I'm reading the Bible

Saint_ · Post by **Saint_** » Wed Sep 29, 2010 5:18 pm

CinnamonBear;1335568 wrote: Predictable from board to board when the subject of The Book comes up. Same ol', same ol', denial, anger, intimidation, lala .... sigh

Yeah, I agree. How can anyone deny a Creator when all they have to do is look up and see the Iniverse, or look down and see the atoms in a grain of sand? As for anger, I guess I'd be angry too if I believed that life had no purpose other than eating and crapping.

"Nobody speaks more of God than an atheist."

Unfortunately, all they speak of is, "There is no God and no soul." How depressing. They should come over to the Light Side. It's much nicer over here where we believe that life does have a purpose and is not just random.

CinnamonBear · Post by **CinnamonBear** » Wed Sep 29, 2010 5:29 pm

Saint_;1335579 wrote: Yeah, I agree. How can anyone deny a Creator when all they have to do is look up and see the Iniverse, or look down and see the atoms in a grain of sand? As for anger, I guess I'd be angry too if I believed that life had no purpose other than eating and crapping.

Unfortunately, all they speak of is, "There is no God and no soul." How depressing. They should come over to the Light Side. It's much nicer over here where we believe that life does have a purpose and is not just random.

That was beautiful. Precise and concise. Lovely.

I also don't equate myself with an ant.

Bez · Post by **Bez** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:30 am

spot;1334927 wrote: There's a lot in it. I can't think of many books to compare it with. If you add a post each time something particularly startles you it'd make for an interesting thread. Who have you met, who did you like, who are the bad guys?

I must admit that I am jumping around a bit and 'skimming through some parts but I will go back and read 'in depth' later.

I have just come across JOB. Poor man - 'a blamess man of complete integrity'. How he suffered through sneaky Satan. In the end he did have his health riches and family restored to him (that God had previously taken away) and lived to a ripe old age to see 4 generations of his children and grandchildren.

So the question was ~ Why must we endure suffering when God is powerful enough to do something about it ?

The Answer ? ~ God is in charge and knows what he is doing...

What do you think ? I'm a bit lost!

All in all I enjoyed reading the speeches of Eliphaz, Zophar, Elihu, Job and God himself but I have to ask myself why was Job so harshly treated when he had lead a 'good' life.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:56 am

Saint_;1335576 wrote: Those who say, "There is no God and life is meaningless then you die."

You know...atheists!

We eat babies too you know

When do athiests say "life is meaningless" ?

I'm happy for you and your faith and the comfort it gives you but you know too little of me to assume that I am "vile".

From dictionary .com

vile

/vaɪl/ Show Spelled[vahyl] Show IPA

â€“adjective, vilÂ·er, vilÂ·est.

1.

wretchedly bad: a vile humor.

2.

highly offensive, unpleasant, or objectionable: vile slander.

3.

repulsive or disgusting, as to the senses or feelings: a vile odor.

4.

morally debased, depraved, or despicable: vile deeds.

5.

foul; filthy: vile language.

6.

poor; wretched: vile workmanship.

7.

of mean or low condition: a vile beggar.

8.

menial; lowly: vile tasks.

9.

degraded; ignominious: vile servitude.

10.

of little value or account; paltry: a vile recompense.

I'm not any of those definitions and its beneath someone of apparent Christian convictions to suggest I am. I'm not a liar or deceiver, an accusation I could throw in your direction with little fear of contradiction.

Its amusing to me that religious people of all faiths are quick to throw the self righteous stones and then complain when some of them bounce back at them. If you are hoping God has a place for you, you better lead a better life than some the wonderful, charitable and generous hearted, non believing people that I know and love. I somehow think that might prove harder than you imagine. Some religious people like to preach morality yet show very little of it themselves.

I know, am friends with and love, both religious and atheistic people. None of them are vile or wretched and I'm happy to have them all in my life. None have shown the spite or contempt you seem to hold. Who's missing something you or us ?

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 4:18 am

Snowfire;1335655 wrote: We eat babies too you know

When do athiests say "life is meaningless" ?

I'm happy for you and your faith and the comfort it gives you but you know too little of me to assume that I am "vile".

The context was not of unbelievers, but of those who make pretense to Christianity- who would of course prefer the limelight of shame to be shone on others.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:10 am

xyz;1335658 wrote: The context was not of unbelievers, but of those who make pretense to Christianity- who would of course prefer the limelight of shame to be shone on others.

Well then that makes much more sense given the context.

Its seems to readily trip off the tongue of people like Saint, that those of us who have no God to answer to, have no morals boundaries to follow. Atheism is path chosen after a life time of reasoning and considerations. It wasnt a get out clause from any morality my mother and father taught me as some seem to want to regard Atheism. I/we do not promote evil and do not worship the devil. Unfortunately because I don't believe in the glory of God, it must follow that I relish and praise the deeds of the devil. The moral compass given to me by my parents have not changed. They remain intact and always will and were taught to my children, who in turn have brought my grandchildren into this world using the same heart. Never have I had the desire to deny religion to anyone. My choice is my choice. None of us will know for sure untill either judgement comes or....nothing. I am completely comfortable with my choices and as Isaac Azimov once said...

"If I were not an atheist, I would believe in a God who would choose to save people on the basis of the totality of their lives and not the pattern of their words. I think he would prefer an honest and righteous atheist to a TV preacher whose every word is God, God, God, and whose every deed is foul, foul, foul."

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:39 am

Snowfire;1335662 wrote: Well then that makes much more sense given the context.

Its seems to readily trip off the tongue of people like Saint, that those of us who have no God to answer to, have no morals boundaries to follow.

Both of you are off topic. Maybe an atheist has some excuse.

Post by **spot** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:40 am

Bez;1335647 wrote: I have just come across JOB. Poor man - 'a blamess man of complete integrity'. How he suffered through sneaky Satan. In the end he did have his health riches and family restored to him (that God had previously taken away) and lived to a ripe old age to see 4 generations of his children and grandchildren.

So the question was ~ Why must we endure suffering when God is powerful enough to do something about it ?

The Answer ? ~ God is in charge and knows what he is doing...

What do you think ? I'm a bit lost! Job is without doubt my favourite book in the entire Bible. The tacked-on happy ending is there, I think, because some while after the book was written the audience felt so uncomfortable to leave Job answered but still smitten. A complaisant bunch of priests removed the sting from the book with that happy ending. They seem not to have noticed that as far as Job's original children and servants are concerned matters hadn't improved at all, they were still just as dead. Both the message and the meaning of that tacked-on fairytale reward are completely out of keeping with the rest of the book.

Job's not so much a discussion of an upright man with no sin as a discussion of the ways of God. Satan's not depicted as a separate force but as God's authorized agent.

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:56 am

xyz;1335664 wrote: Both of you are off topic. Maybe an atheist has some excuse.

Allowable meanderings, within a broad subject surely. Threads evolve and branch off. Posts need replying. No harm done when its finds its way back. I don't need an excuse but thanks anyway

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:57 am

xyz;1335658 wrote: The context was not of unbelievers, but of those who make pretense to Christianity- who would of course prefer the limelight of shame to be shone on others.

Actually the context was I had made this comment.

Christians have been fighting each other over whose version of the bible is correct for generations. Some people would try and start an argument in an empty room. Some things will never change it seems.

You edited it thus

Christians have been fighting each other

and made your own comment

So say the vile.

Snowfire asked you the perfectly reasonable question who are the vile who tell such tales and you are unable to make any kind of sensible answer. It is an imndisputable fact that christians kill christians over who has the right interpretaion of the bible - not as much as they used to but it still goes on. If you are not aware of that you should be, if you think it untrue and do not intend to find out for yourself you are indeed a lost soul. If you want i can point you in the right direction to start your research.

posted by saint

Yeah, I agree. How can anyone deny a Creator when all they have to do is look up and see the Iniverse, or look down and see the atoms in a grain of sand? As for anger, I guess I'd be angry too if I believed that life had no purpose other than eating and crapping.

That is what many christians seem to prefer to believe. The reality is there is no body of atheist thought that can in any way be considered a religion. It is a personal decision not to believe in any of the current religious manaifestations we have around us not an alternative church someone joins where they have been led by false prophets. Even the most diehard atgheist would only claim to be 99.99% certain there is no god since you can't prove conclusively there isn't. Most would probably say you can't prove it either way but on balance of probability think there actually isn't.

How can anyone look up and see the universe, or look down and see the atoms in a grain of sand and decide this must have been made by someone and I should be very careful not to annoy him by not believing in his existence and spend a lifetime tererified that you do and he turns his back on you. How can anyone faced with all the things that can happen and life and the way good people are taken by accident or design by someone else, or by natural disaster believe that it all happens for a purpose and you should just accept your fate in life. How can anyone believe that the thousands who died in haiti died because they were no longer needed on this earth or they had offended god in some way and there is some reason behind what happened and they should just believe it. We know what causes earthquakes unless you actually beliieve we don't and god does it and it was his doing thwen it was an act of nature or an act of god. Good question actually. Which do you think it was?

Perhaps you are frightened that if you ask the question why do I believe what I do you might decide I don't need that church, pastor, minister, to interpret things for me and you start investigating and thinking about what you find out the realisation might come that it's all a load of nonsense that people cling to out of desparation and fear - worse the nonsense is carefully edited so it's "right" . It gives them justification for all their hatred of people who are different from them becaused of colour, creed or sexual orientation. God either made all on the earth and we are his children or he didn't. If he did then who are the religious who claim to believe it and where does the arrogance come from to assume they are right and everybody else wrong? Who says homnosexuality is a lifestyle choice? You ) as in a general you not anyone in particular) have to believe that because the alterntive is that god made people that way for a purpose and you hate one of the chosen - perhaps they were put on the earth to teach compassion and understanding and that it was OK to be different from others - that you should not judge. perhaps know the sophistry round that one better than I do

What arrogance to believe you are right and no one should disgree. Most non-nbelievers will discuss it endlessly, religious people it's usually I'm right and that's all that needs to be said on the matter. Most non-religious people don't mind what religion people are they just to be left alone to live their own lives without being pestered by brainwashed bigots who don't like dissenters and want control.

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 6:09 am

Bez;1335647 wrote: I must admit that I am jumping around a bit and 'skimming through some parts but I will go back and read 'in depth' later.

I have just come across JOB. Poor man - 'a blamess man of complete integrity'. How he suffered through sneaky Satan. In the end he did have his health riches and family restored to him (that God had previously taken away) and lived to a ripe old age to see 4 generations of his children and grandchildren.

So the question was ~ Why must we endure suffering when God is powerful enough to do something about it ?
Remember, Satan sneered at God, saying that Job would curse him if he suffered enough- "But now suppose you take away everything he has — he will curse you to your face!" (Job 1:11 GNB)

But Job did not curse God, and Satan lost the 'bet'. But that isn't the most important part of the story (though many forget it). The main point is that, though Job does not curse, he does not behave as Jesus did. One must read Job along with Isaiah, the passage about Jesus, who kept silent:

'He was oppressed and afflicted,

yet he did not open his mouth;

he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,

and as a sheep before her shearers is silent,

so he did not open his mouth.'

Isa 53:7 NIV

So we have on one hand, Jesus' meekness and silence, allowing himself to be thought evil; and on the other, chapter after tedious chapter of Job letting it be known to all that he was not deserving of his fate, and that he really was righteous. And he was righteous, because the Bible says he was righteous.

But Jesus, as Isaiah tells us, was 'pierced for our transgressions, was crushed for our iniquities'. The punishment that brought us peace was upon him; and by his wounds we are healed — because he did not protest his innocence, as Job did. As we would do, even though we are sinners. We deserve our souls to perish for our wickedness, but Jesus 'became sin', owned sin, for our sakes, though he was totally without sin of his own. Unless we understand that, we will never become saints, because we will never be grateful enough to change our deceitful ways.

It was when Job finally admitted that he was talking too much that his health and wealth returned to him, even more than before, to show that God is generous, and to shame Satan.

binbag · Post by **binbag** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:13 am

gmc;1335453 wrote: Christians have been fighting each other over whose version of the bible is correct for generations. Some people would try and start an argument in an empty room. Some things will never change it seems.

YouTube - Argument Clinic:wah: Absolutely brilliant.

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:24 am

binbag;1335674 wrote: :wah: Absolutely brilliant.

What timing.

binbag · Post by **binbag** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:47 am

gmc;1335443 wrote: I was referring to a comment spot made not your good self. It was a general comment aimed at christians in the wider sense not you in particular.I know your comments weren't directed towards me personally gmc. I wanted to highlight the point that when Christians are referred to in a general sense, especially in a negative manner, we all are classified as being of the same mind set, which is not the case at all.

gmc;1335443 wrote: It would be interesting if you were to give your answer to the question.i.e. spots question quoted below...spot;1335234 wrote: So why has the Old Testament been considered sacred scripture by the Church since the start of Christianity, instead of being considered works of merely historical interest?
I know the answer to that question, I was waiting to see if spot did also.

Never-the-less, the answer to that question is because many many people do not understand, or are unwilling to understand the difference between the Old and New Covenants

gmc;1335443 wrote: It seems almost impossible to discuss religion without someone deciding it is a personal attack on their beliefs.I'm not sure if you mean me this time. If it was intended for me, then I'd refer to to my first reply above.

binbag · Post by **binbag** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:53 am

spot;1335416 wrote: Either it's a conversation or it isn't. Either we engage and exchange views and find what common ground exists or we don't. There aren't any points to be won.Sorry spot, you've completely misunderstood.

I think I'll pass on this one.

All the best.

bb.

Bez · Post by **Bez** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:07 am

spot;1335666 wrote:

Job's not so much a discussion of an upright man with no sin as a discussion of the ways of God. Satan's not depicted as a separate force but as God's authorized agent.

Yes....strange isn't it because I always looked on Satan as an adversary of Gods not a member of the heavenly court. This is such an interesting experience for me. I guess I'm looking at things from a far more 'grown up' stance now, not the stories as taught when I was a child. We were taught the stories but never really told about the 'meanings' or messages captured within them.

Will continue to post snippets about my findings and thoughts....it's great to get the feedback.

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:38 am

Bez;1335680 wrote: Yes....strange isn't it because I always looked on Satan as an adversary of Gods not a member of the heavenly court.

It would be amazingly naive to suppose that the two are incompatible.

Bez · Post by **Bez** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:39 am

xyz;1335685 wrote: It would be amazingly naive to suppose that the two are incompatible.

How so....

Bez · Post by **Bez** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 8:41 am

â€œYou have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.â€

Thought I'd pop this in as I'm worried people are 'falling out' here

Snowfire · Post by **Snowfire** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 9:04 am

binbag;1335677 wrote: I wanted to highlight the point that when Christians are referred to in a general sense, especially in a negative manner, we all are classified as being of the same mind set, which is not the case at all.

I totally agree bb. Its much the same with Atheists

Quoted by Bez

“You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”

Thought I'd pop this in as I'm worried people are 'falling out' here

Again I agree Bez. Disagreement and dsiscussion shouldnt mean we fall out. We should be adult enough to understand our differences and discuss them accordingly. We can only leaarn from each other. Plain good manners also helps.

There is a broad spectrum of posters and therefore thoughts and ideas here on this forum. We are not all here to congratulate ourselves because we all think alike, otherwise we would find ourselves the relevent Christian/Muslim/Atheist forum and glory in our agreement. If we start off with the premise that we may all have something to offer, we may just leave a little more richer for the experience

koan · Post by **koan** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:08 pm

I've read more about the bible than from it. I got a little bored with all the begats. I've never really cared much about genealogy. It would be nice if I could find a version that cuts out all the irrelevant stuff.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:12 pm

koan;1335755 wrote: I've read more about the bible than from it. I got a little bored with all the begats. I've never really cared much about genealogy. It would be nice if I could find a version that cuts out all the irrelevant stuff.

You'll find begats in just about every society.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:19 pm

binbag;1335677 wrote: I know your comments weren't directed towards me personally gmc. I wanted to highlight the point that when Christians are referred to in a general sense, especially in a negative manner, we all are classified as being of the same mind set, which is not the case at all.

i.e. spots question quoted below...

I know the answer to that question, I was waiting to see if spot did also.

Never-the-less, the answer to that question is because many many people do not understand, or are unwilling to understand the difference between the Old and New Covenants

I'm not sure if you mean me this time. If it was intended for me, then I'd refer to to my first reply above.

No I wasn't referring to you that time it was a general comment. I just meant that quite often in any discussion about religion, or politics, there always seem to be some that take it personally if you do not share the same belief or hold the same opinion. I'm guilty of answering a particular post and then making a general comment without making clear I wasn't referring to anyone in particular - like I just did in that thread. The nuances of face to face speech are lost when written down.

posted by snowfire

There is a broad spectrum of posters and therefore thoughts and ideas here on this forum. We are not all here to congratulate ourselves because we all think alike, otherwise we would find ourselves the relevent Christian/Muslim/Atheist forum and glory in our agreement. If we start off with the premise that we may all have something to offer, we may just leave a little more richer for the experience

It would be no fun if we all agreed.

posted by bez

I have just come across JOB. Poor man - 'a blamess man of complete integrity'. How he suffered through sneaky Satan. In the end he did have his health riches and family restored to him (that God had previously taken away) and lived to a ripe old age to see 4 generations of his children and grandchildren.

So the question was ~ Why must we endure suffering when God is powerful enough to do something about it ?

The Answer ? ~ God is in charge and knows what he is doing...

What do you think ? I'm a bit lost!

The point is you must endure without questioning god's mysterious ways. Reading that as a child I almost got thrown out of Sunday school, when asked what we thought I said god was a rotten ----- to do something like that to one of his most devout followers for no better reason than his own amusement and to prove a point to the devil. Why would anyone want to worship a god like that? God's a sadistic capricious person if he exists.

So the question was ~ Why must we endure suffering when God is powerful enough to do something about it ?

The Answer ? ~ God is in charge and knows what he is doing...

Good question but the answer sucks. It's waht marx meant when he called religion the opiate of the people. No matter what misery you were in and what caused you had to accept your lot as god's will, rich man poor man, master or slave god decides don't question it.

posted by binbag

I know the answer to that question, I was waiting to see if spot did also.

Never-the-less, the answer to that question is because many many people do not understand, or are unwilling to understand the difference between the Old and New Covenants

Now I would like to hear your take on that in a non specific general kind of way. I can never understand the fascination with the capricious vindictive judgemental god of the old testament and how a christian can ignore the teaching of christ in favour of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and a thirst for vengeance and retribution meted out to the transgressor.

Why would you think spot knows the answer? He might have an opinion doesn't mean he has an answer. Just as you might have an opinion or think you have an answer it doesn't mean it is a good answer or even the right one. If I disagree does that mean your answer is wrong? If we were both religious we could form splinter groups and start our own religion each claiming to have the right interpretation.

Omni_Skittles · Post by **Omni_Skittles** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:01 pm

koan;1335755 wrote: I've read more about the bible than from it. I got a little bored with all the begats. I've never really cared much about genealogy. It would be nice if I could find a version that cuts out all the irrelevant stuff.wow, the geneology is like SUPER important! If you appreciate history, it's cool to see where and who these people later in the bible come from and sometimes that in itself is a lesson.... personal thought anyways.

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:04 pm

koan;1335755 wrote: I've read more about the bible than from it. I got a little bored with all the begats. I've never really cared much about genealogy. It would be nice if I could find a version that cuts out all the irrelevant stuff.
The genealogies are very important, not because readers need to know the details, but they need to know that details were recorded, because they were key to preserving Israelite identity. Once understood, one may understand that there is no superfluous word in the Bible.

Post by **spot** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:11 pm

xyz;1335774 wrote: The genealogies are very important, not because readers need to know the details, but they need to know that details were recorded, because they were key to preserving Israelite identity. Once understood, one may understand that there is no superfluous word in the Bible.

Go on, pick me a genealogy, I'd quite like to show where it misses generations. Israelite, please, not Genesis.

YZGI · Post by **YZGI** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:32 pm

spot;1335795 wrote: Go on, pick me a genealogy, I'd quite like to show where it misses generations. Israelite, please, not Genesis.

I always knew you were big into begating.

koan · Post by **koan** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:52 pm

Bez;1334999 wrote: It's a 'scary' book to live by Saint. The 10 commandments are quite a basic humanistic premise to live by, but some of the other 'rules and regs.' would be impossible in this day and age.

It can provide comedy trying to though, as profited on by AJ Jacobs in The Year of Living Biblically :wah:

koan · Post by **koan** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:55 pm

Omni_Skittles;1335771 wrote: wow, the geneology is like SUPER important! If you appreciate history, it's cool to see where and who these people later in the bible come from and sometimes that in itself is a lesson.... personal thought anyways.

to each his own salad dressing, I guess. I'm just as happy if they tell me "so a dude showed up and this is what happened."

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 6:00 pm

koan;1335809 wrote: to each his own salad dressing, I guess. I'm just as happy if they tell me "so a dude showed up and this is what happened."
Maybe you'd be happier not reading the Bible at all.

Post by **spot** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 6:53 pm

xyz;1335859 wrote: Maybe you'd be happier not reading the Bible at all.

It's the most important and complex literary collection ever produced, it's difficult to just ignore its existence.

koan · Post by **koan** » Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:26 pm

xyz;1335859 wrote: Maybe you'd be happier not reading the Bible at all.

I rather think you're better off in this conversation if I don't read the bible so it's probably in your best interest to give me that advice

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 5:06 am

koan;1335878 wrote: I rather think you're better off in this conversation if I don't read the bible so it's probably in your best interest to give me that advice

That's well observed. If those who attempt to advise you are either ignored or receive replies like 'to each his own salad dressing, I guess,' they would be better not to waste their time.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 5:08 am

Someone got out of bed on the wrong side this morning.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 5:27 am

spot;1335949 wrote: Someone got out of bed on the wrong side this morning.

Must be one of the more obscure rules in the bible. Where does it say what the right side is?:sneaky:

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 5:50 am

gmc;1335953 wrote: Must be one of the more obscure rules in the bible. Where does it say what the right side is?:sneaky:

The saying derives from the Levitical practice of marking the priest with the blood of the sacrifice - "Slaughter it, take some of its blood and put it on the lobes of the right ears of Aaron and his sons, on the thumbs of their right hands, and on the big toes of their right feet". Someone getting out of bed on the left side would implicitly expose the viewer to God's wrath. If he were a priest, that is. And if he'd not washed since the last sacrificial bout. Priests were dead good at washing before approaching the altar but I've not seen it written that they washed afterwards too.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 5:56 am

xyz;1335670 wrote: It was when Job finally admitted that he was talking too much that his health and wealth returned to him, even more than before, to show that God is generous, and to shame Satan.That didn't, in all honesty, provide justice for Job's dead family though. All those dead sons and daughters from the trials seem to get glossed over.

Bez · Post by **Bez** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 6:06 am

spot;1335963 wrote: That didn't, in all honesty, provide justice for Job's dead family though. All those dead sons and daughters from the trials seem to get glossed over.

I agree....and all those boils AND his wife saying "curse God and die" !

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 6:27 am

Bez;1335970 wrote: I agree....and all those boils AND his wife saying "curse God and die" !
Rather late to say so.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 6:28 am

Bez;1335970 wrote: I agree....and all those boils AND his wife saying "curse God and die" !She was, you'll admit, caught in the middle of a barney she hadn't started. Besides she may well have been peeved at events. Not unreasonably.

koan · Post by **koan** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 8:32 am

xyz;1335944 wrote: That's well observed. If those who attempt to advise you are either ignored or receive replies like 'to each his own salad dressing, I guess,' they would be better not to waste their time.
And you telling me to not read the bible was more civil? :wah:

I'm not even interested in my own ancestry so why would I care about the pages of begats in the bible? I find your lack of charity very unchristian... or old testament at best.

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 10:04 am

koan;1335998 wrote: And you telling me to not read the bible was more civil? :wah:
When was that?

Maybe the problem is that you just can't read?

I'm not even interested in my own ancestry so why would I care about the pages of begats in the bible?

Exactly. So why bother to read it? Maybe the repeated use of the archaic word 'begats' is a clue.

I find your lack of charity very unchristian...
So Christians are charitable. Something has been recognised.

or old testament at best.
Something else has been recognised.

'It's not what I don't understand in the Bible that bothers me, it's what I do understand in the Bible that bothers me.' Mark Twain

koan · Post by **koan** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 10:10 am

xyz;1336002 wrote: When was that?

Maybe the problem is that you just can't read?

Exactly. So why bother to read it? Maybe the repeated use of the archaic word 'begats' is a clue.

So Christians are charitable. Something has been recognised.

Something else has been recognised.

'It's not what I don't understand in the Bible that bothers me, it's what I do understand in the Bible that bothers me.' Mark Twain

check your hostility at the door.

excuse the side show, folks, carry on.

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 10:32 am

koan;1336003 wrote: check your hostility at the door.

excuse the side show, folks, carry on.
Ok, evade the questions, then. Uncivilly.

Typical behaviour of those who love that word 'begat'.

koan · Post by **koan** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 10:52 am

This reminds me of the story of the tower of Babel.

Post by **spot** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 11:09 am

koan;1336010 wrote: This reminds me of the story of the tower of Babel.

It's odd, he was a perfectly normal poster before he blew a gasket in this thread. Fanaticism does strange things to people.

There's still a few outstanding questions I posted here he could pick up on if he wants a civil discussion, they're easy to backtrack and find.

xyz · Post by **xyz** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 12:22 pm

koan;1336010 wrote: This reminds me of the story of the tower of Babel.
So there's not much that you need explaining after all. Just a troublemaking troll.

Omni_Skittles · Post by **Omni_Skittles** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:08 pm

koan;1335809 wrote: to each his own salad dressing, I guess. I'm just as happy if they tell me "so a dude showed up and this is what happened." they have a version of the bible called "the message" i mean it's not exactly erm straight from greek and hebrew translation, but it gives a gist of the scriptures and makes it more understandable

1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2He was with God in the beginning.

John 1:1 new international version

same thing buttttt more understandable is the message

John 1-2 The Word was first, the Word present to God, God present to the Word. The Word was God, in readiness for God from day one.

lol notice the diff :/ i'm not saying to read it but saying there is that option should you choose to ever lol

binbag · Post by **binbag** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 4:52 pm

gmc;1335761 wrote:

Now I would like to hear your take on that in a non specific general kind of way. I can never understand the fascination with the capricious vindictive judgemental god of the old testament and how a christian can ignore the teaching of christ in favour of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and a thirst for vengeance and retribution meted out to the transgressor..ok, keeping it simple gmc.......

"an eye for an eye" is one of the most misused verses of the Bible. It is regularly quoted as a defence for paying someone back for an act that is considered to have been some form of transgression and that that transgression can be paid back with equal measure (or severity), but that is wrong.

God is not saying that at all, He does not advocate "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" principle in the New Testament.

To understand what God is actually saying when He mentions "an eye for an eye", the verses following it must be read also.

gmc;1335761 wrote:

Why would you think spot knows the answer? He might have an opinion doesn't mean he has an answer. Just as you might have an opinion or think you have an answer it doesn't mean it is a good answer or even the right one. If I disagree does that mean your answer is wrong? If we were both religious we could form splinter groups and start our own religion each claiming to have the right interpretation.Sorry but I didn't say I thought spot would know the answer.

I said...

"I know the answer to that question", (and that) "I was waiting to see if spot did also".

Big difference.

bb.

OpenMind · Post by **OpenMind** » Fri Oct 01, 2010 6:26 pm

May I ask a benign question?

Is there any manuscript known to the human race that is older than the book of Genesis?