Support NeoGAF

[Kamina]

So the strangest thing just happened.
One of the shepherds just woke me, talking something about an angel who appeared and told them that our savior was born tonight. I expected to smell Alkohol in his breath but all the others say the same. Plus there is this giant star(?) floating low over Bethlehem.
The sheperds are walking down there to take a look now and I’ll join them.

 

[Kamina]

So we ended up underneath the star, at a stable. And you wont believe me, but it’s Maria an Josef, with their newborn. There is an immense aura emitting from him, and we are all kneeling and watching.
Such a peaceful, quiet ad holy night. It really is true that on this day, our savior was born.
Glory to the newborn King!

 

[Gargus]

Has anyone watched "creatures that defy evolution"? It was on Netflix at one point but it's also on YouTube. It's pretty fascinating. It discusses some animals that are so specialized, natural selection isn't a sufficient explanation for their existence. While an atheist might groan and roll their eyes at the suggestion that this is evidence for a divine creator, it would be interesting to hear what other conclusion they might have.

There is a scientifically rational explanation for everything, even if we haven't found it yet. It wasn't even until recently the reason was found as to why if you slice a grape in half, place it in the microwave and turn it on plasma is generated, the 4th state of matter. It baffled people for a while until not long ago.

500 years ago everyone knew when you were sick it was from tiny frogs living in our stomachs and you could crazy people by drilling holes in there head. Black holes were just a theory, so was gravitational waves in the universe until recently we have a picture of a black hole and the theory of them was surprisingly accurate, and we can measure gravitational waves as well now further proving that theory.

A divine creator is the go to knee jerk response of the lazy minded and weak willed because it is easy and requires no proof at all. That kind of thinking is what holds us back from evolving and learning and growing as a species. Why search for answers when you can pull the God card and put your feet up and call it a day. And we know the flu causes illness now instead of frogs.

If there is a god then which one is it? Multiple groups of millions of people allover the world all believe their god is the one true god, so who is to say which one is correct? Each individual one will say theirs because it's what they are comfortable with and what they grew up with. It's all people who grew up with stories of Santa but no one ever told them he isn't real so they grew up telling their kids he is real and so on. Flash forward 10,000 years and people will think he is real just because a lot of other people said so.

But a lot of things exist that we can explain because we haven't stumbled across the right circumstances or have the proper tools to test with, yet. There is no great unknown spooky stuff in the universe, what we don't know we will in time. Those creatures don't defy evolution at all, they defy our basic understanding of it but in time it will be revealed as so so so so so many other things have that were once impossible. Once we mainstream AI a whole of secrets won't be secrets anymore, and once we can learn to generate gravity and manipulate it the whole universe is going to spread its legs for us like a drunken prom date. It's all a matter of time.

But I understand this need for divinity in people. We came from a dumb and ignorant species that were superstitious and had no knowledge at all. Out of our innate fear of the unknown we created stories about mythical gods to make sense of what we didn't know. We're a story telling species and we told those stories to others who were ignorant and scared and they told them and so on. And then kings and churches came to be and were the most powerful things on the earth and they used those stories to control all the dumb and ignorant people. They created new gods, changed the stories to suit themselves and rewrote things and the dumb and ignorant believed it all because they didn't know how to learn and too primitive to understand science. Flash forward thousands of years of those stories being told as the truth and bam, santa is real in the minds of people. Fiction is reality if you allow it to be.

But those crazy and wacky creatures that defy evolution or whatever nonsense Netflix told you about there are still 2 facts that denounce that notion. 1 they exist so obviously it isn't against evolution at all because it's there. And 2 is it's made up of the same atomic and sub atomic particles as everything else in the universe is made of from my finger nail, to a toaster, to an asteroid, to a speck of dust, to a whale. It's all made of the exact same thing, just circumstances caused its particles to be arranged in the way it was.

 

[Maestr0]

I was christian when I decided to become one, my mom wanted me to have the choice unlike my big brother and sister. And my baptism is one thing that I regret more than anything. It's only a proof of my stupidity. I started to hated god after that, more than ever, and it only just grew over the year, to the point I wish the religion would just disappear and having god dead.
But then I also realised, divinity is just an idea for people that want to find an excuse for themselves (and myself) but if god exist, he is my enemy and the will of him being dead was a good one.

 

[Bolivar687]

Merry Christmas everyone!

 

[Ornlu]

There is a scientifically rational explanation for everything, even if we haven't found it yet. It wasn't even until recently the reason was found as to why if you slice a grape in half, place it in the microwave and turn it on plasma is generated, the 4th state of matter. It baffled people for a while until not long ago.

500 years ago everyone knew when you were sick it was from tiny frogs living in our stomachs and you could crazy people by drilling holes in there head. Black holes were just a theory, so was gravitational waves in the universe until recently we have a picture of a black hole and the theory of them was surprisingly accurate, and we can measure gravitational waves as well now further proving that theory.

A divine creator is the go to knee jerk response of the lazy minded and weak willed because it is easy and requires no proof at all. That kind of thinking is what holds us back from evolving and learning and growing as a species. Why search for answers when you can pull the God card and put your feet up and call it a day. And we know the flu causes illness now instead of frogs.

If there is a god then which one is it? Multiple groups of millions of people allover the world all believe their god is the one true god, so who is to say which one is correct? Each individual one will say theirs because it's what they are comfortable with and what they grew up with. It's all people who grew up with stories of Santa but no one ever told them he isn't real so they grew up telling their kids he is real and so on. Flash forward 10,000 years and people will think he is real just because a lot of other people said so.

But a lot of things exist that we can explain because we haven't stumbled across the right circumstances or have the proper tools to test with, yet. There is no great unknown spooky stuff in the universe, what we don't know we will in time. Those creatures don't defy evolution at all, they defy our basic understanding of it but in time it will be revealed as so so so so so many other things have that were once impossible. Once we mainstream AI a whole of secrets won't be secrets anymore, and once we can learn to generate gravity and manipulate it the whole universe is going to spread its legs for us like a drunken prom date. It's all a matter of time.

But I understand this need for divinity in people. We came from a dumb and ignorant species that were superstitious and had no knowledge at all. Out of our innate fear of the unknown we created stories about mythical gods to make sense of what we didn't know. We're a story telling species and we told those stories to others who were ignorant and scared and they told them and so on. And then kings and churches came to be and were the most powerful things on the earth and they used those stories to control all the dumb and ignorant people. They created new gods, changed the stories to suit themselves and rewrote things and the dumb and ignorant believed it all because they didn't know how to learn and too primitive to understand science. Flash forward thousands of years of those stories being told as the truth and bam, santa is real in the minds of people. Fiction is reality if you allow it to be.

But those crazy and wacky creatures that defy evolution or whatever nonsense Netflix told you about there are still 2 facts that denounce that notion. 1 they exist so obviously it isn't against evolution at all because it's there. And 2 is it's made up of the same atomic and sub atomic particles as everything else in the universe is made of from my finger nail, to a toaster, to an asteroid, to a speck of dust, to a whale. It's all made of the exact same thing, just circumstances caused its particles to be arranged in the way it was.

This might not be the thread you are looking for, friend. Merry Christmas! I hope in time you come to change your views toward your fellow man, instead of viewing most of the world as lazy and weak willed.

Though as a parting zinger for you, it's ironic that you referenced whales in your final paragraph; they are one of the examples used to point out holes in the theory of evolution, as they don't fit the timeline at all.

 

[Ornlu]

I was christian when I decided to become one, my mom wanted me to have the choice unlike my big brother and sister. And my baptism is one thing that I regret more than anything. It's only a proof of my stupidity. I started to hated god after that, more than ever, and it only just grew over the year, to the point I wish the religion would just disappear and having god dead.
But then I also realised, divinity is just an idea for people that want to find an excuse for themselves (and myself) but if god exist, he is my enemy and the will of him being dead was a good one.

That doesn't make much sense. Why would you hate a God that you don't believe in? If you don't believe, then why would baptism make you feel stupid? Wouldn't it then just be an act that means nothing to you? Why do you want religion to disappear, if it doesn't mean anything, and therefore has no purpose in your life?

 

[Liljagare]

If there is one thing I could make Christians understand, it is that Pagan does not mean one without a god.


Regards, a norse. I am sure you probarly heard of Tor and Oden by now.

 

[Ornlu]

If there is one thing I could make Christians understand, it is that Pagan does not mean one without a god.


Regards, a norse. I am sure you probarly heard of Tor and Oden by now.

Is it a regional problem you encounter with Christians in Scandinavia? I've never heard a Christian refer to anyone as a pagan.

 

[Thurible]

There is a scientifically rational explanation for everything, even if we haven't found it yet. It wasn't even until recently the reason was found as to why if you slice a grape in half, place it in the microwave and turn it on plasma is generated, the 4th state of matter. It baffled people for a while until not long ago.

500 years ago everyone knew when you were sick it was from tiny frogs living in our stomachs and you could crazy people by drilling holes in there head. Black holes were just a theory, so was gravitational waves in the universe until recently we have a picture of a black hole and the theory of them was surprisingly accurate, and we can measure gravitational waves as well now further proving that theory.

A divine creator is the go to knee jerk response of the lazy minded and weak willed because it is easy and requires no proof at all. That kind of thinking is what holds us back from evolving and learning and growing as a species. Why search for answers when you can pull the God card and put your feet up and call it a day. And we know the flu causes illness now instead of frogs.

If there is a god then which one is it? Multiple groups of millions of people allover the world all believe their god is the one true god, so who is to say which one is correct? Each individual one will say theirs because it's what they are comfortable with and what they grew up with. It's all people who grew up with stories of Santa but no one ever told them he isn't real so they grew up telling their kids he is real and so on. Flash forward 10,000 years and people will think he is real just because a lot of other people said so.

But a lot of things exist that we can explain because we haven't stumbled across the right circumstances or have the proper tools to test with, yet. There is no great unknown spooky stuff in the universe, what we don't know we will in time. Those creatures don't defy evolution at all, they defy our basic understanding of it but in time it will be revealed as so so so so so many other things have that were once impossible. Once we mainstream AI a whole of secrets won't be secrets anymore, and once we can learn to generate gravity and manipulate it the whole universe is going to spread its legs for us like a drunken prom date. It's all a matter of time.

But I understand this need for divinity in people. We came from a dumb and ignorant species that were superstitious and had no knowledge at all. Out of our innate fear of the unknown we created stories about mythical gods to make sense of what we didn't know. We're a story telling species and we told those stories to others who were ignorant and scared and they told them and so on. And then kings and churches came to be and were the most powerful things on the earth and they used those stories to control all the dumb and ignorant people. They created new gods, changed the stories to suit themselves and rewrote things and the dumb and ignorant believed it all because they didn't know how to learn and too primitive to understand science. Flash forward thousands of years of those stories being told as the truth and bam, santa is real in the minds of people. Fiction is reality if you allow it to be.

But those crazy and wacky creatures that defy evolution or whatever nonsense Netflix told you about there are still 2 facts that denounce that notion. 1 they exist so obviously it isn't against evolution at all because it's there. And 2 is it's made up of the same atomic and sub atomic particles as everything else in the universe is made of from my finger nail, to a toaster, to an asteroid, to a speck of dust, to a whale. It's all made of the exact same thing, just circumstances caused its particles to be arranged in the way it was.

Why do you assume that religion is scientifically illiterate, that it's something irrational used to fill in the gaps of knowledge?

 

[Bolivar687]

There is a scientifically rational explanation for everything, even if we haven't found it yet. It wasn't even until recently the reason was found as to why if you slice a grape in half, place it in the microwave and turn it on plasma is generated, the 4th state of matter. It baffled people for a while until not long ago.

500 years ago everyone knew when you were sick it was from tiny frogs living in our stomachs and you could crazy people by drilling holes in there head. Black holes were just a theory, so was gravitational waves in the universe until recently we have a picture of a black hole and the theory of them was surprisingly accurate, and we can measure gravitational waves as well now further proving that theory.

A divine creator is the go to knee jerk response of the lazy minded and weak willed because it is easy and requires no proof at all. That kind of thinking is what holds us back from evolving and learning and growing as a species. Why search for answers when you can pull the God card and put your feet up and call it a day. And we know the flu causes illness now instead of frogs.

If there is a god then which one is it? Multiple groups of millions of people allover the world all believe their god is the one true god, so who is to say which one is correct? Each individual one will say theirs because it's what they are comfortable with and what they grew up with. It's all people who grew up with stories of Santa but no one ever told them he isn't real so they grew up telling their kids he is real and so on. Flash forward 10,000 years and people will think he is real just because a lot of other people said so.

But a lot of things exist that we can explain because we haven't stumbled across the right circumstances or have the proper tools to test with, yet. There is no great unknown spooky stuff in the universe, what we don't know we will in time. Those creatures don't defy evolution at all, they defy our basic understanding of it but in time it will be revealed as so so so so so many other things have that were once impossible. Once we mainstream AI a whole of secrets won't be secrets anymore, and once we can learn to generate gravity and manipulate it the whole universe is going to spread its legs for us like a drunken prom date. It's all a matter of time.

But I understand this need for divinity in people. We came from a dumb and ignorant species that were superstitious and had no knowledge at all. Out of our innate fear of the unknown we created stories about mythical gods to make sense of what we didn't know. We're a story telling species and we told those stories to others who were ignorant and scared and they told them and so on. And then kings and churches came to be and were the most powerful things on the earth and they used those stories to control all the dumb and ignorant people. They created new gods, changed the stories to suit themselves and rewrote things and the dumb and ignorant believed it all because they didn't know how to learn and too primitive to understand science. Flash forward thousands of years of those stories being told as the truth and bam, santa is real in the minds of people. Fiction is reality if you allow it to be.

But those crazy and wacky creatures that defy evolution or whatever nonsense Netflix told you about there are still 2 facts that denounce that notion. 1 they exist so obviously it isn't against evolution at all because it's there. And 2 is it's made up of the same atomic and sub atomic particles as everything else in the universe is made of from my finger nail, to a toaster, to an asteroid, to a speck of dust, to a whale. It's all made of the exact same thing, just circumstances caused its particles to be arranged in the way it was.

The part I've never been able to reconcile this is that in a universe full of dead rocks, there is only one planet that not only has multicellular life but is then chock full of biodiversity. But even on that extensive biodiverse timeline of billions of years, there is only one species with consciousness, abstractions, creativity, culture, and civilization. A lot of animals have gills, tails, and other appendages, but none of them have these attributes that differentiate mankind. It is statistically improbable that the human experience is a naturally occuring phenomenon. If it was, there would certainly already have been life somewhere in the infinitely old and expanding universe that would have already observably manifested itself.

Similarly within our species, it does not seem that Abrahamic monotheism is a naturally occuring phenomenon, either. Whereas the natural religions conflate creation with creator and recognize transcultural deities, you have this one framework that stands alone bifurcating creator from its creation and states that all other deities are man-made artifacts, and that those who worship them become as lifeless as them. When you rhetorically ask which God is authentic, I'm going to rock with the one that stands a part from the others, offers an explanation for them, and whose prophecies of all nations being drawn to the one He established having indeed come true.

I don't think science is ever going to explain how the Miracle of the Sun manifested itself at Fatima, after three children said the Virgin Mary promised it would happen on that date, to thousands of eye witnesses, many of which were previously skeptics and even atheists beforehand. I've read the critical explanations rationalizing the Fatima miracle, and I personally don't find any of them convincing or even that particularly compelling.

 

[Bolivar687]

Christ is born!

 

[Chaplain]

Merry Christmas!




"...the biblical affirmation that the "word became flesh and lived among us" (John 1:14) offers a radically different concept of God: not the abstract and remote "God of the philosophers," but a God who cares for us; not as a passive distant observer, but as an active fellow traveller and constant companion within the historical process. God is someone we can know and address in worship and prayer. The philosopher Roger Scruton expressed this point rather nicely: "The God of the philosophers disappeared behind the world, because he was described in the third person, and not addressed in the second." The "incarnation" is not a static and timeless idea, but the Christian way of interpreting something which happened - the life, death and resurrection of Christ - and its implications." (Oxford theologian Alister McGrath)

 

[#Phonepunk#]

Christmas was very good this year. spent time with the fam and loved ones.

Christ was in my life in a number of ways. for my roommate i gifted her a Virgin of Guadalupe that I purchased at a cool Mexican mall down the street from where they shot Stranger Things s3. it is about 2 feet tall and has two angels placing a crown on her head. behind her is a fiberglass arrangement, and the piece plugs in and lights up and changes colors and all that. very psychedelic and beautiful. i kind of want to go back and get one for myself!

my dad gave all these prints of famous art to us, and there were a lot of beautiful paintings depicting all kinds of scenes from the Bible. the life and trials of Jesus featured most prominently of course but the whole nativity theme and the importance of family felt to be very strong to me. Jesus and his mother are some of the most ubiquitous iconography. to me it is a hopeful, loving message, about family, about personal connection, etc. of course we can go deep into esoterica if we want, and plenty of Mary-centric sects have sprung up around the world. it gives creation to wonderful expressions like that psychedelic fiberglass Virgin of Guadalupe. to me it truly is a beatific, holy image.

there is something about the fantasy nature of Christianity i have always loved and find fascinating. i like how other non-Christian cultures interact w Christianity, and the things they elaborate on in interesting ways. right now i'm reading Gawain and the Green Knight, a medieval poem of Arthurian lore, a Christmas season classic fantasy of knights and magic. the Arthurian legends have a lot of deep roots in the mixing of pagan-Christian folklores. thus we have the search for the Grail (legends discouraged by the Church at the time) and other tales that connect Biblical stories with other cultures around Europe. Merlin himself was claimed to have constructed Stonehenge. most interestingly was the initial appearance of the titular Green Knight, who arrived on a green horse wearing long, curly, green hair, holding an axe and a holly leaf. the holly is still a Christmas symbol, yet it has very ancient roots.

all this green is a nod to the pagan Green Man, a fertility legend, somewhat related to the Roman Saturn. Saturn was said to hold a club made of holly wood, the holly having some pagan significance. Roman festivals of Saturnalia were held in December, so we can see therein the ancient, legendary pagan-Christian roots of the holiday we still celebrate in 2019. interesting stuff to ponder.

 

[Scotty W]

Flesh Becomes Word: A Lexicography of the Scapegoat or, the History of an Idea (Studies in Violence, Mimesis, & Culture): Dawson, David: 9781611860634: Amazon.com: Books

Flesh Becomes Word: A Lexicography of the Scapegoat or, the History of an Idea (Studies in Violence, Mimesis, & Culture) [Dawson, David] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Flesh Becomes Word: A Lexicography of the Scapegoat or, the History of an Idea (Studies in Violence...

www.amazon.com

I randomly found this book in a university library a few months ago, and really enjoyed it. It is a history of the development of the Scapegoat word and concept. Highly recommended.

 

[-Minsc-]

Flesh Becomes Word: A Lexicography of the Scapegoat or, the History of an Idea (Studies in Violence, Mimesis, & Culture): Dawson, David: 9781611860634: Amazon.com: Books

Flesh Becomes Word: A Lexicography of the Scapegoat or, the History of an Idea (Studies in Violence, Mimesis, & Culture) [Dawson, David] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Flesh Becomes Word: A Lexicography of the Scapegoat or, the History of an Idea (Studies in Violence...

www.amazon.com

I randomly found this book in a university library a few months ago, and really enjoyed it. It is a history of the development of the Scapegoat word and concept. Highly recommended.

Thanks for the recommend, will look into it.

 

[mcz117chief]

Tesseract welcome back, mah boi! How was your Christmas time

 

[Tesseract]

Tesseract welcome back, mah boi! How was your Christmas time

it was great, significant ultra violence simulation in the pentagon labs

 

[MetalAlien]

it was great, significant ultra violence simulation in the pentagon labs

It's f***ing February where is Tess?

www.neogaf.com

 

[Chaplain]

Recent resources that are quite exceptional:

Video: Black History Month and the Early African Influence on Christianity

Black History Month is a time of reflection and celebration, tying the past to the present. One critically important historical set of events concerned the early African influence on the Christian faith. This historical information negates false narratives established during the antebellum period that still have roots in modern society.

Audio from Pure 2020 conference:

• Pure 2020: 01 Andrea Williams - How we got here: the sexual revolution
• Pure 2020: 08 Ade Omooba - Promoting Purity
• Pure 2020: Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali - Devotional 1
• Pure 2020: Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali - Devotional 2
• Pure 2020: 04 Elisha Kolade - Bringing hope and healing for sex addictions
• Pure 2020: 03 Gary McFarlane - What is sex addiction?
• Pure 2020: 02 Joe Boot - The philosophical foundations of pornography
• Pure 2020: 05 Lisa Nolland - There's no such thing as 'naughty harmless fun'
• Pure 2020: 06 Michael Phillips - What can the Church do?
• Pure 2020: 07 Q&A Panel

Video: The Problem of Those Who Have Never Heard of Christ

When Christians claim that Jesus is the only way to God, an objection is often raised: If Jesus is the only way to God, what about those who’ve never heard of Jesus? Is God unfair? Are some people just unlucky - born at the wrong time and place in history? They can’t possibly be saved … or can they? This brief animation addresses these objections to Christian particularism in a way that affirms divine justice and compassion as well as human free choice.

Video: Mental Health, Human Flourishing, and Religion | Curt Thompson, M.D.

Dr. Curt Thompson, a board-certified Psychiatrist and Neurologist, discusses the power of the narrative we tell ourselves and how it affects us throughout our lives. A lecture and conversation covering mental health, human flourishing, and religion. From the stage at the University of Minnesota.

Video: Andy Bannister at Destiny Church Edinburgh

Dr. Andy Bannister preaching on "God and the Environment" at Destiny Church, Edinburgh 24 January 2020.

Article/video: Does brain activity mean God isn’t real?

In recent years, this discipline has been studied by neuroscientists. Professor Andrew Newberg and others have pioneered research into Buddhist meditation, rituals, trance states and Christian prayer. A medical review in 2009 listed forty different brain regions that are involved in prayer and meditation, showing that the brain is very active during spiritual activity. And not in a one-size-fits-all manner. Amazingly, different kinds of prayer activate different networks.

Video: Meaning, Evidence and Truth | Dr. Ard Louis

Ard Louis discusses the question, "Can science answer all of our questions?"

Video: S1:Ex3 | Judging the Evidence | Sir Jeremy Cooke | Genexis 2019

Sir Jeremy Cooke served as a judge at the Queen's Bench in the High Court until his retirement in 2016. Between 2013 and 2016, he presided over the case of R v Tom Hayes, which saw him hand the largest ever sentence for corporate crime in the UK. Sir Jeremy presents how the evidence from morality and justice persuaded him that there had to be a Creator.

Video: Truth and Science | A Christian, Muslim, and Atheist discuss

Kirk Durston, Matt Monrose, and Imam Hosam Helal discuss their perspectives on faith and science.

Video: God and the Modern Age | Dr. Satyan Devadoss

Mathematician Satyan Devadoss, of Williams College, discusses whether science makes faith obsolete or not

Video: Why Science? An Agnostic & Christian Discuss

Dr. Christian Shorey and Dr. C. Jimmy Lin discuss science and faith.

Video: Stuart McAllister: A Tale of Two Stories

Stories define us; they inform and shape who we are and where we will go. But, are all stories equal? Does every story lead us to the same destination? On January 18, 2020 Stuart McAllister spoke on the vital foundations and stories within the framework of Islam and Christianity, examining how we can know what to believe. This talk is a part of our Understanding and Answering Islam conference.

Video: Glen Scrivener & Matt Dillahunty - Morality: Can atheism deliver a better world?

"In the 6th and final episode of The Big Conversation series Season 2, Justin is joined by Matt Dillahunty of The Atheist Experience and Glen Scrivener of Speak Life. They discuss the atheist movement and whether secular humanism can provide a solid grounding for morality. Do studies show that religiosity benefits society? Is there an intrinsic value to humans? What did the Nazis actually do wrong? These questions and more get addressed."

 

[Bolivar687]

The Book of Daniel is

 

[Thurible]

The Book of Daniel is

In the spirit of St. Lawrence, I'll say that your joke is pretty well done.

 

[boutrosinit]

Hello. As someone interested in the origins of humanity as expressed through numerous faiths, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the stories presented in the bible, from the context of seeking your own truth.

Meaning the knowing that the King James bible (the modern known and common bible) was edited / rather butchered and is missing and containing a lot of what wasn't in the earlier forms.

How does that change your relationship to the information you've been given and how do you navigate that in your own faith?

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Hello. As someone interested in the origins of humanity as expressed through numerous faiths, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the stories presented in the bible, from the context of seeking your own truth.

Meaning the knowing that the King James bible (the modern known and common bible) was edited / rather butchered and is missing and containing a lot of what wasn't in the earlier forms.

How does that change your relationship to the information you've been given and how do you navigate that in your own faith?

I think the concerns over the "butchering" are overblown. Having learned koine greek and latin in school I was able to examine the core texts for myself, and there are other translations if one has issues with the KJV.

It also depends on what one means by edited / butchered / missing content. Are we talking about the anglicization of the name "Jesus" (which is Yeshua in hebrew, the same name of the man who marched around the walls of Jericho, "Joshua")? Or are you referring to the apocrypha? Or are you referring to heretical texts that were omitted from the Bible?

It's a fascinating topic but I don't put much stock into modern denominations that insist on one translation or the other.

 

[appaws]

Hello. As someone interested in the origins of humanity as expressed through numerous faiths, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the stories presented in the bible, from the context of seeking your own truth.

Meaning the knowing that the King James bible (the modern known and common bible) was edited / rather butchered and is missing and containing a lot of what wasn't in the earlier forms.

How does that change your relationship to the information you've been given and how do you navigate that in your own faith?

Well, I will say as a Catholic we don't put nearly as much emphasis on attempting to put meaning into literal readings of the Bible. We understand that it is a collection of vastly different types of literature, assembled over a long period of time in different languages, and we have to rely on experts in theology, history, and languages to understand what it is supposed to tell us.

That is why we disagree with Protestants that a central church is unnecessary and that reading the Bible for yourself is sufficient. That is why there are so many Protestant denominations, because every nudnick who reads some English translation thinks he can come up with something everyone else missed and go open a church somewhere.

As for the origins of humanity, most Catholics would say that God created us in his image, but we are not required to believe in a literal reading of Genesis. I am perfectly content with God creating man through the process of natural selection over millions or hundreds of thousands of years. We just don't have the debates about this issue like Protestants do, whether the Hebrew creation myth is literally true.

I would caution you though, about your use of the phrase "your own truth." There is no "your own truth." There is truth, and there are falsehoods. It is not always easy to discern them. I would argue that searching for truth is the greatest thing that humans can participate in. But relativism is a trap. Just using two of the Abrahamaic religions as an example. If the Muslims are right, then I am going to Hell. If I am right, Muslims are going to Hell. There is no secret trick where everyone can be right.

 

[Ornlu]

Hello. As someone interested in the origins of humanity as expressed through numerous faiths, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the stories presented in the bible, from the context of seeking your own truth.

Meaning the knowing that the King James bible (the modern known and common bible) was edited / rather butchered and is missing and containing a lot of what wasn't in the earlier forms.

How does that change your relationship to the information you've been given and how do you navigate that in your own faith?

I guess that would depend on someone being able to identify what was edited/butchered in your opinion.

What portions exactly do you take issue with?

I think the concerns over the "butchering" are overblown. Having learned koine greek and latin in school I was able to examine the core texts for myself, and there are other translations if one has issues with the KJV.

It also depends on what one means by edited / butchered / missing content. Are we talking about the anglicization of the name "Jesus" (which is Yeshua in hebrew, the same name of the man who marched around the walls of Jericho, "Joshua")? Or are you referring to the apocrypha? Or are you referring to heretical texts that were omitted from the Bible?

It's a fascinating topic but I don't put much stock into modern denominations that insist on one translation or the other.

I'd largely second what you posted. I'm not aware of any translational differences that radically change the meaning of the message.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

That is why we disagree with Protestants that a central church is unnecessary and that reading the Bible for yourself is sufficient. That is why there are so many Protestant denominations, because every nudnick who reads some English translation thinks he can come up with something everyone else missed and go open a church somewhere.

I think there are two halves to a whole, because protestants do not think the church is necessary for the communication of a saving gospel. And we would point out that is why there are so many catholic contradictions, because every Pope who wore the hat thinks he can come up with something novel to make a name for himself.

I fully agree with your criticism, by the way. Luther's actions damaged/destroyed the idea that one of the church's important roles was to protect God's word and to accurately communicate it. We would not have a Bible at all if the church had failed in this role in the early centuries. Instead, Luther's presupposition is that the individual can puzzle out the "true" meaning of the word. Denominations multiplied fractally based on this thinking. The Bible is easily the most-discussed and most-documented book in human history, so it is arrogant to think that we can approach it without considering the words of fellow christians who came before ourselves.

But if you look further back into history, Luther's challenge of the catholic authority was just a ripple-effect of the schism between catholic and orthodox christians several hundred years before. It's not like he was splitting up an already-unified church. The schism took place because of Luther's same complaint: one bishop wanted primacy, to dictate the meaning of God's word above all objections.

 

[appaws]

I think there are two halves to a whole, because protestants do not think the church is necessary for the communication of a saving gospel. And we would point out that is why there are so many catholic contradictions, because every Pope who wore the hat thinks he can come up with something novel to make a name for himself.

I fully agree with your criticism, by the way. Luther's actions damaged/destroyed the idea that one of the church's important roles was to protect God's word and to accurately communicate it. We would not have a Bible at all if the church had failed in this role in the early centuries. Instead, Luther's presupposition is that the individual can puzzle out the "true" meaning of the word. Denominations multiplied fractally based on this thinking. The Bible is easily the most-discussed and most-documented book in human history, so it is arrogant to think that we can approach it without considering the words of fellow christians who came before ourselves.

But if you look further back into history, Luther's challenge of the catholic authority was just a ripple-effect of the schism between catholic and orthodox christians several hundred years before. It's not like he was splitting up an already-unified church. The schism took place because of Luther's same complaint: one bishop wanted primacy, to dictate the meaning of God's word above all objections.

Yes and no. The Orthodox didn't dispute the idea of apostolic authority or a (small c, universal) catholic church, even though there were some doctrinal differences, and of course as you say, the primacy of the bishop of Rome was the big issue. Luther, and especially those who followed later, blew the doors off the whole idea of human authority coming down from Christ.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Yes and no. The Orthodox didn't dispute the idea of apostolic authority or a (small c, universal) catholic church, even though there were some doctrinal differences, and of course as you say, the primacy of the bishop of Rome was the big issue. Luther, and especially those who followed later, blew the doors off the whole idea of human authority coming down from Christ.

Agreed, the dispute was not directly about the roman bishop's authority, it was about the roman bishop trying to enforce his regional doctrines -- the big one being Filioque. The schism was fundamentally over the question as to whether the roman bishop had the authority to make those doctrinal decisions for the whole christian church 100s of years after 95% of dogma had already been established by the early church fathers and their successors. I believe both the catholic and the orthodox branches of God's church were neglecting their role as shepherds / protectors of what had been handed down and instead took it upon themselves to argue over nuances. Instead of admitting they looked through a glass but dimly, they insisted on their interpretation.

Which is exactly what catholics accuse Luther of doing, taking it upon himself to give interpretations instead of preserving what had been handed down and respecting the authority of God's church.

It wasn't even a dispute over scripture but over the verbiage of the creeds, which themselves are man-made. I would argue the church fell into the sin that Jesus warned about, to not be like the pharisees who created fences around God's law and who insisted on the truthfulness of their fences.

 

[#Phonepunk#]

Hello. As someone interested in the origins of humanity as expressed through numerous faiths, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the stories presented in the bible, from the context of seeking your own truth.

Meaning the knowing that the King James bible (the modern known and common bible) was edited / rather butchered and is missing and containing a lot of what wasn't in the earlier forms.

How does that change your relationship to the information you've been given and how do you navigate that in your own faith?

Personally I struggled with the KJV of the Bible and gradually expanded my reading to include other sources. Everyday Talmud was a huge doorway into the tradition of Jewish philosophy and theology that is the fundamental of the OT. Many stories i have heard over and over given new meaning and depth by reading Jewish commentaries. Maimonides Guide for the Perplexed is an absolute treasure trove of commentary. Many similar works exist, hundreds of years of commentary and philosophy, waiting for you to discover. You just have to look outside the box.

Basically realizing that the King James is just one version kind of opened the door to me to explore other points of view. That in turn has expanded my faith as well as intellectual curiosity.

Many have this top down dogmatic view of Christianity where there is one authoritative text and one interpretation. I find that view to be not really correct, there is a world of stuff to discover if you keep an open mind.

 

[Ownage]

Whatever gets you thru the day. Just don't prophetize.

 

[Tesseract]

lapsing on bible reading, will try to do some today between scrims and work

 

[mcz117chief]

One thing you must always remember, Bible is not written by God or tells the story about God, it is the sum of HUMAN EXPERIENCES WITH God. So you got a society that lives in terrible conditions full of carnage, hard work, persecution etc. (Jews in Egypt and their conquest of Palestine) so obviously their interpretation of God's actions will be heavily influenced by their environment and mood. That is why people often draw distinction between God of the Old Testament and God of the New Testament.

Whatever gets you thru the day. Just don't prophetize.

The Threefold office clearly says that we have to.

 

[#Phonepunk#]

Threefold office is widely open to interpretation, like anything. it isn’t “clearly” saying you “have to” do anything, given that many interpretations exist.

It feels silly to lean unwaveringly on strict interpretations of dogma, given that Jesus himself did a lot of things that went against that.

I think idolatry happens a lot towards texts, people often cling to the letter while ignoring the spirit.

That said it’s important to learn the contexts for the original writings. Many were written while Christians were actively being hunted down and killed, explaining the violent and revolutionary rhetoric.

 

[mcz117chief]

Threefold office is widely open to interpretation, like anything. it isn’t “clearly” saying you “have to” do anything, given that many interpretations exist.

It feels silly to lean unwaveringly on strict interpretations of dogma, given that Jesus himself did a lot of things that went against that.

I think idolatry happens a lot towards texts, people often cling to the letter while ignoring the spirit.

That said it’s important to learn the contexts for the original writings. Many were written while Christians were actively being hunted down and killed, explaining the violent and revolutionary rhetoric.

King = the humanity's role as shepherds of Earth
Priest = participation in the Holy Communion and the ability to perform baptism
Prophet = spread the gospel

 

[Bolivar687]

Hello. As someone interested in the origins of humanity as expressed through numerous faiths, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the stories presented in the bible, from the context of seeking your own truth.

Meaning the knowing that the King James bible (the modern known and common bible) was edited / rather butchered and is missing and containing a lot of what wasn't in the earlier forms.

How does that change your relationship to the information you've been given and how do you navigate that in your own faith?

From what I understand, the story of Genesis communicates valuable theological information to us about our origin, as opposed to scientific value. It asserts that God existed before the Universe and created it of his own power, at his own discretion. This strongly contrasts the natural religions, who conflate creator with created, portraying deities as the embodiment of natural forces. Genesis also tells us that man was singled out in his creation by God and given the authority to name the animals. There is a special role mankind has as caretaker and custodian of creation.

As far as Bibles go, I currently read a revised New American Bible but will likely go with the Dhouay Rheims next. I don't really know much about the King James version. All I know about the Protestant canon is that they ideologically removed a lot of the books that supported Catholic theology, regardless of whether or not they had always been considered sacred scripture by the early Church and ancient Jewish scholars. Ironically, a lot of the books Protestants removed coincide with the same books which Rabbinic Judaism (the Judaism we know today, not standardized until the Middle Ages) retroactively removed because they support Christian theology.

The Catholic Bible more or less aligns with the Septuagint, the oldest surviving canon of sacred scripture in ancient Judaism. We really only removed a couple minor works whose theological value is already communicated elsewhere in more important books, or were only included in an appendix. So I feel very comfortable with how this information has been credibly passed down through time by the Church.

I don't believe people should individually navigate all of this on their own to subjectively conclude their own truth. We should read scripture through the lens of tradition, not only that of ancient Jewish scholarship and of the early Church, but also in the tradition of the Middle Ages and orthodox scholars today. Within the interior logic of the Bible is the idea that individuals are not capable of comprehending scripture alone by themselves, and will even misuse it for their own purposes when they do. There is a teaching authority clearly given to the prophets and the early Church through the Spirit of God, and the consequences for ignoring this charism, or misappropriating it for yourself, are disastrous.

 

[boutrosinit]

I would caution you though, about your use of the phrase "your own truth." There is no "your own truth." There is truth, and there are falsehoods. It is not always easy to discern them. I would argue that searching for truth is the greatest thing that humans can participate in. But relativism is a trap. Just using two of the Abrahamaic religions as an example. If the Muslims are right, then I am going to Hell. If I am right, Muslims are going to Hell. There is no secret trick where everyone can be right.

I think that eludes to a misconception to "your own truth" having to be correct. I find it's more a part of a journey than an absolute. For me, it started as a hope that it would be absolute, but now I'm at a point content that I have a set of beliefs that bring me inner peace while being helpful to others, so my search for a truth in data-backed fact is less of a priority. More of a "i'll keep searching, playing and exploring, and if I'm right or wrong, whatever. I think I'm living well so I'll keep going, learning, improving and however I end up... so be it."

 

[boutrosinit]

I guess that would depend on someone being able to identify what was edited/butchered in your opinion.

What portions exactly do you take issue with?

Not a personal issue... more-so reports of Historians who were passed down the work of preserving or further studying the King James Bible wanting to go back and track the purest form of the writing and realizing what they were left with was too messy to track back. I meant butchered in the literal sense, less so my emotional interpretation. I've never seen / read the OG book (much like the majority of us) so I have no source to point to from experience.

Here's a lazy google result : http://thelostbooks.org/the-missing-parts-of-the-king-james-bible/

EDIT : And something more credible from a professor who discovered the original KJ version (the modern one used globally today) : https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/15/...f-king-james-bible-is-found-scholar-says.html

The other pointer I was curious about was during a casual bit of research. There's some - arguably unreliable - data about a 'Book of Thomas' that has alleged 'actual Jesus quotes'. The controversy of this alleged book, as that his quotes are sometimes cited as linked to Hermetic / Universal spiritual principles. I didn't see that when I tried a brief search into them, but it was a fascinating idea, which if true, and proven credible, could be transformational for some Christian people.

 

[Helscream]

EDIT: Thought this thread died out before the ResetERA creation. Cool to see it exist still.

Hello. As someone interested in the origins of humanity as expressed through numerous faiths, I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the stories presented in the bible, from the context of seeking your own truth.

Meaning the knowing that the King James bible (the modern known and common bible) was edited / rather butchered and is missing and containing a lot of what wasn't in the earlier forms.

How does that change your relationship to the information you've been given and how do you navigate that in your own faith?

The King James Bible is really one of the most accurate translations of The Old and New Testament into the the English Language from its Original Hebrew and Greek texts. To be as polite as a I can people who claim the King James Bible is inaccurate or missing information only express's their extreme bias or ignorance toward the AV 1611 King James Bible. I would also argue that the reason why Christianity has maintained its impact on humanity as a Faith is because of the extreme abundance of Old and New Testament texts collectively saying the same thing. The KJV is not perfect, but pretty freaking close.

Now concerning the "Origins of humanity" there is a allegorical/metaphorically observation and then there is a more literal observation of what scripture says (I lean more toward the literal side).

In the beginning you have a being of infinite Power and Knowledge. This Entity created everything that was, is, and is to come. If there is anything that a Christian can learn from Genesis is that the God of Israel is The Creator of all things and that He takes his role and title as Creator very seriously.

So The Creator created everything and the Crowning Apex of His creation is Humanity starting with Adam and Eve. Mankind was appointed Dominion (think of humanity as God's Viceroy) over creation. Mankind through the machinations of Satan (The Hebrew word Nachash) forfeited this Dominion and damned itself to an eternity of separation from The Creator. The Creator in his infinite love, mercy, and grace devises a plan to Redeem all of humanity and restore Dominion through the "Seed of the Woman" the Messiah. That is the Bible in a nutshell from beginning to end.

Now the popular question that people like to ask is "where did everyone come from if you only had Adam and Eve?" If you look at The Fifth Chapter of Genesis is specially says that Adam and Eve beget sons and daughters AFTER Seth. Considering that Adam lived over 900 years there is no telling how many children him and his wife bore. Now according to Hebrew tradition Mankind has a very dense "gene pool" if you will. Meaning people who were related could marry, have kids, and they could look very different and there would be no side of effects of things like incest. Now while the Bible does not specifically say this if you look at Abraham he married his Half-Sister. However when you fast-forward to the time of Moses the law strictly forbids the marriage between relatives. So it is a interesting observation if you go backwards in time that perhaps relatives were able to marry.

Finally the concept of "Seeking your own truth" may be applicable to other faiths, but not so in Christianity. The God of the Bible is a God of absolutes, not relativism.

I hope this helps answer your question as best as I understood it.

 

[boutrosinit]

The King James Bible is really one of the most accurate translations of The Old and New Testament into the the English Language from its Original Hebrew and Greek texts. To be as polite as a I can people who claim the King James Bible is inaccurate or missing information only express's their extreme bias or ignorance toward the AV 1611 King James Bible. I would also argue that the reason why Christianity has maintained its impact on humanity as a Faith is because of the extreme abundance of Old and New Testament texts collectively saying the same thing. The KJV is not perfect, but pretty freaking close.

I'm purely going off what is reported online. This kind of thing:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/15/...f-king-james-bible-is-found-scholar-says.html

And this link has some reasonably thorough details on the missing pieces:

The Missing Parts of the King James Bible • The Lost Books

There's no doubt the 14 Apocrypha books of the the original 1615 King James Bible were controversial, but they WERE THERE! Has the Bible been tampered with?

thelostbooks.org

While it might be the closest thing the world has to what came before, it's a significant amount of change. Consider how one line about a major plot point in a movie can re-contextualize so much, and the amount reported as different / missing can impact the final product.

If your chosen relationship with the material is to accept it as-is, then cool. To call people's choices to be wary of the product of a significant editing as extremely biased is not a judgement I would see as reasonable.

Consider that the pre-translated, un-edited, full material is not widely available. To get close to that, we have to dig very deeply. With some diligence and possibly luck, we can find those books in isolation either online (hopefully a real, solid translation) or in an ancient library (the one in Sinai. Possibly Alexandria. Probably the Vatican if you have fancy privileges).

 

[Bolivar687]

Consider that we the pre-translated, un-edited, full material is not widely available. To get close to that, we have to dig very deeply. With some diligence and possibly luck, we can find those books in isolation either online (hopefully a real, solid translation) or in an ancient library (the one in Sinai. Possibly Alexandria. Probably the Vatican if you have fancy privileges).

I don't think it's that obscure, a lot of people read the original Greek. As above, I'd rock with the Douay-Rheims translation of the Vulgate over King James all day.

 

[Helscream]

I'm purely going off what is reported online. This kind of thing:
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/15/...f-king-james-bible-is-found-scholar-says.html

And this link has some reasonably thorough details on the missing pieces:

The Missing Parts of the King James Bible • The Lost Books

There's no doubt the 14 Apocrypha books of the the original 1615 King James Bible were controversial, but they WERE THERE! Has the Bible been tampered with?

thelostbooks.org

While it might be the closest thing the world has to what came before, it's a significant amount of change. Consider how one line about a major plot point in a movie can re-contextualize so much, and the amount reported as different / missing can impact the final product.

If your chosen relationship with the material is to accept it as-is, then cool. To call people's choices to be wary of the product of a significant editing as extremely biased is not a judgement I would see as reasonable.

Consider that the pre-translated, un-edited, full material is not widely available. To get close to that, we have to dig very deeply. With some diligence and possibly luck, we can find those books in isolation either online (hopefully a real, solid translation) or in an ancient library (the one in Sinai. Possibly Alexandria. Probably the Vatican if you have fancy privileges).

To question what the Bible is and where it came from. As well as speculating how it was changed/edited throughout the ages is a natural point of human curiosity. That is not the issue.

The issue is (and let me clearly specify I am speaking about the world of scholastic works) when some random dude from a Ivy League school makes this "huge discovery" that will completely change our understanding of the Bible. These types of sensational claims most likely would not survive the scrutiny of other well informed/educated people of their respective fields of expertise. It also insults the enormity of all the hard unappreciated work of men who came before to help maintain the accuracy and consistency of the Bible in the English language. There is a reason why we have what we have of what we call the Bible today. You never hear about the dude who worked 16 Hour days working with old Hebrew sages to meticulously translate the Old Testament from its Hebrew text into English. Nether do you hear about the extreme's that the ancient Hebrews went to in maintaining the consistency of the Old Testament. Older Translations like the Geneva Bible laid the foundation to help the KJV have the accuracy it does in the English Language.

Now Apocryphal works have a lack of textual documentation support OR do not align with the consistent narrative of the 66 Books in the Bible that is considered cannon. Simply put what we call the Old Testament and New Testament have an extreme abundance of textual documentation throughout the ages that collectively say the same thing. Apocryphal works just don't have that amount of collective textual documentation. Now this does not mean that Apocryphal Books cannot provide some useful information. The Book of Maccabees is a good historical accounting of the time about the end of the Babylonian exile and the building of the Second Temple. There is also a passage from the Book of Enoch that is quoted in the Book of Jude (Who was the half brother of Jesus). But to say that these Apocryphal Books are "Lost Books" is just more sensationalism. They exist, people know about them, they are just no longer included in certain Bible translations.

In today's world we do not have the original text of Scripture. However throughout the ages we have gathered copies of those original texts. And copies of those copies etc etc. The secular pragmatic human perspective would correctly assume the improbable and unlikely chance that we would be able to maintain the accuracy of scripture from its original iteration to the present day.

However I would pose a question from the Biblical perspective. If the God of the Bible is Who He says He is. Would God in His infinite knowledge and power be able to use multiple people throughout the ages thousands of years apart to maintain His Word and its plan of salvation for all of humanity in the English language (whether it be one or multiple translations)? And if not the English language? Then what of all the languages through the entire world throughout all of history? For mortal man alone an impossible task most assuredly. For a Infinite God? A walk in the park.

 

[Kamina]

One thing you must always remember, Bible is not written by God or tells the story about God, it is the sum of HUMAN EXPERIENCES WITH God. So you got a society that lives in terrible conditions full of carnage, hard work, persecution etc. (Jews in Egypt and their conquest of Palestine) so obviously their interpretation of God's actions will be heavily influenced by their environment and mood. That is why people often draw distinction between God of the Old Testament and God of the New Testament.

Well, if you believe that the writers, or some off them, were guided by the holy spirit when writing, then it was written by god in a way.

 

[boutrosinit]

To question what the Bible is and where it came from. As well as speculating how it was changed/edited throughout the ages is a natural point of human curiosity. That is not the issue.

The issue is (and let me clearly specify I am speaking about the world of scholastic works) when some random dude from a Ivy League school makes this "huge discovery" that will completely change our understanding of the Bible. These types of sensational claims most likely would not survive the scrutiny of other well informed/educated people of their respective fields of expertise. It also insults the enormity of all the hard unappreciated work of men who came before to help maintain the accuracy and consistency of the Bible in the English language. There is a reason why we have what we have of what we call the Bible today. You never hear about the dude who worked 16 Hour days working with old Hebrew sages to meticulously translate the Old Testament from its Hebrew text into English. Nether do you hear about the extreme's that the ancient Hebrews went to in maintaining the consistency of the Old Testament. Older Translations like the Geneva Bible laid the foundation to help the KJV have the accuracy it does in the English Language.

Now Apocryphal works have a lack of textual documentation support OR do not align with the consistent narrative of the 66 Books in the Bible that is considered cannon. Simply put what we call the Old Testament and New Testament have an extreme abundance of textual documentation throughout the ages that collectively say the same thing. Apocryphal works just don't have that amount of collective textual documentation. Now this does not mean that Apocryphal Books cannot provide some useful information. The Book of Maccabees is a good historical accounting of the time about the end of the Babylonian exile and the building of the Second Temple. There is also a passage from the Book of Enoch that is quoted in the Book of Jude (Who was the half brother of Jesus). But to say that these Apocryphal Books are "Lost Books" is just more sensationalism. They exist, people know about them, they are just no longer included in certain Bible translations.

In today's world we do not have the original text of Scripture. However throughout the ages we have gathered copies of those original texts. And copies of those copies etc etc. The secular pragmatic human perspective would correctly assume the improbable and unlikely chance that we would be able to maintain the accuracy of scripture from its original iteration to the present day.

However I would pose a question from the Biblical perspective. If the God of the Bible is Who He says He is. Would God in His infinite knowledge and power be able to use multiple people throughout the ages thousands of years apart to maintain His Word and its plan of salvation for all of humanity in the English language (whether it be one or multiple translations)? And if not the English language? Then what of all the languages through the entire world throughout all of history? For mortal man alone an impossible task most assuredly. For a Infinite God? A walk in the park.

Honestly, I'm floored by your reply. Great breakdown. You've clearly put a lot of thought and attention looking into this. I'm told some OG documents exist in Saint Catherine's Library Sinai. I hit the Alexandria library hoping I'd find some gold there, but frankly, it was a crushing disappointment.

Scrubbed clean of the great stuff probably from the (now 2+?) fires. And a barely reasonable attempt at a 'Rare books' section. The Freemason Library in London was far superior. And F-R-E-E. The Vatican Library is probably the only other known place with the best stuff and last I looked you CAN get stuff there with the right researcher credentials. WHICH I'M TOTALLY FUCKING GETTING. You can even order photocopies online. They even have a ton of it scanned online (but not all of it) : https://epicpew.com/vaticans-digital-library-now-online-heres-need-know/

The reason I have issue with the "if the God of the bible was who he said he is" explanation is the inconsistencies with the character of that God as described across the books. It's like there's multiple God personalities swapping out, or, as defined in these books, he's as human as the rest of us.

However, if the idea of it being 'perfect' (paraphrasing what I think you mean) is more about a point in time and a grander plan, assumed to be around humanity evolving toward loving wisdom... Then as-is, it can logically serve a purpose about what exists to compel ideas, wisdom, transformation and evolution to take place through discussion and argument (about the ideas that may or may not be the whole picture at the time)... with the possibility that some seemingly random, perfectly timed event leads to the OG texts being found at a point in time where that new data already has enough momentum in the thought-sphere to change enough minds to a more love-centric evolved space.

This I'm personally more inclined to believe, as it's more relatable with the flowings of what most of us have often shared or read in art as 'divine plan' style narratives, and in real life success stories and probably our own lives as well. I.E., perfection as a perfect-in-the-time-of, providing what is needed, rather than perfect to a final absolute.

Hope these last two paragraphs make sense. Edited a few times for clarity but they got a little fat there.

 

[mcz117chief]

Well, if you believe that the writers, or some off them, were guided by the holy spirit when writing, then it was written by god in a way.

In a way, yes, absolutely.

 

[Kamina]

I confess to almighty God
and to you, my brothers and sisters,
that I have greatly sinned,
in my thoughts and in my words,
in what I have done and in what I have failed to do,
through my fault, through my fault,
through my most grievous fault;
therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
all the Angels and Saints,
and you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God.

 

[Bolivar687]

I confess to almighty God
and to you, my brothers and sisters,
that I have greatly sinned,
in my thoughts and in my words,
in what I have done and in what I have failed to do,
through my fault, through my fault,
through my most grievous fault;
therefore I ask blessed Mary ever-Virgin,
all the Angels and Saints,
and you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God.

CONFITEOR Deo omnipotenti, beatae Mariae semper Virgini, beato Michaeli Archangelo, beato Ioanni Baptistae, sanctis Apostolis Petro et Paulo, et omnibus Sanctis, quia peccavi nimis cogitatione, verbo et opere: mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. Ideo precor beatam Mariam semper Virginem, beatum Michaelem Archangelum, beatum Ioannem Baptistam, sanctos Apostolos Petrum et Paulum, et omnes Sanctos, orare pro me ad Dominum Deum nostrum. Amen.

 

[Kamina]

I see you chose the older longer version.
In German, the version is even shorter than the english one i posed above as we substitute this part

that I have greatly sinned,
in my thoughts and in my words,
in what I have done and in what I have failed to do,

with

that i have omitted good, and committed bad,
i have sinned through thoughts, words and works

 

[mcz117chief]

therefore I ask you, my brothers and sisters,
to pray for me to the Lord our God.

I'll add you to my prayers, brother.

 

[Kamina]

I'll add you to my prayers, brother.

O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell, and lead all souls to Heaven, especially those in most need of Your Mercy
Amen