☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
What Is The Living Word? Comparisons Of Sikh Scripture, The Quran, And The Christian Testament
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="mattqatsi" data-source="post: 126738" data-attributes="member: 11888"><p><strong>Re: Mathematics in Scripture?</strong></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I did not think I was dodging the responses, there was one I purposefully avoided but I said I would get back to it later because, at the time, I had spent an hour laying on my side typing that with one hand. I apologize, I should have chosen a day when I was in better health to respond. Thankfully I'm a bit more awake, alert and... energized now.</p><p>Repeating certain things? That was actually all creative, those aren't prepackaged responses, a lot of what I was talking about most people of my own faith would argue with, I was merely... Well, I'm sorry if it came across that way.</p><p></p><p>Alright, round 2. What a way to make a good first impression.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I actually personally strongly disagree with this. Things can be easily distorted, but the Bible was preserved in a way these others weren't. The Quran was written on leaves and bark for two generations until it could be copied down. The Gospels do not provide contradictory points at all. I've looked through every alleged one and they are all easily resolved, sometimes in a beautiful fashion. But I guess where we differ is that I believe these accounts to be Divinely Inspired and therefore preserved by God through the ages, and sometimes that preservation is confirmed by discoveries like this mathematical structure, or older identical manuscripts are found. Like the Dead Sea Scrolls, they helped show that some of our Jewish manuscripts had not been altered for hundreds of years. Things can be distorted by authors, but it becomes apparent that text was not manipulated or lost. This section of Mark for instance, if one word or letter would have been different, all those sevens would not be possible, the whole thing would change, the order would fall apart into disarray.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I thought I had explained that. The "Dead Word" is something that does not carry real Power behind it, it doesn't shake the mountains or form civilizations or penetrate hearts beyond what is normal. This text is the dead word. I guess you can say, for a better definition, that "Dead Text" doesn't have a consciousness behind it, there isn't a Spirit moving in and through it that shapes and directs the life of the holder.</p><p></p><p>Earlier, I was trying to explain what the dead word is as compared to the Living Word through explaining the Living Word through its differences. Dead words can't protect anyone from spiritual forces or guide its reader.</p><p></p><p></p><p>An immortal Being Who descended and became mortal for our, and His, sake. One who was once mortal but now holds the keys to death and Hades in His hand, One Who has conquered death.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I'll copy those other questions over a bit later. There was no mathematical backing or meaning to this Verse but I was trying to show that, from the Bible's standpoint, Yeshua is the Word ("The Word" refers to the Bible in whole,) and the Bible is the Message. </p><p></p><p></p><p>He believed it, Yahweh revealed it to him, John was a prophet. Hearsay? Then it was, from my viewpoint, hearsay from God. What does Yahweh care about human courts? He gives His Word and it's up to us whether to believe it or not. </p><p></p><p></p><p>I just meant that the word "angel" means "messenger," that would be the dictionary definition. While I certainly believe that angelic beings exist (but don't procreate), I can temporarily be an angel of the Lord, or you can be. But only in the sense of being a messenger, not some sort of spiritual transformation.</p><p> </p><p></p><p> I'd like to pull the sick card, I've been up for nearly 50 hours now. But I apologize, it was disjointed and kind of throwing everything together. But you have to admit trying to describe "The Living Word" is no easy task.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>While taking single verses here and there out of context, especially grand context, is not normally a valid way of studying a Holy Text, this one is a bit "gruesome" in one sense. But also, from the brief context I read, which you should really find a more accurate translation by the way, this serves two purposes. One is, if you've ****** off God, if you're a nation that stands in stark defiance, He will destroy you if He feels like it. This is basically the equivalent of saying "okay guys I've had enough" and he'll unleash the mongols or whatever savage nation there is that hates you against you. He's no longer holding back the floodgates of another culture's hate. </p><p>Also, it is a prophecy against Babylon, which, I hate saying this, but you need to understand a bit more about eschatology to see what this means. It's part of a much larger scale thing and God is saying that because of their horrendous horrendous trespasses, and that they rejected Him even when He showed up again, He's going to stop protecting them, their time is up. A lot of people see this verse today as connected with the FEMA camps being built in America.</p><p>It's a tough topic and terrible to single out a verse that can misunderstood and misconstrued.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Anything that God Divinely Inspired, He sent His Spirit to help guide the writing, and He would do that for a reason. This Writing has purpose if it's Divinely Inspired. If it has this seal on it, which is BEYOND impossible for man to create, then It is Divinely Inspired. If something is Divinely Inspired, that makes It the Living Word.</p><p></p><p></p><p>The Living Word can not be based on guesstimates, correct, but look at your argument. The date doesn't change the message, it doesn't change the story, and it doesn't change the Divine seal on it. Why would God go to the effort of preserving part of the Gospel, why would He seal up different sections of It if He didn't intend on preserving It. You keep forgetting the central belief that Scripture came from Inspiration, and that different things help show that. These manuscripts copies numbered in the thousands by a few hundred years after the incident. We have manuscripts from different places, different areas of the world that mostly agree with each other. Some take out sections, like this section of Mark. Ironically enough, the NIV Bible takes out this chunk as well as a few other different ones. I hope I've shown from the Christian perspective why this 12-verse chunk is considered to be Inspired (by the few who know about this.) When the NIV takes all these extra verses out because they didn't appear in some early manuscripts, all of the verses in Mark add up to 666. Ironic because John warned us that the MARK of the Beast would be with a 666. Coincidental? I doubt it especially since God reinforced the belief that this section is Inspired.</p><p></p><p></p><p>That's where a bit of faith comes in. To me, it makes more sense that His life would be portrayed by four distinct Gospels, especially since there are four distinct beasts surrounding His Throne. It makes sense that Jesus wouldn't compile a list of "do's and don'ts" because if you look at the story of the whole Bible, beginning to end, the reason He came is because He already gave us a list of "Do's and Don'ts" and we kept screwing up to an incredible degree so He took that Law away. He came to lead by example, and what better way to show His example to the world than to have four different accounts of how He acted. He didn't come to say "Stop doing this" and "do that" but to show us how to properly love one another (which I totally failed at today, sorry, I came to learn about Sikhism, not quite to argue my own faith, or at least not to this extreme.)</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="mattqatsi, post: 126738, member: 11888"] [b]Re: Mathematics in Scripture?[/b] I did not think I was dodging the responses, there was one I purposefully avoided but I said I would get back to it later because, at the time, I had spent an hour laying on my side typing that with one hand. I apologize, I should have chosen a day when I was in better health to respond. Thankfully I'm a bit more awake, alert and... energized now. Repeating certain things? That was actually all creative, those aren't prepackaged responses, a lot of what I was talking about most people of my own faith would argue with, I was merely... Well, I'm sorry if it came across that way. Alright, round 2. What a way to make a good first impression. I actually personally strongly disagree with this. Things can be easily distorted, but the Bible was preserved in a way these others weren't. The Quran was written on leaves and bark for two generations until it could be copied down. The Gospels do not provide contradictory points at all. I've looked through every alleged one and they are all easily resolved, sometimes in a beautiful fashion. But I guess where we differ is that I believe these accounts to be Divinely Inspired and therefore preserved by God through the ages, and sometimes that preservation is confirmed by discoveries like this mathematical structure, or older identical manuscripts are found. Like the Dead Sea Scrolls, they helped show that some of our Jewish manuscripts had not been altered for hundreds of years. Things can be distorted by authors, but it becomes apparent that text was not manipulated or lost. This section of Mark for instance, if one word or letter would have been different, all those sevens would not be possible, the whole thing would change, the order would fall apart into disarray. I thought I had explained that. The "Dead Word" is something that does not carry real Power behind it, it doesn't shake the mountains or form civilizations or penetrate hearts beyond what is normal. This text is the dead word. I guess you can say, for a better definition, that "Dead Text" doesn't have a consciousness behind it, there isn't a Spirit moving in and through it that shapes and directs the life of the holder. Earlier, I was trying to explain what the dead word is as compared to the Living Word through explaining the Living Word through its differences. Dead words can't protect anyone from spiritual forces or guide its reader. An immortal Being Who descended and became mortal for our, and His, sake. One who was once mortal but now holds the keys to death and Hades in His hand, One Who has conquered death. I'll copy those other questions over a bit later. There was no mathematical backing or meaning to this Verse but I was trying to show that, from the Bible's standpoint, Yeshua is the Word ("The Word" refers to the Bible in whole,) and the Bible is the Message. He believed it, Yahweh revealed it to him, John was a prophet. Hearsay? Then it was, from my viewpoint, hearsay from God. What does Yahweh care about human courts? He gives His Word and it's up to us whether to believe it or not. I just meant that the word "angel" means "messenger," that would be the dictionary definition. While I certainly believe that angelic beings exist (but don't procreate), I can temporarily be an angel of the Lord, or you can be. But only in the sense of being a messenger, not some sort of spiritual transformation. I'd like to pull the sick card, I've been up for nearly 50 hours now. But I apologize, it was disjointed and kind of throwing everything together. But you have to admit trying to describe "The Living Word" is no easy task. While taking single verses here and there out of context, especially grand context, is not normally a valid way of studying a Holy Text, this one is a bit "gruesome" in one sense. But also, from the brief context I read, which you should really find a more accurate translation by the way, this serves two purposes. One is, if you've ****** off God, if you're a nation that stands in stark defiance, He will destroy you if He feels like it. This is basically the equivalent of saying "okay guys I've had enough" and he'll unleash the mongols or whatever savage nation there is that hates you against you. He's no longer holding back the floodgates of another culture's hate. Also, it is a prophecy against Babylon, which, I hate saying this, but you need to understand a bit more about eschatology to see what this means. It's part of a much larger scale thing and God is saying that because of their horrendous horrendous trespasses, and that they rejected Him even when He showed up again, He's going to stop protecting them, their time is up. A lot of people see this verse today as connected with the FEMA camps being built in America. It's a tough topic and terrible to single out a verse that can misunderstood and misconstrued. Anything that God Divinely Inspired, He sent His Spirit to help guide the writing, and He would do that for a reason. This Writing has purpose if it's Divinely Inspired. If it has this seal on it, which is BEYOND impossible for man to create, then It is Divinely Inspired. If something is Divinely Inspired, that makes It the Living Word. The Living Word can not be based on guesstimates, correct, but look at your argument. The date doesn't change the message, it doesn't change the story, and it doesn't change the Divine seal on it. Why would God go to the effort of preserving part of the Gospel, why would He seal up different sections of It if He didn't intend on preserving It. You keep forgetting the central belief that Scripture came from Inspiration, and that different things help show that. These manuscripts copies numbered in the thousands by a few hundred years after the incident. We have manuscripts from different places, different areas of the world that mostly agree with each other. Some take out sections, like this section of Mark. Ironically enough, the NIV Bible takes out this chunk as well as a few other different ones. I hope I've shown from the Christian perspective why this 12-verse chunk is considered to be Inspired (by the few who know about this.) When the NIV takes all these extra verses out because they didn't appear in some early manuscripts, all of the verses in Mark add up to 666. Ironic because John warned us that the MARK of the Beast would be with a 666. Coincidental? I doubt it especially since God reinforced the belief that this section is Inspired. That's where a bit of faith comes in. To me, it makes more sense that His life would be portrayed by four distinct Gospels, especially since there are four distinct beasts surrounding His Throne. It makes sense that Jesus wouldn't compile a list of "do's and don'ts" because if you look at the story of the whole Bible, beginning to end, the reason He came is because He already gave us a list of "Do's and Don'ts" and we kept screwing up to an incredible degree so He took that Law away. He came to lead by example, and what better way to show His example to the world than to have four different accounts of how He acted. He didn't come to say "Stop doing this" and "do that" but to show us how to properly love one another (which I totally failed at today, sorry, I came to learn about Sikhism, not quite to argue my own faith, or at least not to this extreme.) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Discussions
Interfaith Dialogues
What Is The Living Word? Comparisons Of Sikh Scripture, The Quran, And The Christian Testament
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top