| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"James" |
| Date: |
22 Jun 2007 11:19:13 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Once Upon a Time... |
mark_evins@sbcglobal.net
Re: Once Upon a Time...
The one who was and wasn't had a thought, and the thought was and
wasn't the second one.
In discovering the second one, the first one knew that it was still
one, and the knowing became the third one.
The third one, then, was the offspring of the first and second. And
from these three which were the one which was and wasn't, all things
came to be, imagining themselves to be different things and forgetting
that they were all simply the one that was and wasn't.
In due course, the illusion of seperation gave birth to the insistence
of individuality, which in time gave birth to the idea of the literal
and concrete.
The one who was and wasn't rejoiced at each new iteration of itself,
mourning each rehearsal of seperation.
Hello,
Concerning above, ???
Treating the bible as literal truth is rather like treating a
signpost to a distant city as being the city itself.
Or rather, 'treating the Bible as literal truth' is like looking at an
accurate road map, which correctly helps you to get to your
destination, while at the same time warning you of possible detours,
etc.
Just keep in mind, that the Bible does not promote credulity, but
wants you to verify all that you can of it. 1 Th 5:21,
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." (KJV)
Don't you think that sounds reasonable?
Sincerely, James
**If you wish to have a discussion with me, please use email since I
do not follow ng threads
***********************************
Want a Free home Bible study?
Have Jehovah's Witnesses questions?
Go to the authorized source:
http://www.watchtower.org
***********************************
.
|
|
| User: "Bill M" |
|
| Title: Re: Once Upon a Time... |
22 Jun 2007 03:20:58 PM |
|
|
"James" <bireda@allvantage.com> wrote in message
news:f0tn73di8jku657lmf5e0p22k8o21ovhn7@4ax.com...
Hello,
Concerning above, ???
Treating the bible as literal truth is rather like treating a
signpost to a distant city as being the city itself.
Or rather, 'treating the Bible as literal truth' is like looking at an
accurate road map, which correctly helps you to get to your
destination, while at the same time warning you of possible detours,
etc.
Just keep in mind, that the Bible does not promote credulity, but
wants you to verify all that you can of it. 1 Th 5:21,
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." (KJV)
Don't you think that sounds reasonable?
Christians totally base their faith on the Bibles.
The Bibles are nothing more than books of myths, fables, contradictions,
human and animal sacrifices, genocide, slaveholding, misogyny, destruction,
barbarisms, and impossible tales. They are not accurate history and
certainly are not the words of any god unless he is an insane and totally
untrustworthy monster. They are not even good fiction.
The average person today does not appreciate the difficulty and unlikelihood
of producing accurate transmissions of the original Bibles. Firstly there
are NO ORIGINALS in existence. They are all copies of copies of unknown
accuracy.
One of the problems with the accuracy of the Bibles is that when they were
copied, no marks of punctuation were used, no distinction was made between
lower case and upper case letters and more bizarre to modern script, no
spaces were used to separate words.
This kind of continuous writing was called "scriptuo continua"
'godisnowhere' could mean 'god is now here' or quit the opposite, 'god is no
where' depending on the spacing which not used at the time. This left
accurate interpretation very unlikely if not impossible.
Add to this the natural occurrence of errors of transmission and the
intentional modification to suite the transcribers wishes and beliefs and
you have documents of highly questionable meaning and very poor accuracy.
Further compounding the problem was the size and accuracy of the
vocabularies were much more limited than today.
The Bibles are a foundation of quicksand. There are NO ORIGINALS in
existence. Why would not any 'real' God protect the originals??? What are
available are altered copies of copies by unknown men of questionable
veracity. The books of the Bibles were written over 1,000 years before the
invention of the printing press. Even the so called originals were
supposedly written by 50 or more different authors of unknown veracity. They
are biased by, and dependent on the writings and opinions of the clergy. And
the status and survival of the clergy is totally dependent on their follower's
belief in their Bible stories. There are 18 different English versions alone
and there is no way of knowing how far they have wondered from the
originals.
And there is no evidence that even the originals are anything more than
inaccurate fiction.
Basing ones life and faith on these documents is not very sound reasoning.
It is the equivalent of depending on the good luck of a rabbits foot.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
