Is just a family that has been spiritually abused by a ****ty old crazy man and that makes for raunch TV and gets used by uninformed lefty bloggers as a ****ty example.
The bible is a fairy tale!
- Thread starter MapleOne
- Start date
- Status
It's a little deeper than that. It's not a rejection of that particular passage, it's a rejection of the whole concept of the covenant and a conviction that that story is fiction. Can't make a deal with a being that doesn't exist. By your own lights you're perfectly rational, given your assumptions, but if your assumptions are wrong (and they are) your conclusions are too.
Best explanation I've heard from the "Not a faery tale" side.
YouTube - Pure and Simple: Christian Supremacy
YouTube - Pure and Simple: Christian Supremacy
Too bad JC never wrote that nor does he say that in the original texts, so this guy bases his faith on what other said about JC. How is that any more rational than Scientology? Quoting and basing ones faith in a fictitious character does not give one authority to tell the rest of the world they are wrong. And if you watch this guys facial and body expressions, you see a megalomaniac at work. He knows better than anybody else what the truth is. After two thousand years of scholars pouring over these texts, he has found something that everybody else missed. Beyond egotistical!
I didn't say it was logical or rational; I said it was best!
PS
Keep up the Good Works, Cliffy!
PPS
Xianity took a wrong turn and began to drift aimlessly when it declared good works were no longer necessary; justification by bind faith alone was a sea change!
Ahhh, specifics repudiating a general comment again. How very convenient. :roll:
Perhaps different people simply have different views; thanks for agreeing.
Good for you. Something easy for one person to remember may not be for another. You're in the dumb book constantly remember? I'm not. I found enough BS in it to keep me from taking its comments about history and science seriously and left it at that. There are plenty of fiction books that I haven't read yet.
Ah, so ignoring the creatures that it made is using higher thoughts than those of the creatures themselves? roflmao
So some verses "mesh"? Who is to say that the ones that do are accurate in the first place? I'll tell you who (or what rather); the Bible. Big deal. More self-referencing nonsense.
Well, I can't explain your lack of imagination.
lol It's hard to reply to stuff that doesn't make any sense because the English used to say it is terrible. For instance: "22ft of rain in 40 days and the 150 days with before the run-off starts" so I have no idea how to reply here. What is an 'over part'"
Stones have eyes?
Oh yeah, that makes sense. :roll:
one day that is not day or night but it has an evening? Come on. It's gibberish. I think anyone could interpret that BS in any number of ways.
You mean I can add my own words to Bibles?
Oh, you meant type "grace" into a search engine.
Sounds like too much work. There are clearer books (and more accurate) around than the Bible.
So? In order to find confirmation of them you still have to look elsewhere in the SAME book. Self-referencing nonsense. I say so and its true because I say so.
Like knowing about historical dates before your start manipulating them?
I don't know. I haven't been looking for what you ignore.
Ah, looking for specifics from a general statement again. You said I have never referenced the Bible. You are wrong.
But, yup, I did reference stuff from the bible in this thread. I didn't quote chap. and verse though because everyone and their dog knows about what I was referring to.
So that means you must agree with it. You seem to like altering stuff that doesn't agree with you.
You've mentioned that several times, yes. But I disagree that your god desired this. Humans wrote the Bible, not any god.
Fun.
Ask who? I know a cop whose testimony was refused in court. Tons of civilian witnesses have had theirs refused.
Ah. So people do not mistake things after being baptised. I see. BS
Right. I believe that.
*shrugs* I am not confused about the Bible anymore.
Sounds fine by me. I get tired sometimes of self-referencing people and literature.
I'm not pissed and I think there is no plan now.
huh? English please.
Wrong.
Bullshyte. You virtually said it would stay in liquid form until it reached -200 and got to Neptune.
And don't care. The Bible (or your interpretation of it) proveably has very little correct about the formation of Earth and its water and life.
Mules are not humans. DUH There is genetic evidence that modern humans still carry neanderthalensis genes in them today, so unless those people are millions of years old, there was no sterility. :tard:
Nice picture. What about it?
Exactly, for an anti-theist. For this agnostic, it is irrelevant that the assumption is wrong because there's no evidence suggesting that gods pay attention to us.
Last edited:
It was for those that took that path - As they are in conflict with the teaching of Jesus - We both are aware of that -
I think and I will mess up the quote - " it is easier for a camel to walk thru the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter Heaven.
The above is clear as to doing and helping those in need.
Thank you
I meet as you know people of different faiths where I work. Friendships develop and as we are from different parts of the world we talk, politics to religion. And the common man / women - Muslim. Hindu. Sikh, Christian all realize the importance of helping those in need.
It is the power structures that are out of touch, not the average person with Religious beliefs. Just my opinion.
Sorry Spade, I wasn't accusing you of anything. I was responding to the clown in the video.
And you are right. I life it is more important how you treat your fellow travelers than which doctrine or dogma you adhere to. I believe the story of JC is of more value when one looks at it as him setting an example for human behaviour rather than worshiping any symbolic representation of the divine.
Like you I have talked to people from many faiths and walks of life. Many understand the concept of human charity but I find many get caught up in dogma and do not necessarily live according to those teachings.
WE had a saying when i was growing up
Sunday Morning Christians
That is the problem - I just love it when a person who has a religious belief states -I am not really religious - And what does that mean - You believe but only on certain days - You believe in some of the big ten
Ok with stealing but i draw the line at killing
And yessir that covet the neighbors wife - have you seen her.
I am sure you catch my drift Cliffy.
Basing a position entirely upon one one quote and the reactions to it is rational?
I'd suggest if the guy actually did study the Tao Te Ching, he didn't understand much of it.
2 of the 4 questions I have asked so far are quite straight forward, the other two are a little harder only because the 'similarities' are in different books of the Bible. They are either connected by the context of the passage or not. A yes answer results in a continuation with some differences. God starts the 70 the week with the calling of John the Baptist to start preaching about repenting because the Kingdom of God is at hand. The full 3 1/2 years before the cross is measured from that point in time. Your Revelation viewpoint is impossible when Rome is not the iron in the last Kingdom before a physical rule with many literal deaths and literal resurrections.
Then read it as if it was a novel along the lines of Lord of the Rings. Take all the prophecies in the OT and leave them out of the first part of the 'feature film' and have the script run in the sequence the Bible depicts. If there end up being 20 passages about the changes on 'the day of change' then why the resistance to accept that is what the Bible is promoting. Does coming up with a 'very detailed plan' written over many books and only once the last book was written can all the links to the previous prophecies be understood. Something that complex would need a very complex author rather than a series of strangers, all of whom would have been minor players in a kingdom if they are killed as part of their 'role'.
Judaism has the 10 Royal Laws and a slew of other Laws that have consequences that are life-threatening, literally. It would be nice to see how that lines up in a chart on how the other 'cultures' handled the same 'offenses'. I doubt very much that they were more brutal than any other 'authority' that was from that era.
You promote reading 'science' material before all the facts are in. You promote publishing science material before all the facts are in. How many scientific research and development projects go against just the 10 Commandments. Murder is against the morality Laws of most nations yet new and improved ways to kill people is something that science is well funded in. Loopholes in contracts and such certainly aid some people when it comes to obtaining somebodies elses property.
I didn't write the verses, how do you rationalize that two references from the very same passage cannot possibly be connected?
The two examples about events that were already said to be fulfilled cannot have assumptions, the links to two other verses eliminates any chance of assumptions and speculation.
This is the land those children will be coming back from, it also supports a reading of Eze:37:1-12 as literal.
M't:2:16:
Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men,
was exceeding wroth,
and sent forth,
and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem,
and in all the coasts thereof,
from two years old and under,
according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men.
M't:2:17:
Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet,
saying,
M't:2:18:
In Rama was there a voice heard,
lamentation,
and weeping,
and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children,
and would not be comforted,
because they are not.
If they are in error there will appear big glaring conflicts that cannot be missed. One in yours, is there is no 'rational' explanation for a jump in events in Da:11 that take it from the middle of the 70 weeks to well after what was only started in the very last week of all 70. Most people would admit that it isn't the best of fits in the rational dept.
These two verses are meant to help the reader determine a few points that 'set the stage'.
M'r:13:14:
But when ye shall see the abomination of desolation,
spoken of by Daniel the prophet,
standing where it ought not,
(let him that readeth understand,)
then let them that be in Judaea flee to the mountains:
Da:11:31:
And arms shall stand on his part,
and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength,
and shall take away the daily sacrifice,
and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate.
Re:13:14:
And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast;
saying to them that dwell on the earth,
that they should make an image to the beast,
which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
Re:13:15:
And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast,
that the image of the beast should both speak,
and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
What is in those verses leads you to other passages, the 1st wound has a short reference by Moses. This next verse add a little more detail to what is happening on that same day.
2Th:2:4:
Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God,
or that is worshipped;
so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God,
shewing himself that he is God.
In just those few references you can 'begin to believe' that the throne and the image are the same 'item'. If you need to prove the existence of God before you can understand the connections then there isn't much point in any communication when it comes to the inner-workings of the prophecies. Which verse would Dawkins have to read to understand there is such a thing as a false Christian? I wouldn't have any problem supporting him should he start speaking about them in particular when it comes to delusions and false visions and a threat to civilization. False Christians are no bigger threat to 'peace' than a misguided patriot who is tricked into supporting a false hood. Both can be exposed but they have to be singled out before they can be eradicated or at least blocked from promoting an agenda that is war driven.
That's precisely why I don't take any of this stuff seriously and why I rarely respond to your long posts in any detail anymore. You've obviously invested a great deal of time and effort into trying to make sense of over five dozen ancient books of varying ages that happen to be between the same covers, on the assumption that it's both possible and necessary to do so in order to understand what some fictitious deity is up to. If there is no god your exhaustive and exhausting biblical exegesis has neither meaning nor purpose. The questions you ask are clearly things you believe you've figured out the answers to, your purpose here is didactic and evangelical, and I'm not interested in that because I believe the foundation of it is false.
I wonder what you could have accomplished if you'd put that single-minded dedication to work on something useful.
I admit no such thing. If you were a little less prickly and defensive you might have understood that by "this stuff" I meant MHz's attempts to make sense of biblical prophecy and the history of the future he thinks is recorded there. Religion in general I take very seriously, because I think it's wrong and potentially dangerous and people like you are one of the reasons why. You seem to view any criticism of or challenge to your religious beliefs as bashing and appear to think they should be immune from that simply because they have the label "religion" on them. You don't respond to criticisms and challenges with reasoned argument in support of your position, you resort immediately to name calling, swearing, and complaining. I see no reason to take you seriously, though your hostility's a bit worrisome and all too typical of certain groups of believers. Religious claims have to stand or fall on their own merits in the marketplace of ideas just as everything else does, and they've had a free ride for too long.
Sam Harris in his book Letter to a Christian Nation makes the point that "The truth is that many who claim to be transformed by Christ's love are deeply, even murderously, intolerant of criticism. While we may want to ascribe this to human nature, it is clear that such hatred draws considerable support from the Bible. How do I know this? The most disturbed of my correspondents always cite chapter and verse." You don't bother to cite chapter and verse as herald and MHz do, you just whine and moan and swear, but he's talking about people like you.
Last edited:
It'd be a better world than the one you'd create if you could. I believe you would suppress, and murder if you could get away with it, people who think as I do. But as I said before in one of the posts Ron deleted, I will not again be drawn into an exchange of personal insults with you. You can make me angry only once, after that I laugh at you or ignore you. I'm pretty sure you'll offer at least one more insulting post in response to this, and I find it amusing that you think by having the last word that you've won something.
Last edited by a moderator:
This is not unknown when two Christians are talking about variances in what the Bible's message. Things went 'downhill' from when the RCC started teaching from their own version of the original manuscripts. That was the whole reason for the KJV and it was to be published so the ones sitting in the Churches could read and learn on their own at home. The hurdle that is left behind is the physical proof of God before the writings can even be examined.
(Preface KJV1611, in part)
THE BEST THINGS HAVE BEEN CULMINATED
Zeal to promote the common good, whether it be by devising anything ourselves, or revising that which hath been laboured by others, deserveth certainly much respect and esteem, but yet findeth but cold entertainment in the world. It is welcomed with suspicion instead of love, and with emulation instead of thanks: and if there be any hole left for cavil to enter, (and cavil, if it do not find a hole, will make one) it is sure to be misconstrued, and in danger to be condemned.
- Status