Bible Contradictions

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
941

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
Lol. The bible is full of errors and contradictions, but that’s okay because it’s only THE BIBLE! The inerrant word of God doesn’t need to be inerrant, it’s not some history book, it’s just a book of (supposed) historical events… way different!!!
Clearly by pointing out these abhorrent flaws I am making the logical fallacy of… being accurate.

Boy, I sure am glad you all took the time to tell me I was wrong, you know, without actually showing the flaws in mt logic, because otherwise I’d be some heathenish SCIENTIST or something childish like that. =3[/quote]

Oh, that was logic?
You talk to much and listen to little. The bible is what it is, I make no apologies for it, but I am pretty sure I know it far better than you. If you don’t like, don’t read it, it’s blatant that you have not. It is no concern of mine. I don’t care. [/quote]

I haven’t read the bible? Why? Because I don’t agree with it? That exact same argument could be used to “justify” ANY religion.

Besides, I’ve listed several verses, all related to the topic at hand, was this just a coincidence? I just typed a name and some numbers and it just happened to fit? Hmm?[/quote]

No, because you don’t know what your talking about.[/quote]

How so? Be specific. [/quote]

All your ‘arguments’ have been made by other athiests. They got them from virtually same sources but unfortunately for you they provided the links. So you ain’t breaking any new ground, I have seen in all before. Same exact things.

So you reckon your self a biblical scholar do you? These questions should be easy for you then, we’ll do a little test.
Who wrote the bible?
When was it written?
Who removed books from the bible and why? What books were they?
Which books got put back?

Google away…[/quote]

Didn’t you JUST say you didn’t want to talk to me? Did you just change your mind real quick?

Again you proclaim such simplicity in debunking my arguments, but make no effort whatsoever to do so. I call bullshit.

WTF? You already acknowledge that all these questions could be answered by anyone capable of maneuvering Google, but proceed to ask as though these questions will prove anything either way?

You’re not an intelligent man, Pat. If you’re going to talk to me anyway you might as well bring up arguments relative to my argument, is that so damn hard?[/quote]

Come on, dude…is it really necessary insult his intelligence? Pat is a bright guy, and is more open minded than many religious folks I’ve met. For that matter, Tiribulus is intelligent as well. There’s no correlation between intelligence and religious beliefs. Some of the brightest people on the planet are believers.
[/quote]

No, Pat is not a bright guy. His argument is essentially “sure, the bible has flaws, but that’s okay I still take it has 100% indisputable fact!” – intelligent persons don’t do this to themselves.

Despite what you believe, religion DOES correlate with intelligence and as the studies show, atheists score six points higher on the aggregate (controlled for G): Religiosity and intelligence - Wikipedia

Lastly, I’ve never really talked to Tiribulus so I can’t say either way about him.[/quote]

Says the idiot who says somebody said something, they did not say. Oh, wait. Let’s lie about reading several translations of the bible, but cannot attest to one of them.

And I thought Justin beaver was a tool.[/quote]

Pat how many times have we seen this type of approach? The funny part is the kid thinks he’s original LOL- That’s one reason I walked away when he first came in, this act is getting old.
[/quote]

I think the hubris is amusing myself.
Hey I have run across some really amazing, really smart kids. This unfortunately isn’t one of them. I work with teens, most of them are really awesome people. I sense as hard as yu gi oh struggles to get admired for his brilliance here, that he is actually very insecure. I would have pity save for the fact that he is begging to made an example of…

942

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

No, it’s not a God of gaps argument. It is called a ‘necessary being’. A non-contingent being must be the basis for all that is contingent, which is everything else.
[/quote]

Doesn’t this imply that there was a time when there was nothing?[/quote]

No, why would you think so? Could there have been? Sure, but it’s not necessary for the point.

943

[quote]forbes wrote:

So if he doesn’t believe and is not baptized, he has not faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. So according to scriptures, he is on a path to hell.[/quote]

But how do you know Christ? Think about it, is it only by name? As the point BC made, ‘what you do to the least of my people that you do unto me’. Does not the man who takes care of the least of His people, not know Christ?
This man is behaving in a way more Christ like than all of us combined. While we’re all whining and wagging are dicks as to how much religion we know, this guy goes out, to his enemies and cares for them, aka Him.
Indeed, if this story is an accurate snap shot of who this guy is, he knows Christ better than all of us, because he cares for Him everyday.

944

[quote]forbes wrote:

Yes I do believe baptism is essential for salvation. But the man in the article doesn’t seem like he believes in Christ nor was baptized (I don’t know, it didn’t say).

So if he doesn’t believe and is not baptized, he has not faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. So according to scriptures, he is on a path to hell.[/quote]

I do not know if he was baptized. At least in the formal ritualistic sense. But as I responded before, he serves Christ directly; not merely with lip service. Does he have faith in Christ? Absolutely! It is who he serves and we should do better as he does and serve him as he does. While we sit on our comfy chairs, he goes out and gets dirty and serves Christ with his hands and his feet.

945

[quote]forbes wrote:

Yes I do believe baptism is essential for salvation. But the man in the article doesn’t seem like he believes in Christ nor was baptized (I don’t know, it didn’t say).

So if he doesn’t believe and is not baptized, he has not faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. So according to scriptures, he is on a path to hell.[/quote]

No where in the Christian Bible does it say that baptism is needed for salvation. Rather it is a public act of faith which shows the rest of the community, Christian and otherwise, that you are in fact now a Christian. It’s really more an act of submission.

946

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Glad you believe in Thomism. Catholic Magazines & Religious Articles | Catholic Answers try Chris =] Interesting link though.

947

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

Yes I do believe baptism is essential for salvation. But the man in the article doesn’t seem like he believes in Christ nor was baptized (I don’t know, it didn’t say).

So if he doesn’t believe and is not baptized, he has not faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. So according to scriptures, he is on a path to hell.[/quote]

No where in the Christian Bible does it say that baptism is needed for salvation. Rather it is a public act of faith which shows the rest of the community, Christian and otherwise, that you are in fact now a Christian. It’s really more an act of submission. [/quote]I am not taking sides, but then what do you do with 1 Peter 3:21 which was the trap that Chris set earlier on this page.

948

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
Liberal professors?.. Okay o.O

Not only have I read the bible in its entirety, but I’ve read several translations of it.[/quote]

Oh? What was your favorite translation and why? or least favorite…Mostly interested in the why…[/quote]

Is this your best attempt at establishing that I don’t know the bible? Anyone could answer this question within 5 minutes via google.

I have a better idea, next time try to find an actual flaw in my arguement to establish my lack of biblical knowledge. [/quote]

You said you read several translations whole bible several times in it’s entirety, I want to know which translations and why you did not like them. Because I think you lied because you
don’t know what you talk about…But you can cut and paste like a mother fucker.

As far as I know, all you said, in very long prose is, that there is contradiction in the bible. I agree, I know there is. I don’t have to watch cartoons to figure that out.
A math book doesn’t often accurately define what an onomatopoeia is, but it has nothing to do with the purpose of the book or what the book actually is. Somebody who read the bible would know that.

You don’t have to like it, read it or anything. It’s not an issue to me. You’re entitled to your opinion. You think it’s bunk, then don’t waste your time with it. I couldn’t care less if I tried.[/quote]

If he’s 20 years old and has already read several versions of the Bible that means he must have begun at a very early age and read on a regular basis. And then when he was finished decided that all the reading was a waste because of certain contradictions. And those contradictions were only noticed after he was finished reading that one final version.

(clears throat) You think he’s lying huh?

:slight_smile:
[/quote]

I’m not an idiot. I know certain versions translates certain verses differently. It’s only logical that I look into them before debating about it.

FYI, the bible is actually a pretty easy book to get through (especially the new testiment). It hardly takes years to get through a few versions. [/quote]

If you dedicate some serious time to read several pages a day and have nothing else going on in your life you might be able to get through many versions of it in several years time. That is reading and understanding what you’ve read. But once again if you’re around 20 years old that means you got a sudden desire as a teenager to read several versions of the Bible and then at some point came to the conclusions that it was all just a big lie. Do you see why your story is hard to swallow?

I’d like to introduce you to a young man about your age named Ryan. Ryan is in college too, and the two of you seem to have quite a lot in common. You are both barely into your 20’s (if that) and you both know just about every dang thing there is to know. He has the economic system figured out and thinks that socialism is the way to go. And you? Well you have the universe figured out and know without question that there is no God and the Bible is wrong. Wow…you two guys are really shmart. (Eye Roll)

Isn’t the Internet wonderful? I wonder what you guys would be doing if there were no Internet? Probably just pissing off other guys your age who didn’t have anything else to do either.

Keep em coming kid you’re a real beauty!

[/quote]

Perhaps it would take YOU several years of no-lifing the bible to get through it, but then again you still think this shit is true! Personally, I find Steven King’s books to be more believable and harder to read through. [/quote]

Then why did Yale and Harvard both teach Paul’s writings as great acccurate works of literature long before there was an attack on God?

Tell me if you know everything at the age of 20 what do you have left to learn? Life is really going to be boring for the next 60 or 70 years isn’t it?
[/quote]

Yeah, you’ll notice that doesn’t happen anymore. Any guesses why? :wink:

I’ve never once claimed to know everything, but I know enough to know a bunk book when I read it.

949

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

No, it’s not a God of gaps argument. It is called a ‘necessary being’. A non-contingent being must be the basis for all that is contingent, which is everything else.
[/quote]

Doesn’t this imply that there was a time when there was nothing?[/quote]

No, why would you think so? Could there have been? Sure, but it’s not necessary for the point.[/quote]

Because if everything was created by something outside of everything, before that something created everything, there was nothing.

950

In other words, before God created the universe, what was there? Just God? God in heaven with all the angels?

951

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

So if he doesn’t believe and is not baptized, he has not faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. So according to scriptures, he is on a path to hell.[/quote]

But how do you know Christ? Think about it, is it only by name? As the point BC made, ‘what you do to the least of my people that you do unto me’. Does not the man who takes care of the least of His people, not know Christ?
This man is behaving in a way more Christ like than all of us combined. While we’re all whining and wagging are dicks as to how much religion we know, this guy goes out, to his enemies and cares for them, aka Him.
Indeed, if this story is an accurate snap shot of who this guy is, he knows Christ better than all of us, because he cares for Him everyday.[/quote]I really pray the Lord delivers you from this. I really really do. Jake, here is your works gospel that is a blasphemous affront to the name, work and resurrection life of Jesus Christ. Christians are not Christians because of what they do. They are Christians because of what they self consciously believe by God’s gift and grace and what they believe will produce works, but the idea that a benevolent pagan has God’s favor without intentionally owning Christ is a satanic deception and is everywhere refuted by scripture.

Pat your assumption that Jesus was saying that doing those things generally without open glory being given directly to His name demonstrates a total and utter lack of understanding of anything Christian whatsoever. Jesus has no secret agent disciples. People who just do good enough and He saves them without them being a witness to His Crown and kingdom do not exist and you do the devil’s work preaching that false and damning gospel.

I would welcome death by being burned alive at the stake before I would ever let such evil fall from my lips. REPENT and the sooner the better. Your hippified sugar daddy Jesus is an impostor.

952

Tiribulus, you’re really not even worth it.

Pat, thought occured to me - you say its stupid to say something came from nothing, but, unless you are suggesting a way that God created the universe other than making it from nothing, you’re saying “Something came from nothing because God can do that”.

953

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
Lol. The bible is full of errors and contradictions, but that’s okay because it’s only THE BIBLE! The inerrant word of God doesn’t need to be inerrant, it’s not some history book, it’s just a book of (supposed) historical events… way different!!!
Clearly by pointing out these abhorrent flaws I am making the logical fallacy of… being accurate.

Boy, I sure am glad you all took the time to tell me I was wrong, you know, without actually showing the flaws in mt logic, because otherwise I’d be some heathenish SCIENTIST or something childish like that. =3[/quote]

Oh, that was logic?
You talk to much and listen to little. The bible is what it is, I make no apologies for it, but I am pretty sure I know it far better than you. If you don’t like, don’t read it, it’s blatant that you have not. It is no concern of mine. I don’t care. [/quote]

I haven’t read the bible? Why? Because I don’t agree with it? That exact same argument could be used to “justify” ANY religion.

Besides, I’ve listed several verses, all related to the topic at hand, was this just a coincidence? I just typed a name and some numbers and it just happened to fit? Hmm?[/quote]

No, because you don’t know what your talking about.[/quote]

How so? Be specific. [/quote]

All your ‘arguments’ have been made by other athiests. They got them from virtually same sources but unfortunately for you they provided the links. So you ain’t breaking any new ground, I have seen in all before. Same exact things.

So you reckon your self a biblical scholar do you? These questions should be easy for you then, we’ll do a little test.
Who wrote the bible?
When was it written?
Who removed books from the bible and why? What books were they?
Which books got put back?

Google away…[/quote]

Didn’t you JUST say you didn’t want to talk to me? Did you just change your mind real quick?

Again you proclaim such simplicity in debunking my arguments, but make no effort whatsoever to do so. I call bullshit.

WTF? You already acknowledge that all these questions could be answered by anyone capable of maneuvering Google, but proceed to ask as though these questions will prove anything either way?

You’re not an intelligent man, Pat. If you’re going to talk to me anyway you might as well bring up arguments relative to my argument, is that so damn hard?[/quote]

Come on, dude…is it really necessary insult his intelligence? Pat is a bright guy, and is more open minded than many religious folks I’ve met. For that matter, Tiribulus is intelligent as well. There’s no correlation between intelligence and religious beliefs. Some of the brightest people on the planet are believers.
[/quote]

No, Pat is not a bright guy. His argument is essentially “sure, the bible has flaws, but that’s okay I still take it has 100% indisputable fact!” – intelligent persons don’t do this to themselves.

Despite what you believe, religion DOES correlate with intelligence and as the studies show, atheists score six points higher on the aggregate (controlled for G): Religiosity and intelligence - Wikipedia

Lastly, I’ve never really talked to Tiribulus so I can’t say either way about him.[/quote]

Says the idiot who says somebody said something, they did not say. Oh, wait. Let’s lie about reading several translations of the bible, but cannot attest to one of them.

And I thought Justin beaver was a tool.[/quote]

Pat how many times have we seen this type of approach? The funny part is the kid thinks he’s original LOL- That’s one reason I walked away when he first came in, this act is getting old.
[/quote]

I know age isn’t a factor into validity of one’s argument, but the kid isn’t 20, he’s 17. So…hypothetically let’s say he’s a genius…and he started at 12 (you know when most kids are thinking about girls and cars), 5 years to become proficient of multiple translations of Bibles, history, exegesis, Jewish soliloquies, Greek (not just ordinary Greek, but Greek for Bible), 1st Century Palestinian Aramaic, Hebrew, geography, tradition, customs, feasts, on top of that…diving in to the fast array of early Church fathers to understand what their friends meant when they wrote those all so simple books as well as studying the history of the Bible, the heresies, and on and on and on. Five years for something that takes people decades to understand. Kid is by far the smartest kid I know.

954

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
Lol. The bible is full of errors and contradictions, but that’s okay because it’s only THE BIBLE! The inerrant word of God doesn’t need to be inerrant, it’s not some history book, it’s just a book of (supposed) historical events… way different!!!
Clearly by pointing out these abhorrent flaws I am making the logical fallacy of… being accurate.

Boy, I sure am glad you all took the time to tell me I was wrong, you know, without actually showing the flaws in mt logic, because otherwise I’d be some heathenish SCIENTIST or something childish like that. =3[/quote]

Oh, that was logic?
You talk to much and listen to little. The bible is what it is, I make no apologies for it, but I am pretty sure I know it far better than you. If you don’t like, don’t read it, it’s blatant that you have not. It is no concern of mine. I don’t care. [/quote]

I haven’t read the bible? Why? Because I don’t agree with it? That exact same argument could be used to “justify” ANY religion.

Besides, I’ve listed several verses, all related to the topic at hand, was this just a coincidence? I just typed a name and some numbers and it just happened to fit? Hmm?[/quote]

No, because you don’t know what your talking about.[/quote]

How so? Be specific. [/quote]

All your ‘arguments’ have been made by other athiests. They got them from virtually same sources but unfortunately for you they provided the links. So you ain’t breaking any new ground, I have seen in all before. Same exact things.

So you reckon your self a biblical scholar do you? These questions should be easy for you then, we’ll do a little test.
Who wrote the bible?
When was it written?
Who removed books from the bible and why? What books were they?
Which books got put back?

Google away…[/quote]

Didn’t you JUST say you didn’t want to talk to me? Did you just change your mind real quick?

Again you proclaim such simplicity in debunking my arguments, but make no effort whatsoever to do so. I call bullshit.

WTF? You already acknowledge that all these questions could be answered by anyone capable of maneuvering Google, but proceed to ask as though these questions will prove anything either way?

You’re not an intelligent man, Pat. If you’re going to talk to me anyway you might as well bring up arguments relative to my argument, is that so damn hard?[/quote]

Come on, dude…is it really necessary insult his intelligence? Pat is a bright guy, and is more open minded than many religious folks I’ve met. For that matter, Tiribulus is intelligent as well. There’s no correlation between intelligence and religious beliefs. Some of the brightest people on the planet are believers.
[/quote]

No, Pat is not a bright guy. His argument is essentially “sure, the bible has flaws, but that’s okay I still take it has 100% indisputable fact!” – intelligent persons don’t do this to themselves.

Despite what you believe, religion DOES correlate with intelligence and as the studies show, atheists score six points higher on the aggregate (controlled for G): Religiosity and intelligence - Wikipedia

Lastly, I’ve never really talked to Tiribulus so I can’t say either way about him.[/quote]

Says the idiot who says somebody said something, they did not say. Oh, wait. Let’s lie about reading several translations of the bible, but cannot attest to one of them.

And I thought Justin beaver was a tool.[/quote]

There you go again, attacking me instead of my argument and saying I’m wrong without ever actually saying WHY I’m wrong. When in doubt, shout that you’re right even louder! I’ve given a LIST of every version I’ve read (sent to BC). Your remedial attempts to prove I haven’t read the bible are unimpressive as even you have shown foreknowledge that anyone capable of working Google can pull up info on the bible.

Interesting, though, that upon the explosion of a massive information network like the internet, the bible falls from grace and is rejected more and more every day. One would expect just the opposite to happen if the book really is the word of GOD.

When I say I find you to be an unintelligent person, I’m not merely trying to insult you. I honestly think you would test the lowest IQ out of everyone on this thread (that I’ve spoken to).

955

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

Yes I do believe baptism is essential for salvation. But the man in the article doesn’t seem like he believes in Christ nor was baptized (I don’t know, it didn’t say).

So if he doesn’t believe and is not baptized, he has not faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. So according to scriptures, he is on a path to hell.[/quote]

No where in the Christian Bible does it say that baptism is needed for salvation. Rather it is a public act of faith which shows the rest of the community, Christian and otherwise, that you are in fact now a Christian. It’s really more an act of submission. [/quote]

Then what do you say about 1 Peter 3:21 or Matthew 28:19 where Jesus tells them all to baptize all nations, if it was just a show only…what is making disciples and observation of everything Jesus commanded?

956

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< Glad you believe in Thomism. Catholic Magazines & Religious Articles | Catholic Answers try Chris =] Interesting link though.
[/quote]

Haha.

957

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
In other words, before God created the universe, what was there? Just God? God in heaven with all the angels?[/quote]

Just God.

958

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:
Lol. The bible is full of errors and contradictions, but that’s okay because it’s only THE BIBLE! The inerrant word of God doesn’t need to be inerrant, it’s not some history book, it’s just a book of (supposed) historical events… way different!!!
Clearly by pointing out these abhorrent flaws I am making the logical fallacy of… being accurate.

Boy, I sure am glad you all took the time to tell me I was wrong, you know, without actually showing the flaws in mt logic, because otherwise I’d be some heathenish SCIENTIST or something childish like that. =3[/quote]

Oh, that was logic?
You talk to much and listen to little. The bible is what it is, I make no apologies for it, but I am pretty sure I know it far better than you. If you don’t like, don’t read it, it’s blatant that you have not. It is no concern of mine. I don’t care. [/quote]

I haven’t read the bible? Why? Because I don’t agree with it? That exact same argument could be used to “justify” ANY religion.

Besides, I’ve listed several verses, all related to the topic at hand, was this just a coincidence? I just typed a name and some numbers and it just happened to fit? Hmm?[/quote]

No, because you don’t know what your talking about.[/quote]

How so? Be specific. [/quote]

All your ‘arguments’ have been made by other athiests. They got them from virtually same sources but unfortunately for you they provided the links. So you ain’t breaking any new ground, I have seen in all before. Same exact things.

So you reckon your self a biblical scholar do you? These questions should be easy for you then, we’ll do a little test.
Who wrote the bible?
When was it written?
Who removed books from the bible and why? What books were they?
Which books got put back?

Google away…[/quote]

Didn’t you JUST say you didn’t want to talk to me? Did you just change your mind real quick?

Again you proclaim such simplicity in debunking my arguments, but make no effort whatsoever to do so. I call bullshit.

WTF? You already acknowledge that all these questions could be answered by anyone capable of maneuvering Google, but proceed to ask as though these questions will prove anything either way?

You’re not an intelligent man, Pat. If you’re going to talk to me anyway you might as well bring up arguments relative to my argument, is that so damn hard?[/quote]

Come on, dude…is it really necessary insult his intelligence? Pat is a bright guy, and is more open minded than many religious folks I’ve met. For that matter, Tiribulus is intelligent as well. There’s no correlation between intelligence and religious beliefs. Some of the brightest people on the planet are believers.
[/quote]

No, Pat is not a bright guy. His argument is essentially “sure, the bible has flaws, but that’s okay I still take it has 100% indisputable fact!” – intelligent persons don’t do this to themselves.

Despite what you believe, religion DOES correlate with intelligence and as the studies show, atheists score six points higher on the aggregate (controlled for G): Religiosity and intelligence - Wikipedia

Lastly, I’ve never really talked to Tiribulus so I can’t say either way about him.[/quote]

Says the idiot who says somebody said something, they did not say. Oh, wait. Let’s lie about reading several translations of the bible, but cannot attest to one of them.

And I thought Justin beaver was a tool.[/quote]

Pat how many times have we seen this type of approach? The funny part is the kid thinks he’s original LOL- That’s one reason I walked away when he first came in, this act is getting old.
[/quote]

I know age isn’t a factor into validity of one’s argument, but the kid isn’t 20, he’s 17. So…hypothetically let’s say he’s a genius…and he started at 12 (you know when most kids are thinking about girls and cars), 5 years to become proficient of multiple translations of Bibles, history, exegesis, Jewish soliloquies, Greek (not just ordinary Greek, but Greek for Bible), 1st Century Palestinian Aramaic, Hebrew, geography, tradition, customs, feasts, on top of that…diving in to the fast array of early Church fathers to understand what their friends meant when they wrote those all so simple books as well as studying the history of the Bible, the heresies, and on and on and on. Five years for something that takes people decades to understand. Kid is by far the smartest kid I know.[/quote]

My grandfather died when I was 13. He was a Freemason and I inherited his Freemason paraphernalia. Along with that was his Masonic King James Bible. That was the first bible I’ve read front to back. From there I read a few other full versions and several NT versions. The new testament is surprisingly short and hardly takes a few hours to get through. It doesn’t take decades to get through this, but I guess it takes decades to twist your mind into finding logic in this book.

For someone who denies saying it takes a tri-lingual theologian doctor to be properly opposed to your dogma, you sure are saying a lot of things that suggest such. :wink:

959

[quote]RyuuKyuzo wrote:

Interesting, though, that upon the explosion of a massive information network like the internet, the bible falls from grace and is rejected more and more every day. One would expect just the opposite to happen if the book really is the word of GOD.
[/quote]

Exactly. Notice how God did HUGE MASSIVE THINGS WHICH CLEARLY PROVED HIS EXISTENCE… in the old testament. Then he did …much smaller but still MIRACULOUS THINGS WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE IMPOSSIBLE WITHOUT GOD…in the new testament. Two thousand years ago. If you note the cultural contexts of when each testament was written, you see that the authors of the new tesatment were actually held accountable for truthfulness - so instead of the huge bullshit claims of the OT, you get smaller, much-harder-to-contest bullshit claims in the NT.

And now, when most people in America, and many people in other countries, carry recording devices with them all the time? Where are the fucking miracles appearing on YouTube?

And now, when we have weather systems in place? Where are the random unexplanable acts of God wiping out whole nations?

You would think by now there would be a shred of evidence of the huge claims believers make. Yet, there is none. Not a scratch.

960

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:
Tiribulus, you’re really not even worth it.

Pat, thought occured to me - you say its stupid to say something came from nothing, but, unless you are suggesting a way that God created the universe other than making it from nothing, you’re saying “Something came from nothing because God can do that”.[/quote]

Correct, God can create something out of nothing because he is omnipotent. However, if there is just nothing before the universe, then that would mean that there would be nothing to move it into existence.