Studying the bible

[doggy777777]

Are there any non bias study books on the bible?
(or books about Christianity in general?)

All the books I've seen are either "God is good" or "God is bad"..
I haven't found anything that leaves the final decision up to the reader.

[Bob Israel]

First of all, I am not a prophet,, but go ahead - continue.

Next, was it not they that could spell; that has taken you in.
How much money did they suck out of you before you got it.

Thirdly Yahweh never gave understanding to the learn ,and we can see that in their pagan worship. It seems their bad habits show up in the news far to often.
Well, good beleivers defense them,yes even their ex-cons.
As for the bad written got uses to it ,it comes with the stroke.

Praise Yahweh my Elohim

[McCulloch]

Next, was it not they that could spell; that has taken you in.

Truly, it was not that they could spell that deceived me. However, I would have more quickly discounted the scholarship of those who cannot written in English goodly.

How much money did they suck out of you before you got it.

Too much. I'm more careful now.

Thirdly Yahweh never gave understanding to the learn ,and we can see that in their pagan worship.

One of the advantages of good grammar is that the readers of your posts can easily discern what you mean from what you have written. I don't understand what meaning this sentence is intended to convey.

As for the bad written got uses to it ,it comes with the stroke.

My doctor says that I should try to avoid a stroke. Try reading your post, word for word, out loud. Did it sound right?


Back to the points you made earlier, you claim that it is forbidden to use pagan (read European) names for yahweh and Yahshua. Yet, you, yourself use a transliteration of these two names into the pagan English script, the Latin alphabet. Why is it that you don't write exclusively in Hebrew, the language of God?

You also make the claim that we should Only listen to what Yahweh and Yahshua says. How is it that you know what Yahweh and Yahshua say? As far as I am aware, Yahweh and Yahshua have left humans with no writings or recordings of what they have said. In order to access the alleged words of Yahweh I have to first listen to Moshe, Yəšaʿyáhu, David and the rest. In order to access the alleged words of Yahsua, I have to first listen to Mattithyahu, Μά�κος, Loukas (or maybe not him) and Yoḥanan. How do I know that any of them are reliable?

[Bob Israel]

I keep forgetting to read it out loud,thank you.
Allow me to state how I understand it.
None of the 13 books of Paul are scripture ,also Luke is the student/disciple of Paul.
Still, many of the other New Testament books are unclear as to who we are reading.
Still the New Testament is not scripture, Yahshua quoted the scripture and told us it was scripture[the law and the Prophets]. There was no Bible for him to refer too!

The Old Testament [Torah and Tenakh] states not to use the names of Baali.
This is also, shown in Joshua 24:14. The "E came before J" before Moses,while the "J came after the E" came after Moses.

Is not the salvation of the Jews. And, in that day 10 gentiles will grab hold of a Jews garment;everyone of them because Christianity has no truth in them.

Bob

[McCulloch]

None of the 13 books of Paul are scripture

The author of 2 Peter disagrees.

Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Notice how the author refers to the writings that are not Paul's as being the rest of Scripture, implying that Paul's writing is to be included as Scripture. So, if you wish to exclude Paul and of course, Luke, you will need to exclude 2 Peter. Do you exclude 1 Peter too? Exclude Mark as well, Acts identifies him as Paul's companion.

Still the New Testament is not scripture, Yahshua quoted the scripture and told us it was scripture[the law and the Prophets]. There was no Bible for him to refer too!

OK, now we're getting clearer. Toss out the whole New Testament. None of it is scripture. Ahem. How do you know anything about Yahshua without the New Testament? I take it then that you are a Jew. What interest do the Jews have in Yahshua?

[Bob Israel]

Quote:
"Although 2 Peter internally purports to be a work of the apostle, most biblical scholars have concluded that Peter is not the author, and instead consider the epistle pseudepigraphical.[2] Reasons for this include its linguistic differences from 1 Peter, its apparent use of Jude, possible allusions to second-century gnosticism, encouragement in the wake of a delayed parousia, and weak external support."
2 Peter or at least parts of it is wriiten by somebody else. Its called the lairing pen.
Now, there are some books/letters which still can be considered. Matthews,John,Jude and Revelations. Also, some books which Yahshua quoted from and gave referrances to.
Even so, Matthews and John stand out as two witnesses against Paul and Luke. What is profound is Matthew and John have the words of Yahshua,while Paul and Luke do not even quote Yahshua. Indeed Jude, even rebukes their message. James himself rebuked Paul.
Now, when we stop thinking like christians; we see a different history , we than can start looking for the players. And, I think I found them.
Barabuss - Nethanel (Dositheus) may have been Saul who became Paul.
Flavius Josephus who may have been Dr.Luke
Joiachim, also known as Marcian, "John Mark" and Mark the Evangelist was one of the three sons born to Nethanel (Dositheus) also known as Saul.
Judas who appears to be related to Paul by his sister.
Why is Paul living at the house of Judas.
This writes awhole new understanding of the power struggle between Paul and Yahshua for the King/Priest messiah/annointing. And,not so far from the truth for which the assumption religions books were written.
Bob

[McCulloch]

Also, some books which Yahshua quoted from and gave referrances to.

How do you know anything about what Yahshua made reference to, except by the writings handed down in the Christian church written in the Greek language about ιησου χ�ιστου not Yahshua. I have no problem with you being Jewish or following the Jewish religion, but if you do, why even bother yourself with this failed messiah and his various purported followers?

What is profound is Matthew and John have the words of Yahshua,while Paul and Luke do not even quote Yahshua.

I agree with you about Paul. However, Luke claims to quote Jesus.

• Luke 5:10
• Luke 5:34
• Luke 6:9
• Luke 8:45
• Luke 8:46
• Luke 9:50
• Luke 9:58
• Luke 9:62
• Luke 10:37
• Luke 13:2
• Luke 18:19
• Luke 18:42
• Luke 19:9
• Luke 20:8
• Luke 20:34
• Luke 22:48
• Luke 22:52

I see no reason why Luke's claims are any less valid than Mark's.

Barabuss - Nethanel (Dositheus) may have been Saul who became Paul.

Fascinating speculation. Got any evidence?

Flavius Josephus who may have been Dr.Luke

This one is even further from the mainstream. Why would you claim that Flavius Josephus was Luke?

Judas who appears to be related to Paul by his sister.

Please cite some reference.

Why is Paul living at the house of Judas.

When was Paul living at Judas' house? Which Judas? For reference Judas = Jude in Greek.

[Bob Israel]

Have to give you quotes from other site or give you their website if you want them.
I started looking for this when I understood that those guys in the books do not seem to know each other,their records are out of line with each other.

I do not know allot about the site, but they sure have alot of facts about all the evils that has existed.
http://one-evil.org/default.asp
The site about is one source.
Here is another http://www.lost-history.com/onias.php
Let me know what you think.
If they were trying to do away with the kingship and Priesthood and replaced in with their own,making Yahshua into a false religion would do it. However,it backfired and the Roman mythra won the day.
Bob

[McCulloch]

I do not know allot about the site, but they sure have alot of facts about all the evils that has existed.
http://one-evil.org/default.asp

Bob, do you expect to get unbiased information from a site that provides a list of the most evil organizations:

1. Jesuits
2. Roman Cult
3. Nazi SS
4. Holy See
5. Illuminati
6. New World Order

and has a link to the Great Vatican-Jesuit Global Depression 2009-2012 ?

You will forgive me if it looks like you may be into conspiracy theories.

1. Jesuits
2. Catholicism, a veiled continuation of Babylonian paganism
3. Fourth Reich
4. Illuminati
5. New World Order

[cnorman18]

I looked at both of those sites, and my reaction was "There it goes again."

That's the problem with the Internet. It's a great source for hard-to-find information - but it's a great source for crapola, too. Any idiot with a domain name can pose as an authority on anything, make up any kind of fable or fantasy he likes, and people will buy it.

The puzzle to me is those who read the crapola and swallow it whole - five minutes of fact-checking will usually dispell the aura of omniscience - and then posture as wiser and smarter and better critical thinkers than the rest of us. Of course, when your "facts" are selected with an eye to your ideology, which is unfortunately just as common on the left as on the right, you will soon begin to believe that you know and can explain everything, as both the fundamentalists and the extreme leftists here frequently demonstrate. That is precisely what I meant when I wrote elsewhere that cynicism is toxic in quantity. I would say that in its way, knee-jerk cynicism is just as toxic to the body politic as knee-jerk dogmatic religionism.

The political debates here are often as silly and exaggerated as a Marx Brothers movie, but not as entertaining.

[Bob Israel]

Well, I disagree and to claim they are not telling the truth is an assumption.
(ps I referring only to the name game,I never read any of the other stuff)
Clearly the facts that the new testament disagree with itself, let alone the Torah,speaks for itself.

With over 2300 different christian religions all claiming the same god which they can not agree on everyone of them think we have to beleive them. And, beleive what they do not even beleive or understand,their assumption.
If the Almighty give his word without confusion ,why would we need Paul who only speaks with confusion. Inwhich everyone agrees since their first response is,"Paul is hard to understand".
This acourse is even after showing he goes directly against the word of the Creator.

Further, to this is the long history of the assumption religion which kill millions in the name their god. Just like the founder of their assumption religion.

For the most part, I do not beleive Israelites including Jews are going around and war with nations. Its just not their way. However, they are not cowards that would run from a fight,but would rather live it peace.

Nor,do I think they invoke fighting,but have to deal with endless claims of attacks against them.

But, it seems fair for many to listen to Christians that never read the Bible ,including the Torah.

Where infact the conspiracy theories have been from to many Christian Preachers who claim " end the world" to gain membership in a lie. Not to mention all the dollars they gather.

Do we get unbiased information from christain sites, no!However, the information about the characters in the New Testament from these site sound an alarm,which adds to the facts about the New Testament, which is it is not the word of the Almighty. At best some books in maybe true,however; with all the miss translation and the fact many changed the words to suit their own religion.

However, I do not think you find any Jew that changed the Torah to suit his feelings,but rather change his feelings to suit the Torah.

However, I can not speak for Jews,nor do I.

Bob