| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Codebreaker" |
| Date: |
09 Jan 2008 03:27:47 PM |
| Object: |
How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia and how
usefull an Encyclopedia is depends on the work
that can be done of it.
The point being made here is that Catholicism and Islam
have made a good use of the Bible so far as opposed to
Martin Luther and his crowd.
Let it be known that for anything said about the perpetuity
of the Law of Moses in the Old Testament, there is the opposite
being said in the New Testament by Paul. Even some verses
in the New Testament have their own contradictions in the next pages.
This means that Sola Scriptura is not the best way to approach the
whole book. So trying to probe it as the inerrant word
of God is a waste of time because its reader is left with PICKING
AND CHOOSING.
Just as turning a raw material into a finished product requires SKILLS
and knowledge, so is for the Bible.
It is a raw material that is in need to be polished. The end result
or the finished product tells us MORE about the workman.
So far Catholicism and Islam, each at its own level, have
convinced us of their knowledge and understanding of the document
and its historical evolution.
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree. Unfortunately, the Sola-Scriptura
and the Oops- I am-Saved crowd confuse it with the table
which is made of the tree.
THEY ARE IN A BLATANT ERROR.
Again Catholico-Trinitarian And Islam are two branches of Christianity
in a check and balance position though martin Luther
may not like it.
.
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
09 Jan 2008 04:40:01 PM |
|
|
Idiot Codebreaker wrote:
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
Who cares? It's just someone else's religious belief.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
All religions have fought tooth and nail over which superstition is the
correct superstition, and not one of them has actually won, with the
possible exception of Emperor Constantine, who pretty much wiped out
Paganism in the 3rd century, CE. But, like your buddy Hitler, he missed
most of the Jews, and since his time quite a few new faiths (Islam,
Mormonism, Scientology, etc.) have popped up, probably because some
people recognized the utter ***** that is Christianity, so they made
up some other *****. It's been like that throughout known history.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia
<SLAP!>
What??? Who knows this, or are you pulling "information" out of your
***** again, then wiping it with pages from the Quran?
<snip>
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
--
Uncle Vic
2011
.
|
|
|
| User: "Orthodox News" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
11 Jan 2008 10:00:47 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:CeGdnTO5N9zX0BjanZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@inreach.com...
Idiot Codebreaker wrote:
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
Who cares? It's just someone else's religious belief.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
All religions have fought tooth and nail over which superstition is the
correct superstition, and not one of them has actually won, with the
possible exception of Emperor Constantine, who pretty much wiped out
Paganism in the 3rd century, CE. But, like your buddy Hitler, he missed
most of the Jews, and since his time quite a few new faiths (Islam,
Mormonism, Scientology, etc.) have popped up, probably because some people
recognized the utter ***** that is Christianity, so they made up some
other *****. It's been like that throughout known history.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia
<SLAP!>
What??? Who knows this, or are you pulling "information" out of your *****
again, then wiping it with pages from the Quran?
<snip>
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
***What is God's "original word"? There were hundreds of epistles and
gospels circulating in the early church until the Canon of the New Testament
was established late in the fourth century.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BAM" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
13 Jan 2008 10:54:22 AM |
|
|
"Orthodox News" <OrthodoxNews@nospamsnet.org> wrote in message
news:fm9e1g0319i@enews5.newsguy.com...
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:CeGdnTO5N9zX0BjanZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@inreach.com...
Idiot Codebreaker wrote:
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
Who cares? It's just someone else's religious belief.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
All religions have fought tooth and nail over which superstition is the
correct superstition, and not one of them has actually won, with the
possible exception of Emperor Constantine, who pretty much wiped out
Paganism in the 3rd century, CE. But, like your buddy Hitler, he missed
most of the Jews, and since his time quite a few new faiths (Islam,
Mormonism, Scientology, etc.) have popped up, probably because some
people recognized the utter ***** that is Christianity, so they made
up some other *****. It's been like that throughout known history.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia
<SLAP!>
What??? Who knows this, or are you pulling "information" out of your *****
again, then wiping it with pages from the Quran?
<snip>
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
***What is God's "original word"? There were hundreds of epistles and
gospels circulating in the early church until the Canon of the New
Testament was established late in the fourth century.
Brings up another question the answer to which doesn't seem to be common
knowledge. How did the Jews regard their scriptures before Christ? They
couldn't have said it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Much of it was merely
historical and not doctrinal. So when did the expression "written word of
God" arise, and who "coined the phrase"? Did everyday Jews test the
scriptures against the high priests, saducees, etc.?
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
13 Jan 2008 02:29:53 PM |
|
|
BAM wrote:
"Orthodox News" <OrthodoxNews@nospamsnet.org> wrote in message
news:fm9e1g0319i@enews5.newsguy.com...
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:CeGdnTO5N9zX0BjanZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@inreach.com...
Idiot Codebreaker wrote:
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
Who cares? It's just someone else's religious belief.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
All religions have fought tooth and nail over which superstition is the
correct superstition, and not one of them has actually won, with the
possible exception of Emperor Constantine, who pretty much wiped out
Paganism in the 3rd century, CE. But, like your buddy Hitler, he missed
most of the Jews, and since his time quite a few new faiths (Islam,
Mormonism, Scientology, etc.) have popped up, probably because some
people recognized the utter ***** that is Christianity, so they made
up some other *****. It's been like that throughout known history.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia
<SLAP!>
What??? Who knows this, or are you pulling "information" out of your *****
again, then wiping it with pages from the Quran?
<snip>
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
***What is God's "original word"? There were hundreds of epistles and
gospels circulating in the early church until the Canon of the New
Testament was established late in the fourth century.
Brings up another question the answer to which doesn't seem to be common
knowledge. How did the Jews regard their scriptures before Christ?
As law and history. Hasn't really changed, except that some of the
history has been corrected by modern scholarship.
They
couldn't have said it was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Of course not. The notion does not exist in Judaism.
Much of it was merely
historical and not doctrinal.
Legal, and mythic as well.
So when did the expression "written word of
God" arise, and who "coined the phrase"? Did everyday Jews test the
scriptures against the high priests, saducees, etc.?
Of course. The Priests were required to understand Torah, and as much of
Tanakh as had been written. They were judges, often called on for
judicial and religious rulings.
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "BAM" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
13 Jan 2008 05:42:43 PM |
|
|
"cactus" <cactus@nonespam.com> wrote in message
news:5xuij.35838$JD.8512@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
BAM wrote:
"Orthodox News" <OrthodoxNews@nospamsnet.org> wrote in message
news:fm9e1g0319i@enews5.newsguy.com...
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:CeGdnTO5N9zX0BjanZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@inreach.com...
Idiot Codebreaker wrote:
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
Who cares? It's just someone else's religious belief.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
All religions have fought tooth and nail over which superstition is the
correct superstition, and not one of them has actually won, with the
possible exception of Emperor Constantine, who pretty much wiped out
Paganism in the 3rd century, CE. But, like your buddy Hitler, he
missed most of the Jews, and since his time quite a few new faiths
(Islam, Mormonism, Scientology, etc.) have popped up, probably because
some people recognized the utter ***** that is Christianity, so they
made up some other *****. It's been like that throughout known
history.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia
<SLAP!>
What??? Who knows this, or are you pulling "information" out of your
***** again, then wiping it with pages from the Quran?
<snip>
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there
are many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains
The Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that
the versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
***What is God's "original word"? There were hundreds of epistles and
gospels circulating in the early church until the Canon of the New
Testament was established late in the fourth century.
Brings up another question the answer to which doesn't seem to be common
knowledge. How did the Jews regard their scriptures before Christ?
As law and history. Hasn't really changed, except that some of the
history has been corrected by modern scholarship.
They
couldn't have said it was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Of course not. The notion does not exist in Judaism.
Much of it was merely
historical and not doctrinal.
Legal, and mythic as well.
So when did the expression "written word of
God" arise, and who "coined the phrase"? Did everyday Jews test the
scriptures against the high priests, saducees, etc.?
Of course. The Priests were required to understand Torah, and as much of
Tanakh as had been written. They were judges, often called on for
judicial and religious rulings.
So the Protestant notion of sola scriptura is as alien to Catholicism as it
is to ancient Judaism.
BAM
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "•R. L. Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
13 Jan 2008 01:44:07 PM |
|
|
In article <Imrij.51746$_m.50435@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "BAM"
<mcca5761@blahblahbellsouth.net> wrote:
"Orthodox News" <OrthodoxNews@nospamsnet.org> wrote in message
news:fm9e1g0319i@enews5.newsguy.com...
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:CeGdnTO5N9zX0BjanZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@inreach.com...
Idiot Codebreaker wrote:
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
Who cares? It's just someone else's religious belief.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
All religions have fought tooth and nail over which superstition is the
correct superstition, and not one of them has actually won, with the
possible exception of Emperor Constantine, who pretty much wiped out
Paganism in the 3rd century, CE. But, like your buddy Hitler, he missed
most of the Jews, and since his time quite a few new faiths (Islam,
Mormonism, Scientology, etc.) have popped up, probably because some
people recognized the utter ***** that is Christianity, so they made
up some other *****. It's been like that throughout known history.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia
<SLAP!>
What??? Who knows this, or are you pulling "information" out of your *****
again, then wiping it with pages from the Quran?
<snip>
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
***What is God's "original word"? There were hundreds of epistles and
gospels circulating in the early church until the Canon of the New
Testament was established late in the fourth century.
Brings up another question the answer to which doesn't seem to be common
knowledge. How did the Jews regard their scriptures before Christ? They
couldn't have said it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Much of it was merely
historical and not doctrinal. So when did the expression "written word of
God" arise, and who "coined the phrase"? Did everyday Jews test the
scriptures against the high priests, saducees, etc.?
** unlikely considering what the holy men did to their critic who called
himself the Son of man.
--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "BAM" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
13 Jan 2008 05:41:52 PM |
|
|
".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
news:2-1301081144070001@10.0.1.199...
In article <Imrij.51746$_m.50435@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "BAM"
<mcca5761@blahblahbellsouth.net> wrote:
"Orthodox News" <OrthodoxNews@nospamsnet.org> wrote in message
news:fm9e1g0319i@enews5.newsguy.com...
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:CeGdnTO5N9zX0BjanZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@inreach.com...
Idiot Codebreaker wrote:
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
Who cares? It's just someone else's religious belief.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
All religions have fought tooth and nail over which superstition is
the
correct superstition, and not one of them has actually won, with the
possible exception of Emperor Constantine, who pretty much wiped out
Paganism in the 3rd century, CE. But, like your buddy Hitler, he
missed
most of the Jews, and since his time quite a few new faiths (Islam,
Mormonism, Scientology, etc.) have popped up, probably because some
people recognized the utter ***** that is Christianity, so they
made
up some other *****. It's been like that throughout known history.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia
<SLAP!>
What??? Who knows this, or are you pulling "information" out of your
*****
again, then wiping it with pages from the Quran?
<snip>
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there
are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that
the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
***What is God's "original word"? There were hundreds of epistles and
gospels circulating in the early church until the Canon of the New
Testament was established late in the fourth century.
Brings up another question the answer to which doesn't seem to be common
knowledge. How did the Jews regard their scriptures before Christ? They
couldn't have said it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Much of it was
merely
historical and not doctrinal. So when did the expression "written word of
God" arise, and who "coined the phrase"? Did everyday Jews test the
scriptures against the high priests, saducees, etc.?
** unlikely considering what the holy men did to their critic who called
himself the Son of man.
Another perfect answer to the wrong question.........
BAM
.
|
|
|
| User: "•R. L. Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
13 Jan 2008 06:56:22 PM |
|
|
In article <Ikxij.51922$_m.48753@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "BAM"
<mcca5761@blahblahbellsouth.net> wrote:
".R. L. Measures" <2@vc.net> wrote in message
news:2-1301081144070001@10.0.1.199...
In article <Imrij.51746$_m.50435@bignews4.bellsouth.net>, "BAM"
<mcca5761@blahblahbellsouth.net> wrote:
"Orthodox News" <OrthodoxNews@nospamsnet.org> wrote in message
news:fm9e1g0319i@enews5.newsguy.com...
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:CeGdnTO5N9zX0BjanZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@inreach.com...
Idiot Codebreaker wrote:
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
Who cares? It's just someone else's religious belief.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
All religions have fought tooth and nail over which superstition is
the
correct superstition, and not one of them has actually won, with the
possible exception of Emperor Constantine, who pretty much wiped out
Paganism in the 3rd century, CE. But, like your buddy Hitler, he
missed
most of the Jews, and since his time quite a few new faiths (Islam,
Mormonism, Scientology, etc.) have popped up, probably because some
people recognized the utter ***** that is Christianity, so they
made
up some other *****. It's been like that throughout known history.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia
<SLAP!>
What??? Who knows this, or are you pulling "information" out of your
*****
again, then wiping it with pages from the Quran?
<snip>
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there
are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that
the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
***What is God's "original word"? There were hundreds of epistles and
gospels circulating in the early church until the Canon of the New
Testament was established late in the fourth century.
Brings up another question the answer to which doesn't seem to be common
knowledge. How did the Jews regard their scriptures before Christ? They
couldn't have said it was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Much of it was
merely
historical and not doctrinal. So when did the expression "written word of
God" arise, and who "coined the phrase"? Did everyday Jews test the
scriptures against the high priests, saducees, etc.?
** unlikely considering what the holy men did to their critic who called
himself the Son of man.
Another perfect answer to the wrong question.........
** chortle
--
R.L. Measures. 805-386-3734, www.somis.org
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "?R. L. Measures" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
15 Jan 2008 05:36:16 PM |
|
|
true. If there had never been any remedy for any in, and all ills
had been incurable, it is impossible that men should have imagined that they
could give remedies, and still more impossible that so many others should
have believed those who boasted of having remedies; in the same way as did a
man boast of preventing death, no one would believe him, because there is no
example of this. But as there were a number of remedies found to be true by
the very knowledge of the greatest men, the belief of men is thereby
induced; and, this being known to be possible, it has been therefore
concluded that it was. For people commonly reason thus: "A thing is
possible, therefore it is"; because the thing cannot be denied generally,
since there are particular effects which are true, the people, who cannot
distinguish which among these particular effects are true, believe them all.
In the same way, the reason why so many false effects are credited to the
moon is that there are some true, as the tide.
It is the same with prophecies, miracles, divination by dreams, sorceries,
etc.
For if there had been nothing true in all this, men would have believed
nothing of them; and thus, instead of concluding that there are no true
miracles because there are so many false, we must, on the contrary, say that
there certainly are true miracles, since there are false, and that there are
false miracles only because some are true. We must reason in the same way
about religion; for it would not be
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "BAM" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
11 Jan 2008 09:19:37 PM |
|
|
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld.com> wrote in message
news:CeGdnTO5N9zX0BjanZ2dnUVZ_jadnZ2d@inreach.com...
Idiot Codebreaker wrote:
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
Who cares? It's just someone else's religious belief.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
All religions have fought tooth and nail over which superstition is the
correct superstition, and not one of them has actually won, with the
possible exception of Emperor Constantine, who pretty much wiped out
Paganism in the 3rd century, CE. But, like your buddy Hitler, he missed
most of the Jews, and since his time quite a few new faiths (Islam,
Mormonism, Scientology, etc.) have popped up, probably because some people
recognized the utter ***** that is Christianity, so they made up some
other *****. It's been like that throughout known history.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia
<SLAP!>
What??? Who knows this, or are you pulling "information" out of your *****
again, then wiping it with pages from the Quran?
<snip>
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
Rome has spoken; the case is closed.
BAM
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Orthodox News" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
15 Jan 2008 07:15:54 PM |
|
|
***Not posted by me. --Al
"Orthodox News" <OrthodoxNews@nospamsnet.org> wrote in message
news:ao0f9e3188w@enews5.newsguy.com...
and ready every moment to singe it, and burn it asunder; and you
have no interest in any Mediator, and nothing to lay hold of to save
yourself, nothing to keep off the flames of wrath, nothing of your own,
nothing that you ever have done, nothing that you can do, to induce God
to spare you one moment. -- And consider here more particularly,
Whose wrath it is: it is the wrath of the infinite God. If it were only
the wrath of man, though it were of the most potent prince, it would be
comparatively little to be regarded. The wrath of kings is very much
dreaded, especially of absolute monarchs, who have the possessions and
lives of their subjects wholly in their power, to be disposed of at
their mere will. Prov. 20:2. "The fear of a king is as the roaring of a
lion: Whoso provoketh him to anger, sinneth against his own soul." The
subject that very much enrages an arbitrary prince, is liable to suffer
the most extreme torments that human art can invent, or human power can
inflict. But the greatest earthly potentates in their greatest majesty
and strength, and when clothed in their greatest terrors, are but
feeble, despicable worms of the dust, in comparison of the great and
almighty Creator and King of heaven and earth. It is but little that
they can do, when most enraged, and when they have exerted the utmost of
their fury. All the kings of the earth, before God, are as grasshoppers;
they are nothing, and less than nothing: both their love and their
hatred is to be despised
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "alt" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
09 Jan 2008 06:15:38 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:40:01 -0800, Uncle Vic wrote:
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
We have manuscripts that go back thousands of years for starters as well
as an understanding of how the scribes kept the integrity of the
scriptures.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Weldon" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
09 Jan 2008 07:33:31 PM |
|
|
"alt" <spamtrap@lazyeyez.net> wrote in message
news:JaCdnQjlF-I3_hjanZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@giganews.com...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:40:01 -0800, Uncle Vic wrote:
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
We have manuscripts that go back thousands of years for starters as well
as an understanding of how the scribes kept the integrity of the
scriptures.
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies alike?
With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the time. How
about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
09 Jan 2008 10:49:29 PM |
|
|
On Jan 9, 8:33 pm, "Robert Weldon" <rweldon.spambl...@jrpspamblock.ca>
wrote:
"alt" <spamt...@lazyeyez.net> wrote in message
news:JaCdnQjlF-I3_hjanZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@giganews.com...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:40:01 -0800, Uncle Vic wrote:
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
We have manuscripts that go back thousands of years for starters as well
as an understanding of how the scribes kept the integrity of the
scriptures.
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies alike?
With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the time. How
about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Or the fact that they contain nonsense in the first place...
Olrik
.
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
10 Jan 2008 12:30:13 AM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, Olrik <olrik666@gmail.com> bloodied us up
with this:
On Jan 9, 8:33 pm, "Robert Weldon" <rweldon.spambl...@jrpspamblock.ca>
wrote:
"alt" <spamt...@lazyeyez.net> wrote in message
news:JaCdnQjlF-I3_hjanZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@giganews.com...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:40:01 -0800, Uncle Vic wrote:
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest? Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as
there are many translations and versions of the bible. Which one
contains The Truth? The bible was not even available to the
general public as a printed book until the 16th century, so how
exactly do you know that the versions out there now even resemble
God's Original Word?
We have manuscripts that go back thousands of years for starters as
well as an understanding of how the scribes kept the integrity of
the scriptures.
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies
alike? With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the
time. How about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Or the fact that they contain nonsense in the first place...
Right. How do we know the Bible wasn't a cook book?
--
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.
Convicted by Earthquack.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
10 Jan 2008 01:23:12 AM |
|
|
On Jan 10, 1:30 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:
One fine day in alt.atheism, Olrik <olrik...@gmail.com> bloodied us up
with this:
On Jan 9, 8:33 pm, "Robert Weldon" <rweldon.spambl...@jrpspamblock.ca>
wrote:
"alt" <spamt...@lazyeyez.net> wrote in message
news:JaCdnQjlF-I3_hjanZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@giganews.com...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:40:01 -0800, Uncle Vic wrote:
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest? Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as
there are many translations and versions of the bible. Which one
contains The Truth? The bible was not even available to the
general public as a printed book until the 16th century, so how
exactly do you know that the versions out there now even resemble
God's Original Word?
We have manuscripts that go back thousands of years for starters as
well as an understanding of how the scribes kept the integrity of
the scriptures.
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies
alike? With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the
time. How about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Or the fact that they contain nonsense in the first place...
Right. How do we know the Bible wasn't a cook book?
Well, that book was cooked allright...
;-)
Olrik
--
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.
Convicted by Earthquack.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "alt" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
10 Jan 2008 10:29:39 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:33:31 +0000, Robert Weldon wrote:
"alt" <spamtrap@lazyeyez.net> wrote in message
news:JaCdnQjlF-I3_hjanZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@giganews.com...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:40:01 -0800, Uncle Vic wrote:
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest? Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there
are many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains
The Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as
a printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that
the versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
We have manuscripts that go back thousands of years for starters as
well as an understanding of how the scribes kept the integrity of the
scriptures.
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies alike?
With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the time. How
about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Try contextual accuracy of 99.5% across 5600 different manuscripts and of
any discrepancies, none of them affect doctrine.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
11 Jan 2008 12:43:06 AM |
|
|
On Jan 10, 11:29 pm, alt <spamt...@lazyeyez.net> wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:33:31 +0000, Robert Weldon wrote:
"alt" <spamt...@lazyeyez.net> wrote in message
news:JaCdnQjlF-I3_hjanZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@giganews.com...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:40:01 -0800, Uncle Vic wrote:
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest? Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there
are many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains
The Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as
a printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that
the versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
We have manuscripts that go back thousands of years for starters as
well as an understanding of how the scribes kept the integrity of the
scriptures.
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies alike?
With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the time. How
about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Try contextual accuracy of 99.5% across 5600 different manuscripts and of
any discrepancies, none of them affect doctrine.
That's not even important. What if Homer's Odyssey was 99.99% accurate
to the original Homer's manuscript? It would still be only a story.
Much like the bible.
Olrik
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jack" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
14 Jan 2008 07:18:46 AM |
|
|
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies alike=
?
With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the time. =
=A0How
about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Try contextual accuracy of 99.5% across 5600 different manuscripts and o=
f
any discrepancies, none of them affect doctrine.
That's not even important. What if Homer's Odyssey was 99.99% accurate
to the original Homer's manuscript? It would still be only a story.
Much like the bible.
The issue 'alt' was addressing was of course faithful reproduction in
response to the question:
how exactly do you know that the versions out there now even resemble God'=
s Original Word?
Regarding truth, you can deal with the Bible as you deal with any
ancient text reporting on occurances. By any accepted method (textual
criticism, archaeology, cross referencing extra biblical texts...) the
Bible holds up immensly well and warrants confidence. Far better than
texts describing roman wars which nobody questions.
The investigation, if it gets past the historical claims however,
stops when it comes to the miraculous. Avowed skeptics will dismiss
the Bible forthwith because it gives testimony to the miraculous which
reflects a prejudice not permissive of any honest engement with the
truth claims. The investigation stops and the question: "Did a miracle
occur as witnessed here" is answered with a loud "No" because
"miracles cannot occur".
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
14 Jan 2008 07:36:33 AM |
|
|
Jack wrote:
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies alike?
With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the time. How
about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Try contextual accuracy of 99.5% across 5600 different manuscripts and of
any discrepancies, none of them affect doctrine.
That's not even important. What if Homer's Odyssey was 99.99% accurate
to the original Homer's manuscript? It would still be only a story.
Much like the bible.
The issue 'alt' was addressing was of course faithful reproduction in
response to the question:
how exactly do you know that the versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
Regarding truth, you can deal with the Bible as you deal with any
ancient text reporting on occurances. By any accepted method (textual
criticism, archaeology, cross referencing extra biblical texts...) the
Bible holds up immensly well and warrants confidence. Far better than
texts describing roman wars which nobody questions.
The investigation, if it gets past the historical claims however,
stops when it comes to the miraculous. Avowed skeptics will dismiss
the Bible forthwith because it gives testimony to the miraculous which
reflects a prejudice not permissive of any honest engement with the
truth claims. The investigation stops and the question: "Did a miracle
occur as witnessed here" is answered with a loud "No" because
"miracles cannot occur".
And you can make all of those folks look supremely and utterly foolish
by posting evidence of a "miracle" that has no other explanation.
No, Jack. You can't wiggle a stick at a person and cause them to float,
even though it happens frequently in the Harry Potter books. The
investigation does, indeed, stop there. However, you are more than able
to make me look foolish by showing that you CAN wiggle a stick at
someone and cause them to float.
So, show some evidence that the "miracles" that happened in the Bible
are real, or leave alt.atheism.
Thanks!
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jack" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
14 Jan 2008 08:40:26 AM |
|
|
You've evaded the issue of the reproduction of the New Testament. Does
this mean you accept it has been faithfully reproduced?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
14 Jan 2008 07:10:24 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 06:40:26 -0800 (PST), Jack <cawoodm@gmail.com>
wrote:
You've evaded the issue of the reproduction of the New Testament. Does
this mean you accept it has been faithfully reproduced?
Another demonstration that "Jack" is a liar and an idiot.
He knows perfectly well that it hasn't been. And that the Gospels are
a set of myths about earlier hero figures retold in the setting of
what their authors thought was first century Palestine.
Also that there are no originals.
And that they were heavily edited three centuries after the alleged
events.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michelle Malkin" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
14 Jan 2008 09:36:42 PM |
|
|
"Christopher A.Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:pq1oo35k1op0f75nsidik6te6cvev1jk97@4ax.com...
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 06:40:26 -0800 (PST), Jack <cawoodm@gmail.com>
wrote:
You've evaded the issue of the reproduction of the New Testament. Does
this mean you accept it has been faithfully reproduced?
Another demonstration that "Jack" is a liar and an idiot.
He knows perfectly well that it hasn't been. And that the Gospels are
a set of myths about earlier hero figures retold in the setting of
what their authors thought was first century Palestine.
Also that there are no originals.
And that they were heavily edited three centuries after the alleged
events.
I've learned that both the old and New
Testaments are combinations of orally
passed down stories, bits taken from earlier
myths and folklore (various versions of the
same story). Just because a historical
person, place or event is mentioned doesn't
mean that the mention is historically factual
or even in the correct time period (Jericho
in the OT and the Roman census in the NT
are good examples of this).
Of course, the Bible also includes a bunch
of ridiculous laws (even for their time) and
some very sexy poetry (much of which was
taken from earlier Egyptian poems).
--
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Michelle Malkin (Mickey) aa list#1
BAAWA Knight & Bible Thumper Thumper
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
When fascism comes to America, it will be
wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross -
Sinclair Lewis
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A.Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
14 Jan 2008 07:23:21 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 05:18:46 -0800 (PST), Jack <cawoodm@gmail.com>
wrote:
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies alike?
With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the time. How
about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Try contextual accuracy of 99.5% across 5600 different manuscripts and of
any discrepancies, none of them affect doctrine.
That's not even important. What if Homer's Odyssey was 99.99% accurate
to the original Homer's manuscript? It would still be only a story.
Much like the bible.
The issue 'alt' was addressing was of course faithful reproduction in
response to the question:
how exactly do you know that the versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
Regarding truth, you can deal with the Bible as you deal with any
ancient text reporting on occurances. By any accepted method (textual
criticism, archaeology, cross referencing extra biblical texts...) the
Bible holds up immensly well and warrants confidence. Far better than
texts describing roman wars which nobody questions.
Liar.
It does no such thing. And you know it.
The investigation, if it gets past the historical claims however,
stops when it comes to the miraculous. Avowed skeptics will dismiss
the Bible forthwith because it gives testimony to the miraculous which
reflects a prejudice not permissive of any honest engement with the
truth claims. The investigation stops and the question: "Did a miracle
occur as witnessed here" is answered with a loud "No" because
"miracles cannot occur".
Yet another lying theist who invents falsehoods as "motives" for
others.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
10 Jan 2008 10:43:36 PM |
|
|
alt wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:33:31 +0000, Robert Weldon wrote:
"alt" <spamtrap@lazyeyez.net> wrote in message
news:JaCdnQjlF-I3_hjanZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@giganews.com...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:40:01 -0800, Uncle Vic wrote:
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest? Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there
are many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains
The Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as
a printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that
the versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
We have manuscripts that go back thousands of years for starters as
well as an understanding of how the scribes kept the integrity of the
scriptures.
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies alike?
With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the time. How
about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Try contextual accuracy of 99.5% across 5600 different manuscripts and of
any discrepancies, none of them affect doctrine.
Except a major one in the first line!
In one, God creates the Earth.
In another, God prepares the Earth.
In one, God is the creator.
In another, someone else created the Earth.
Two Bibles. Two different foundations. Two different God attributes.
Seriously, though: The "doctrine" you refer to transcends the Bible; it
transcends religion. The "doctrine" you refer to evolved over the
millennia and all but "damaged" humans feel it. God is irrelevant.
Allah is irrelevant. The Flying Spaghetti Monster, while tasty, is also
irrelevant.
Luke Skywalker doesn't exist. Harry Potter doesn't exist. Frodo
Baggins doesn't exist. God doesn't exist. But it doesn't matter. Good
will always triumph over evil, regardless of religion, regardless of
theology. It's human nature. Period.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jack" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
14 Jan 2008 07:08:35 AM |
|
|
On Jan 11, 5:43=A0am, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
alt wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:33:31 +0000, Robert Weldon wrote:
"alt" <spamt...@lazyeyez.net> wrote in message
news:JaCdnQjlF-I3_hjanZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@giganews.com...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:40:01 -0800, Uncle Vic wrote:
=A0> How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
=A0> forest? Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. =A0Just as ther=
e
are many translations and versions of the bible. =A0Which one contain=
s
The Truth? =A0The bible was not even available to the general public =
as
a printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know tha=
t
the versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
We have manuscripts that go back thousands of years for starters as
well as an understanding of how the scribes kept the integrity of the
scriptures.
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies alike?=
With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the time. =A0=
How
about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Try contextual accuracy of 99.5% across 5600 different manuscripts and o=
f
any discrepancies, none of them affect doctrine.
Except a major one in the first line!
In one, God creates the Earth.
In another, God prepares the Earth.
In one, God is the creator.
In another, someone else created the Earth.
Two Bibles. =A0Two different foundations. =A0Two different God attributes.=
So what? Check the manuscripts to see which one is a faithful
interpretation. I could translate Darwin's Origin of the Species today
and do it badly. Would that be grounds for discounting his theory?
.
|
|
|
| User: "DanielSan" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
14 Jan 2008 07:31:37 AM |
|
|
Jack wrote:
On Jan 11, 5:43 am, DanielSan <peterson...@comcast.net> wrote:
alt wrote:
On Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:33:31 +0000, Robert Weldon wrote:
"alt" <spamt...@lazyeyez.net> wrote in message
news:JaCdnQjlF-I3_hjanZ2dnUVZ_sLinZ2d@giganews.com...
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 14:40:01 -0800, Uncle Vic wrote:
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest? Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there
are many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains
The Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as
a printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that
the versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
We have manuscripts that go back thousands of years for starters as
well as an understanding of how the scribes kept the integrity of the
scriptures.
You mean the ones that vary widely, with virtually no two copies alike?
With scribes changing the text to meet their own needs at the time. How
about the hundreds of different versions of the bible?
Try contextual accuracy of 99.5% across 5600 different manuscripts and of
any discrepancies, none of them affect doctrine.
Except a major one in the first line!
In one, God creates the Earth.
In another, God prepares the Earth.
In one, God is the creator.
In another, someone else created the Earth.
Two Bibles. Two different foundations. Two different God attributes.
So what? Check the manuscripts to see which one is a faithful
interpretation. I could translate Darwin's Origin of the Species today
and do it badly. Would that be grounds for discounting his theory?
If "Origin of the Species" was the only evidence? Yes.
--
****************************************************
* DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 *
*--------------------------------------------------*
* "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act *
* of the whole American people which declared that *
* their legislature should make no law respecting *
* an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the *
* free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of *
* separation between church and state." *
* --Thomas Jefferson, 1802 *
****************************************************
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: How Martin Luther Disserviced God And Helped Atheism |
11 Jan 2008 03:10:02 AM |
|
|
Uncle Vic wrote:
Idiot Codebreaker wrote:
Only Martin Luther, some bible thumpers, protestators
and Oops-I am- Saved jerks and Sola-Scriptura crowd
would deny that Islam is a version of Christianity
just as Catholicism -and not just Papal Catholicism-
is another form.
Who cares? It's just someone else's religious belief.
They deny it because this undermines their core doctrine
about the New Testament being an inerrent word of God
and makes their money making schemes and the
reste of their THEOLOGY fall on the ground.
All religions have fought tooth and nail over which superstition is the
correct superstition, and not one of them has actually won, with the
possible exception of Emperor Constantine, who pretty much wiped out
Paganism in the 3rd century, CE. But, like your buddy Hitler, he missed
most of the Jews, and since his time quite a few new faiths (Islam,
Mormonism, Scientology, etc.) have popped up, probably because some
people recognized the utter ***** that is Christianity, so they made
up some other *****. It's been like that throughout known history.
But as we know, the Bible is an Encyclopedia
<SLAP!>
What??? Who knows this, or are you pulling "information" out of your
***** again, then wiping it with pages from the Quran?
<snip>
How many things can be made of a tree that grows in the rain
forest?
Yet the Bible is like that tree.
There are many trees in the forest, no two are alike. Just as there are
many translations and versions of the bible. Which one contains The
Truth? The bible was not even available to the general public as a
printed book until the 16th century, so how exactly do you know that the
versions out there now even resemble God's Original Word?
no-one knows
no-one ever will
--
Uncle Vic
2011
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
