Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire For Christians,non-Christians & Atheists

A piece of horse manure almost as stupid as AGW.
http://apologetics-notes.comereason.org/2015/02/how-to-quickly-debunk-horus-jesus-myth.html

👍

I wonder how many here believe this nonsense about the sun being the Son of God proclaimed in Scripture.
I realize DRE didn’t make any claims to it being truth but he was just asking my opinion.

For the record, I do not believe in any religion.
More of an evolution kind of a guy.

https://youtu.be/Ljt5iESYA7k

Where did I misquote you? And if I did I apologize.

Seriously! That is the equivalent of saying because CNN said this it is true.

Very simply answered--the Bible quotes non-canonical books as simply books. Paul quotes the poet Aratus in Acts 17 without intending to consider it Scripture. When the Bible quotes other Scriptures it typically refers to them as "it is written" "the Scripture says" "the Holy Ghost says" or uses the name of a "recognized prophet." It is illogical to assume that books should be included in the Bible that were never intended to be included nor were they recognized as Scripture by their contemporary audience. The inter-testamental books indicate there was no prophet in Israel at that time and the Jews considered those books by their own Jewish authors as a merely an uninspired record of history. Jesus affirms the Tanakh as the extent of the OT canon in Luke. He refers to the 3 divisions of and calls them all the Scriptures. In Matthew He gives a list of martyrs beginning with Abel and ending with Zechariah the son Barachias. Zechariah was not the last chronological martyr--rather he was the last martyr recorded in the last book of the Tanakh--2Chronicles.

What I have witnessed over and over again is that many times atheists and agnostics don't do their homework before they draw conclusions. It is akin to liberalism-simply equate it with enlightened thinking and no further intellectual honesty, critical thinking, or careful research needs to be employed.

You are correct in that direct contradictions cannot both be true--which means all religions cannot be equally true nor can agnosticism and atheism.

This is what I said below. I didn't say that no more was needed, i said we"d never get to the end or to the totality of the meat that is contained inside the Old and New testaments in two lifetimes put together.
Thank you

What I hear you saying is that within the old and New Testaments, you are considering that to be milk only and you need to find the beef in those 24 other non-canonized books that you at stating to be scripture?

You say you love Christ can you tell me why you love him ?
Do these other 24 books talk of Christ, does Enoch talk of Christ in his book?

I understand that only fragments of Enochs writings were found?

What you are looks very much like a corporate institutional programming. Many of the early church fathers recognized that those books should be included with the 66 books. And Enoch was at the forefront. Is it not written in the book of ____ , would that not be the same as, it is written? Having Christ quote many scriptures from a book would or should be enough reason to research I would think.

It appears that I not only quoted you correct, but also your thoughts that the other books are not needed.

Not 65 books or 105 books, but 66 books.

So here I am in a debate concerning books I have read and studied while those debating against me have not read nor studied them. That makes me a fool for debating and those debating against it not having read nor studied them foolish. This is going nowhere.
I offer my blessings to you and hope you fair well.

Atheism is neither a fixed position or a belief. It is a lack of conviction or belief in the existence of a God or gods based on a lack of evidence to support a justified conviction in their existence.....nobody argues over the existence of the World, the sun, stars, moon, etc.....it is about justification through evidence. Evidence is not something that this or that Holy Book happens to say is true.

Worth mention by Jesus , but not considered worthy of inclusion by church leaders.

I wonder who Christians should trust?..

List your favorite three or four "contradictions in the bible," please.



Excellent observation.

This is erroneous simply because you are making a bold generalization. For some it is definitely a fixed position due to their nearly unshakable beliefs. They believe in spite of available information.

LOL!

Do You Confess

So if Enoch is at the forefront of your position, let's consider it:
And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints,To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.

This is the one reference to Enoch's prophecies in the Bible. Now let's keep in mind that neither Enoch nor his contemporaries had alphabetic writing and so his prophecies would not have been recorded in a book that he wrote. This was an oral prophecy that was preserved by tradition among the Jews. The Jews never recognized a book of Enoch in their canon. Jude does not reference any "book of Enoch" but rather an oral tradition that recorded a prophecy of Enoch that was accurate. Moses wrote the first books of the Bible and included a narrative about Enoch but did not make any mention of a collection his prophecies or writings (hieroglyphics). Every early Bible character is recorded by Moses along with their sayings that became part of the Biblical record. What Jude is trying to establish is, not that Enoch's prophecies should be in the inspired canon, but rather just like Enoch foresaw the judgment of God coming upon the wicked--first in the flood and then at the end of the world, likewise Jude is also bearing witness to the same message. Jude is saying there is a consistent testimony from the advent of evil to the end of the age that wickedness will be ultimately judged by God. Jude is confirming the truth of Enoch's oral prophecy that was preserved.

Jesus confirmed the the extent of the OT canon of the Hebrew Tanakh, as I previously explained. Paul in Romans also indicates that to the Jews were committed the oracles of God. So the NT affirms the OT Jewish Tanakh as the OT canon as preserved by the Jews. The OT canon was settled before Jesus even came to earth. He said that every jot and tittle of it would be fulfilled--this is a clear reference to the Hebrew canon as the Greek alphabet does not have jots or tittles.

Next I want to note the Biblical principle that the truth of the Lord endures to all generations (Psa 100:5) The text of Enoch, though cited from throughout history has been lost to most of the Christian world for centuries at a time whereas the Biblical canon has always been preserved for every generation according to God's promise. The canonical books have never disappeared from human history.

Next I want to note that the Bible's quotation of Enoch's prophecy is not the same as the writings in the alleged book of Enoch.

Enoch 1:9
. . . Behold, he will arrive with ten million of the holy ones in order to execute judgment upon all. He will destroy the wicked ones and censure all flesh on account of everything that they have done, that which the sinners and the wicked ones committed against him.


The Bible says to "execute judgment and convince/convict" ... the book of Enoch says "destroy" ... while the meaning is similar the wording is clearly different, indicating that Jude was quoting from an original prophecy and not the book of Enoch per se. In the NT quotes of the OT there is some variation also, but if the NT citation is not following the Hebrew text it is following the Greek Septuagint text.
There are other significant differences such as where Jude says, “harsh things/hard speeches” but Enoch does not. Jude says, “spoken against” but Enoch says, “committed against him.” A comparison of the two passages from Greek texts reveal that the Greek text of Jude has 29 words but the text of the book of Enoch as translated by R. H. Charles has 36 words.

The Book of Enoch also fails the doctrinal truth test of Scripture:
A major theme in 1 Enoch is sinful angels taking human wives (e.g., 1 Enoch 6:2, 7:1, 12:4, 106:14, etc.). This is in direct contradiction to the words of the Word, Jesus Christ, who in Matthew 22:29-30, Jesus said, “You are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God…they neither marry nor are given in marriage…like the angels…” (see also Mark 12:24-25, Luke 20:34-36). The "sons of God" in Genesis 6 are not fallen angles, because fallen angels are never referred to in Scripture as "sons of God" but rather demons.

Another consideration is that some of the observed narratives actually occur after the life of Enoch--meaning Enoch could not have been the author of those narratives. For example, Abraham did not write his own narratives in Genesis, but rather Moses did later as they were preserved by oral traditions. Therefore Enoch could not have been the author of this whole book which as a book was of much later origins than Enoch. Jude simply quotes a real saying of Enoch as originally prophesied and preserved by Jewish tradition and is not endorsing the book of Enoch.

Finally I will note, that although this book in some form was cited and and revered by some early Church writers, it was not included in any Jewish canon or any widely recognized Christian Bible. It is largely the Ethiopian church which have canonized this book on their own.

So if it is not a fixed belief, then it also means that you are quite uncertain in your own lack of conviction ... or do you firmly believe in your doubts? But this would make it a fixed belief! If you are looking for evidence you would not look to your doubts and uncertainty, you would look to the facts, the truth, and the internal and external witnesses of it. The Bible has plenty of internal and external witnesses - but if you prefer uncertainty you will likely remain in atheism or agnosticism (which literally means without knowledge). Check out the meaning of the word "agnostic" in Latin--you might find it surprising, becuase in the end most atheists are also agnostics.

"They'll no' get him a' in a book I think
Though they write it cunningly;"