|
Post by Stephen on Aug 30, 2008 18:35:44 GMT -5
In Mark 14:12 and 15: 25 it says Jesus was crucified the day after the Passovermeal was eaten. John says he was crucified the day before it was eaten (John 19:14). So it is a diference of a day , not the possibility of what happenned up to 12 years. Again, how could God get this wrong? AND, there is another answer to my first query that is perfectly acceptable and simple. But I don't think you can bring yourself to admit it. My goodness... we vacated that topic quickly, didn't we? Okay, let's adopt your faith and proceed on the assumption of your choosing - that the bible is flawed, wrong, incorrect, hypocritical, full of lies, myths and fabrications. Dan is right. Matthew, Paul, Moses, Timothy, Luke, John, Isaiah, James, Peter, Mark and the rest of those jokers are all wrong. What now?
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Aug 30, 2008 18:47:15 GMT -5
Your reply here is very curious considering you are one of the most adamant 'the Bible is 100 LITERAL meaning exactly what the current translation indicates' that I have ever met. No I'm not. That would be Kevin. In fact, I'm probably the only Christian you've ever met who challenged the meaning of "exousia" in Romans and the allegation that the NT was originally written in Greek. Whoa horsie. That was the fastest switch I've seen since... since Dan's post. Correct me, but it sounds as if you've totally abandoned any debate over scripture and are now more concerned with the procedures and methods by which I argue a point? Okay. You're right. My methods are lousy, duplicitous and sometimes I kick my dog. The biblical statements initially offered by Dan are still not mutually exclusive.
|
|
albpilot
Ace of Aces
Red Baron Fight XVIII Champ
I'm not frightened of terrorism, so please don't go and create a police state on my account...
Posts: 1,181
|
Post by albpilot on Aug 31, 2008 8:24:41 GMT -5
Okay. You're right. My methods are lousy, duplicitous and sometimes I kick my dog. I doubt you kick your dog. ;D
|
|
noski
Captain
"Richthofen lived where the rest of us go , only in our greatest moments." Udet
Posts: 286
|
Post by noski on Sept 1, 2008 16:49:13 GMT -5
I'm staying on topic Stephen. You are the one playing the deflect game. There are people that say the Bible is THE , literal word of God, inspired by God himself. My second example is solid. How did God get it wrong? It is a simple question refuting a simple statement that the Bible is the exact word of God.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Sept 2, 2008 10:20:08 GMT -5
I'm staying on topic Stephen. You are the one playing the deflect game. There are people that say the Bible is THE , literal word of God, inspired by God himself. My second example is solid. How did God get it wrong? It is a simple question refuting a simple statement that the Bible is the exact word of God. If you were staying on topic you'd still be addressing your first example. Instead, you've moved to your second, claiming it to be "solid" this time. However, based on your latest argument, I concede the point. God got it wrong. The bible is therefore not the word of God. It is full of mistakes, errors and lies. You have made your case, won your point and the debate has ended in your favor. What is the practical impact of this new knowledge? How does this alter the way you and I should live?
|
|
noski
Captain
"Richthofen lived where the rest of us go , only in our greatest moments." Udet
Posts: 286
|
Post by noski on Sept 3, 2008 18:26:34 GMT -5
Mistakes and errors, yes. Lies? I'm not saying that yet. However, if the Bible is the 'literal word of God' it has been corrupted by man in the past 2000 years If it is God's literal word, we don't need scholars to tell us what it means. Why would God leave his Holy word in the hand of scholars? That is why I brought up the second point. God doesn't make mistakes, man does. People don't need a bible to know the difference between right and wrong. So my point doesn't alter how you and I should live our lives. However, it does give some credence to Ken's tag line.
Personally I follow Jesus' two commandments. If you follow them, the rest just falls in place. It is that simple. The practical impact is that the bible and all other holy books are books of faith , not fact.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Sept 3, 2008 19:09:30 GMT -5
my point doesn't alter how you and I should live our lives. Why make an irrelevant point? Ken's line would only offend 500 year old Catholics. To them, it had credence (and I would agree). To us, its just a bitter, out of context jab by Ken that's 500 years too late. How do you know they are actually Jesus' commandments? How is faith-based error practical?
|
|
noski
Captain
"Richthofen lived where the rest of us go , only in our greatest moments." Udet
Posts: 286
|
Post by noski on Sept 3, 2008 20:15:51 GMT -5
My point is... the bible is not the literal word of God. Period. You are the one worried about its effect , not me. The Roman Catholic Church and the Greek Orthodox are the only Christian faiths that can be historically traced directly to Christ. Since all other Christian faiths are off shoots of these two, Ken's tag line is a poke at all Christian faiths indirectly. How do I know they are Jesus' laws? I have faith they are His laws. I don't undrstand your last query.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Sept 5, 2008 23:42:43 GMT -5
My point is... the bible is not the literal word of God. Period. You are the one worried about its effect , not me. Again, why are you working so hard to make the point that the bible is absolutely, positively not the word of God, if that point has no practical effect and no meaning whatsoever in anyone's life? Why bother? Exactly. He takes no shots at Buddhists, Muslims or Jews... but he is particularly embittered against Christians and all things remotely related thereto. Interesting. So you make a specific effort to live by those laws, having not the slightest idea whether or not they are genuine or whether Jesus ever actually spoke them or not, but nevertheless accepting them entirely on blind faith. But if someone believes that the bible is the word of God and they act on that belief, having not the slightest idea whether it genuinely is or not, but accepting it entirely on blind faith, you vehemently oppose their position. Would you be willing to grant to others the same leap of faith that you practice yourself?
|
|
joseki
Captain
Come to the dark side!
Posts: 274
|
Post by joseki on Sept 7, 2008 0:42:38 GMT -5
(Reaches up on the shelf pulls down the book marked religion and blows the dust off of it.) Just by definition any translated version of the bible is not the true or actual text. The Koran has also been translated into multiple languages, but in each translation the original text appears on the opposite page to reduce misquotes and misunderstandings. And if we are to take the bible as the literal way we are to live then slavery would be an accepted practice?
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Sept 7, 2008 14:16:33 GMT -5
Slavery is actually denounced in scripture, and slave owners are referred to as the lowest members of society. I believe you are probably referring to I Peter 2's recommendation that slaves obey their masters (for special purposes under unique circumstances), or possibly the observation of several old testament passages of slavery being practiced by some ancient cultures. In neither case is slavery actually supported or recommended.
However, your point is well taken. A literal translation is not always possible between languages, plus, we have the additional problem of not even knowing what the original language actually was. In many cases, the earliest New Testament copies known are in Greek, but we have no way of proving that this was the original language of scripture... it is just the earliest copy that we have.
That neither supports or disproves the allegation that the bible is the word of God, but it must be remembered when practicing textual criticism and research.
|
|
noski
Captain
"Richthofen lived where the rest of us go , only in our greatest moments." Udet
Posts: 286
|
Post by noski on Sept 12, 2008 13:19:34 GMT -5
I was alarmed when I heard Huckabee say he wants to change the US Constitution to be more like the Bible because it is the literal word of God. But I am not working hard to make my point. You can believe what you want about the Bible, I am not stopping you and no where in my posts have I suggested otherwise. However ,belief is not fact. The sun rises every day in the east. Fact. The story of Jesus and the prositute and who should throw thw first stone is not found in any of the early Latin bibles. It is , in fact, found written along the boarder of a 900ad bible ( imay have the year wrong but it is close) and was later copied by another monk into the manuscript he was working on and this continued until it became part of today's bible. And regardless if they are Jesus' commandments or Budda's or the Great Spirit's...they work for me.
The Book of Leviticus is where you will find the OK to own slaves. It is the part of the bible that our Founding Fathers used to justify their ownership of slaves. Good Christian men that they were .
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Sept 13, 2008 9:26:09 GMT -5
The story of Jesus and the prositute and who should throw thw first stone is not found in any of the early Latin bibles. It is , in fact, found written along the boarder of a 900ad bible ( imay have the year wrong but it is close) and was later copied by another monk into the manuscript he was working on and this continued until it became part of today's bible. You're still working overtime to make the same point that we conceded long ago. Let's move on. 1) Why are you repeatedly making the point that the bible is absolutely, positively not the word of God, if that point has no practical effect and no meaning whatsoever in anyone's life? Why bother? 2) You make a specific effort to live by Jesus' laws, having not the slightest idea whether or not they are genuine or whether Jesus ever actually spoke them or not, but nevertheless accepting them entirely on blind faith. But if someone believes that the bible is the word of God and they act on that belief, having not the slightest idea whether it genuinely is or not, but accepting it entirely on blind faith, you vehemently oppose their position. Would you be willing to grant to others the same leap of faith that you practice yourself?
|
|
joseki
Captain
Come to the dark side!
Posts: 274
|
Post by joseki on Sept 14, 2008 9:33:09 GMT -5
[quote author=admin board=ot thread=185 post=3909 time=1221315969 But if someone believes that the bible is the word of God and they act on that belief, having not the slightest idea whether it genuinely is or not, but accepting it entirely on blind faith, you vehemently oppose their position.
Would you be willing to grant to others the same leap of faith that you practice yourself? [/quote]
Genesis 20:17 Then Abraham prayed to God, and God healed Abimelech, his wife and his slave girls so they could have children again,
Genesis 21:10 and she said to Abraham, "Get rid of that slave woman and her son, for that slave woman's son will never share in the inheritance with my son Isaac."
You may need to adjust the premise of your argument Stephen.
Let me throw this tidbit out as well. The salem witch trials quoted Exodus 22:18 Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
So if we are to live by the literal translation we are sanctioned killers as well.
I would not grant the leap of faith that Thou shalt live by the word of the bible.
Pharisies (pardon the spelling) had 900 some odd rules to live by gods word and yet they are found wanting in the bible. Alive today we find a version of Judaism that has 644 (or so) diferent rules and they are not found wanting.
And what of the books of the bible not included? The apocrypha. Are these shunned as not worthy or are they for the advanced student who believes that God helps those who help themselves and has gone the extra mile to help his understanding of god.
No I do not grant the leap of faith that would allow 9 crusades into the middle east to free the resting place of Jesus from muslims. That decrees the only way to decide who hears god better is to fight it out because war is the earthly hinge of gods will.
|
|
noski
Captain
"Richthofen lived where the rest of us go , only in our greatest moments." Udet
Posts: 286
|
Post by noski on Sept 15, 2008 10:00:06 GMT -5
a. You concede the point that the bible is not the literal word of God. b. If you want to continue to believe that it is , go ahead and do so. I do not 'vehemently' oppose your belief. c. If you want to believe the earth is flat, even though it is not, you can do that too. d. my work is done here.
|
|