Rubbish. Many books about a whole bunch of controversial subjects are written by many authors, and they agree with one another.
Go to amazon.com, type a “controversial subject” in the search box. Count the number of books with more than one author.
Yes, it is the most printed book, but what does that prove? Google is the most visited web site on the internet. Is Google therefore the word of god?
A one time, Bram Stoker’s Dracula was the 2nd most printed book. Should we hoard crucifix and garlic to ward off vampires?
Note also that the most printed Bible version is the Roman Catholic one, not the butchered, man-edited copy you prefer. From your own “argument from popularity,” you’re following the wrong version of Christianity.
That’s ok, though, they’re all wrong.
Again, that proves what? That the Bible got a headstart, being old and widely available?
Other widely translated authors included L. Ron Hubbard (founder of Scientology) and Isaac Asimov (agnostic/atheist).
So, what does translation show, except that some people who read language X want to read the book?
It had the whole Church devoted to keeping it “intact” (as long as the intact parts supported whatever canon was in vogue at the time).
Anyone caught with a Bible would be executed? In 300 A.D.? What, some guy with a mountain of scrolls on his back?
Sheesh, these arguments are so stupid. What is it with you guys and dates? Anything longer than a year seems to confuse you.
If you still don’t get it, the printing press was invented in the 1400s. People didn’t go around carrying Bibles much before that time.
Yeay, yeah. The Bible is full of contradictions, but if you “interpret” it enough, they all go away. God is apparently unable to get anything right, but that’s ok, 'cause he can blame it all on men, another one of his butched up creation.
Let’s tally it up:
God creates angels, some of them rebel against him.
God creates man (and later woman, as he hadn’t anticipated that man would be lonely) and they “fall from grace”. Strike two.
He “inspires” the Bible, supposed to be the True Word of God, but men get it wrong, mistranslate it, misinterpret it, etc, etc. A few thousand years later, we’ve got some 3000 sects/cults/etc of various religion.
God appears to be the George W. Bush of Creation; there’s apparently very little he can’t bungle up.
Convenient of you to pick one of the minor inconsistencies as an example of a contradiction.
I also noticed that you conveniently ignored the link that was given to you that goes into details about the multitudes of contradictions in the Bible.
Yes, god gives the brains, but simply doesn’t want anyone to use it. Be like a child in your reasoning, and you’ll understand the Bible. Read it like an adult should, and it’s simply old mythology.
The Earth is flat, don’t you know? The Bible says so.
[quote]harris447 wrote:
kroby wrote:
The politics forum has been inundated with religion? And it’s now spilling over to other forums?
I formally request a Religion Forum, so as to keep religion OUT of everything else. There are people here that do not want to be accosted. We do not want to lose members out of religious zealousness…
That is all.
Strongly, strongly second.[/quote]
You know you would still check it out when you are bored.
[quote]Tank53 wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
Here is a teaser: The crucifiction of Christ has an alternate ending! And it does not contradict what the disciples claim to have seen!
So what this is like Jesus 2: The less bloody ending? Claim? You’ll have to elaborate for all of us here.
[/quote]
Verse 4:156-159 - That they rejected Faith; That they uttered against Mary A grave false charge; That they said (in boast): ‘We killed Christ Jesus The son of Mary, The Messenger of Allah.’ But they killed him not, Nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjunction to follow, for of a surety they killed him not. Nay, Allah raised him up Unto Himself; and Allah Is Exalted in Power, Wise. And there is none of the people of the book (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (Jesus) Before his death; And on the Day of Judgment He (Jesus) will be a witness Against them.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
harris447 wrote:
kroby wrote:
The politics forum has been inundated with religion? And it’s now spilling over to other forums?
I formally request a Religion Forum, so as to keep religion OUT of everything else. There are people here that do not want to be accosted. We do not want to lose members out of religious zealousness…
That is all.
Strongly, strongly second.
You know you would still check it out when you are bored.[/quote]
I feel I’m partly at fault for this CRAP continuing. Does that make me a troll? Yes, I’d still look into it. As I’ve said before, how can I distinguish myself, if not for an opposing view?
[quote]JPBear wrote:
The godly base their confidence on two truths: 1) “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16); and 2) an elementary rule of Scripture is that God has deliberately included seeming contradictions in His Word to “snare” the proud. He has “hidden” things from the “wise and prudent” and “revealed them to babes” (Luke 10:21), purposely choosing foolish things to confound the wise (1 Corinthians 1:27).
[/quote]
Why would God want to snare anybody? That’s just ridiculous. I’m sorry but I prefer to believe in a God who is above being petty and trying to trick people that think their shit don’t stink. It is beyond me why God would try to confound anybody. Why not save everyone?
[quote]pookie wrote:
Tank53 wrote:
Aleksandr wrote:
Here is a teaser: The crucifiction of Christ has an alternate ending! And it does not contradict what the disciples claim to have seen!
So what this is like Jesus 2: The less bloody ending? Claim? You’ll have to elaborate for all of us here.
Verse 4:156-159 - That they rejected Faith; That they uttered against Mary A grave false charge; That they said (in boast): ‘We killed Christ Jesus The son of Mary, The Messenger of Allah.’ But they killed him not, Nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them, and those who differ therein are full of doubts, with no (certain) knowledge, but only conjunction to follow, for of a surety they killed him not. Nay, Allah raised him up Unto Himself; and Allah Is Exalted in Power, Wise. And there is none of the people of the book (Jews and Christians) But must believe in him (Jesus) Before his death; And on the Day of Judgment He (Jesus) will be a witness Against them.
[/quote]
Damn, Pookie, you sure know a lot about religion! Are you a de-frocked priest or something?
[quote]JPBear wrote:
I did not post that blurb about the Bible for you or any other non-believers. I posted it to strengthen the faith of the other believers.
[/quote]
And there lies the fault with most apologists. It’s a system of logic that is only provable if you accept certain initial conditions that are dubious at best.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
JPBear wrote:
The godly base their confidence on two truths: 1) “all Scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16); and 2) an elementary rule of Scripture is that God has deliberately included seeming contradictions in His Word to “snare” the proud. He has “hidden” things from the “wise and prudent” and “revealed them to babes” (Luke 10:21), purposely choosing foolish things to confound the wise (1 Corinthians 1:27).
Why would God want to snare anybody? That’s just ridiculous. I’m sorry but I prefer to believe in a God who is above being petty and trying to trick people that think their shit don’t stink. It is beyond me why God would try to confound anybody. Why not save everyone?[/quote]
God was/is not petty. That is the ideals of the ones whom wrote the scripture. This is their doing and not the word of god. (come on you crazy fanatics, bring it!)
You can still smell the BS even in such an old and ‘revered’ document.
[quote]JPBear wrote:
Pookie! There you are. I knew you would show up, since I have never met anyone more fascinated with Christianity.[/quote]
Actually, I’m more fascinated with religion itself, be it Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, etc.
Learning about all those religions and the ones that preceded them is really an enlightening experience. You see the same common myths being retold and recycled, similar ideas being adopted by neighboring faiths, especially the old, B.C. ones.
The other interesting aspect is the mind-killing aspect of religion. Where matters of faith are concerned, reason and logic are voluntarily suppressed so as not to allow the believer to see a load of nonsense for what it is. It gets to the point that the more nonsensical something is, the better it is, because it requires more “faith” to believe it.
And finally, if you’re going to argue against something, you should at least know what you’re arguing about. I can’t really dismiss the Bible as an old history and moral tales book unless I’ve read it, can I?
[quote]kroby wrote:
I feel I’m partly at fault for this CRAP continuing. Does that make me a troll? Yes, I’d still look into it. As I’ve said before, how can I distinguish myself, if not for an opposing view?[/quote]
It’d be nice if everyone would stop whining about threads they don’t like.
There’s plenty of threads in this place that I don’t like for whatever reasons. I don’t take the time to post “This thread is lame.” in everyone of them, I just ignore them and move on to the next one.
[quote]JPBear wrote:
I did not post that blurb about the Bible for you or any other non-believers. I posted it to strengthen the faith of the other believers. [/quote]
How does using invalid arguments strengthen anything? Shouldn’t it have the opposite effect? Doesn’t the fact that your beliefs can only be supported by fallacies, circular logic and sophistry tell you something?
[quote]pookie wrote:
kroby wrote:
I feel I’m partly at fault for this CRAP continuing. Does that make me a troll? Yes, I’d still look into it. As I’ve said before, how can I distinguish myself, if not for an opposing view?
It’d be nice if everyone would stop whining about threads they don’t like.
There’s plenty of threads in this place that I don’t like for whatever reasons. I don’t take the time to post “This thread is lame.” in everyone of them, I just ignore them and move on to the next one.
[/quote]
pookie, I wasn’t whining. I was owning up to it - an admission of fault. I’m creepily addicted to this specific thread. I asked for intervention, but got none. Thus, I still patrol, read and join in.
I must admit I really enjoy your ability to enunciate your point of view, and have been waiting for you to join in for some time.
[quote]kroby wrote:
pookie, I wasn’t whining. I was owning up to it - an admission of fault. I’m creepily addicted to this specific thread. I asked for intervention, but got none. Thus, I still patrol, read and join in.[/quote]
It’s like slowing down to look at an accident by the side of the road.
Or staring in fascination at a botched tattoo someone will be wearing for the rest of their lives…
Does that mean I won’t be getting your vote in the Troll Vote thread?
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
What are the differences between Scientology and Christianity other than the fact that we KNOW Scientology is made up and we don’t KNOW that Christianity is made up. I guess I kind of answered my own question there, but I guess what I’m asking (and I’d like to get some serious feedback) is why people who are of Christian faith have chosen to put their faith in that particular religon rather than others?[/quote]
Thanks for your kind responses. At least you arent trying to be so difficult on me to try to pull the “prove it to me” at every turn. That gets pretty aggreviating ya know. But you were good, and I dont mind going on with a bit of other things.
Again I didnt come on here to address every single thing we talked about last. I think some of it must sink in and partly because the details cannot be exhausted. There can always be one more point to address on a deeper topic. One more doubt or debate, and with the fear of sounding cliche, some of the faith part is…well…fath. I mean we doesnt always have to know or understand exactly how something works before we experience it. Certainly something like supplementing or even riding on an airplane works that way. If I had to understand all the intracies of an airplane before I would ride one, I’d never fly! We may not understand how it works like it does, but it does. Just when to finally trust and leave behind the doubts is all personal.
I had two thoughts for you, one while driving to Louisville. One from the post above, here’s an idea. Christianity is the only falsifiable religion in the world. Meaning that, its the only religion that puts itself to stakes. Either Christ did or didnt die on a cross for the sins of this world. Contrastly, its the only religion in the world that can be proven true. That means if Christ really did all those things mentioned in the Bible, all the rest of its true. No other religion has a stake like that. No other religion has a risen (overcoming death) savior. If Christ never returns, I guess we can put to pasture Christianity and call it junk. But if Christ does return, then that puts to pasture all the rest. And this is the single reason why Christians can seem so zealous for the name of Christ. Not always correctly…but you know that…
Secondly, and this is more of a question since I’ve taken so much room. What is your idea of Hell anyhow? Is it the Dante’s Inferno type of eternal damnation and suffering? Satan with a pitch fork always gouging out peoples eyes?
-T
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Well, not arguing with you, just clarifying – imagine if you spoke to someone with a very low IQ and told them to write down what you said. Would they get it perfectly? Not likely. This is how I think of the Bible.
Ever see a movie called ‘PI’ (no, not American Pie:)? The main character starts to figure out the mind of God. It is so painful, he lobotomizes himself with a power drill. He was not yet ready to receive ‘the message’. I don’t think we are ready for the complete message.
[/quote]
No and I think you would be correct if one person was the sole person to copy from one manuscript to another. But the copying of Gods word, from Jewish history, is much more serious than that. People were literally trained in the art of reproducing the exact letters. Two people would actually spending time reproducing the letters that were spoken by God. One would write slowly and another would watch over the shoulder proof reading as it would progress. Any errors would be corrected immediately, and that didnt mean white out!
Not only this, our version of any type of Bible didnt come from a sole source. Thousands upon thousands of replicate Biblical text are referecned for a single word. It would be like having 1,000 math papers, with the answer of 141 for #5. And they should all say the same thing. If there were any inconsistancies, like paper 1001 said 151, it was relied on for the majority that 141 was meant instead of 151.
