ohmi

No, it is what anyone would get if they followed the same explication of scripture by scripture that I have followed. [but it takes a long time to do this]

Simply people who haven't looked to check that their views are consistent with all the scripture , so they aren't

Luke 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

But the sun was created on the fourth day , how can one have days without a sun ?

Just an attempt to impose an external theory on words that do not say that , and the sequence in genesis is demonstrably different than the sequence in the world : green plants would have problems living a thousand years without the sun, the earth would not support life without the sun and moon - a desperate attempt to impose on scripture that which makes no sense .

I don't see how it gets around the creation of the earth before the sun and the creation of herbs before the sun , but animals after the sun

Just a half-thought-out attempt to fit evolution in with traditional misrepresentations, but again it does not explain all that the scripture says ,not even all of Genesis 1 - seeding the earth with plants before there was a sun to keep them alive makes no sense at all , nor does having an earth without the sun and moon because it would be extremely cold ,no liquid water as required for life.

What they don't do is check it against ALL the scripture , else they would be reproved of these beliefs by the saints and prophets they pretend to believe :-

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

One can observe that men die more evil [greater 'karma'] than when they came into the world as innocent babes - so if reincarnation were the case then there would never be any escape for creation from mankind's ever-growing unlovingness [sin]

Reincarnation predicts that things would get steadily better , but in fact they get steadily worse and the rate of getting worse is accelerating .

Add humans to [the means to make] corn and one gets more humans , life is like that ... the idea has some sense behind it in that Mayans respected their food production system, valued it because it was life itself to them . Modern 'Western' man has lost all respect for the nature we depend upon for food and is thus destroying species at ever-increasing rate in the name of 'progress', ensuring death of our culture . So the Mayans were more right in their symbolic mural than modern man is with all our science, because they took account of it whereas we ignore what we know .

The scripture contains much of such wisdom that is systematically ignored and replaced with other ideas to fit modern dying culture , and even predicts the sudden end which mankind is currently rushing to secure for ourselves ... the mural today would have mankind created out of oil in just one century since oil caused the rise in world population from one billion to six , and nine tenths of the energy for food creation and delivery to 'Westernised' humans comes from oil - few today see that the 25-year-old decline in max poss oil supply has reached the rising demand and so the death rate must exponentiate now [this already under way in India]

The scripture describes this terrible 'tribulation' , its resultant acceptance by the world of yet another, but greater, dictator with [almost completed] aims to unite and control the world, and even sees his death by assasinattion ... we see the slump beginning in USA and why it will escalate rapidly and affect the whole world so quickly [global markets, globalisation] just as the oil-price shy-rockets and makes all 'economic theory' be seen as fool's talk - again predicted that most men are led by the nose by faith in fools to their destruction

As I say, it takes time to compare possible interpretations with all the scripture and exclude those which are reproved... most do not have anything like that much patience , do not feel they have the time to bother .

I would be quite ready to give up any interpretations which were inconsistent with the 'empirical' and in fact do so , but much of what men call 'science' is just propaganda paid for by 'big bucks' , scientists do not speak in unanimity any more than do religionists , the truth is a rare largely-unrespected commodity in this world

human beings have the 'right' to be wrong , in fact the scripture says that God gives us that right ...and the means to be wrong [in order to break our stubborn pride completely eventually] I do my best with all that i have been given, one can asjk no more of a mere man:

Romans 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

Sadly not so, and no doubt most people would react as you do even if it were so... it takes an inordinate amount of time to check against all the scripture , one can only do so for a few things even in a lifetime.

That is NOT the way God says that He teaches mankind [John 16:13] , just a way to understand some things whilst one is patiently waiting for God's intervention .

As you imply, God's predicted allowing of mankind to fall flat on its face by faith in itself that destroys our own home , this does not look to many like a Loving God , yet it is the effective way to deal with the conceit of billions.

But you are again confusing religion with scripture , and they do not agree.

Those [saints] of the first resurrection [at Jesus' return] have no 'married partner' in heaven after translation to spirit

Matthew 22:30 For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.

Those who died sinners cannot get to heaven at all until they perfect their love in the new earth after resurrection [the second] of the unjust , the scripture says nothing whatsoever about sinners [no matter what they profess] going to heaven to meet their loved ones at death.

God's 'nanny' plan for our 'kindergaden' is in three distinct phases with death the 'purge' for unlovingness between each [but no death possible in the third, should one reach that before turning to a loving way of life in the body]

The story told in scripture is thus entirely different than that told in modern 'christian' religion, all the memorial days reminding men of God's plan have been deliberately changed so most men do not recognise His stated plan at all any longer , even the way we keep time has also been corrupted , as predicted it would :-

Daniel 7:25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

ohmi

The scripture is nor written for that purpose , and it matters not that you cannot see what it means without much work

Luke 8:10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

Matthew 13:35 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.

the passgae says that prophecy is not of ANY private interpretation, it does nt by any means say that people will not make up their own interpretations instead of getting scripture [alone] to show them what is meant by the scripture

There is plenty of data on mythologies paralleling the scripture long before Jesus arrived and featuring saviours of one kind or another , there is no reason to assume that any arose in any brief period [that is incompatible with the structuring of the ancient world i.e. no rapid transit, poor and slow communications, xenophobic culture , etc]

There is too much correlation and integration of the NT and OT for that to be the case , but ina any case t would not matter to any Christian because all receive all truth from God [John 16:13] long enough before they die to be able to perfect their love [cease from sin]

2 Timothy 2:19 Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.

The scripture explains that few find the narrow way of the saints [Christians] in this world [Matt 7:14] but many cry out 'Lord' to Jesus at his return and are left behind because they are still sinners

Matthew 7:23 And then [at his return] will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

It is rather bizarre that religion never admits this, that very few are saved at Jesus' return ,but then religion wants to hold onto many to support its apostate sinner-'priesthood'...

Jesus however states that the many [who go by the broad way] are saved to, just later on [Rev 7:9-10] ... again it disprves te dogma of religion, all men are not saved at one time , most are saved after the resurrection of the unjust [n the new earth kingdom come, the few are just those God will prepare as His true priesthood of His new covenant [Heb 8:8-12] with thse whose 'fathers' broke the old covenant.

Sure, but the saint assures us that all this private interpretation [hermeneutics, exegesis] is false , that these sinners failed t understand because they refuse reproof by the whole scripture :-

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

Luke 4:4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.
The scripture does not say that people won't interpret it privately, on the contrary, it prophesies that the whole of religion will fall away [apostasy] and that the whole world [bar only the few saints then alive] will worship the false christ image created by modern religion under Satan's sway [Rev 13:7- 13]

All that the saint says is that all these private interpretations, the whole of modern chrsitianity of sinners, is false , as one could deduce by its dvision [that it is not one truth, not God's truth, despite its foolish claims to be]

The absolute is already written in one's heart , one cannot deny that Love si right, even though few do it all the time [as the saints come to do, and as is required for translation, salvation, to immortality of the spirit]

the scripture certainly confirms this which we all know, and also that we must eventually come to cease all unlovingness, but only a few will do so in this life [Matt 7:14] because God requires but a few as His perfect priesthood to prepare for the resurrection of the unjust and salvation of the many [Rev 7:9-10] in the new earth kingdom come .

ohmi

You are confusing religion with what the scripture actually says... stop listening to sinners' vested hearsay and read what God has had written , go to the source [beyond poor translations we have] and then you may have something to say with foundation.

elevator

I agree - sounds like one of those inconsistencies we talked about earlier. Explain that then? All of these (the 4 examples I gave) are ways your fellow Christians interpret the same scriptures. These are not my words at all, I am just repeating them. If you find them all wrong, as you clearly do, why don't you enlighten us with the correct account of creation - according to your interpretation? I am sure all these Christians would appreciate learning how the creation really took place, according to the bible - if you read every word of it.

There is nothing about reincarnation that predicts a steadily better world. Reincarnation doesn't guarantee spiritual improvement. Also read about the Yugas (specifically Kali Yuga, which some Hindu scholars believe we are currently in). I don't believe in reincarnation, but it is certainly an alternative to biblical creation, equally unsupported by empirical evidence.

I seriously doubt it. It sounds to me like you have already made up your mind. There are no empirical evidence to suggest that Christianity is right, and there is certainly no empirical evidence to suggest that Christianity is more right than any other religion. Science, on the other hand, is based on exactly this empirical evidence. If anything is dogmatic it is religion. As for the "big bucks", you must not forget that billions of donated funds are annually spewed into various religious organizations.

I am not confusing the two. In fact I have been pointing it out all along. The fact that numerous interpretations of this one scripture has given rise to so many denominations should be fair indication that something about these scriptures are grossly ambiguous. You, of course, claim that they are not, but so far all you have done is told us that believers should read every word in the bible and every ambiguity will explain itself. I am convinced that there are millions out there who have read every word of the bible, yet denominations persist, Christians disagree and the bible remains fabulously incoherent and inconsistent.

It is clear that you consider the bible to be true (at least your interpretation of it). My point is though, and has been throughout this discussion, to what extent can you support your assertion that biblical scripture is the word of God? To what extent can you support that biblical scripture is more accurate than any other non-Christian scriptures that claim divine origin? What is stopping us from rejecting both as baloney simply from lack of empirical evidence? What cognitive reasoning must you employ to accept biblical scripture as the authorative word of God and at the same time reject everything else? Is this not a claim from personal experience or personal interpretation? If it's not personal experience, what is it? It certainly can't be empirical evidence? Yes, you provide endless quotes from the bible, but the bible itself is not evidence of its own divine authorship or divine authority.

ohmi

I think that you will find that it is [inconsistent] private interpretation that has been wrong consistently , and still is in modern religion of sinners [who say they believe all the scripture, but do not...]

2 Peter 1:20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

ohmi

Simply search the rest of scripture for the metaphors and similes and the like which explain the symbolism , then decode what it is saying , then you will get the same result as anyone could, without any need for any private interpretation whatsoever.

First off, I ain't a Christian , and they ain't my 'fellow Christians' , being neither my fellows, nor mostly Christians either [being sinners, not saints]

And scripture does not say that people won't misinterpret it by failing to take account of its explanation of itself, on the cantrary, it says that the whole world [bar a very few saints left alive] will get it wrong by following a false private interpretation of one who is given power to unite all religion and do wonders [to convince even atheists, because they see what they cannot explain]

I don't have any interpretation of my own , only the one given by scripture in which the scripture provides the meaning of all the symbols . It is a long process that few are prepared to undertake , but it may be worth an exposition in a more suitable forum with thread to itself even though many will not bother to read long expositions.

still let us have a 'taster' and see if you want to look further into the literate structure of the scripture or not :-

Revelation 17:15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

Now see if you can make any sense of these together :-

Gen 1:7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so.

Luke 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:

Daniel 12:3 And they that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.

Genesis 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

Whereas resurrection does , the 'solution' to evil and redemption of creation in three 'phases' [this earth, the new earth, and the 'lake of fire']

That is why it seems inconsistent to me, most people would seem to be on a never-ending downward spiral of increasing 'karma' with no end .

I can see why they would come to that conclusion, but I do not understand the idea of endless repetition within a finite space-time universe which only runs down [demonstrably]

The 'empirical evidence' of prophecies that already came true is available . oe cannot expect empirical evidence for prophecies made about our future until we get there [some seem to be imminent in our likely lifetime though, we really have gone insane in allowing a few greedy men to controlus and destroy the viability of our home planet in the false [propaganda] name of 'progress'.

You forget that scripture condemns modern apostate religion of sinners, you are conflating God and religion, a common but serious error.

It only indicates exactly what scripture predicts , the apostasy of religion (until a false image of christ adopted by the whole world [bar a very few saints]is the final climax of evil, its failure at the return of Jesus in the mortal death of its false 'god' )

reading scripture is far from enough, one has to read it without preconception, without prior religious belief, and accept only its interpretation of itself... but again , the scripture is NOT the way one is redeemed , only a description as witness that men ignored it , rather God Himself reveals the truth to the few saints of this world [John 16;13] and commits to revealing all truth to all men after resurrection [Joel 2:28] , death for most being necessitated first to free sinners from sin :-

Romans 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

It is clear that you consider the bible to be true (at least your interpretation of it).

I don't have an interpretation of it, it explains itself [and disagrees with all private interpretations of it] ... and its truth is simply [paraphrasing for sake of explication] that Love is the only way which will lead to translation , else all those who continue being unloving will die and be resurrected to a new opportunity of living loving lives [up to two deaths, before death is denied and men have to learn the hard way that evil is not a good way to live , all those that they used to prey upon with impunity having been redeemed from their grasp]

I find that consistent with what I know of Love, and so it is my current belief ,but it is no dogma ,nor could be.

Its structure and intricately woven modes of expression are unlike even the most admired works of human playwrights, it is simply beyond human skills to manufacture such a collection of such consistent works , particularly when considering the timespan and the connections both forward and backward through time [what human would be able to conceive such a thing, let alone implement it -bearing in mind the human lifespan? ]

The scripture is unique also in condemning the many of several religions which claim to be based upon it, unlike other 'sacred texts' it simply blows the religions supposedly based upon it out of the water [acknowledging only a tiny number of saints - 144,000 through the period between Jesus' visits, only some couple of thousand alive at any one time, scattered worldwide seeking the disappeared House of Israel amongst all nations for the rest of the few]

We do not have all the scripture, so one cannot make that claim, nor is the scripture even required {John 16:13] , just a facility for the few, and a stumbling block for many who foolishly put their own words to it

Isaiah 30:1 Woe to the rebellious children, saith the LORD, that take counsel, but not of me; and that cover with a covering, but not of my spirit, that they may add sin to sin:

Revelation 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

Clearly some do this , having blind faith in 'empiricism' which has however been duly called into question , is not the single faith that perhaps you wish it were.

The foundations of logic and language are unsound in the way these are used [incompleteness was proven formally by Godel, but is still ignored in the usage of these as though they were complete . And the axioms of 'reason' are by no means accepted by all , certainly not by me either... so 'reason' is not only a faith , like religion, but also is formally unsound in the way it is commonly used , even by scientists and philosophers.


That the bible condemns the unloving ways of most men is pretty good evidence that it was not faked ... and it only claims to be written by the most loving of men, the saints and the prophets, men who clearly died for their love of truth and of Love itself ...

the evidence of that stares at one from the words once one begins to understand what it actually says [as distinct from what sinners in modern religion say that it says and means] ... and the reason it is so impressive is that it judges one to oneself and one cannot doubt its judgment , it is convicting ...

But the scripture never claims to be an authority, conceding the authority to baptism of the spirit of god Himself [which comes to all eventually, but only to the few required as priests first, thus taken in this life by a new covenant of grace with [a remnant few of both Jewish and lost non-Jewish] Israel [Heb 8:8-12] whose ancestors broke the old covenant with God.

juergen

I apologize for not being clear in my question at all. I meant to ask, out of the different interpretations that we encounter across different Christian groups, which one matches the one true way Scripture interprets itself and how can one be sure that one has found the one that matches this one true way Scripture interprets itself?

[Edit: How could Scripture ever just interpret itself unless a human being utters the "How it all comes together"?]

Cheers
juergen

elevator

How can you decode anything without putting your personal interpretation into it? How can you understand metaphors without putting your personal interpretation into it?

My bad for not asking. Let me remedy that right now: with what religion or philosophy would you identify? Clearly you have an extraordinary affinity for the bible.

That really sucks doesn’t it? Would God deliberately lead people astray then, or is this the result of some other, perhaps evil, mechanism? What basis do you have for even making a claim like that?

Yes, that is of course very convenient. It gets you off the hook at least.

True wisdom, isn’t it? If you interpret this scientifically, it’s wrong. If you interpret it metaphorically, it is ambiguous. How would you interpret those passages you just cited, ohmi?

Yet, it painfully lacks evidence. In fact, there is nothing to indicate that neither scenario (Christian or Hindu reincarnation) is correct.

It has an end (at least in Hindu philosophy, and Buddhism and Jainism have similar concepts). It is called Moksha, and entails liberation from the cycle of reincarnation. I really don’t see how the concept of rebirth and karma is any more inconsistent than biblical accounts of the afterlife and salvation? In fact, I imagine the Hindu and Buddhist ways to be far less inconsistent; only because both have specific paths to attain Moksha. It seems that Christians, however, are far less consistent. Particular Christian denominations have different interpretations of the process of salvation and imagine everyone else to suffer eternal punishment in hell. At the end of the day though, neither one can provide any evidence, and it boils down to a matter of belief on insufficient evidence.

I am sure you can provide a list of fulfilled prophecies? And why can’t prophecies be made for the future? Science does this all the time. An hypothesis is developed all the time to attempt to predict or confirm a certain scientific claim. The bible, talking about 7 day creation, firmament, stars as holes in the firmament, etc, are making scientific claims that have long ago been refuted by scientific research. Copernicus predicted heliocentrism. One of the reasons he didn’t publish this until his deathbed may have been because he was scared of religious criticism. While many good scientists have been religious, religion has rarely encouraged scientific discovery when it may contradict established dogma. And, yet, science is the culprit of false propaganda?

You seem to forget that the Christian religion is a direct result of interpretation of your scriptures. Would there be a Christian religion without the bible? The Christian religion is composed of almost two millennia of people reading and interpreting scriptures (even parts of scriptures no longer part of the official canon), so of course the two are intimately connected.

A.k.a. blind belief. So, I must form no prior opinion of its content (including skepticism I assume?), I must read it with no prior religious beliefs (that alone will narrow the target audience dramatically), and I must allow it to interpret itself (no idea how this is supposed to work if I can’t rely on personal interpretation)? Seriously, ohmi?

Another poster in here preferred Dante, and I must agree. Even Shakespeare far surpasses the bible as a work of literary genius. As for predictions in time; I have yet to see any evidence of this. And neither Dante nor Shakespeare pretended their works were the results of divine mediation.

We do not have all the scripture? What is missing from it? The apocrypha? The Gnostic literature? If you don’t even have an accurate bible, isn’t it then even more difficult to explain its superiority over, say, the Quran or the Vedas?

Blind faith in empiricism? Another one of those comments you must be joking about right? The very definition of empiricism indicates that it arises from experience (of the natural world) rather than revelation or belief. I would love to see examples of how you imagine that empiricism have "been duly called into question"?

Several other books (take Jainism as an example of extreme "loving ways") condemn "unloving ways" as well. Am I going to take that as evidence that those are not faked either? I have no doubt that some of these books were written by profoundly good human beings, but they were nonetheless just human beings. There is no evidence, however, that they were in any way in touch with the supernatural.

Again, a valid assertion only if you are a believer in its authority as a divine book. To the Muslim, the Quran is just as impressive. A lot of Muslims make the exact same arguments actually. A Muslim I once debated asserted that the English translation (Ralph Griffin) of the Quran (in fact any foreign language translation) was invalid, and that the Quran could only be read and understood in its original language; which I do neither speak nor read, therefore effectively ending the debate from his standpoint.

An authority over all other claims to divine wisdom though? No interpretation of your scriptures would ever concede authority of any subject to another deity or divine book. Authority lies either with God himself or the scriptures according to you, correct? So I repeat; the bible itself is not evidence of its divine authority and the belief in a God is not evidence of this God’s existence or divine authority.

George S

If ability to do implies authority to do then might makes right. Authority, in the world in which power is the key, is a world in which there must be a Highest Power.

Why would one obey an omnipotent god who threatens punishment? Because, of course, might makes right.

If, on the other hand, what is right is not being more powerful, then what is it?

(Take a moment, dear reader, and reread that question and form an answer for yourself.)

My answer for myself is that what is right is to consider each pairwise encounter with an other. Each meeting of I and Thou is an opportunity to enhance that other's wellbeing. Absent other data we might follow the Golden Rule (what would I want if our situations were reversed). Basic empathy. Assuming that the other is following the Golden Rule as best they can we then treat them as they treat us. If they lie to us, they must really appreciate being lied to, so get creative with them! If they prove trustworthy they have earned the right to be treated as trustworthy. Etc.

Imagine, if you will, what your successfully completed life would look like if you look back upon your life with pride.

I am the Doctor bringing you the bad news, "You're dying." The medical death sentence will be carried out. For some the date is rather vague; for others well defined.

The good news is, "You're living." You can add events to that life to make it more whole. It is your life! You are living it. Today!

When to be moral? Right! Now!

With whom to be moral? Right! Each living conscious soul encountered today now.

With what to be moral? Right! We need this environment to change but slowly.

The authority of moral philosophers like the Rabbi from Nazareth named Yeshua (transliterated Joshua or Jesus depending) is in their philosophy not their authority! Similarly all of them, you know. Buddha, Confucius, Jain, Gandhi, Baha, and more, Epicurus, Aristotle, Descartes, and Popes and preachers galore have preached moral philosophy.

What they have in common (even from those who claim they are 'authority') is messages of love.

Regrettably, for many of these, their idea of whom to love is a subset of humanity.

The truly moral philosophies transcend even Humanism. These more enlightened souls have empathy with the values of any other creature capable of having a value system.

Some other moral philosophers transcend Humanism in a different direction and anthropomorphize the environment. Gaia -- the world -- is treated as a person worthy of dignity and respect.

Imagine (and it is, regrettably only imaginary) a world in which each and every person recognizes in each other person a Thou as worth of dignity as I. Violence except in response to clear and present danger never happens.

And I can aver, with no other authority than myself, that morality is always exercise of empathy. Thus moral growth -- personal growth -- is always more empathy. More recognition that all points of view are meaningful to the holder of that point of view.

What say you?

ohmi

A simple metaphor is of the form : A is like B
so to decode ,using the metaphor, one simply puts B in place of A wherever one finds A

Simple example decoding 'chaff' :
Psalms 1:4 The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.

Luke 3:17 .... but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.

One can also check the objectivity by getting others to do the decoding , so helping in avoiding mistakes of personal interpretation.

As I have said, I have no religious , scientific, or philosophical creed , it would be seem to be foolish indeed to follow divided sinners in life and I know no saints personally , so whilst waiting patiently upon God for spirit baptism [John 16:13] I spend much of my time discussing the documented flaws and more obvious fallacies of science, religion, philosophy, etc [despite that delusional dogmas have already gripped most people's beliefs and that I am not wholly free of the world yet]
Many have, almost religiously, accepted faith in the idea of 'proof' ,despite all its known flaws ... for me there is something better, hope based upon faith in Love [because Love ,given and received, is he deepest desire in mankind] and because I recognise that myconciousness is simply an apparent separation from the wholeness from whence I came, and that love is the only way back that which I have never ceased longing for. [Which happens to correspond with what Jesus and the saints have said in scripture]

As to the bible, the canon itself recognises over twenty other books [scrolls] as scripture, so scripture is more than the bible by far...

But the scripture is unique in depth, for such a small work I still haven't plumbed its depths in over thirty years' work, it is so intricate , far more so than works of human playwrights , and integrated despite being written by so many over so long...

God has due cause in deluding most people ,including the sinners of modern christianity , Satan will not confess his blasphemy unless people adore his image as their god . 2Thess 2 explains the details , also Isaiah 14, Ezek 28, Rev 13...

2 Thessalonians 2:11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
The only 'hook' is in your imagination, I was never 'on the hook' at any time ...

But that was my point, there is no ambiguity if one lets the scripture do all the interpreting as it says it will ... you cannot make it say any different thing than I can, hence the point in digging out the example for you to try [and thus see that I did not use personal interpretation]

As scriptures states, the evidence when it comes will cause almost all men [Rev 13:7-13] to believe the antichrist , evidence can be used to deceive , as any street magician can demonstrate :-

2 Thessalonians 2:9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders

Yes but observe that almost all people vastly increase in karma all their lives, on balance almost everyone is going the wrong way ,the number who get free is always tiny ,the number trapped in the downward spiral increases endlessly with no resolution.

Again you are confusing what sinner-'christians' say with what scripture says , there is no point in flogging a dead horse or a dead man ,and the bible says no such thing... only the living can suffer and all men are released from death , no-one remains in 'hell' [unseen and unknowing in death] as Jesus showed and states:-

Acts 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

Revelation 20:13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.

If you examined your acquired belief in evidence then you would find no cause to have faith in that either, men are inconsistent in believing in causality and yet in independence of their will too ... beliefs are not rationally based and cannot be , not even the predominant [pagan Greek] faith in reason of current fashion in the 'West' , a little questioning tears it to shreds but how many want to know their faith is void?

For me ,I 'remember' or reconstruct what I came from... in that moment of first consciousness I wanted whlly to cease from conciousness, not to feel separated as an individual in an uncontrollable uncaring world - that is personal evidence, but some can be taken back to that experience who do not remember it openly

And the other evidence is the deepest desire of all men to Love and be Loved, what is that doing inside us , all the same, and why do we long to do what we do not do , why do we let the world stand in our way , why do we not see that all are free to Love ? Yet very few indeed do it and know what that brings... the point though is that no-one can deny that Love is right, so it is an absolute, perhaps the only absolute knowledge we have , yet mostly ignored in favour of the conditional knowledge the world floods our minds with, relative knowledge that cannot satisfy the mind, nor give peace.

Prophecies are about the future, even about things beyond this world, but some were made long ago and have already come true, so that is evidence if one troubles to look for it amongst the mass of propaganda of science , religion, philosophy, etc

Except that the 'stars' in scripture are the messengers of God, not the small lights in the sky at night , science and scripture are talking about very different things

Revelation 1:20 The mystery of the seven stars which thou sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches:

The stars of science cannot fall to earth, they are suns , but the angels can and will :-

Revelation 6:13 And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth

Thus one simply has to decode what scripture is saying, else , as you say, it makes no sense at all [like other things in code make no sense until decoded]

Again , do not confuse religion with God. Religious 'leaders' are indeed mostly jealous of their power [and 'easy' life] and will abuse their power to stay in control as much as they can.

As for science , it has fashions , and almost all the theories which so many accept today were laughed to scorn when first proposed ... funding for science is governed by an arbitrary system of fashion and dogma which effectively determines what gets investigated and accepted , some matters of great importance never get funding at all because of dogma .

Big business buys the results it wants from scientists to gain lobbying material for government and the public ... all very sick, but as they say, it 'works' , many people believe the propaganda because it is labelled 'science'

Like I keep pointing out , religion and scripture tell very different stories indeed [and religion we know is false, not only because it is so deeply divided, but because it disagrees with the scripture which it says it believes in]

The bible however does NOT claim that belief is based upon scripture [as religion falsey claims itself to be] ,but states that belief is GIVEN by God in spirit baptism, that the followers of Jesus are saints who come to know all truth during their life and cease to be unlving, cease to be sinners... this is NOTHING like what religion teaches . There is simply almost nothing of importance left in modern sinner 'christianity' of what the scripture teaches , all has been corrupted, just as was prophesied must happen.

The aim of first reading the scripture is not belief in it, but simply to find out what it really says and divorce the idea that religion reports the truth about scripture and its declared plan of God for progressive redemption of creation

Dante is simply fiction and Shakespeare comes nowhere near the depth of scripture.

Well , it would seem that yo have not found out what the scripture says yet, so that is not entirely surprising perhaps?

the other books [scrolls] are mentioned in the scripture , many we do not have any copy of , perhaps since men have at times tried to destroy all record of scripture... many lost their lives bringing us what we do have.

As I have said, the establishment of faith in God [not faith in religion] is progressive, the scripture states that only 144,000 will have faith in Jesus sufficient to obey him [cease from sin] before his return... that is about one in a million, and is all that God has said will be His priesthood of His new covenant with Israel , no-one else is needed yet , the many are redeemed after death in the new earth kingdom, not now , and provably not by faith in religion of sinners.

So it matters not greatly what most believe , it becomes irrelevant except that the vain pride of man is broken when we come to see that almost everyone was wrong in their faith in science, religion, philosophy, whatever ... the purpose of this earth for almost all is destruction of pride, not belief in God , men have to see that the basis of belief was wrong , it was built on shifting sand of the relative , not solid rock of the absolute.

Matthew 7:26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

Your faith is clearly strong, but again, you have not examined carefully the foundations of empiricism before committing to faith in it... people mostly accept the propaganda on faith ,but much work has been done [mostly ignored] in attempt to establish the foundations ,but it failed to do so.

As one example, consider the implications of the 'Liar' 'paradox' , a contradiction to the implicitly assumed completeness of language, logic, reason... not all statements have to be true or untrue , so one cannot assume that if some statement is not untrue then it must be true [Yet people do that much of the time , even scientists and philosophers who should know better]

The concept of 'supernatural' , one might note, is a changing one... it is thus not much use then ...is it?

That some books include some truths is not in any way inconsistent with my current beliefs , but what might interest you is that you seem to have faith in some of the words , in particular the reverence for Love.

Yeah, he has a point, scripture loses much of its content in translation , and indeed we do not even have an decently accurate translation into English .

For the saints though, to whom it is mainly directed since they are the first redeemed , there is no problem, since even our poorest translation informs them that they will receive all truth direct from God, not from man, not from any book ...

There is simply no need for belief in God by the masses at this time, quite the contrary , most men will believe in the antichrist of a united world religion fairly soon ...on the basis of evidence from wonders [albeit lying wonders]

It shows/will show how little one can rely upon evidence from the world [since evidence is relative, built on shifting sands of belief]

Down will come faith in the propaganda of science, religion, philosophy ...
a whole new beginning , and a new world of progressively increasing faith in Love, but not before mankind finally does the insane, destroys our own home planet that fed us [which we are partway to completing and already irreversibly committed to doing through our institutions and habits and beliefs]