Problems with Judiasm/Christianity

[ElementalDearWatson]

What you're saying is clear.  What it has to do with whether or not the leaders of many major religions accept that parts of the Bible is metaphorical is less clear.

[Gorghandi]

I think one main problem with Christianity, is that its followers forget that it is Clearly written within their un-foul-able  book, that god specifically divided up his knowledge among all people. so that one would have to travel and communicate in order to hear his true words.
second thing I find maybe one of newest biggest flaws with cristianity, is that the religion and views of Joshua bar joseph, isn't even in the book. the whole religion is based on a guy that taught completely different prophesies, and scriptures'. more closer to what is called agnosis.(may have mispelld it).
third problem I think with, and more specifically wrong with those viewing it, is that they don't realize religion is the original word for science.
other than the event that led to the term jewish; i.e. that's jewish; being jewed; ect. I don't have opinions about problems with judiasm.

[UTAlan]

I think one main problem with Christianity, is that its followers forget that it is Clearly written within their un-foul-able  book, that god specifically divided up his knowledge among all people. so that one would have to travel and communicate in order to hear his true words.

Source/reference?

second thing I find maybe one of newest biggest flaws with cristianity, is that the religion and views of Joshua bar joseph, isn't even in the book. the whole religion is based on a guy that taught completely different prophesies, and scriptures'. more closer to what is called agnosis.(may have mispelld it).

I'm not sure what you're saying here. That the teachings of Jesus isn't in the bible? The 66-book bible that includes the 4 gospels detailing Jesus' life and ministry?

third problem I think with, and more specifically wrong with those viewing it, is that they don't realize religion is the original word for science.
other than the event that led to the term jewish; i.e. that's jewish; being jewed; ect. I don't have opinions about problems with judiasm.

I'm not really sure what the problem is here. Because for one, if what you say is true, you're just arguing semantics. I'm fine with throwing the word "religion" out. That doesn't change what I believe about Jesus being my Savior. And two, do you have a source on "religion is the original word for science"?

[Gorghandi]

your first question, my source is the 34 different versions bibles ive read. and studied, some over a few hundred years old. spoiler alert, there are vast differences even among the same kind of bible. depending on its age.

the second thing you mention, is infact the 4 gospels detailing his life and ministry, but the are not his works. they are from his apostles, from their views. don't worry they are starting to dig up a lot of the work specifically from joshuas perspectives, and teachings. I'm sure in next few years if church deams it wont disbar their versions of things too  much will release it for you to read.

your third question. the greatest source is common sense. and the ability to understand from the perpectives beyond onself, and ones time. to understand how all things are the same. and how only perspective, and the words to describe them change. also over a thousand technological creations exist from the specific examples from the books in the bible. like the creation of modified food, space ships, power cells, excetera.
also I feel like this post was made to get your opinions, not question anothers.

[UTAlan]

your first question, my source is the 34 different versions bibles ive read. and studied, some over a few hundred years old. spoiler alert, there are vast differences even among the same kind of bible. depending on its age.

This sounds like a different argument than your first point. You said that it is clearly written in the bible that God divided up his knowledge among all people. Here it sounds like you are saying you have an issue with different translations. I would love a bible verse showing your first point. On this second one, different versions/translations will of course say different things to some degree. That's why they are different translations. I can't speak for 34 different translations, but I know of a few that I do trust as solid translations from the original sources (Hebrew/Greek/Aramaic) - New International Version, English Standard Version, New Living Translation, and a handful of others.

Do you have any specific examples where there are different things being said among different translations? I would love to try to address a specific issue, if it might help.

the second thing you mention, is infact the 4 gospels detailing his life and ministry, but the are not his works. they are from his apostles, from their views. don't worry they are starting to dig up a lot of the work specifically from joshuas perspectives, and teachings. I'm sure in next few years if church deams it wont disbar their versions of things too  much will release it for you to read.

True, they are not his works. But they are eye-witness testimonies and while the historical reliability of them is debated, there is a lot of evidence supporting their historical reliability.

your third question. the greatest source is common sense. and the ability to understand from the perpectives beyond onself, and ones time. to understand how all things are the same. and how only perspective, and the words to describe them change. also over a thousand technological creations exist from the specific examples from the books in the bible. like the creation of modified food, space ships, power cells, excetera.
also I feel like this post was made to get your opinions, not question anothers.

I would love to give you my opinions. The biggest reason for my questions is to try to better understand your statements so that I can give you my response/thoughts/opinions. Also, most of what you stated came across as though it were fact, which is why I was asking for sources. If you simply are of the opinion that Jesus never existed, or that he did but that he wasn't the Son of God, that's perfectly fine. You are welcome to that opinion and I will accept it as such.

[Gorghandi]

I would love to give you my opinions. The biggest reason for my questions is to try to better understand your statements so that I can give you my response/thoughts/opinions. Also, most of what you stated came across as though it were fact, which is why I was asking for sources. If you simply are of the opinion that Jesus never existed, or that he did but that he wasn't the Son of God, that's perfectly fine. You are welcome to that opinion and I will accept it as such.
[/quote]

sorry, most of my sources are from my many years of tutoring, in philosophies, theology, and many others(not necessarily relevant). and again its not me that made this post, its northcity4, that wants to hear your opinions. and of course Joshua bar joseph existed. and once you understand what gods are and who; you could never deny his existence and an extension to said gods.  and my first responce  wasn't stating I had issues with different sources, was merely pointing out my one grouping of source for the original comment. and within any number of bibles, there is a statement about his dividing up his word so that no one people would have it. and that its required to travel and communicate with folk afar in order to receive his full word.

[MasterofPun]

Yes indeed: the entire Bible is not distributed to everyone. The Jews were the target of most of the Bible. Most books of the Bible started of in Israel.
Is there a problem with that?