the Bible tells of the creation of men in the plural. In Genesis
1:26-28 is says "Male and female created He THEM"
Yes, "them", as in "Adam and Eve", a man and a woman.
and God told these
people "Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth" (1:28).
"Plenish" is an obsolete English word meaning "to fill" and you
cannot
RE-plenish what was never plenished, or filled before.
Actually, you're wrong about this. This term is found
in the KJV. Prior to about 1650 A.D., that was a word
that simply meant, "to fill". Remember, it was
Elizabethan English that was used in the KJV
translation. Going back to the Hebrew confirms the
meaning in the original language.
male (maw-lay) - to fill.
Yet when Cain killed Abel, and in punishment
was driven out of the land he complained to God that "any one that
findeth me shall slay me." (4:14)
Upon being sent away Cain found many other people. Genesis 4:17
records
that Cain not only married a wife, but built a city. These were the
pre-Adamite races mentioned in the latter part of Genesis. The Garden
of Eden was not a plantation of ordinary trees and shrubs.
You're speculating now. The fact is, that the Bible
does not say that Adam and Eve did not have other
children.
God did nothing
so foolish as to make a special creation just to have a man to wield
shovel and pruning shears when He already had millions of pre-Adamite
peoples available for that sort of work.
Sorry, the Bible says that God put Adam and Eve into
the garden to take care of it.
"And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the
garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it." - Gen 2:15
Using Scripture to try to prove your case, or should I
say, misusing Scripture to try to prove your case and
then ignoring passages that don't line up with your
thinking, isn't an honest approach. Maybe you weren't
aware of this passage, but if that's the case, then you
are in no position to teach.
Obviously, the trees in the Garden of
God in Eden were "family trees" of races and nations who admired and
envied the early Assyrian Empire. These made up the "garden" that
Adam was to cultivate.
"Obviously"? no, what is obvious, is that you should
have kept reading. :)
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
"If something in science suddenly becomes
so sacrosanct that you can't question it,
then it ceases to be science," he said.
"And I really think that's what's become
of Darwinism." - Roger DeHart
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Dave" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
02 Feb 2004 11:34:11 AM |
|
|
On 2 Feb 2004 16:54:26 GMT, David Vestal
<someoggetridofthis@mailcity.com> spake thusly:
Evolution doesn't teach that we descended from apes.
Uh, yes, it does. In fact, it teaches that we are
primates and a type of ape.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"As for me, I have not hastened from being a pastor
to follow thee: neither have I desired the woeful day;
thou knowest: that which came out of my lips was right
before thee." - Jeremiah 17:16
"If something in science suddenly becomes
so sacrosanct that you can't question it,
then it ceases to be science," he said.
"And I really think that's what's become
of Darwinism." - Roger DeHart
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alan M" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
30 Jan 2004 08:05:32 AM |
|
|
"Raymond" <NOSPAM-rwknapp@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:401a6149_1@rain.i-cable.com...
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
You just keep telling yourself that till the judgment day, and find you
are
too late to enjoy the joy of the Lord. Adam is, was and always will be
the
first man or human on earth.
The real fables is the collection of books on Evolution. You just go on
believing you family was from the Apes, then the Apes are still with us,
so
we can see how they act, and their mental state, we know right off you
problems with the Bible. The real Bible, so you have the false bible, a
make believe bible, a spirit bible, a hunters bible, the Gun Bible, and on
and on...... Your teacher was the fraud!!
Ranting ...
Raving ...
Oogh, oogh ...
Scratch, scratch, scratch
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Iconoclast" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
02 Feb 2004 08:37:27 PM |
|
|
"is" Adam?
No
Adam isn't anymore.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
30 Jan 2004 10:39:37 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 21:47:45 +0800, "Raymond"
<NOSPAM-rwknapp@hotmail.com> wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
You just keep telling yourself that till the judgment day, and find you are
too late to enjoy the joy of the Lord. Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
The real fables is the collection of books on Evolution. You just go on
believing you family was from the Apes, then the Apes are still with us, so
we can see how they act, and their mental state, we know right off you
problems with the Bible.
Yes, any fool who would believe man came from apes would also believe
things like a talking snake or a talking jackass...wait...I just
described a Baptist preacher I know...and a few non-Baptists.
D*
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!
These comments are meant to offend everyone equally. If, for some reason you are not offended, please write me with a description of
yourself including your name, race, weight, religious views, political party, strong opinions, physical disabilities and anything else that you are
touchy about, and I will try to offend you in a future comment. Complaints should be emailed to:
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rod" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
13 Feb 2005 09:40:48 PM |
|
|
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant of
the truth. The clergy are very clearly responsible for this heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've been
spoonfed lies....
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
.
|
|
|
| User: "Your Name Here=Harvey" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
14 Feb 2005 03:20:03 PM |
|
|
In article <11107e91fpcaqd6@corp.supernews.com>,
says...
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant of
the truth. The clergy are very clearly responsible for this heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've been
spoonfed lies....
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
We need to know our actual history.
The bible is neither 100% true, nor probably 100% lies.
However we can never agree upon which is true and which isn't.
It is hardly likely that Adam is the first man on earth - and if so?
What of it?
The Bible is not the only ancient text - it is the most changed and
edited of all the ancient texts, yes.
Harvey
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rod" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
15 Feb 2005 09:38:10 AM |
|
|
Your Name Here=Harvey wrote:
In article <11107e91fpcaqd6@corp.supernews.com>,
says...
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant of
the truth. The clergy are very clearly responsible for this heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've been
spoonfed lies....
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
We need to know our actual history.
The bible is neither 100% true, nor probably 100% lies.
However we can never agree upon which is true and which isn't.
It is hardly likely that Adam is the first man on earth - and if so?
What of it?
It is the old desire in me to KNOW the complete story, a part will not
suffice as I'll keep digging until I'm satisfied. Thats the way I am...
The Bible is not the only ancient text - it is the most changed and
edited of all the ancient texts, yes.
I agree with this Harvey. Nothing is hands off where men are
concerned, and God know this, it's sad that most christians don't.
Harvey
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cindy" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
15 Feb 2005 09:54:59 AM |
|
|
"Rod" <freelance74601@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11145r9n47fd9cd@corp.supernews.com...
Your Name Here=Harvey wrote:
In article <11107e91fpcaqd6@corp.supernews.com>,
freelance74601@yahoo.com
says...
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed
conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of
fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by
pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop
Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the
general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not
have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant
of
the truth. The clergy are very clearly responsible for this
heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith
in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the
original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false
hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've
been
spoonfed lies....
IOW: "do not believe the bible, it is lies, do not believe Jesus'
disciples, they were lying clergy. Who should you believe and have
blind faith in, and follow instead? "Clement of Alexandria" who with
his blend of paganism and philosophy, and mysticism, this poster tells
us is one of the founders of "the Church"
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htm
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
We need to know our actual history.
The bible is neither 100% true, nor probably 100% lies.
However we can never agree upon which is true and which isn't.
It is hardly likely that Adam is the first man on earth - and if
so?
What of it?
It is the old desire in me to KNOW the complete story, a part
will not
suffice as I'll keep digging until I'm satisfied. Thats the way I
am...
The Bible is not the only ancient text - it is the most changed
and
edited of all the ancient texts, yes.
I agree with this Harvey. Nothing is hands off where men are
concerned, and God know this, it's sad that most christians don't.
Harvey
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rod" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
15 Feb 2005 12:06:29 PM |
|
|
Cindy wrote:
"Rod" <freelance74601@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11145r9n47fd9cd@corp.supernews.com...
Your Name Here=Harvey wrote:
In article <11107e91fpcaqd6@corp.supernews.com>,
freelance74601@yahoo.com
says...
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed
conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of
fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by
pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop
Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the
general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not
have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant
of
the truth. The clergy are very clearly responsible for this
heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith
in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the
original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false
hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've
been
spoonfed lies....
IOW: "do not believe the bible, it is lies, do not believe Jesus'
disciples, they were lying clergy.
I have not stated that all have lied. I state for the record that
those of the council of nicea having knowledge of Bishop Clements
intentions regarding the Gospel of Mark are partakers of his heresy
and lie. I will not go further until I have proof.
Who should you believe and have
blind faith in, and follow instead?
Faith is just that...FAITH. You either do believe for personal
reasons or reasons of your choice, or you do not. But you do NOT
CRAM your beliefs down the throats of those stating that they do NOT
want them. You preach what you BELIEVE is truth, they either accept it
or reject it, and YOU move on.
"Clement of Alexandria" who with
his blend of paganism and philosophy, and mysticism, this poster tells
us is one of the founders of "the Church"
I stand by my statements concerning Bishop Clement and the council,
as one's own testimony in one's OWN handwriting is considered as
very solid evidence, and much less questionable than Pauls Gospel.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htm
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Your Name Here=Harvey" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
15 Feb 2005 04:20:50 PM |
|
|
In article <cut6us$67k@library1.airnews.net>, says...
"Rod" <freelance74601@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:11145r9n47fd9cd@corp.supernews.com...
Your Name Here=Harvey wrote:
In article <11107e91fpcaqd6@corp.supernews.com>,
freelance74601@yahoo.com
says...
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed
conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of
fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by
pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop
Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the
general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not
have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant
of
the truth. The clergy are very clearly responsible for this
heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith
in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the
original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false
hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've
been
spoonfed lies....
IOW: "do not believe the bible, it is lies, do not believe Jesus'
disciples, they were lying clergy. Who should you believe and have
blind faith in, and follow instead? "Clement of Alexandria" who with
his blend of paganism and philosophy, and mysticism, this poster tells
us is one of the founders of "the Church"
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04045a.htm
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
We need to know our actual history.
The bible is neither 100% true, nor probably 100% lies.
However we can never agree upon which is true and which isn't.
It is hardly likely that Adam is the first man on earth - and if
so?
What of it?
It is the old desire in me to KNOW the complete story, a part
will not
suffice as I'll keep digging until I'm satisfied. Thats the way I
am...
The Bible is not the only ancient text - it is the most changed
and
edited of all the ancient texts, yes.
I agree with this Harvey. Nothing is hands off where men are
concerned, and God know this, it's sad that most christians don't.
Harvey
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
I have to go along with the views expressed here
www.tjresearch.info
This is along the lines of Edgar Cayce - who was regarded as a prophet
of his times - with reincarnation being taught by Jesus which was
later edited out.
There is Billy Meier - who is a prophet of our times.
All truths tie together and verify each other, even they be very
controversial. All the media, etc are controlled - especially religions
in manipulating what people think and accept.
It is time to examine our most basic principles and beliefs - to examine
everything very closely - and discard that which is false.
Resurrection? It seems most probable that it was resusicitation -
see the British television program 'Did Jesus Die?'.
This makes no reference to 'The Talmud Jmmanuel' or Billy Meier -
and takes viewers to Jesus tombsite in Kashmir.
www.tombofjesus.com
Yes folks, Jesus survived the crucifixion and journeyed onto Kashmir,
where he lived for many years and died there...
See also Edward T Martin's book 'King of Travellers - Jesus Lost Years in
India'. This guy lived and worked in that region and has done his own
investigations into the matter.
Harvey
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Ings" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
15 Feb 2005 12:15:14 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 10:54:59 -0500, "Cindy" <truth@nospam.com> wrote:
IOW: "do not believe the bible, it is lies,
Not all lies. There's some truth, some honest error, and a good deal
of fraud as well as the outright lies.
do not believe Jesus' disciples,
Haven't heard from any.
they were lying clergy. Who should you believe and have
blind faith in, and follow instead?
Nobody! Having blind faith in ANYTHING is stupid!
## Religion explains to ignorance the nature of the unknowable
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Ings" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
15 Feb 2005 12:15:48 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 10:54:59 -0500, "Cindy" <truth@nospam.com> wrote:
IOW: "do not believe the bible, it is lies,
Not all lies. There's some truth, some honest error, and a good deal
of fraud as well as the outright lies.
do not believe Jesus' disciples,
Haven't heard from any.
they were lying clergy. Who should you believe and have
blind faith in, and follow instead?
Nobody! Having blind faith in ANYTHING is stupid!
## Religion explains to ignorance the nature of the unknowable
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Your Name Here=Harvey" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
15 Feb 2005 04:07:22 PM |
|
|
In article <11145r9n47fd9cd@corp.supernews.com>,
says...
Your Name Here=Harvey wrote:
In article <11107e91fpcaqd6@corp.supernews.com>,
says...
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant of
the truth. The clergy are very clearly responsible for this heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've been
spoonfed lies....
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
We need to know our actual history.
The bible is neither 100% true, nor probably 100% lies.
However we can never agree upon which is true and which isn't.
It is hardly likely that Adam is the first man on earth - and if so?
What of it?
It is the old desire in me to KNOW the complete story, a part will not
suffice as I'll keep digging until I'm satisfied. Thats the way I am...
The Bible is not the only ancient text - it is the most changed and
edited of all the ancient texts, yes.
I agree with this Harvey. Nothing is hands off where men are
concerned, and God know this, it's sad that most christians don't.
Harvey
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
I totally agree with the desire to know the actual truth of what
really did happen, and to be satisfied with nothing but the truth,
as far as you can follow it.
Truth does not belong to the Jews, Christians or Muslims, etc -
and to use the Bible as your only source of reference - is crazy.
Know your bible history to know it is a selected text of the men of
that time (of Christians) - and know what they were doing.
You do have to act the detective and question all sources of information,
and question especially what motives people have?
The person who acts like he's all spiritual and divinely inspired -
may not be - as seen by the actions that are taken.
Harvey
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bible Bob" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
17 Feb 2005 04:22:51 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 21:40:48 -0600, Rod <freelance74601@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant of
the truth. The clergy are very clearly responsible for this heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've been
spoonfed lies....
Rod
Rod,
First, Smith's alledged find that no one has seen has not been
substantiated.
Second, Clement was under a lot of influences and he lived long after
the Gospels were written. He was de-sainted by one or two of the
Popes (even though they don't have that authority).
Can you produce the writings of one man that lived before Adam?
BB
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rod" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
18 Feb 2005 08:31:46 AM |
|
|
Bible Bob wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 21:40:48 -0600, Rod <freelance74601@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant of
the truth. The clergy are very clearly responsible for this heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've been
spoonfed lies....
Rod
Rod,
First, Smith's alledged find that no one has seen has not been
substantiated.
Second, Clement was under a lot of influences and he lived long after
the Gospels were written. He was de-sainted by one or two of the
Popes (even though they don't have that authority).
Can you produce the writings of one man that lived before Adam?
BB
Perhaps with enough field work someone will. It's difficult enough
to provide writings from the 1st century. If the library at
Alexandria hadn't been burned we would have a wealth of knowledge
at our fingertips.
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rod" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
26 Feb 2005 03:01:24 PM |
|
|
Rod wrote:
Bible Bob wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 21:40:48 -0600, Rod <freelance74601@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending
it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant of
the truth. The clergy are very clearly responsible for this heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've been
spoonfed lies....
Rod
Rod,
First, Smith's alledged find that no one has seen has not been
substantiated.
Thats misinformation that has been spread about by the christian
academic community ( what a contrast in terminology, "christain
academics"). Talk about a lack of objectivity.......
Second, Clement was under a lot of influences and he lived long after
the Gospels were written.
We're all under the influence(s)of something at one time or another,
I'm under the influence of my wife at this moment, who wants me to stop
responding to posts and go grocery shopping at walmart, so this doesn't
mean that I'm going to hurry up and write a few lies for the unbelieving
to discover 1700 years later.
He was de-sainted by one or two of the
Popes (even though they don't have that authority).
The classic christian academic approach, attack and discredit when
you cannot disprove.........real honest representation of your God...
Can you produce the writings of one man that lived before Adam?
BB
Can you provide proof that your bible is divinely inspired ? I am
NOT talking about the original scriptures here..I am talking about
the Bible, ergo KJV, NKJV, and any other volume put togather after
320 AD. Can ya ?
Rod
Rod
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Rowland Croucher" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
14 Feb 2005 03:02:20 AM |
|
|
One possibility:
Adam was the first *theological* man
--
*
Shalom! Rowland Croucher
* *
http://jmm.aaa.net.au/ *
(14300+ articles, 3100 clean jokes/stories, 1.5 m. hits/month)
Internet Evangelism Conference http://ie-21stcentury.com/
*
.
|
|
|
| User: "William" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
14 Feb 2005 04:19:16 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 20:02:20 +1100, "Rowland Croucher"
<rccroucher@removethispleaseoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
One possibility:
Adam was the first *theological* man
You mean Rev Adam and his wife Eve?
William
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "jw j" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
14 Feb 2005 07:48:17 AM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 21:40:48 -0600, Rod <freelance74601@yahoo.com>
wrote:
copyright 2005 John Weatherly all rights reserved (keep it in the
group)
Raymond wrote:
"ZenIsWhen" <ZenIsWhen@anywhere.com> wrote in message
news:101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com...
"Will Wynn" <willwynn@theendoftheday.com> wrote in message
news:4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com...
Kong asked:
Why is Adam considered to be the 1st man on earth?
Thanks.
ADAM WAS NOT THE FIRST MAN
Many people have become agnostics because of the supposed conflict
between the Bible and science.
That's because the bible is nothing more than a collection of fables,
fantasies and fairy tales.
ANY attempt to give the bible more credit than due, by pretending it is
related to REAL history, is mere fraud!
Adam is, was and always will be the
first man or human on earth.
I don't think so Raymond. Their is to much evidence accumulating
that points to the fact that their are things we are not told by
the Bible, for instance the Book of Mark is in doubt. Bishop Clement
of Alexandria, one of the founding fathers of the church describes
in a letter how the Book of Mark was re-written to keep the general
public ignorant of it's secrets. Secrets which Christ would not have
revealed to His servants should He have wanted the public ignorant of
the truth.
You cannot be the Rod I know.
You are teaching doctrines of demons.
jw
The clergy are very clearly responsible for this heretical
abomination and deception. Anyone placing completely blind faith in
the Bible without making an effort to find further truth in the original
scriptures is willing to be decieved for the comfort that false hope
offers. The truth IS a fearfull thing until you find that you've been
spoonfed lies....
Rod
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rod" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
14 Feb 2005 09:06:27 AM |
|
|
jw <j w wrote:
<snip>
You cannot be the Rod I know.
You are teaching doctrines of demons.
Doctrines of demons can't stand up to the light of day, John, and
what I have said can. Copies of scripture in hebrew can be found in
libraries across the world, all one has to do is learn hebrew or find
a translator (hebrew speaking). ONe can also spend time doing research
on clement of alexandria and his writings.
Or one can chose to believe what one does. It's your decision
John, I won't fault you for it.
Rod
jw
Rod
<snip>
--
1 Corr 6:16 an nescitis quoniam qui adheret meretrici unum corpus
efficitur erunt enim inquit duo in carne una
Gen 2:24 quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et
adherebit uxori suae et erunt duo in carne una
.
|
|
|
| User: "jw j" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
14 Feb 2005 02:20:28 PM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:06:27 -0600, Rod <freelance74601@yahoo.com>
wrote:
copyright 2005 John Weatherly all rights reserved (keep it in the
group)
jw <j w wrote:
<snip>
You cannot be the Rod I know.
You are teaching doctrines of demons.
Doctrines of demons can't stand up to the light of day, John, and
what I have said can. Copies of scripture in hebrew can be found in
libraries across the world, all one has to do is learn hebrew or find
a translator (hebrew speaking). ONe can also spend time doing research
on clement of alexandria and his writings.
Or one can chose to believe what one does. It's your decision
John, I won't fault you for it.
I may not be a Hebrew or Greek or Aramiac scholar, sir, but my pastors
and seminary professors have been the leading conservative scholars of
our time.
And you are no conservative Christian, or even a Christian, when you
attack God's preserved revelation, which we call the Bible.
"ALL scripture is inspired.." and we must trust that God preserved
what we were supposed to have as the Bible. You must also deal with
the Eastern Orthodox (coptics), who have their "own Bible", also
called the Syriac translation, or the "Peshitta" translation.
It is reputedly an early 2nd Century complete Bible, and it reads MUCH
like the NIV and the NASB I have today.
'nuff said.
jw
Rod
jw
Rod
<snip>
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
14 Feb 2005 02:51:37 PM |
|
|
In <5q12115c481cpl159v7vuntlcnqn2f7g3h@4ax.com>, on 02/14/05
at 12:20 PM, jw <j w<no>@yahoo.com> in a vain attempt to appeal to
authority & assume its conclusions left the following scent trail behind.
X-Hamster-Info: Score=0 Received=20050214143803
Xref: localhost alt.religion.christian.baptist:17110
Path:
dwarf.nntpserver.com!newsfeed.ultrafeed.com!newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com!newsfeed-east.nntpserver.com!nntpserver.com!news.glorb.com!newsfeed2.telusplanet.net!newsfeed.telus.net!west2.newsfeed.sprint-canada.net!east1.newsfeed.sprint-canada.net!tor-nx1.netcom.ca!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jw <j w<no>@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.bible,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy,alt.religion.christian.pentecostal,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth?
Message-ID: <5q12115c481cpl159v7vuntlcnqn2f7g3h@4ax.com>
References: <4019b434_2@news.tm.net.my>
<4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com>
<101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com> <401a6149_1@rain.i-cable.com>
<11107e91fpcaqd6@corp.supernews.com>
<vva111daa4dp4681coeqsh9igp8afc1qqq@4ax.com>
<1111fjq8ga8288d@corp.supernews.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 55
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 12:20:28 -0800
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.58.70.30
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1108412421 70.58.70.30 (Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:20:21
CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 14:20:21 CST
X-Old-Xref: newsfeed-west.nntpserver.com alt.bible:887438
alt.bible.prophecy:345256 alt.religion.christian:1227994
alt.religion.christian.adventist:152791
alt.religion.christian.baptist:748643
alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:358189
alt.religion.christian.pentecostal:326779
alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic:1035693
x-no-archive: yes
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:06:27 -0600, Rod <freelance74601@yahoo.com> wrote:
copyright 2005 John Weatherly all rights reserved (keep it in the group)
jw <j w wrote:
<snip>
You cannot be the Rod I know.
You are teaching doctrines of demons.
Doctrines of demons can't stand up to the light of day, John, and
what I have said can. Copies of scripture in hebrew can be found in
libraries across the world, all one has to do is learn hebrew or find
a translator (hebrew speaking). ONe can also spend time doing research
on clement of alexandria and his writings.
Or one can chose to believe what one does. It's your decision
John, I won't fault you for it.
I may not be a Hebrew or Greek or Aramiac scholar, sir, but my pastors
and seminary professors have been the leading conservative scholars of
There is a difference between scholars & apologetics, or even teachers in
a seminary. The word does not apply to none academic studies, nor
seminary's. & yes, there are biblical scholars that are chaired, just none
you know.
our time.
Your appeal to authority, without verifying that authority is real, is
noted, & dismissed for the logical fallacy it is. BTW, just who are those
scholars Again, not a who's who for apologetics, but scholars as the term
is supposed to be used. & yes jw, that definitely excludes you.
And you are no conservative Christian, or even a Christian, when you
attack God's preserved revelation, which we call the Bible.
One does not need to attack anything to show the errors in it, your red
herring is falling apart & you are to ignorant to notice.
"ALL scripture is inspired.." and we must trust that God preserved what
In that case, you have only the Torah, for it was the only scripture
allowed by yahweh. But then, its that context thing you, & other xians
have so much trouble with. You have to pretend you know what you are
talking about, else you might lose your faith.
we were supposed to have as the Bible. You must also deal with the
Then you are stuck with the OT, which does not predict your versioj of the
missing bogy of the xian myth.
Eastern Orthodox (coptics), who have their "own Bible", also called the
Syriac translation, or the "Peshitta" translation.
It is reputedly an early 2nd Century complete Bible, and it reads MUCH
like the NIV and the NASB I have today.
I don't see how, the Coptic use the 70 for their OT.
'nuff said.
From you, to much is said eevrytimme you try to pimp yourself as a
knowledgable xian.
jw
The genuine faux xian, that one. Could just be,
walksalone who has to admit he used to think jw was just uninformed & had
to change his mind, jw is really as ignorant, IAW his posts, as he
presents himself to those that have studied the myths of the Jews as well
as the xians.
--
The Hadith Qudsi 6
The first of people against whom judgment will be pronounced on the Day of Resurrection will be a
man who died a martyr. He will be brought and Allah will make known to him His favours and he will
recognize them.
The Almighty will say: And what did you do about them? He will say: I fought for you until I died a
martyr. He will say: You have lied - you did but fight that it might be said [of you]: He is courageous.
And so it was said.
Then he will be ordered to be dragged along on his face until he is cast into Hell-fire.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Grane" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
14 Feb 2005 10:22:56 PM |
|
|
In article <5q12115c481cpl159v7vuntlcnqn2f7g3h@4ax.com>, jw <j
w<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
I may not be a Hebrew or Greek or Aramiac scholar, sir, but my pastors
and seminary professors have been the leading conservative scholars of
our time.
Reminds me of what Aleister Crowley said about L Ron Hubbard when Hubbard
visited him in Italy.
(Aleister Crowley being a Satanist and the only man actually expelled from
Mussolini's Fascist Italy for "lowering the tone of the place"
He said that he was the biggest F---ing idiot he had met in his life
It is not your "opinion" of your tutors that matters
It is THEIR opinion of you!
++++++++++++++++++
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "William" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
14 Feb 2005 03:30:21 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 12:20:28 -0800, jw <j w<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:06:27 -0600, Rod <freelance74601@yahoo.com>
wrote:
copyright 2005 John Weatherly all rights reserved (keep it in the
group)
jw <j w wrote:
<snip>
You cannot be the Rod I know.
You are teaching doctrines of demons.
Doctrines of demons can't stand up to the light of day, John, and
what I have said can. Copies of scripture in hebrew can be found in
libraries across the world, all one has to do is learn hebrew or find
a translator (hebrew speaking). ONe can also spend time doing research
on clement of alexandria and his writings.
Or one can chose to believe what one does. It's your decision
John, I won't fault you for it.
I may not be a Hebrew or Greek or Aramiac scholar, sir, but my pastors
and seminary professors have been the leading conservative scholars of
our time.
And you are no conservative Christian, or even a Christian, when you
attack God's preserved revelation, which we call the Bible.
"ALL scripture is inspired.."
Please tell us what scriptures were in existence at the time the above
was written.
William
.
|
|
|
| User: "jw j" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
15 Feb 2005 04:01:39 AM |
|
|
x-no-archive: yes
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 21:30:21 GMT, William <tielige@mail.clara.fl.com>
wrote:
copyright 2005 John Weatherly all rights reserved (keep it in the
group)
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 12:20:28 -0800, jw <j w<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:06:27 -0600, Rod <freelance74601@yahoo.com>
wrote:
copyright 2005 John Weatherly all rights reserved (keep it in the
group)
jw <j w wrote:
<snip>
You cannot be the Rod I know.
You are teaching doctrines of demons.
Doctrines of demons can't stand up to the light of day, John, and
what I have said can. Copies of scripture in hebrew can be found in
libraries across the world, all one has to do is learn hebrew or find
a translator (hebrew speaking). ONe can also spend time doing research
on clement of alexandria and his writings.
Or one can chose to believe what one does. It's your decision
John, I won't fault you for it.
I may not be a Hebrew or Greek or Aramiac scholar, sir, but my pastors
and seminary professors have been the leading conservative scholars of
our time.
And you are no conservative Christian, or even a Christian, when you
attack God's preserved revelation, which we call the Bible.
"ALL scripture is inspired.."
Please tell us what scriptures were in existence at the time the above
was written.
William
Your qusetion presumes that the authors of the New Testament
scriptures were NOT writing under divine inspiration.
Anyone who accept the inspiration doctrine accepts that the authors
knew they were writing scripture, and they were divinely inpsired to
understand that other books would be forthcoming.
The references to "all scripture is inspired", then, would involve all
66 books, not just the OT.
Your question contains the built-in assumption that the authors were
NOT inspired, and had NO clue when they wrote their "memoirs" that
they were writing scripture.
Comments by most of the authors indicate otherwise. They knew as they
penned their writing that it was from the Holy Spirit.
Proof? Much of what they wrote was beyond their understanding.
Because much of what they wrote was not only intended for them, but
for the future of mankind as well.
And I don't expect agreement. The Bible says few will find the truth,
because few are truly seeking.
"It works for me."
If it doesn't work for you, don't believe!
jw
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: jw was Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth? |
15 Feb 2005 09:19:46 AM |
|
|
In <r3i31156oqhoumantkvcc4ijd8l35chs3m@4ax.com>, on 02/15/05
at 02:01 AM, jw <j w<no>@yahoo.com> elected to redefine logical fallacy's & provided a fine example with the following effort.
elected to redefine logical fallacy's & provided a fine example with the following effort.
X-Hamster-Info: Score=0 Received=20050215081339
Xref: localhost alt.religion.christian.baptist:18767
Path: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu!spool.maxwell.syr.edu!drn.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-feed01.roc.ny.frontiernet.net!nntp.frontiernet.net!news.glorb.com!mpls-transit-01.news.qwest.net!feed.news.qwest.net!news.uswest.net.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jw <j w<no>@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: alt.bible,alt.bible.prophecy,alt.religion.christian,alt.religion.christian.adventist,alt.religion.christian.baptist,alt.religion.christian.biblestudy,alt.religion.christian.pentecostal,alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic
Subject: Re: Is Adam the 1st man on earth?
Message-ID: <r3i31156oqhoumantkvcc4ijd8l35chs3m@4ax.com>
References: <4019b434_2@news.tm.net.my> <4019EDA0.5E455D17@theendoftheday.com> <101k5uv6m932j70@corp.supernews.com> <401a6149_1@rain.i-cable.com> <11107e91fpcaqd6@corp.supernews.com> <vva111daa4dp4681coeqsh9igp8afc1qqq@4ax.com> <1111fjq8ga8288d@corp.supernews.com> <5q12115c481cpl159v7vuntlcnqn2f7g3h@4ax.com> <7r5211pilgtgo3gk6rnjp7f4e6vcbcrgsf@4ax.com>
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 76
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 02:01:39 -0800
NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.58.70.30
X-Trace: news.uswest.net 1108461691 70.58.70.30 (Tue, 15 Feb 2005 04:01:31 CST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2005 04:01:31 CST
X-Old-Xref: dp-news.maxwell.syr.edu alt.bible.prophecy:409585 alt.religion.christian:1139525 alt.religion.christian.adventist:127986 alt.religion.christian.baptist:654602 alt.religion.christian.biblestudy:333369 alt.religion.christian.pentecostal:325937 alt.religion.christian.roman-catholic:1015015
x-no-archive: yes
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 21:30:21 GMT, William <tielige@mail.clara.fl.com>
wrote:
copyright 2005 John Weatherly all rights reserved (keep it in the group)
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 12:20:28 -0800, jw <j w<no>@yahoo.com> wrote:
x-no-archive: yes
On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 09:06:27 -0600, Rod <freelance74601@yahoo.com>
wrote:
copyright 2005 John Weatherly all rights reserved (keep it in the
group)
jw <j w wrote:
snip
Or one can chose to believe what one does. It's your decision
John, I won't fault you for it.
I may not be a Hebrew or Greek or Aramiac scholar, sir, but my pastors
and seminary professors have been the leading conservative scholars of
our time.
And you are no conservative Christian, or even a Christian, when you
attack God's preserved revelation, which we call the Bible.
"ALL scripture is inspired.."
Please tell us what scriptures were in existence at the time the above
was written.
William
Your qusetion presumes that the authors of the New Testament scriptures
were NOT writing under divine inspiration.
& your fallacy of assuming your conclusions is obvious to all. Try the following concept, assumptions like you make are routine for the individuals that do not have nothing to say & nothing to back it up with. People like you IOW.
Anyone who accept the inspiration doctrine accepts that the authors knew
Anyone one accepts that doctrine admit they do not know what they are talking about. You see, there was only one set of scripture until the xian myth was recorded, & that was the Torah.
they were writing scripture, and they were divinely inpsired to
understand that other books would be forthcoming.
IOW, you haven't a guess & make it up as you go.
The references to "all scripture is inspired", then, would involve all 66
books, not just the OT.
Except that it did not mean that, for your scripture was an accident, & you are not smart enough to figure it out.
Burt then, you think that there was a spook named Jesus of nazareth, & ha\ve to defend that as much as you can. No matter how ridiculous your fantasy, you are stupid enough to think your saying anything makes it so.
Your question contains the built-in assumption that the authors were NOT
& your answer carry's the assumption that you:
A: Know what you are talking about, in spite of your posting history.
B: That your assumption carry's any more weight than anyone elses.
C: That your special pleading is of merit & anyone that does not agree is less than human.
D: That your question begging is not noticed.
I could continue with your errors, but most people are familiar with your lack of knowledge.
inspired, and had NO clue when they wrote their "memoirs" that they were
writing scripture.
They did not, for you can not even identify the authors. But then, you refuse to believe that, so its your problem.
Comments by most of the authors indicate otherwise. They knew as they
penned their writing that it was from the Holy Spirit.
Except, they did not, for there is no indication that any other scripture was in existence except the Torah. What they were writing was their version of the myth, & that was not scripture.
Proof? Much of what they wrote was beyond their understanding. Because
much of what they wrote was not only intended for them, but for the
future of mankind as well.
That is not proof, that is your assumption based on your inability to read in context or with comprehension. But then, that is your best trait IAW your posting history.
It is also the logical fallacy's of assuming your conclusion, excluding other possibility's, and as usual from you, special pleading.
And I don't expect agreement. The Bible says few will find the truth,
because few are truly seeking.
Unlike you, many are still looking & willing to admit, as myths go, there is no reason to accept the missing bogy of xianity. There are better gods, & they are not missing according to their followers.
Not to mention there are gods & goddesses are still around & being worshiped, one goddess from the same region for over 5000 years.
"It works for me."
Anything that feeds your ego & sense of over inflated importance works for you, his is n ot exactly news you know.
If it doesn't work for you, don't believe!
Hard to believe anything that attracts people like you has any merit. Known by the fruits IIRC. But then, thankfully for the world, the bleaters of your stripe are not in control.
jw
walksalone who used to think jw might not of been stupid, but there is just to much evidence that says it is, namely his posts.
--
The Hadith Qudsi 6
The first of people against whom judgment will be pronounced on the Day of Resurrection will be a
man who died a martyr. He will be brought and Allah will make known to him His favours and he will
recognize them.
The Almighty will say: And what did you do about them? He will say: I fought for you until I died a
martyr. He will say: You have lied - you did but fight that it might be said [of you]: He is courageous.
And so it was said.
Then he will be ordered to be dragged along on his face until he is cast into Hell-fi
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
