Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-01-2009, 10:40 AM   #201
Axgar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,028
Send a message via Yahoo to Axgar
So Horm claims he is Christian or no?

he seems to want to have his cake and eat it to......ride the fence, just in case, he is under the false assumption that just saying you believe there is a God that he will be ok when the time comes....... not so fast my friend, if you say you believe you still dont have a leg to stand on, you must believe, and you must repent and you must do so faithfully and honestly, a false feel good repentance will not work.
Axgar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 01:21 PM   #202
Hormadrune
Sociopathic bully?
 
Hormadrune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: PA
Posts: 11,895
Originally Posted by Lurikeen View Post
Nice troll. I shouldn't have responded to the last one, or this one. You've got the baiting down pat. All little trolls should aspire to be as great as you one day.
So are you really gonna take your ball and go home this time? Somehow I doubt it, you need the validation only a father figure like me can provide.

P.S.—I already answered your quip about showing how wrong you are in earlier posts above. What is there to prove against a vacuous claim like "Christianity is a myth"? Oh, thanks for telling us that, I will be sure to tell the millions of Christians in the world your oh so convincing words. Do you have something substantial to back your claims that can be responded to with something other than, "No you're wrong"? Once you can come up with something other than slogans maybe you will get a worthy response.
No offense kid, but I don't think you have a worthy response in you. That you've done nothing but waffle or point me to books you know I'm not going to simply drop what I'm doing to read, what other conclusion can one draw but that you are incapable of substantiating your position? My side of this is admittedly easy. I don't claim to know one way or the other about God's existence- but I'll be damned (bazing!) if I'm just going to take your word for it.

P.S.S.—In anticipation of your next quip let me add that I have already told you that I can't provide proof that will satisfy a skeptic. Jesus could appear right in front of you and tell you Himself that He loves you, died on a cross for your sins, and resurrected so that you can have eternal life, but you would think a Chris Angel clone had broken into your house and call the cops.

Now that we have come full circle, I will leave you to what you do best, rowing your troll boat.
I'd tell him his old man was a bit of a hardass for making him endure crucifixion just because I use his name in vain sometimes. I'm guessing after all the wine and cardboard bread though that he could use a beer- is he a tasteless macrobrew sort of guy or is he looking for something more refreshing, like a Boddington's or Belhaven? I really hope it's the latter, if JHC shows up at my house and wants a Bud Light I'm pretty sure I'll be going to hell.

Originally Posted by Axgar
So Horm claims he is Christian or no?

he seems to want to have his cake and eat it to......ride the fence, just in case, he is under the false assumption that just saying you believe there is a God that he will be ok when the time comes....... not so fast my friend, if you say you believe you still dont have a leg to stand on, you must believe, and you must repent and you must do so faithfully and honestly, a false feel good repentance will not work.
Not really, no. I was raised Christian, did the whole Sunday school thing, played CYO basketball, you name it. But no, I wouldn't call myself a Christian today- what makes you think I would? I didn't think there was any real ambiguity there.

I'm not really sure how many more times I can state my position on the existence of God. I'm not by any means an atheist, but I've yet to hear a religion give me anything especially compelling to latch on to. As I've said, I sure hope the atheists are wrong. That everything just....is....is a bleakly pragmatic worldview that I just can't get behind. But really I'm just suspicious of anyone who really thinks they know one way or the other. Given the vacuum of proof in either direction, anyone who goes beyond simple blind faith is full of it.

What exactly am I supposed to be repenting for by the way? Rational thought? Being human? /shrug Sorry?
__________________
WoW-Ghostlands-US: Prae | Æsöp | Prolonix | Horm | Ulfhednar | Æölï
EQ: Hormadrune <Retired> <OFS> <CoI> <Affy> <CE>
Hormadrune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 02:00 PM   #203
Drysdale
RSS Feed
 
Drysdale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 20,628
Originally Posted by Hormadrune View Post
But no, I wouldn't call myself a Christian today-
Well Duh!
__________________
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
-Robert A. Heinlein

"Thou shalt not steal. Except by majority vote." - Gary North
Drysdale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 02:48 PM   #204
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by Davek View Post
HAHAHHA....ummm WTF?
Watch this YouTube and here. That is what the video Misty posted up is about. Pretty funny.

Edit: And here. ROFL!
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." —Monty Python's "Life of Brian"

Last edited by Lurikeen; 10-01-2009 at 02:57 PM.
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 02:58 PM   #205
Misty
Do Not Disturb
 
Misty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,068
kudos Luri

/OFF TOPIC - YouTube has Matrix, StarWars and an Obama versions as well, actually there's tons of 'em. I think ytmd started it all.

/OFF TOPIC *off
Misty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2009, 05:45 PM   #206
Axgar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,028
Send a message via Yahoo to Axgar
Well you have said you read the bible ..... that pretty much tells you the way you SHOULD live life.... It doesnt say you have to, although if you dont then this is your only life UNLESS you repent, but doing so just to do it wont help, and being a good person and doing good things throughout life isnt good enough either, the bible tells us that.
Axgar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 07:53 AM   #207
GraemeFaelban
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: At the foot of the Rockies
Posts: 523
Send a message via AIM to GraemeFaelban
Originally Posted by Drysdale View Post
You get a gold star. My fiancee is studying ancient Hebrew at the moment (I can recite about 1/2 the aleph-bet as they call it from helping her) and the dugesh's are the little dots and squiggles that denote vowels, which weren't originally included. It apparently was up to the reader to contextualize the vowels.

Oh well, the new testament can be even more difficult as ancient Greek doesn't really strees a word order. It can come out very much like a Yoda sentence.
Helps a lot that I lived in Israel for 6 years, ages 9-15, and thus was directly educated on much of the old testaments, and yes, even the difficulties involved in the passing down of the scriptures and interpretations thereof. Also helps that the issue with ancient Hebrew still exists with modern Hebrew. They still use the same system for the vowel sounds, and they still omit them from many books.

Originally Posted by Lurikeen View Post
Yes, that is a difficulty but it is not a show stopper and neither does it allow for the breadth of interpretation you are suggesting. What Drysdale speaks of is correct about the markings called "vowel points". Early Hebrew manuscripts lack the vowel points and later Hebrew texts have them included. We have to keep in mind that the Hebrews had a strong oral tradition, hence the vowel points were likely of little use to them until the Jews began to spread out around the world. Vowel points then become a necessity and are used. (Edit: Jesus mentions vowel points as recorded in the Gospels. He states that not one "jot nor tittle will pass away". "Jot" and "tittle" refers to the small vowel point markings in the Hebrew. They are already widely used in the Hebrew text used in Jesus' day. ) But again, this isn't the show stopper you are looking for. Finds like the Qumran Scrolls (aka "Dead Sea Scrolls") have demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that our current Hebrew texts are quite accurate.
I admit, my knowledge on the subject is somewhat old, mostly from the mid 70s, but my understanding is that despite your claims here, there are still enough potential issues that do call into question the current accepted version of the old testaments. If you dig around, you can find a lot of writing on the subject that illustrates both sides of the issue. The oral tradition was a problem because the pronounciations of words varied in different areas. As I understand it, this is largely why a Hebrew text, with the vowels was put down on paper, and agreed to by the scholars of the time, in the 6th or 7th century I believe.

As I understand it from when I last looked into the subject, the Qumran scrolls, do differ from the current Hebrew old testaments, as well as from the old Greek translations. In most cases, the differences are not significant enough to affect the message. Parts of the scrolls appear to match the Hebrew, parts the Greek, and other parts differ from both.
__________________
Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Shaman of 85 Seasons <Resolution of Erollisi Marr>
GraemeFaelban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 07:58 AM   #208
GraemeFaelban
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: At the foot of the Rockies
Posts: 523
Send a message via AIM to GraemeFaelban
Originally Posted by Axgar View Post
Well you have said you read the bible ..... that pretty much tells you the way you SHOULD live life.... It doesnt say you have to, although if you dont then this is your only life UNLESS you repent, but doing so just to do it wont help, and being a good person and doing good things throughout life isnt good enough either, the bible tells us that.
Reading the bible, and actually believing what it says and living by it are completely different things...

I read lots of Science Fiction and Fantasy, I don't live my life by them...

Other religious texts tell a different story of how you should live your life if you want your ultimate reward. You have chosen yours. I think Hormadrune has made it fairly clear which choice he has made.

EDIT:
Oh, just to make it clear here to the more rabid readers, I am not equating the bible to sci fi books as such. The bible, old and new testaments, does contain much that is reasonably indisputable historical fact, it also contains much that I, and many others, find to be non factual.
__________________
Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Shaman of 85 Seasons <Resolution of Erollisi Marr>
GraemeFaelban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 08:34 AM   #209
Axgar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,028
Send a message via Yahoo to Axgar
IF ONE part of the bible is not fact then it should all be discounted and anyone who believes it is not factual (I know it can be interpreted differently by different people that is an whole different arguement) then they do NOT beleive in Jesus Christ and are not Christian.

The Lord does not change his mind, his scripture and laws are what he has went by from the beginning and are what he will ALWAYS go by, the BIBLE is not a politically correct book and has no intentions on being PC, it may even offend some people (obviously) but to bad so sad the Lord is the one who makes the rules not us and we chose to have our own little freedom of choice and look what it has landed us.... we asked the lord to stay out of our business...... look what it landed us....... Im not trying to be holier than thou... I am just as guilty as anyone and more guilty than others.
Axgar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 09:45 AM   #210
Drysdale
RSS Feed
 
Drysdale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 20,628
Originally Posted by GraemeFaelban View Post
EDIT:
Oh, just to make it clear here to the more rabid readers, I am not equating the bible to sci fi books as such. The bible, old and new testaments, does contain much that is reasonably indisputable historical fact, it also contains much that I, and many others, find to be non factual.
The style of communication back in that time was storytelling and parabels ya know.
__________________
"A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects."
-Robert A. Heinlein

"Thou shalt not steal. Except by majority vote." - Gary North
Drysdale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 10:46 AM   #211
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by GraemeFaelban View Post
I admit, my knowledge on the subject is somewhat old, mostly from the mid 70s, but my understanding is that despite your claims here, there are still enough potential issues that do call into question the current accepted version of the old testaments. If you dig around, you can find a lot of writing on the subject that illustrates both sides of the issue. The oral tradition was a problem because the pronounciations of words varied in different areas. As I understand it, this is largely why a Hebrew text, with the vowels was put down on paper, and agreed to by the scholars of the time, in the 6th or 7th century I believe.
As I pointed out in a post above Jesus refers to the use of vowel points in the Gospel of Matthew, "I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled"; "jot" and "tittle" here referring to the vowel points. So it simply is not true that vowel points didn't come into use until the 6th or 7th century. They had to have been in common use even in Jesus' time for His statement to make sense to those who He was talking with. Although, they aren't found in classical Hebrew writing. That is true.

But I think the more important point to be made here is that you appear to be implying that without the vowel points in the classical Hebrew we can't ever hope to have an accurate translation of those words in today's modern text. That is just false. There is a robust scholarship of classical Hebrew to such an extent that it can be taught in universities around the world. Drysdale has a fiancee learning a "dead language" successfully. Consider also, your argument being applied to the Bible necessarily must be applied to all ancient Hebrew literature. We can't apply your criticism in a vacuum. If you want to dismiss all transcriptions of the classical Hebrew "holy texts" then you must dismiss, or "call into question", all period literature written in classical Hebrew for the reasons you raise; which frankly I think would be nonsense.

As far as the vowel points are concerned, as I stated earlier that is not a show stopper, since classical Hebrew words did not need to represent vowels by specific symbols in order to successfully convey meaning. We will likely continue to disagree on that point.

Originally Posted by GraemeFaelban View Post
As I understand it from when I last looked into the subject, the Qumran scrolls, do differ from the current Hebrew old testaments, as well as from the old Greek translations. In most cases, the differences are not significant enough to affect the message. Parts of the scrolls appear to match the Hebrew, parts the Greek, and other parts differ from both.
I agree, there are differences. However, the scrolls themselves are widely regarded as confirming the great accuracy of later Hebrew manuscripts (Masoretic text). This is one of those things as to how you want to approach the text. Some will look at the modern text and point at a comma and say "See, those types of punctuation marks weren't in the classical texts, the meaning has been changed significantly!" and dismiss the whole as not possibly coming from God. On the other hand, others will point at the accuracy in word for word translation and praise God for His providence in preserving the text.

So, I guess we could reduce this whole conversation down to what one wants to latch onto and that really is the point I have made in this thread to another; there can't be enough proof offered to the skeptic, since the skeptic wants to see a necessary connection between some cause and effect before they will admit to knowing the cause. Never mind that in daily life they don't live by their own precepts of skepticism. The skeptic drinks a beer thinking they know it was brewed from grains, hops, yeast, and water, but they never actually saw that particular beer brewed. For all we know, "beer" was garbled in translation and what the poor slob ordered off the menu was the "Chef's special drink" better described by the word "piss". But how could we possibly know that unless we actually saw the Chef's penis dangling over and pissing in the glass?

Thanks for the dialogue, Graeme. I appreciate our exchange for many reasons and in particular because you do know something about which you speak. If you don't mind I am going to call it quits here. I don't really have anything more I could add to the conversation.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." —Monty Python's "Life of Brian"

Last edited by Lurikeen; 10-02-2009 at 11:34 AM. Reason: Had to finish a thought.
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 01:04 PM   #212
GraemeFaelban
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: At the foot of the Rockies
Posts: 523
Send a message via AIM to GraemeFaelban
Originally Posted by Lurikeen View Post
As I pointed out in a post above Jesus refers to the use of vowel points in the Gospel of Matthew, "I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled"; "jot" and "tittle" here referring to the vowel points. So it simply is not true that vowel points didn't come into use until the 6th or 7th century. They had to have been in common use even in Jesus' time for His statement to make sense to those who He was talking with. Although, they aren't found in classical Hebrew writing. That is true.
I did not say they were not in use, I said they did not generally appear in the writings, such as the old testaments. This is still true today in Hebrew. This is not to say they were never used in any copies, but, in the oldest ones we have found, the Qumran scrolls, you will not find them.
__________________
Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Shaman of 85 Seasons <Resolution of Erollisi Marr>
GraemeFaelban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 01:06 PM   #213
GraemeFaelban
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: At the foot of the Rockies
Posts: 523
Send a message via AIM to GraemeFaelban
Originally Posted by Drysdale View Post
The style of communication back in that time was storytelling and parabels ya know.
Yes, that is true. So we both agree it shouldn't be taken literally. I just happen to also believe that other than what is basically historical fact, is nothing more than story telling with the purpose of conveying morals, much like say, Aesop's fables.
__________________
Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Shaman of 85 Seasons <Resolution of Erollisi Marr>
GraemeFaelban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 01:15 PM   #214
GraemeFaelban
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: At the foot of the Rockies
Posts: 523
Send a message via AIM to GraemeFaelban
Originally Posted by Axgar View Post
IF ONE part of the bible is not fact then it should all be discounted and anyone who believes it is not factual (I know it can be interpreted differently by different people that is an whole different arguement) then they do NOT beleive in Jesus Christ and are not Christian.
Someone could still believe that Jesus was their savior without necessarilly taking everything in the bible as fact. Whether that makes them Christian or not, I couldn't answer.

Personally, I believe that the bible has many accurate facts in it. I also believe it has much that is not factual.
__________________
Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Shaman of 85 Seasons <Resolution of Erollisi Marr>
GraemeFaelban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 01:42 PM   #215
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by GraemeFaelban View Post
I did not say they were not in use, I said they did not generally appear in the writings, such as the old testaments. This is still true today in Hebrew. This is not to say they were never used in any copies, but, in the oldest ones we have found, the Qumran scrolls, you will not find them.
You quoted my agreement with you, "Although, they aren't found in classical Hebrew writing. That is true." Just for clarification's sake, my point is that it would be an error to suggest that vowel points aren't in use until the time of the 6th or 7th century as your earlier statement could be taken by another. And all though the vowel pointing system we are familiar with today wasn't in use in the Qumran scrolls, my understanding is that they extensively contain vowel letters, called "short vowels". But, again, that isn't the most important point which is that vocalizations of the classical Hebrew don't require vowels, the context of the text provides the speaker with the meaning of each word to express. This is how Rabbi's can read from the Torah, written in classical Hebrew, today and still convey meanings which we can look back into older manuscripts such as those found in Qumran and find that there are no significant differences which would mar the meaning of the text or render meanings in later texts to such an extent that they look wholly different. You didn't argue this specifically but the following is pertinent. In short, the idea that we would call into question the meanings of the words in the current old testament texts because vowel points weren't systematized until the 5th century C.E. isn't a good reason and I have pointed out why.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." —Monty Python's "Life of Brian"

Last edited by Lurikeen; 10-02-2009 at 01:52 PM.
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2009, 08:49 PM   #216
Axgar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,028
Send a message via Yahoo to Axgar
Originally Posted by GraemeFaelban View Post
Someone could still believe that Jesus was their savior without necessarilly taking everything in the bible as fact. Whether that makes them Christian or not, I couldn't answer.

Personally, I believe that the bible has many accurate facts in it. I also believe it has much that is not factual.
So you are saying Jesus exists but only the parts of the bible you agree with are accurate? Im not trying to be a smartass even, just saying it is either all true or none of it is.....

I think some of it may be interpreted somewhat wrong, but I think if God can create what he has created so far he can surely make sure a simple book is accurate throughout time cant he? not saying people cant write BS for people to read, in fact the bible pretty much tells us this type of thing will happen............ I guess we all can believe differently about some things but regardless the "repent" thing i mentioned is a MUST, just believing and being a good person isnt enough..... although if you beleive i would think you would be willing to repent so that point should be moot.
Axgar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-03-2009, 06:11 AM   #217
AjTaliesen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,516
Originally Posted by Axgar View Post
So you are saying Jesus exists but only the parts of the bible you agree with are accurate? Im not trying to be a smartass even, just saying it is either all true or none of it is.....
That doesn't even make sense.
AjTaliesen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 07:52 AM   #218
Axgar
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,028
Send a message via Yahoo to Axgar
I will make it easy for you, if you read a book and you say wow i AGREE with this part it is SOOO true BUT there is no way this part can be true ........ you are being ignorant.

HOWEVER, I will not dispute that there will be different interpretations of some things in the bible and it is up to us to read it and decipher what we believe it means, FAITH is a damn big 5 letter work, if you have it and follow a few SIMPLE rules and of course repent ect....... you will probably go to Heaven.

YOu see I do not believe in HELL as some of you do, I read about it in a few magazines and it makes sense to me, although me trying to explain it without getting the article out and typing it word for word would not make sense to anyone im sure, but to make it real short I think there are like 3 or 4 different words in the bible that translate as hell, and none of them have anything to do with eternal pain and suffering, i believe SOME Of us will just cease to exist, our families will not know we existed and everyone else will live a life with Christ, and a good life being able to do things unimaginable to us right now.

to each their own I guess though, but telling God sorry dude I really didnt know will not be an excuse for some of us, now some of the people may have that excuse, like some of the tribes in other countries that have never heard the scripture ect........... I guess in a way they are the lucky ones, because all they will have to believe is what they are seeing when the time comes...(if i am correct on that i dunno but i kinda figure it this way).
Axgar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 01:58 PM   #219
AjTaliesen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,516
Originally Posted by Axgar View Post
I will make it easy for you, if you read a book and you say wow i AGREE with this part it is SOOO true BUT there is no way this part can be true ........ you are being ignorant.
.

It's Monday. And you're a dumb ass.


Do you agree with both of those statements or just one of them?

The bible had many different authors. Not all of them believed ALL the same things. You don't even need to read the bible to get that much. The table of contents gives you that.


Even worse for a Christian to make this kind of statement. Even though Jesus never says he is disputing the prophets to come before him, Paul makes it pretty clear that allot of the old testament is not relevant in light of Jesus's new message.

Parts of the bible even contradict each other. Are you saying it's impossible to believe in God becuase parts of the bible disagree on minor points?

Or are you just making a statement you didn't think through?
AjTaliesen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 02:31 PM   #220
Shylodog
Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Reno, NV
Posts: 1,377
Send a message via Yahoo to Shylodog
Originally Posted by AjTaliesen View Post
...Or are you just making a statement you didn't think through?
Heh. This was rhetorical, right?
__________________
Shylodog Wamphyri
66 Arch Convoker
(Retired)

Originally Posted by Hormadrune
Write it down- Chuk made me lolirl
Originally Posted by Drysdale
To bumbleroot: Know what? You're right. I DID misread your statement and I DO apologize.
Shylodog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:08 PM   #221
Heretic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,762
Originally Posted by lurikeen
The skeptics and conspiracy theorists simply look like "Big Foot hunters
Bigfoot has far more evidence.


Originally Posted by axgar
Well you have said you read the bible ..... that pretty much tells you the way you SHOULD live life
And why should we live our life by it just because it says it? Superstitious much? You want self induced slavery?


Originally Posted by axgar
and being a good person and doing good things throughout life isnt good enough either, the bible tells us that
And thats why I say its full of shit. Being a good person IS what matters. I shouldn't have to also suck some godly figures cock.


Originally Posted by graemefaelban
The bible, old and new testaments, does contain much that is reasonably indisputable historical fact, it also contains much that I, and many others, find to be non factual
Exactly, its like the movie forest gump. Lots of those events existed, but Gump didnt.


Originally Posted by axgar
IF ONE part of the bible is not fact then it should all be discounted
So you are saying that there are no parts of the bible that were changed over the years through countless translations?

What about the HUNDREDS of DIRECT contradictions in the Bible? Shall I start posting them?

Jesus' last words
MAT 27:46,50: "And about the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, eli, lama sabachthani?" that is to say, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" ...Jesus, when he cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost."

LUK 23:46: "And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, "Father, unto thy hands I commend my spirit:" and having said thus, he gave up the ghost."

JOH 19:30: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, "It is finished:" and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost."

For Christ's sake, (pun) they couldn't even get his last words right!


Who is the father of Joseph?
MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.






Originally Posted by lurikeen
there can't be enough proof offered to the skeptic
What are some of the proofs? If there is enough evidence I will believe it as well. The question is why you believe with such a lack of proof? Only because it is offering what you were seeking and you overlook the cause/effect for your own mental well being benefit?


Originally Posted by axgar
to each their own I guess though, but telling God sorry dude I really didnt know will not be an excuse for some of us, now some of the people may have that excuse, like some of the tribes in other countries that have never heard the scripture ect........... I guess in a way they are the lucky ones, because all they will have to believe is what they are seeing when the time comes...(if i am correct on that i dunno but i kinda figure it this way).
Blessed are the Koolaid drinkers?

Why do tribes in other countries get a free pass? Why because we have heard of the scripture are we damned for not believing someone else that it is fact? God likes gullibility? If he damns us for not following him, he should show himself to us in person. Not this 'he said, she said' secondhand knowledge crap.
__________________
bg85 on another forum:
"i always refer to myself as a "missionary agnostic." that is, not only do i not know shit about shit, but i'm going to try and convince you that you don't know shit about shit either and there's no way for you to know shit about shit."

Heretic

Last edited by Heretic; 10-05-2009 at 04:19 PM.
Heretic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:12 PM   #222
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by AjTaliesen View Post
It's Monday. And you're a dumb ass.
In fairness to "dumb ass" he hasn't been a Christian all that long and likely meant something much different than what he stated. I am guessing, and could be wrong (wouldn't be a first), he is wanting to say that if the Bible is the word of God, then it must be accepted as the truth in whole and not just in part. I agree with that idea. Once we start down the road of higher criticism there is nothing that saves the authority of the Bible as God's revealed word.

A couple other points... the Bible may contain apparent contradictions, but to claim that it definitely contains them means you know there are no solutions that can be reasonably had. I think that would be rather presumptuous. But I understand your point. I think it is more accurate to speak of paradoxes in the Bible rather than contradictions.

Regarding Paul, "allot" isn't very clear. We can be more clear and state that Paul's claim is that those in Christ must not live under the Jewish Law anymore. That isn't the same as saying "allot of the old testament is not relevant...". Paul points out that the Law is in fact relevant for Christians and non-Christians alike, because it shows us what terrible sinners we are.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." —Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:13 PM   #223
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by Heretic View Post
Blessed are the Koolaid drinkers?
And what has been your favorite flavor to date?
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." —Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 04:23 PM   #224
Heretic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,762
Oooh I got a new one that is my favorite. God mooned this fool!

God be seen?
EXO 24:9,10; AMO 9:1; GEN 26:2; and JOH 14:9
God CAN be seen:
"And I will take away my hand, and thou shalt see my backparts." (EXO 33:23)
"And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend." (EXO 33:11)
"For I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." (GEN 32:30)

God CANNOT be seen:
"No man hath seen God at any time." (JOH 1:18)
"And he said, Thou canst not see my face; for there shall no man see me and live." (EXO 33:20)
"Whom no man hath seen nor can see." (1TIM 6:16)
__________________
bg85 on another forum:
"i always refer to myself as a "missionary agnostic." that is, not only do i not know shit about shit, but i'm going to try and convince you that you don't know shit about shit either and there's no way for you to know shit about shit."

Heretic
Heretic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2009, 05:02 PM   #225
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Congratulations Heretic! You have learned the art of eisegesis. Here's one for you. God is a "spirit" so how can He have a "backside", a "face", or a "hand"? Like that one? Of course, these texts referring to "hands", "feet", "face", and the "backside" of God can be explained as anthropomorphisms, and hence there is no contradiction involved in the scriptures you cite, but what's the use? You will not accept a reasonable explanation for the use of a literary device in context. You will brazenly embrace an unreasonable claim of "contradiction" with no thought put to it at all. Isn't that right, Heretic?
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." —Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:48 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.