• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Spirit in the sky

cataway

Well-Known Member
Does this belief in heaven come from the Bible? If so, where?
the bible does speak of the ones that are /do go to heaven . the words come from those that are going talking to others that are going .
then the ones that are not going read the letters and assume the letters are for them as well . some times its like reading some other persons mail. what if a letter came with your mail .you open it to find a invention to a wedding . you don't know the people getting married and then you look to see the address where the letter was addressed to ....and its not you. (it happens) do you still go to the wedding ?? i hope not
 

ecco

Veteran Member
/or you can read one, such as Matthew, fully through, and see for yourself.
Why would I, or any rational person, accept what Matthew has to say? He was not there at the time of the incidents he describes. Even Matthew was smart enough to never say "I saw..." or "I heard...".

His stories are as believable as the stories of Washington Irving - Rip Van Winkle and James MacGillivray - Paul Bunyan.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
No one, in private life or in the government, made any notations at the time.

This is so a far reaching assertion, since it has no qualifier.

Fair enough. No one, in private life or in the government, made any notations at the time that anyone knows of.

Do you have evidence that anyone, in private life or in the government, made any notations at the time?
 

lostwanderingsoul

Well-Known Member
the bible does speak of the ones that are /do go to heaven . the words come from those that are going talking to others that are going .
then the ones that are not going read the letters and assume the letters are for them as well . some times its like reading some other persons mail. what if a letter came with your mail .you open it to find a invention to a wedding . you don't know the people getting married and then you look to see the address where the letter was addressed to ....and its not you. (it happens) do you still go to the wedding ?? i hope not
I would like to read those verses. Can you list them?
 

rational experiences

Veteran Member
I know that we already live in heaven, what do you think surrounds the planet?

I know that when I look up above me, it is clouds...and clouds get visions and images in them.

I also know that our science brother sacrificed nucleated our life, and so our human images with animals were put up into the clouds, above us. And that was the sacrificed life that died.

So I would contend that humans knowingly, being consciously aware say, when I die I will get my image up in the clouds, for death is a body sacrifice, for it no longer can live a life of the holy spirit.

I also know as a scientist taught me that when a bio life body dies, it off gases, so that spirit is a hot spirit by gas reference. Might be why an arrogant brother said you went to hell when you die.

I also know that bacterias that exist already attack that body and I assist those bodies to continue to exist in the circle of life.

Therefore I also know love, honour and respect all life and never attack or change it without necessity....why I know occult science is a liar.
 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
Why would I, or any rational person, accept what Matthew has to say? He was not there at the time of the incidents he describes. Even Matthew was smart enough to never say "I saw..." or "I heard...".

His stories are as believable as the stories of Washington Irving - Rip Van Winkle and James MacGillivray - Paul Bunyan.
What? I've actually don't think I heard anyone say that the Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew recently. heh heh (that's actually funny to me for some reason)

You appear to assume and attribute to me quite a lot of viewpoints that I just do not have.

Maybe if you start over, and just consider you don't know any of my viewpoints at all, except what I say, and then try to go cautiously forward from there, it will help.

--------
You ask about the accuracy of gospel accounts.

Matthew seems to have been partly just using the first gospel written down, that of 'Mark', and then have additional stuff, from that group that wrote Matthew.

You can learn a bit of the mainstream view of scholars about Mark in the wiki: it was written around 35 years after Christ (in 66-70AD is a widespread view).

Which means something interesting to me -- 35 years later would imply that among the thousands that listen to Jesus, a 15 or 20 year old that heard Jesus and lived to be 50-55 or so would be alive when Mark was written down.

Of course many older witnesses would have been dying out, and it's thought that is one main reason Mark was written, to preserve their accounts.

But I never got side tracked worrying about how accurate gospel accounts were. That would not be possible to pin down with certainty. I had a far more rational way of gauging the words -- To actually try out the instructions in the gospels and see what happens.
 
Last edited:

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
Fair enough. No one, in private life or in the government, made any notations at the time that anyone knows of.

Do you have evidence that anyone, in private life or in the government, made any notations at the time?
No.

By the way, it would contradict most of the books in the common bible very strongly if there was simple clear evidence of miracles and of God that anyone could examine or see.

Why? -- The text repeatedly states in various ways that God wants faith from people, and faith isn't to simply believe in what is seen, but to believe/trust before something is seen. It's without easy or ahead-of-time evidence, or to be more exact, at least willing to take a temporary leap of faith, as it were, before getting any kind of personal evidence. God wants those that trust him that much. Ergo, if there was easy evidence that anyone could just examine, that would sharply contradict one of the 2 main stated goals repeated in the texts.

Actually, I think when someone tries to prove God with 'evidence' they don't know the contents of the scripture very well (usually I'd expect just from having read not much of it).
 

ecco

Veteran Member
What? I've actually don't think I heard anyone say that the Gospel of Matthew was written by Matthew recently. heh heh (that's actually funny to me for some reason)

I suppose I should have written "The stories attributed to an individual labeled Matthew". Or I could have just put quote marks around the word Matthew. But I didn't want to get off track.

Which means something interesting to me -- 35 years later would imply that among the thousands that listen to Jesus, a 15 or 20 year old that heard Jesus and lived to be 50-55 or so would be alive when Mark was written down.

So you admit that "Matthew" and the rest of the gospels are nothing more than hearsay stories. That's refreshing.

But I never got side tracked worrying about how accurate gospel accounts were.

So, it doesn't concern you that the writers/compilers of the Bible put the following long monologue in quotes?
1And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said: 2“The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son, 3and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come. 4Again, he sent out other servants, saying, ‘Tell those who are invited, “See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding.” ’ 5But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business. 6And the rest seized his servants, treated them [a]spitefully, and killed them. 7But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. 8Then he said to his servants, ‘The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy. 9Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.’ 10So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests.

11“But when the king came in to see the guests, he saw a man there who did not have on a wedding garment. 12So he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you come in here without a wedding garment?’ And he was speechless. 13Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’​

Doesn't it concern you that the writers/compilers of the Bible put words into Jesus' mouth?
Doesn't it bother you that the writers/compilers of the Bible were intentionally deceiving the reader?

How can you be certain that Jesus was even real?


I had a far more rational way of gauging the words -- To actually try out the instructions in the gospels and see what happens.

Just because a book of stories contains some good information is no reason to believe the star of the books is a God or even a real person.
Am I correct that you believe Jesus was a real person and a God?
 

ecco

Veteran Member
God wants those that trust him that much.

How do you know what God wants? Are you basing your "knowledge" on the contents of the Bible? You've already pretty much admitted that you realize that, at least, the gospels are just a bunch of hearsay stories. There are hearsay stories about Ballulah and Joseph Smith and David Koresh also.
 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
you admit that "Matthew" and the rest of the gospels are nothing more than hearsay stories.
Well, for me personally, I never relied on that. I just tested ideas, without caring about unverifiable things.

But still, this question you raise of hearing and then relaying, hearsay, is itself quite interesting!
(Aren't history reports a kind of hearsay? -- a writer hears an officer say there are 25,000 soldiers, and writes that down in his account. )

We are used to thinking most people don't have perfect memory. Memories get changed. Etc.

Eye witness accounts aren't that believable then unless many (and most of the) different witnesses are agreeing on the same thing.

But, nature throws us a wildcard on this.

It turns out that some people recall details with astonishing detailed accuracy, even decades later.

I first heard an account on NPR from a college literature professor, telling how some few students would just have this odd perfect recall, which intrigued her over the years. There were usually 1 or 2 in a class with it.

Then I found this fun 60 Minutes segment I think you'll find interesting.

(60 Minutes is a high quality CBS News Magazine running for decades now).

95% of videos people link are hardly worth seeing is my experience. This is one of that small portion you don't want to miss.

 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
How do you know what God wants? Are you basing your "knowledge" on the contents of the Bible?

The answer to the first question is that the answer to the 2nd question is: Yes. We are told certain things that God wants of us in the text, such as from Jesus's teachings for instance.

Jesus is someone that knows more about this than we do, and I'm quite able to defer to superior knowledge. :)
 

ecco

Veteran Member
But still, this question you raise of hearing and then relaying, hearsay, is itself quite interesting!
(Aren't history reports a kind of hearsay? -- a writer hears an officer say there are 25,000 soldiers, and writes that down in his account. )
...
]It turns out that some people recall details with astonishing detailed accuracy, even decades later.
...
There were usually 1 or 2 in a class with it.

You say 1 or 2 in a class. Your own video puts it at a few that have ever been found. That's quite a difference.

None of which accounts for the gospel writers putting quote marks around things like the 3000? words of the Sermon on the Mount. That is intentional fraud. That is made-up stories presented as fact. Of course, it's not just this one sermon. It's all the stories asserting: ...and then He said "..."

How many of these people with these photographic memories were around back then?

The Bible is a bunch of fantastic stories written by unknown persons with an agenda of promoting another new religion.


Yet you believe the basic premise of these stories.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
The answer to the first question is that the answer to the 2nd question is: Yes. We are told certain things that God wants of us in the text, such as from Jesus's teachings for instance.

Jesus is someone that knows more about this than we do, and I'm quite able to defer to superior knowledge.


You've stated that you realize that the authors of all the words that Jesus is crediting with saying could not have had first-hand knowledge. You need to believe that somehow anything that Jesus said was said in front of people with photographic memories.

You can't accept the fact that all these stories and quotes are just the utterings of people with a religious agenda.
 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
You say 1 or 2 in a class. Your own video puts it at a few that have ever been found. That's quite a difference.

You understand that if 5 or 8 show up to a researcher in a couple of years, that tells us zero information about how many are in the U.S., what portion of the populace? You see that, right?
(e.g. -- If I had that ability, I would not volunteer to come forward to a researcher. I have other things to do with my time. ) We'd need some entirely different way to learn what portion of the population has this ability though, anecdotes aside.

But, of the tens of thousands that would have heard Jesus preach, perhaps only 2 or 3 having this ability might be enough to matter to account writers.

Why do I think so? --
Because in that time it would be more valuable than today to have such perfect recall, and it would stand out as....maybe something special of value, like 'sharp' or 'reliable' or 'wise' or such.

So, if people had gathered and some were telling their own memories of what Jesus had said, the person with that better recall could say "Wait, you left out a part..." and then fill in the parts left out or not perfectly recalled.

But this isn't necessary to get an accurate account to begin with.

You get why, right?

Because people would compare their accounts already, and already begin to notice what they all recalled, and agreed on, the reliable things everyone notice.



 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
You've stated that you realize that the authors of all the words that Jesus is crediting with saying could not have had first-hand knowledge. Y

I certainly did not say anything like that at all!

It's the opposite of what I pointed to above.

I pointed out, clearly, that some living eye witnesses would still be alive when Mark was written down.

Now I wonder if you read my posts before you respond to them.

I said quite a few significant points that are about the gospel accounts accuracy, actually, not just 2 or 3 points. If you think I said only 3 things, you didn't get all I said yet.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
But, of the tens of thousands that would have heard Jesus preach, perhaps only 2 or 3 having this ability might be enough to matter to account writers.

You make the baseless assumption that the "2 or 3" followed Jesus around like the Gospel authors pretend to have done.

Why do I think so? -- Because in that time it would be more valuable than today to have such perfect recall, and it would stand out as....maybe something special of value, like 'sharp' or 'reliable' or 'wise' or such.

Yes, indeed, they would have stood out. But if "they" followed Jesus around why didn't the Gospel writers mention them? Why didn't the Gospel writers say where they got their information?

Instead, they just wrote what looks and sounds like a first-person narrative. That shows that the Gospel writers were dishonest right from the beginning. Yet, somehow, you believe the utterances attributed to Jesus were actually his.


So, if people had gathered and some were telling their own memories of what Jesus had said, the person with that better recall could say "Wait, you left out a part..." and then fill in the parts left out or not perfectly recalled.
But this isn't necessary to get an accurate account to begin with.

You get why, right?

Because people would compare their accounts already, and already begin to notice what they all recalled, and agreed on, the reliable things everyone notice.

You do have a good imagination. To justify what are obviously made up stories, you make up stories to try to explain how the stories came into existence. You come up with people with photographic memories. You imagine them following Jesus around. You imagine the Gospel writers gathering people to recount their recollections. Recollections such as an accurate rendition of the 3000+ words of the Sermon on the Mount.

A far more realistic explanation is that a couple of people wrote stories based on their imaginations and a couple of other people plagiarized much of their work and added their own ruffles and flourishes.
 

halbhh

The wonder and awe of "all things".
You make the baseless assumption that the "2 or 3" followed Jesus around like the Gospel authors pretend to have done.
No, actually l didn't make that assumption.

But... have you made an assumption though?
(the opposite one -- that the 'disciples' did not follow Him for 3 years?)

?

(I'm actually asking, sincerely. It appears implied in your label "baseless".... that you yourself actually reached a judgement/conclusion, which would then imply you used an assumption it would seem)

Or did you use an assumption that none of the 12 could possibly have a highly accurate memory?

?

What assumption did you make?
 
Top