Do you mean the same biblical account that was written by the Nicene convention 300 years after the death of Christ led by a self-acclaimed worshiper of the Sun God?
People who claim this actually know better and want to propagate the lies, beware of them. They obviously don't understand the discernment that comes from our Creator.
If anyone wants to actually spend an hour and understand why "flat earthers" believe the way they do, then please watch this. Then you can either come back and "debunk" away or be set on your own journey of discovery. ANYONE who simply calls other believers clowns and such, without doing an ounce of actual research, is part of the problem. You are no different than the NPC's that get memed non stop, just living in your world and unwilling to be respectful of other peoples beliefs or to dig deeper and find out why they believe the way they do. There is a great divide of "TRUTH" in this world. One side says you either take their word for it or you are retarded, anti-science, or some sort of a denier...the other says "here's what we believe and why, now please do your own research with an OPEN MIND and decide for yourselves." It's funny how those who call out mental gymnastics of NPC's have no problem with their own mental gymnastics when a truth may potentially invade their little safe spaces. This short one hour movie will answer most of your questions and give you the general gist. BTW..the creator of this film is not religious in any way, so it's not even going into what our Bible teaches us. https://rumble.com/vi4xo3-level-2021-flat-earth-documentary-hd.html
It's not being deceived to consider how God made the world. It is being deceived to adhere to fiction that not only can you not prove, but you cannot find biblical backing for. I look to debunk nothing. I could care less if your error goes un checked. However, your own lack of confidence in what you believe is clearly revealed in your judgmental remarks.
I chose my words exactly as I intended them. The Nicene convention (NC) was the final editor of the Bible most people ascribe as "complete". Was it based on previous works? Almost certainly. There is no dispute of that coming from me. But based on previous works and "final edit" means changes were made, or decided upon, or whatever.
The bible describes itself as "complete".
“For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book” (Revelation 22:18-19)
Who ordered that? Who decided that little sentence? Was it in fact the apostle John as many wish to believe (but for which there is much debate)? Did he maybe write it slightly different, but a few word changes made it into a closed circle that would forestall any future questions of the Christian Religion created at the NC? How could such a sentence make sense Prior to when the conventioneers decided on which books to include and which to leave out?
How do you know there weren't many other previous revisions or edits to create the Religion between the time of the original author and the NC? I mean, that is exactly what the NC did: formalize the tenets of the Religion, creating a formal work of dogma which was thereafter used as a means of social control of several continents for almost two millennia.
The bible as known today was a work of dogma created at the convention. A change of phrase here, a word there, can make all the difference in the world. It doesn't take much to completely alter meaning.
It's also very important to realize (which most do, but don't fully grasp) that the entire concept of "the law" part of the bible (Torah) is in large part the Jewish bible. Within it are stories of things like God demanding, or desiring first born son blood sacrifices, etc..
"Oh, but that's just the way the world was then." Really? So God wanted first born son sacrifices just like Molloch?
Look at the original Passover event. The Torah (old Testament) version of the "Creator God" apparently wanted all first born Egyptian sons to die so badly, he sent his angels to kill them all. "Oh, but that was only a last resort because they wouldn't let 'God's chosen people' go" (think about who those people were, one chosen race above all humanity in the entire world). Please note that murder by angel directive is not the same thing as "allowing bad things to happen". This is a direct act of murder by thug. So God wouldn't have killed them all (because presumably such a direct action of murder is bad) if they had only let the people go. God had to choose the lesser of two evils...
What kind of Creator God has to choose the lesser of two evils? Does that make ANY SENSE AT ALL?
Of course, the bible also says "if you run into logic that doesn't allow this book to make sense, take it on faith that the book is right and the logic is wrong".
Where else have we seen such statements?
In no way do I mean to demean the teachings of Christ. I am pointing out possible Luciferian influences in the Bible that creates the Dogma of the Religion. I am not in any way talking about Christ, nor his teachings.
Everyone who thinks the Bible somehow escaped Luciferian influence because the Bible says so when that book was written (final edit) by a self stated worshiper of the Sun God (aka Lucifer in some cultures) is deluding themselves, because that is what that same book told them to do.
Perhaps there is debate there, and indeed exactly that debate has happened countless times, but it does in fact say or imply that it is a "completed" work in several places. You have just pointed out how insane it is that billions of people believe they know the truth of the Bible, and yet none of them agree on any of it.
Please note again, I am not talking about the teachings of Jesus. The teachings of Jesus is not the Bible, but a small subsection of it. They may also be found in other books not included in the Nicene Convention final edit of the Bible.
His accounting of the history is accurate. Josephus the historian is worth a read for the secular history if .anybsoiritualnevents he witness. Not biblical but eyewitnesses at that time so significant.
I think you are correct that many private interpretations have crept into the explanations of Gods Word. Of which God says "no prophesy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
The Greek word for private is the word idios. Translates to "one's own" as in one's own interpretation. Also, the word idios is the basis for a word we throw sroumd here alot misusing it.
Anyway, the Bible has to interpret itself. In the word, in the verse in the chapter, in the Bible. Thknk first usages... same as a human author.
The Dead Sea scrolls verify the accuracy of the biblical text that is still preserved to this day. That means that the text I hold in my hand is accurate therefore your claims of alteration are null and void. Now there has been slight differences through the translation into other languages but with further study into the original words used you can gain the original contest and depth of meaning.
Who told you that is true? Did you read the scrolls yourself? Do you know Hebrew and Greek? Did you translate them? Which version of the Bible do they verify as being exactly accurate?
All Biblical translations make minor modifications. In each sect you can find variation in belief in no small part depending on which is the most common translation that sect uses predominantly. Were the Dead Sea Scrolls a work that substantiated a reasonable similarity with the current Bible? According to documentation yes and no, though I have not translated the actual scrolls myself to corroborate. But that does not in any way change anything I have said. In fact, to a large extent the Dead Sea Scrolls substantiate what I have said.
The DSS that are also found in the Bible are from the Torah. So really it substantiates the Torah, except of course that there are all kinds of extra books and stories in there that have been changed in the current version. What happened to the Book of Jubilees not included in Genesis? Why was the Book of Giants/Book of Enoch left out completely? Why is the Apocryphan not included in the Bible in its entirety? Does this story of Noah and his children not deserve a part there? Is its removal not exactly proof of editing of a larger text?
What about the Book of Mysteries?
Here are two translations of the same passage to show that even among translators, to suggest that the Bible is the exact same as the DSS is utterly ludicrous. One is from here, and one is from the first link above.
This shall be the sign that this shall come to pass : when the sources of evil are shut up and wickedness is banished in the presence of righteousness, as darkness in the presence of light, or as smoke vanishes and is no more, in the same way wickedness will vanish forever and righteousness will be manifest like the sun. The world will be made firm and all the adherents of the secrets of sin shall be no more. True knowledge shall fill the world and there will never be any more folly. This is all ready to happen, it is a true oracle, and by this it shall be known to you that it cannot be averted.
And this shall be the sign for you that these things shall come to
pass. When the breed of iniquity is shut up, wickedness shall then be
banished by righteousness as darkness is banished by the light. As
smoke clears and is no more, so shall wickedness perish for ever and
righteousness be revealed like a sun governing the world. All who
cleave to the mysteries of sin shall be no more; knowledge shall fill the
world and folly shall exist no longer.
This word shall surely come to pass; this prophecy is true. And by
this may it be known to you that it shall not be taken back
Just in the very beginning it says:
"when the sources of evil are shut up"
v.
"when the breed of iniquity is shut up"
Sources of evil could be anything. Breed of iniquity sounds like a specific group of people.
Regardless, does this not sound like a prophecy of The Great Awakening to you? It sounds like what is happening to me. Why was this left out of the Bible?
What about the New Jerusalem story? Is that not probably a very important thing to include? Some of it seems to have been rolled up into Revelations (possibly denying a John the Apostle authorship), but I would think that any true biblical scholar would appreciate that there is more to this prophecy than we have been told.
Where in the Dead Sea Scrolls are the texts of Jesus? Oh, that's right. Even though some texts are dated past his death (maybe), there isn't a smidge of a mention of him.
The truth is there is more that was left out of the Bible and is in the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) than is verified in any way by them. While some DSS are similar to current texts (largely in the Pentateuch, with a fair bit possibly edited out), they are otherwise almost completely different than the Bible we have today. Not to mention that the vast majority of the DSS didn't make it into the Old Testament at all.
And the OT is really just a Book of Laws (Torah). Why did the Book Of Laws not include all the other Books Of Law that were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls?
The DSS provide more questions than answers with regards to Biblical accuracy. Whatever you have been told about them, I recommend actually reading them or at least a translation of them (all of them) before spouting off how amazingly precise they are to the current Bible (nothing could be further from the truth in the scope of the whole Bible).
I’ll give it to you, you could probably make a pretty good living as a used car salesman. I mean I wouldn’t buy one from you but there’s plenty of gullible people out there.Im sure that’s what your boss says.
Let me ask you a question. Have you heard of the red river meeting house revival? Have you heard of the Azusa street revival? Have you studied the moves of the spirit through the ages? So your saying they all had it wrong and the Bible that the Holy Spirit used and baptized throngs of people throughout the ages was wrong? Do you know how many times the gospel and New Testament scrolls were duplicated and from every corner where it reached it was accurately transcribed and we can verify the accuracy of those transcripts through a collective comparison throughout the centuries.
Do you mean the same biblical account that was written by the Nicene convention 300 years after the death of Christ led by a self-acclaimed worshiper of the Sun God?
WORD CHOICE... You might want to replace written with assembled. The Bible is an anthology, not a novel.
Praise the lord 🙌
People who claim this actually know better and want to propagate the lies, beware of them. They obviously don't understand the discernment that comes from our Creator. If anyone wants to actually spend an hour and understand why "flat earthers" believe the way they do, then please watch this. Then you can either come back and "debunk" away or be set on your own journey of discovery. ANYONE who simply calls other believers clowns and such, without doing an ounce of actual research, is part of the problem. You are no different than the NPC's that get memed non stop, just living in your world and unwilling to be respectful of other peoples beliefs or to dig deeper and find out why they believe the way they do. There is a great divide of "TRUTH" in this world. One side says you either take their word for it or you are retarded, anti-science, or some sort of a denier...the other says "here's what we believe and why, now please do your own research with an OPEN MIND and decide for yourselves." It's funny how those who call out mental gymnastics of NPC's have no problem with their own mental gymnastics when a truth may potentially invade their little safe spaces. This short one hour movie will answer most of your questions and give you the general gist. BTW..the creator of this film is not religious in any way, so it's not even going into what our Bible teaches us. https://rumble.com/vi4xo3-level-2021-flat-earth-documentary-hd.html
It's not being deceived to consider how God made the world. It is being deceived to adhere to fiction that not only can you not prove, but you cannot find biblical backing for. I look to debunk nothing. I could care less if your error goes un checked. However, your own lack of confidence in what you believe is clearly revealed in your judgmental remarks.
This is the way.
I chose my words exactly as I intended them. The Nicene convention (NC) was the final editor of the Bible most people ascribe as "complete". Was it based on previous works? Almost certainly. There is no dispute of that coming from me. But based on previous works and "final edit" means changes were made, or decided upon, or whatever.
The bible describes itself as "complete".
Who ordered that? Who decided that little sentence? Was it in fact the apostle John as many wish to believe (but for which there is much debate)? Did he maybe write it slightly different, but a few word changes made it into a closed circle that would forestall any future questions of the Christian Religion created at the NC? How could such a sentence make sense Prior to when the conventioneers decided on which books to include and which to leave out?
How do you know there weren't many other previous revisions or edits to create the Religion between the time of the original author and the NC? I mean, that is exactly what the NC did: formalize the tenets of the Religion, creating a formal work of dogma which was thereafter used as a means of social control of several continents for almost two millennia.
The bible as known today was a work of dogma created at the convention. A change of phrase here, a word there, can make all the difference in the world. It doesn't take much to completely alter meaning.
It's also very important to realize (which most do, but don't fully grasp) that the entire concept of "the law" part of the bible (Torah) is in large part the Jewish bible. Within it are stories of things like God demanding, or desiring first born son blood sacrifices, etc..
"Oh, but that's just the way the world was then." Really? So God wanted first born son sacrifices just like Molloch?
Look at the original Passover event. The Torah (old Testament) version of the "Creator God" apparently wanted all first born Egyptian sons to die so badly, he sent his angels to kill them all. "Oh, but that was only a last resort because they wouldn't let 'God's chosen people' go" (think about who those people were, one chosen race above all humanity in the entire world). Please note that murder by angel directive is not the same thing as "allowing bad things to happen". This is a direct act of murder by thug. So God wouldn't have killed them all (because presumably such a direct action of murder is bad) if they had only let the people go. God had to choose the lesser of two evils...
What kind of Creator God has to choose the lesser of two evils? Does that make ANY SENSE AT ALL?
Of course, the bible also says "if you run into logic that doesn't allow this book to make sense, take it on faith that the book is right and the logic is wrong".
Where else have we seen such statements?
In no way do I mean to demean the teachings of Christ. I am pointing out possible Luciferian influences in the Bible that creates the Dogma of the Religion. I am not in any way talking about Christ, nor his teachings.
Everyone who thinks the Bible somehow escaped Luciferian influence because the Bible says so when that book was written (final edit) by a self stated worshiper of the Sun God (aka Lucifer in some cultures) is deluding themselves, because that is what that same book told them to do.
The bible does not call itself complete; the book of revelation calls itself complete. There was no bible when John wrote the letter.
Perhaps there is debate there, and indeed exactly that debate has happened countless times, but it does in fact say or imply that it is a "completed" work in several places. You have just pointed out how insane it is that billions of people believe they know the truth of the Bible, and yet none of them agree on any of it.
Please note again, I am not talking about the teachings of Jesus. The teachings of Jesus is not the Bible, but a small subsection of it. They may also be found in other books not included in the Nicene Convention final edit of the Bible.
You moron. Quit trying to sound smart. Your about as knowledgeable as a hamster on a wheel spinning in circles.
lol somebody sounds triggered.
His accounting of the history is accurate. Josephus the historian is worth a read for the secular history if .anybsoiritualnevents he witness. Not biblical but eyewitnesses at that time so significant.
Thanks for this. I need to digest this. I have studied the Bible a fair bit, but
I think you are correct that many private interpretations have crept into the explanations of Gods Word. Of which God says "no prophesy of the scripture is of any private interpretation."
The Greek word for private is the word idios. Translates to "one's own" as in one's own interpretation. Also, the word idios is the basis for a word we throw sroumd here alot misusing it.
Anyway, the Bible has to interpret itself. In the word, in the verse in the chapter, in the Bible. Thknk first usages... same as a human author.
And go look up the Dead Sea scrolls
Pretty sure I mentioned them, albeit not directly. Are you trying to support my point? Thank you!
The Dead Sea scrolls verify the accuracy of the biblical text that is still preserved to this day. That means that the text I hold in my hand is accurate therefore your claims of alteration are null and void. Now there has been slight differences through the translation into other languages but with further study into the original words used you can gain the original contest and depth of meaning.
Who told you that is true? Did you read the scrolls yourself? Do you know Hebrew and Greek? Did you translate them? Which version of the Bible do they verify as being exactly accurate?
All Biblical translations make minor modifications. In each sect you can find variation in belief in no small part depending on which is the most common translation that sect uses predominantly. Were the Dead Sea Scrolls a work that substantiated a reasonable similarity with the current Bible? According to documentation yes and no, though I have not translated the actual scrolls myself to corroborate. But that does not in any way change anything I have said. In fact, to a large extent the Dead Sea Scrolls substantiate what I have said.
The DSS that are also found in the Bible are from the Torah. So really it substantiates the Torah, except of course that there are all kinds of extra books and stories in there that have been changed in the current version. What happened to the Book of Jubilees not included in Genesis? Why was the Book of Giants/Book of Enoch left out completely? Why is the Apocryphan not included in the Bible in its entirety? Does this story of Noah and his children not deserve a part there? Is its removal not exactly proof of editing of a larger text?
What about the Book of Mysteries?
Here are two translations of the same passage to show that even among translators, to suggest that the Bible is the exact same as the DSS is utterly ludicrous. One is from here, and one is from the first link above.
Just in the very beginning it says:
"when the sources of evil are shut up"
v.
"when the breed of iniquity is shut up"
Sources of evil could be anything. Breed of iniquity sounds like a specific group of people.
Regardless, does this not sound like a prophecy of The Great Awakening to you? It sounds like what is happening to me. Why was this left out of the Bible?
What about the New Jerusalem story? Is that not probably a very important thing to include? Some of it seems to have been rolled up into Revelations (possibly denying a John the Apostle authorship), but I would think that any true biblical scholar would appreciate that there is more to this prophecy than we have been told.
Where in the Dead Sea Scrolls are the texts of Jesus? Oh, that's right. Even though some texts are dated past his death (maybe), there isn't a smidge of a mention of him.
The truth is there is more that was left out of the Bible and is in the Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) than is verified in any way by them. While some DSS are similar to current texts (largely in the Pentateuch, with a fair bit possibly edited out), they are otherwise almost completely different than the Bible we have today. Not to mention that the vast majority of the DSS didn't make it into the Old Testament at all.
And the OT is really just a Book of Laws (Torah). Why did the Book Of Laws not include all the other Books Of Law that were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls?
The DSS provide more questions than answers with regards to Biblical accuracy. Whatever you have been told about them, I recommend actually reading them or at least a translation of them (all of them) before spouting off how amazingly precise they are to the current Bible (nothing could be further from the truth in the scope of the whole Bible).
I’ll give it to you, you could probably make a pretty good living as a used car salesman. I mean I wouldn’t buy one from you but there’s plenty of gullible people out there.Im sure that’s what your boss says.
Let me ask you a question. Have you heard of the red river meeting house revival? Have you heard of the Azusa street revival? Have you studied the moves of the spirit through the ages? So your saying they all had it wrong and the Bible that the Holy Spirit used and baptized throngs of people throughout the ages was wrong? Do you know how many times the gospel and New Testament scrolls were duplicated and from every corner where it reached it was accurately transcribed and we can verify the accuracy of those transcripts through a collective comparison throughout the centuries.
And reaffirmed In 482 AD