| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Bill M" |
| Date: |
28 Jan 2007 03:19:39 PM |
| Object: |
CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives on
a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them the
truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence. The originals all
rotted away thousands of years ago. What are available are copies of an
unknown number of copies by copiers of unknown veracity and accuracy.
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
3. The Bibles copies are nothing more than books of myths, fables,
contradictions, human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding,
misogyny, destruction, barbarisms, and impossible tales by authors of
totally unknown veracity.
This is purely a foundation of quick sand!
.
|
|
| User: "Pastor Frank" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
29 Jan 2007 06:02:26 PM |
|
|
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:zr8vh.2827$ch1.1119@bigfe9...
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives
on a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them
the truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence. The originals
all rotted away thousands of years ago. What are available are copies of
an unknown number of copies by copiers of unknown veracity and accuracy.
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
3. The Bibles copies are nothing more than books of myths, fables,
contradictions, human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding,
misogyny, destruction, barbarisms, and impossible tales by authors of
totally unknown veracity.
You have been repeating yourself now for 80 years without ever having a
new thought, and you are proud of it. Why not try something new before it's
too late or is your mind fossilized already? Consider this: Bibles are
poetry and poetry ain't "facts" but something akin to music, i.e. a hymn of
praise. That's why your arguments are non sequitur and amount to nothing.
You have been complaining now for 80 years that music isn't facts.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
30 Jan 2007 08:18:53 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:02:26 +0800, "Pastor Frank"
<PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:zr8vh.2827$ch1.1119@bigfe9...
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives
on a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them
the truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence. The originals
all rotted away thousands of years ago. What are available are copies of
an unknown number of copies by copiers of unknown veracity and accuracy.
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
3. The Bibles copies are nothing more than books of myths, fables,
contradictions, human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding,
misogyny, destruction, barbarisms, and impossible tales by authors of
totally unknown veracity.
You have been repeating yourself now for 80 years without ever having a
new thought, and you are proud of it.
Accusing without presenting evidence is strictly Satanic. Are you
one of Satan's minions?
Do you remember those words, Frank?
Can you say hypocrite, Frank?
Now tell us: When are you going to stop running away, and answer my
question, Frank?
If your god was so set against killing, why did it make the Sun stand
still in the
sky, for a day, to allow Joshua to continue the slaughter?
JOS 10:11 And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, and
were
in the going down to Bethhoron, that the LORD cast down great stones
from
heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more which
died with
hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword.
JOS 10:12 Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD
delivered up
the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight
of
Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the
valley of
Ajalon.
JOS 10:13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the
people had
avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the
book of
Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not
to go
down about a whole day.
JOS 10:14 And there was no day like that before it or after it, that
the LORD
hearkened unto the voice of a man: for the LORD fought for Israel.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
30 Jan 2007 10:43:02 PM |
|
|
Dubh Ghall wrote:
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:02:26 +0800, "Pastor Frank"
<PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:zr8vh.2827$ch1.1119@bigfe9...
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives
on a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them
the truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence. The originals
all rotted away thousands of years ago. What are available are copies of
an unknown number of copies by copiers of unknown veracity and accuracy.
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
3. The Bibles copies are nothing more than books of myths, fables,
contradictions, human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding,
misogyny, destruction, barbarisms, and impossible tales by authors of
totally unknown veracity.
You have been repeating yourself now for 80 years without ever having a
new thought, and you are proud of it.
Accusing without presenting evidence is strictly Satanic. Are you
one of Satan's minions?
Do you remember those words, Frank?
Can you say hypocrite, Frank?
Now tell us: When are you going to stop running away, and answer my
question, Frank?
Frank splutters into his cofee, stands up and hurls cup at wall
looks up towards heaven [where we now fly commercial jets]
and cries "O lord Jesus why have you forsaken me?"
Collapses in a heap on the floor muttering incoherently
"I gotta take a rest, I really need a holiday"
[Try the Phillipines again Frank,
they have real weeping Madonnas over there]
If your god was so set against killing, why did it make the Sun stand
still in the
sky, for a day, to allow Joshua to continue the slaughter?
JOS 10:11 And it came to pass, as they fled from before Israel, and
were
in the going down to Bethhoron, that the LORD cast down great stones
from
heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more which
died with
hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword.
JOS 10:12 Then spake Joshua to the LORD in the day when the LORD
delivered up
the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight
of
Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the
valley of
Ajalon.
JOS 10:13 And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the
people had
avenged themselves upon their enemies. Is not this written in the
book of
Jasher? So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not
to go
down about a whole day.
JOS 10:14 And there was no day like that before it or after it, that
the LORD
hearkened unto the voice of a man: for the LORD fought for Israel.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
31 Jan 2007 10:42:19 AM |
|
|
On 30 Jan 2007 22:43:02 -0600, bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com>
wrote:
Do you remember those words, Frank?
Can you say hypocrite, Frank?
Now tell us: When are you going to stop running away, and answer my
question, Frank?
Frank splutters into his cofee, stands up and hurls cup at wall
looks up towards heaven [where we now fly commercial jets]
and cries "O lord Jesus why have you forsaken me?"
Collapses in a heap on the floor muttering incoherently
"I gotta take a rest, I really need a holiday"
[Try the Phillipines again Frank,
they have real weeping Madonnas over there]
Bet he don't answer the question though.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
31 Jan 2007 03:42:59 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:02:26 +0800, "Pastor Frank"
<PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
You have been repeating yourself now for 80 years without ever having a
new thought, and you are proud of it. Why not try something new before it's
too late or is your mind fossilized already? Consider this: Bibles are
poetry and poetry ain't "facts" but something akin to music, i.e. a hymn of
praise. That's why your arguments are non sequitur
Do you have even the vaguest idea of what a non sequitur, is?
and amount to nothing.
You have been complaining now for 80 years that music isn't facts.
Accusing without presenting evidence is strictly Satanic. Are you
one of Satan's minions?
Do you remember those words, Frank?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
30 Jan 2007 09:51:25 PM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu>
bloodied us up with this:
"Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:zr8vh.2827$ch1.1119@bigfe9...
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their
lives on a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely
claims. It is probably because they trust that their church leaders
are providing them the truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence. The
originals all rotted away thousands of years ago. What are available
are copies of an unknown number of copies by copiers of unknown
veracity and accuracy. 2. None of the other historic documents of
the period confirm a Jesus Christ the god.
3. The Bibles copies are nothing more than books of myths,
fables, contradictions, human and animal sacrifices, genocide,
slaveholding, misogyny, destruction, barbarisms, and impossible tales
by authors of totally unknown veracity.
You have been repeating yourself now for 80 years without ever
having a
new thought, and you are proud of it.
Just like those morons on Church TV.
Why not try something new before
it's too late or is your mind fossilized already?
Do you have anything new?
Consider this:
Bibles are poetry and poetry ain't "facts" but something akin to
music, i.e. a hymn of praise. That's why your arguments are non
sequitur and amount to nothing. You have been complaining now for 80
years that music isn't facts.
So the bible is not fact. I didn't know you were an atheist, Frank.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Proud member of Earthquack's "Ghost fulla holes" convict page.
Don’t be afraid. The lack of a deity is not an opening for chaos. It is a
call for responsibility. -Lauren Becker
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Richter" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
30 Jan 2007 10:01:38 PM |
|
|
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
Consider this: Bibles are poetry and poetry ain't "facts" but something
akin to music, i.e. a hymn of praise.
No, Bibles are superstitions and superstitions ain't "facts" but
something akin to fairy tales, i.e. a story you tell children.
In the end, the Bible is no more relevant than Goldilocks and the Three
Bears...
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Frank" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
01 Feb 2007 05:27:43 AM |
|
|
"Scott Richter" <scottrichter422@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1hsrrei.105vt7w6pmorgN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com...
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
Consider this: Bibles are poetry and poetry ain't "facts" but something
akin to music, i.e. a hymn of praise.
No, Bibles are superstitions and superstitions ain't "facts" but
something akin to fairy tales, i.e. a story you tell children.
In the end, the Bible is no more relevant than Goldilocks and the Three
Bears...
I doubt you would get the deeper meanings of those fairy tales either.
You remind me a young atheist in the making, who in first grade had a fairy
tale read to, the one of the princess and the frog who changes into a prince
when getting kissed by the princess.
He regaled the class by remarking: There ain't no such frogs. I bet you
would have been one of the few who wouldn't have laughed, looking nonplused
wondering why the others found this funny. That of course is in it self
hilarious.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Phipps" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
01 Feb 2007 08:11:48 PM |
|
|
On Feb 1, 7:27 pm, "Pastor Frank" <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote:
"Scott Richter" <scottrichter...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1hsrrei.105vt7w6pmorgN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com...> Pastor Frank <P...@christfirst.edu> wrote:
Consider this: Bibles are poetry and poetry ain't "facts" but something
akin to music, i.e. a hymn of praise.
No, Bibles are superstitions and superstitions ain't "facts" but
something akin to fairy tales, i.e. a story you tell children.
In the end, the Bible is no more relevant than Goldilocks and the Three
Bears...
I doubt you would get the deeper meanings of those fairy tales either.
You remind me a young atheist in the making, who in first grade had a fairy
tale read to, the one of the princess and the frog who changes into a prince
when getting kissed by the princess.
He regaled the class by remarking: There ain't no such frogs. I bet you
would have been one of the few who wouldn't have laughed, looking nonplused
wondering why the others found this funny. That of course is in it self
hilarious.
The difference is that you think the fairy stories in the Bible are
true.
Martin
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
01 Feb 2007 07:59:30 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007 19:27:43 +0800, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu>
wrote:
"Scott Richter" <scottrichter422@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1hsrrei.105vt7w6pmorgN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com...
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
Consider this: Bibles are poetry and poetry ain't "facts" but something
akin to music, i.e. a hymn of praise.
No, Bibles are superstitions and superstitions ain't "facts" but
something akin to fairy tales, i.e. a story you tell children.
In the end, the Bible is no more relevant than Goldilocks and the Three
Bears...
I doubt you would get the deeper meanings of those fairy tales either.
Quite the opposite, Frank.
But whether or not we do, do not make them anything more than faerie
tales.
You remind me a young atheist in the making, who in first grade had a fairy
tale read to, the one of the princess and the frog who changes into a prince
when getting kissed by the princess. He regaled the class by remarking:
There ain't no such frogs.
Must have been an American, Red Neck, school: No English school would
have tolerated such poor grammar.
I bet you would have been one of the few who wouldn't have laughed,
looking nonplused wondering why the others found this funny.
Indeed: What is funny about poor grammar, or making silly comments
about something which was never intended to be believed in the first
place.
Besides, to laugh at such stupidity, would have been unnecessary
cruelty to an obviously feeble mind.
That of course is in it self hilarious.
Why?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Richter" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
01 Feb 2007 09:40:44 PM |
|
|
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
Consider this: Bibles are poetry and poetry ain't "facts" but something
akin to music, i.e. a hymn of praise.
No, Bibles are superstitions and superstitions ain't "facts" but
something akin to fairy tales, i.e. a story you tell children.
In the end, the Bible is no more relevant than Goldilocks and the Three
Bears...
I doubt you would get the deeper meanings of those fairy tales either.
You remind me a young atheist in the making, who in first grade had a fairy
tale read to, the one of the princess and the frog who changes into a prince
when getting kissed by the princess.
He regaled the class by remarking: There ain't no such frogs.
Is your fairy tale from the New Testament or Old Testament?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
01 Feb 2007 01:53:49 PM |
|
|
Pastor Frank wrote:
"Scott Richter" <scottrichter422@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1hsrrei.105vt7w6pmorgN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com...
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
Consider this: Bibles are poetry and poetry ain't "facts" but
something akin to music, i.e. a hymn of praise.
No, Bibles are superstitions and superstitions ain't "facts" but
something akin to fairy tales, i.e. a story you tell children.
In the end, the Bible is no more relevant than Goldilocks and the
Three Bears...
I doubt you would get the deeper meanings of those fairy tales
either. You remind me a young atheist in the making, who in first
grade had a fairy tale read to, the one of the princess and the frog
who changes into a prince when getting kissed by the princess.
He regaled the class by remarking: There ain't no such frogs. I
bet you would have been one of the few who wouldn't have laughed,
looking nonplused wondering why the others found this funny. That of
course is in it self hilarious.
At least Frank admits the bible is a fairy tale.
Sad, but typical of those who don't think that he would find thinking and
asking qeustions about reality a funny thing.
As usual with people like Frank. He has no support from any of teh other
groups he crossposts to.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Frank" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
01 Feb 2007 09:41:00 PM |
|
|
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:hzrwh.6933$O02.6589@newssvr11.news.prodigy.net...
Pastor Frank wrote:
"Scott Richter" <scottrichter422@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1hsrrei.105vt7w6pmorgN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com...
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
Consider this: Bibles are poetry and poetry ain't "facts" but
something akin to music, i.e. a hymn of praise.
No, Bibles are superstitions and superstitions ain't "facts" but
something akin to fairy tales, i.e. a story you tell children.
In the end, the Bible is no more relevant than Goldilocks and the
Three Bears...
I doubt you would get the deeper meanings of those fairy tales
either. You remind me a young atheist in the making, who in first
grade had a fairy tale read to, the one of the princess and the frog
who changes into a prince when getting kissed by the princess.
He regaled the class by remarking: There ain't no such frogs. I
bet you would have been one of the few who wouldn't have laughed,
looking nonplused wondering why the others found this funny. That of
course is in it self hilarious.
At least Frank admits the bible is a fairy tale.
Sad, but typical of those who don't think that he would find thinking and
asking qeustions about reality a funny thing.
As usual with people like Frank. He has no support from any of teh other
groups he crossposts to.
I was taking about your Goldilocks and the 3 Bears above. If you think
that is a Biblical fairytale, you are more screwed up than most atheist.
The Christian Bible original is mostly poetry and hence inerrant. The
only error possible lies in its interpretation.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
03 Feb 2007 09:04:14 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007 11:41:00 +0800, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu>
wrote:
I was taking about your Goldilocks and the 3 Bears above. If you think
that is a Biblical fairytale, you are more screwed up than most atheist.
The Christian Bible original is mostly poetry and hence inerrant. The
only error possible lies in its interpretation.
It is a faery tale; What difference the boo it is from, Hans Anderson,
Grimm brothers, the bible, et al?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Richter" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
03 Feb 2007 12:06:43 PM |
|
|
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
I doubt you would get the deeper meanings of those fairy tales
either. You remind me a young atheist in the making, who in first
grade had a fairy tale read to, the one of the princess and the frog
who changes into a prince when getting kissed by the princess.
He regaled the class by remarking: There ain't no such frogs. I
bet you would have been one of the few who wouldn't have laughed,
looking nonplused wondering why the others found this funny. That of
course is in it self hilarious.
At least Frank admits the bible is a fairy tale. Sad, but typical of
those who don't think that he would find thinking and asking qeustions
about reality a funny thing. As usual with people like Frank. He has no
support from any of teh other groups he crossposts to.
I was taking about your Goldilocks and the 3 Bears above.
There were princes and frogs in Goldilocks and the 3 Bears?
The Christian Bible original is mostly poetry and hence inerrant.
"There once was a man from Nantucket..."
The only error possible lies in its interpretation.
And therein lies the problem.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Frank" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
03 Feb 2007 09:22:08 PM |
|
|
"Scott Richter" <scottrichter422@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1hsyeg0.175k6pm1becpyxN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com...
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
I doubt you would get the deeper meanings of those fairy tales
either. You remind me a young atheist in the making, who in first
grade had a fairy tale read to, the one of the princess and the frog
who changes into a prince when getting kissed by the princess.
He regaled the class by remarking: There ain't no such frogs. I
bet you would have been one of the few who wouldn't have laughed,
looking nonplused wondering why the others found this funny. That of
course is in it self hilarious.
At least Frank admits the bible is a fairy tale. Sad, but typical of
those who don't think that he would find thinking and asking qeustions
about reality a funny thing. As usual with people like Frank. He has no
support from any of teh other groups he crossposts to.
I was taking about your Goldilocks and the 3 Bears above.
There were princes and frogs in Goldilocks and the 3 Bears?
The Christian Bible original is mostly poetry and hence inerrant.
"There once was a man from Nantucket..."
The only error possible lies in its interpretation.
And therein lies the problem.
Only problematic to the perceptually and philosophically challenged. By
far MOST people can find a sensible interpretation for ancient philosophical
metaphor and symbolism.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
04 Feb 2007 12:25:54 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 11:22:08 +0800, "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.edu>
wrote:
Only problematic to the perceptually and philosophically challenged. By
far MOST people can find a sensible interpretation for ancient philosophical
metaphor and symbolism.
Not exactly, Frank.
There are things which have to be taken into account, when trying to
make sense of ancient metaphors etc.
The first, is deciding whether it actually is a metaphor, or is it
supposed to be literal.
The creation story in Genesis, is an excellent example, and one upon
which there is no final agreement, either between the Abrahamic
religions, or even between the various sects, within those religions.
Then there is the language.
It cannot be assumed that the words used always mean what they did, a
hundred years earlier.
Take today's slang.
When you were a child, "wicked", was very bad, not nice, definitely un
good.
But not today, the meanings of wicked, and bad, have been reversed
among the younger generations, and some dictionaries are starting to
reflect that reversal, by adding a foot note to the effect.
We do not know the extent to which this happened in the past, but to
assume that it did not, that it to be something peculiar to modern
times, would be the hight of foolishness.
When one determines something to be a metaphor, or symbol, the next
problem it to decide what it is a metaphor, or symbol for.
Most often, we try to relate it to our own world, and translate it
accordingly.
What we often fail to take into account, is that it was possibly
written, thousands of years ago, in a world, of which we know very
little.
We do not know the common parlance, or the slang, nor do we know if
the metaphor is written using pure speech, common speech, slang, or
what.
At best, all that you can offer, is a wild guess.
Claims, on your part, to be guided by a "holy spirit", are of about
the same worth as claims to be guided by a holey sock.
Xtianity discovers a new biblical metaphor, every time science shows
the bible to be in error.
Then there is philosophy: IMFFHO, philosophy is no more than a lazy
way to get a degree, and way for pseudo intellectuals to impress them
selves with their own self importance.
As for your self, you have demonstrated your own ignorance of both
philosophy, and metaphor, on numerous occasions.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Richter" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
04 Feb 2007 11:10:46 AM |
|
|
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
The only error possible lies in its interpretation.
And therein lies the problem.
Only problematic to the perceptually and philosophically challenged. By
far MOST people can find a sensible interpretation for ancient philosophical
metaphor and symbolism.
You mean like the 9/11 terrorists? That kind of "sensible
interpretation"? After all, they were deeply religious individuals who
came from deeply religious cultures, and spent a considerable amount of
time studying ancient philosophical metaphor and symbolism.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Pastor Frank" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
04 Feb 2007 05:18:17 PM |
|
|
"Scott Richter" <scottrichter422@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1ht06g3.s3h7x713otm0dN%scottrichter422@yahoo.com...
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
The only error possible lies in its interpretation.
And therein lies the problem.
Only problematic to the perceptually and philosophically challenged.
By
far MOST people can find a sensible interpretation for ancient
philosophical
metaphor and symbolism.
You mean like the 9/11 terrorists? That kind of "sensible
interpretation"? After all, they were deeply religious individuals who
came from deeply religious cultures, and spent a considerable amount of
time studying ancient philosophical metaphor and symbolism.
That's all non sequitur to the teachings of Jesus. But then you seem
pretty stupid to pull that our of your hat, for our underground resistance
movement did that sort of "terrorism" for a lot longer to the German
invaders, and were feted as heroes by the folks back home. But then
hypocrisy is inherent in atheism, isn't it? Perhaps you need spend time
under the heel of Israel's occupation force in Palestine to get the drift.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Scott Richter" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
05 Feb 2007 11:15:50 AM |
|
|
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
The only error possible lies in its interpretation.
And therein lies the problem.
Only problematic to the perceptually and philosophically challenged.
By
far MOST people can find a sensible interpretation for ancient
philosophical
metaphor and symbolism.
You mean like the 9/11 terrorists? That kind of "sensible
interpretation"? After all, they were deeply religious individuals who
came from deeply religious cultures, and spent a considerable amount of
time studying ancient philosophical metaphor and symbolism.
That's all non sequitur to the teachings of Jesus.
No it's not. We were talking about ancient philosphical metaphor and
symbolism in general, which includes all three major desert religions.
But once again, your addiction disorder shows through because you get
uncomfortable whenever Jesus isn't the center of attention, don't you?
But then you seem pretty stupid to pull that our of your hat, for our
underground resistance movement did that sort of "terrorism" for a lot
longer to the German invaders, and were feted as heroes by the folks back
home.
So now you're comparing the 9/11 terrorists to resistance movement
heroes, are you?
Noted...
But then hypocrisy is inherent in atheism, isn't it?
Yawn... Sorry, I wasn't listening. Did you say something?
Perhaps you need spend time under the heel of Israel's occupation force in
Palestine to get the drift.
The drift of what? How allowing religion into government leads to
oppressive societies? I already know that.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
04 Feb 2007 11:29:03 PM |
|
|
Scott Richter wrote:
Pastor Frank <PF@christfirst.edu> wrote:
The only error possible lies in its interpretation.
And therein lies the problem.
Only problematic to the perceptually and philosophically challenged. By
far MOST people can find a sensible interpretation for ancient philosophical
metaphor and symbolism.
You mean like the 9/11 terrorists? That kind of "sensible
interpretation"? After all, they were deeply religious individuals who
came from deeply religious cultures, and spent a considerable amount of
time studying ancient philosophical metaphor and symbolism.
....and they screamed "God os great' as they wiped out thousands of innocent
lives, for what?
...............religious bigotry and insanity
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
01 Feb 2007 08:35:06 AM |
|
|
On Jan 28, 4:19 pm, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives on
a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them the
truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
No, not the Bible but the Torah...
Christianity, the TRADITIONAL as explained in the New Testament
by the Aposltes is grounded on Moses and on his farewell
speech in front of the Hebrews, speech recorded as Deuteronomy.
Paul was sent by God to explain to the Gentiles how that Torah
also works for them in relation to Christ. He did it brilliantly
Orally and in writing as seen in his epistles.
You may think along with the SOLA SCRIPTURA crowd that
Christianity is grounded in the New Testament, but it is not.
There was Christianity before the New Testament was put together.
Sola Scriptura sucks, so do you.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence. The originals all
rotted away thousands of years ago. What are available are copies of an
unknown number of copies by copiers of unknown veracity and accuracy.
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
3. The Bibles copies are nothing more than books of myths, fables,
contradictions, human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding,
misogyny, destruction, barbarisms, and impossible tales by authors of
totally unknown veracity.
This is purely a foundation of quick sand!
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Richo" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
28 Jan 2007 06:33:30 PM |
|
|
On Jan 29, 8:19 am, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives on
a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them the
truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
I don't believe you.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence.
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
True but irrelavent.
3. The Bibles copies are nothing more than books of myths, fables,
contradictions, human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding,
misogyny, destruction, barbarisms, and impossible tales by authors of
totally unknown veracity.
The bible certainly contains these things.
The truth of the "nothing more" depends on whom you ask.
It's a subjective personal opinion of yours - not an objective fact.
Some people manage to look beyond that and see something worthwhile in
there (Bishop Spong for example) - I look to life (and my parents,
freinds and people I admire) to tell me what I need to know - so any
wisdom that is in there I can find elsewhere but without the nonsense
- so I go that route.
Mark.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill M" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
28 Jan 2007 08:07:49 PM |
|
|
"Richo" <m.richardson@utas.edu.au> wrote in message
news:1170030810.597945.265780@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 29, 8:19 am, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives
on
a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them
the
truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
I don't believe you.
Just look up the facts. Jesus Christ is purely derived from the Bible
stories.
There is no other historical evidence.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence.
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
True but irrelavent.
In your unsubstantiated 'opinion'.
3. The Bibles copies are nothing more than books of myths, fables,
contradictions, human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding,
misogyny, destruction, barbarisms, and impossible tales by authors of
totally unknown veracity.
The bible certainly contains these things.
The truth of the "nothing more" depends on whom you ask.
It's a subjective personal opinion of yours - not an objective fact.
Read the Bible!
Some people manage to look beyond that and see something worthwhile in
there (Bishop Spong for example) - I look to life (and my parents,
freinds and people I admire) to tell me what I need to know - so any
wisdom that is in there I can find elsewhere but without the nonsense
- so I go that route.
In other words you believe what you are told to believe!
Mark.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richo" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
28 Jan 2007 11:43:54 PM |
|
|
On Jan 29, 1:07 pm, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Richo" <m.richard...@utas.edu.au> wrote in messagenews:1170030810.597945.265780@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 29, 8:19 am, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives
on
a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them
the
truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
I don't believe you.
Just look up the facts.
O.K.
What facts?
Jesus Christ is purely derived from the Bible
stories.
Perhaps thats true - perhaps it isnt.
Where are your facts?
There is no other historical evidence.
There is historical evidence - like the dead sea scrolls etc that the
religion which became christianity was developing for quite a while
before the books of the new testament were written.
Things don't happen in a vacuum.
It is quite possible that various "prototype" jesus stories came and
went over a period of 200 - 300 years before the bible was written.
There were messianic and mystical sects of Jews comming and going for
centuries - and that is all backed by evidence.
Your idea that the bible "poped" into existence without anything
preceeding it is absurd.
Humans invent new religions continuously - but they only write them
down occassionally - the writting down of a religion ( a rare event)
is not the source of a religion ( a common nearly universal event).
It is much more reasonable to suppose that the arising of a new
religion created the bibles - not the other way around.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence.
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
True but irrelavent.
In your unsubstantiated 'opinion'.
You are scornful of education - not a good sign.
3. The Bibles copies are nothing more than books of myths, fables,
contradictions, human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding,
misogyny, destruction, barbarisms, and impossible tales by authors of
totally unknown veracity.
The bible certainly contains these things.
The truth of the "nothing more" depends on whom you ask.
It's a subjective personal opinion of yours - not an objective fact.
Read the Bible!
I have read enough - it just isnt that interesting to me.
Cheers, Mark.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Martin Phipps" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
30 Jan 2007 10:44:10 PM |
|
|
On Jan 29, 1:43 pm, "Richo" <m.richard...@utas.edu.au> wrote:
On Jan 29, 1:07 pm, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Richo" <m.richard...@utas.edu.au> wrote in messagenews:1170030810.597945.265780@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 29, 8:19 am, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives
on
a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them
the
truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
I don't believe you.
Just look up the facts.
O.K.
What facts?
Jesus Christ is purely derived from the Bible
stories.
Perhaps thats true - perhaps it isnt.
Where are your facts?
There is no other historical evidence.
There is historical evidence - like the dead sea scrolls etc that the
religion which became christianity was developing for quite a while
before the books of the new testament were written.
Things don't happen in a vacuum.
It is quite possible that various "prototype" jesus stories came and
went over a period of 200 - 300 years before the bible was written.
There were messianic and mystical sects of Jews comming and going for
centuries - and that is all backed by evidence.
Your idea that the bible "poped" into existence without anything
preceeding it is absurd.
Humans invent new religions continuously - but they only write them
down occassionally - the writting down of a religion ( a rare event)
is not the source of a religion ( a common nearly universal event).
It is much more reasonable to suppose that the arising of a new
religion created the bibles - not the other way around.
It's the old chicken and egg argument. Yes, the religion came first
but the written word established what people were supposed to believe.
Martin
.
|
|
|
| User: "Richo" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
30 Jan 2007 11:20:37 PM |
|
|
On Jan 31, 3:44 pm, "Martin Phipps" <martinphip...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On Jan 29, 1:43 pm, "Richo" <m.richard...@utas.edu.au> wrote:
On Jan 29, 1:07 pm, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
"Richo" <m.richard...@utas.edu.au> wrote in messagenews:1170030810.597945.265780@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 29, 8:19 am, "Bill M" <w...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives
on
a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them
the
truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
I don't believe you.
Just look up the facts.
O.K.
What facts?
Jesus Christ is purely derived from the Bible
stories.
Perhaps thats true - perhaps it isnt.
Where are your facts?
There is no other historical evidence.
There is historical evidence - like the dead sea scrolls etc that the
religion which became christianity was developing for quite a while
before the books of the new testament were written.
Things don't happen in a vacuum.
It is quite possible that various "prototype" jesus stories came and
went over a period of 200 - 300 years before the bible was written.
There were messianic and mystical sects of Jews comming and going for
centuries - and that is all backed by evidence.
Your idea that the bible "poped" into existence without anything
preceeding it is absurd.
Humans invent new religions continuously - but they only write them
down occassionally - the writting down of a religion ( a rare event)
is not the source of a religion ( a common nearly universal event).
It is much more reasonable to suppose that the arising of a new
religion created the bibles - not the other way around.
It's the old chicken and egg argument. Yes, the religion came first
but the written word established what people were supposed to believe.
True enough - what we know of as christianity is what survived from
the sturggles in the early "church" - was Jesus flesh or spirit? was
he both? - lots of nutters running around being certain that theirs
was the "true" faith - the winners of those early battles got to
decide what was in and what was out.
Even *with* the bibles set and stable you have about 15 major
divisions of christianity - so the writting down didnt stop the
process - just constrained it a little.
8-)
Mark.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "old man joe" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
29 Jan 2007 03:57:35 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 16:19:39 -0500, "Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives on
a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them the
truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence. The originals all
rotted away thousands of years ago. What are available are copies of an
unknown number of copies by copiers of unknown veracity and accuracy.
where's your proof of such great claims ? is your saying so all the
proof the masses need ?
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
the Bible doesn't claim Darwin is right... nor the Catholic priest
who concocted the Big Bang theory. the Bible is the only Book on the
planet saying God created the universe and man is a sinner who must
reckon with God for his sins and Jesus Christ Eternal God is the
propitiation for those sins only if God desires you should be forgiven
or passed by. those who hate God are showing they've been passed by.
3. The Bibles copies are nothing more than books of myths, fables,
contradictions, human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding,
misogyny, destruction, barbarisms, and impossible tales by authors of
totally unknown veracity.
the Bible is nothing more than fables to those passed by for
salvation, indeed. God must show the judical side of His attributes...
He might as well show them on you.
This is purely a foundation of quick sand!
if there was no God people would not have a need to disclaim Him.
if they had no sin they wouldn't need to disclaim Him. if there was
no Judgement Day people would have no need to claim they're innocent
of cursing a God who doesn't exist nor require satisfaction from them.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Semper Libčr" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
29 Jan 2007 11:21:35 PM |
|
|
"old man joe" <not@home.com> wrote in message
news:d9grr2dlt2k30sb776ftp752jmu72lsqei@4ax.com...
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 16:19:39 -0500, "Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives
on
a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them
the
truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence. The originals
all
rotted away thousands of years ago. What are available are copies of an
unknown number of copies by copiers of unknown veracity and accuracy.
where's your proof of such great claims ? is your saying so all the
proof the masses need ?
He is right about the lack of "original" first hand copies, however his
conclusion that the fragments we have now are not trustworthy is baseless
and false. In fact, there are numerous "copies" of all the original Biblical
texts, and they are remarkably similar. For example, there are 24 known
fragments of the fifth chapter of Revelation, and 23 of these fragments are
totally and completely identical from the other.
It may seem remarkable that such accuracy could be maintained for such a
long time, with so many copies being hand written, but the job of copying
Holy text was of the utmost importance and was designated to "scribes" who
study\ied their craft for years and years. When a copy of, for example, the
Hebrew Bible was written, the very vowels themselves were even counted and
added to the borders, and the work was reviewed by other scribes. They were
incredibly accurate at their job, and therefore the texts in their original
languages can be wholly trusted.
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
the Bible doesn't claim Darwin is right... nor the Catholic priest
who concocted the Big Bang theory. the Bible is the only Book on the
planet saying God created the universe and man is a sinner who must
reckon with God for his sins and Jesus Christ Eternal God is the
propitiation for those sins only if God desires you should be forgiven
or passed by. those who hate God are showing they've been passed by.
Actually the Bible says that each who are his will come in their own
time....
1Co 15:21 For since death is through man, the resurrection of the dead also
is through a Man.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all will be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But each in his own order: Christ the first-fruit, and afterward
they who are Christ's at His coming;
1Co 15:24 then is the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God, even the
Father; when He makes to cease all rule and all authority and power.
.
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: CHRISTIANITY - FOUNDATION OF SAND |
30 Jan 2007 11:03:02 PM |
|
|
"Semper Libčr" wrote:
"old man joe" <not@home.com> wrote in message
news:d9grr2dlt2k30sb776ftp752jmu72lsqei@4ax.com...
On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 16:19:39 -0500, "Bill M" <wmech@bellsouth.net>
wrote:
I find it amazing that so many Christians believe in and base their lives
on
a religion that is based on totally unproven and unlikely claims. It is
probably because they trust that their church leaders are providing them
the
truth.
The foundation of this religion is the Bibles.
1. There are NO originals of the Bibles in existence. The originals
all
rotted away thousands of years ago. What are available are copies of an
unknown number of copies by copiers of unknown veracity and accuracy.
where's your proof of such great claims ? is your saying so all the
proof the masses need ?
He is right about the lack of "original" first hand copies, however his
conclusion that the fragments we have now are not trustworthy is baseless
and false. In fact, there are numerous "copies" of all the original Biblical
texts, and they are remarkably similar. For example, there are 24 known
fragments of the fifth chapter of Revelation, and 23 of these fragments are
totally and completely identical from the other.
It may seem remarkable that such accuracy could be maintained for such a
long time, with so many copies being hand written, but the job of copying
Holy text was of the utmost importance and was designated to "scribes" who
study\ied their craft for years and years. When a copy of, for example, the
Hebrew Bible was written, the very vowels themselves were even counted and
added to the borders, and the work was reviewed by other scribes. They were
incredibly accurate at their job, and therefore the texts in their original
languages can be wholly trusted.
Yes I can see you have been well and truly brainwashed.
Strange how we homo sapiens are so good at controlling one another.
Maybe it is instinctive from our Stone Age days
when we had to hunt in packs in order to survive.
No gods back then of course, only the 'evil spirits' in the dense forest -
we made up our gods a little later to chase them away.
Some Aborigines in Australia still do something along these lines.
2. None of the other historic documents of the period confirm a Jesus
Christ the god.
the Bible doesn't claim Darwin is right... nor the Catholic priest
who concocted the Big Bang theory. the Bible is the only Book on the
planet saying God created the universe and man is a sinner who must
reckon with God for his sins and Jesus Christ Eternal God is the
propitiation for those sins only if God desires you should be forgiven
or passed by. those who hate God are showing they've been passed by.
Actually the Bible says that each who are his will come in their own
time....
1Co 15:21 For since death is through man, the resurrection of the dead also
is through a Man.
1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all will be made alive.
1Co 15:23 But each in his own order: Christ the first-fruit, and afterward
they who are Christ's at His coming;
1Co 15:24 then is the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God, even the
Father; when He makes to cease all rule and all authority and power.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
