The Bible

[DLH]

...

 

[none]

How does it differ from what we experience and what difference does that make? Produce a god? God's are a dime a dozen. You want a god? I can get you a god. Hell, I can get you a god by 3:00 A.M.

A story about a fish isn't going to feed the fisherman nor his family and the God of the bible is just like the metaphorical fish that feeds the fisherman and his family.
God has yet to be produced.
I'd give you credit if you could produce a metaphorical fish, honest I would.

Your mode of speech is difficult to follow, Earthling man.

oh yeah, your education into what astrophysics and chemistry is would help right now.

Well, admittedly, it seems to have worked wonders for you.

let me guess.. you're a comedian.

 

[dystopian]

Enlighten me on the difference between theory and speculation.

In science, a theory is a highly substantiated explanation, acquired through judicious application of the scientific method, confirmed and repeatedly verified through experimental testing and observation; and predictive in nature.

In other words, a scientifc theory is as close to a factual model as one can get. It is just about the exact *opposite* of speculation.

And I didn't mention anything about science.

Except you *did* exactly that the moment you compared the scientific explanation (ie; gravity) for the earth's formation to speculation.

There currently is no question, you mean. That could change.

No, it couldn't. Stellar accretion disks are observed phenomenon. We have predictive models that can show us in exacting details the mechanics of these disks and the accretion process itself. This idea that people like you have, that science can change its mind is based on a complete misunderstanding of how science works and its history. Science does not do 180 degree turns. At times, there are explanations that appear to explain empirical data but which later turn out to be *insufficient*. But one never finds science having a fully developed theory about something only to then throw it all away in exchange for a completely different explanation. Rather, it always turns out that the theory simply gets altered slightly, or added to, in order to explain new observations or experimental results. So again, science doesn't do 180 turns. It does minor course corrections.

Precisely what about it makes no sense whatsoever, in your opinion?

It would be more useful to ask what, if anything, *does* make sense about it.

The answer, however, would be the same in both cases: absolutely nothing.

 

[bilby]

ZZZZZ...

Oh, sorry, I fell asleep trying to read that.

Lessee, proselytizing, against TOU, you may want to fix that.

We'll continue this discussion never.

Which do you think is more revealing, that discussion of sacred text is only likely to be tolerated from the perspective of the infidel or that you bothered to inform me that our discussion was over before it started? I think the latter, though it is extremely close.

Before any discussion of sacred text can occur, you must show that there is such a thing as sacred text. If your text is not sacred, then only the infidel perspective is relevant.

Can you show: A) That there is such a thing as sacred text; and B) That the Bible is such a text?

You might be happy to presume that the Bible is sacred; but I see no reason to elevate it above the other purportedly sacred texts that abound in the world. The Bible, Quaran, Grunth, Gita, Kojiki, Book of Mormon, Egyptian Book of the Dead, and many others have been claimed as sacred texts, but many of them claim to be the ONLY such text, so they can't all be sacred; But it is perfectly possible that none of them are.

 

[DLH]

Certainly misunderstood by many. The most basic misunderstanding is that it is one coherent thing. It is not. "The Bible" (and there are many versions) is really an anthology of works, compiled over a long period of time and subsequently edited and translated over and over again.

It has been my experience that skeptics tend to regurgitate propaganda they've read about the Bible without giving it much thought. At the risk of being supplied a smart ass non-answer, what, exactly, isn't coherent within the text itself, and what alleged effect, if any, has resulted negatively from the alleged editing and repeated translation?

In a very real way, the Bible is itself propaganda. Books written with an eye to proving that Jesus was the messiah. It isn't a miracle or a coincidence that Jesus is claimed to have "fulfilled" all the "prophecies" you mentioned earlier. The "meaning" of the New Testament is salesmanship.


If you're here to make the sales pitch, you may find yourself disappointed. We've heard it many times.

I haven't anything to sell, as such, Mr. Prefect, I simply seek dialogue.

 

[DLH]

How does it differ from what we experience and what difference does that make? Produce a god? God's are a dime a dozen. You want a god? I can get you a god. Hell, I can get you a god by 3:00 A.M.



Your mode of speech is difficult to follow, Earthling man.

oh yeah, your education into what astrophysics and chemistry is would help right now.

Well, admittedly, it seems to have worked wonders for you.

let me guess.. you're a comedian.

Not as such. Not a very original one, anyway. The first line was paraphrasing The Big Lebowski, the second line quoted Slartibartfast speaking to Dent, Arthur Dent in the original British Television series Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and the third line was my own sarcasm.

 

[none]

How does it differ from what we experience and what difference does that make? Produce a god? God's are a dime a dozen. You want a god? I can get you a god. Hell, I can get you a god by 3:00 A.M.



Your mode of speech is difficult to follow, Earthling man.

oh yeah, your education into what astrophysics and chemistry is would help right now.

Well, admittedly, it seems to have worked wonders for you.

let me guess.. you're a comedian.

Not as such. Not a very original one, anyway. The first line was paraphrasing The Big Lebowski, the second line quoted Slartibartfast speaking to Dent, Arthur Dent in the original British Television series Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, and the third line was my own sarcasm.

just let me know the next time you say something stupid, ok?

 

[Duke Leto]

The vindication Of Jehovah God's name through the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus. From there we begin to learn what that is all about.

In case I was not sufficiently clear, the above is Preaching/Proselytizing.

When you created your profile, you accepted a group of Terms of Use, which expressly forbid using the forum as a platform for preaching or proselytizing.

So when I informed you that the conversation was over, that might technically be considered "prophesy".

We're now simply waiting for one of the Mods to notice, shitcan the thread and hit you with an infraction.

By all means, feel free to accelerate the process by telling us more about how wonderful "The Bible" TM is.

 

[DLH]

just let me know the next time you say something stupid, ok?

Alas, I'm afraid I'm not at leisure to keep you so well informed. I have much to do and so you will have to keep abreast of my stupidity of your own accord.

 

[DLH]

The vindication Of Jehovah God's name through the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus. From there we begin to learn what that is all about.

In case I was not sufficiently clear, the above is Preaching/Proselytizing.

When you created your profile, you accepted a group of Terms of Use, which expressly forbid using the forum as a platform for preaching or proselytizing.

So when I informed you that the conversation was over, that might technically be considered "prophesy".

We're now simply waiting for one of the Mods to notice, shitcan the thread and hit you with an infraction.

By all means, feel free to accelerate the process by telling us more about how wonderful "The Bible" TM is.

Fascinating. The intensity of dysfunction is remarkable! What power you grant me over you I do not care to accept the responsibility of. To what end your hatred and intolerance would be satiated is terribly alarming. If I, like Maud'dib buried deep beneath the desert sand, dare to follow it's possible paths to their various conclusions I would likely see very little good coming of it and a great deal of harm. Why don't you set that God free in your mind. Just let it go and trouble you no more.

Perhaps we could talk about The Dhammapada instead?

 

[Ford]

I simply seek dialogue.

 

[Iznomneak]

You have to be fucking kidding me. Are we talking about the same Bible?

Wow. Noble Savage, Iznomneak, Keith&Co. . . . the entire former SAB mob in attendance. This is like old times.

Yes, Noble. The same Bible.

I could be mistaken, but I think this NobleSavage is a different person than the one who posted at the SAB. Are you the guy at the SAB with multiple aliases that would go back and delete all of his posts?

 

[Iznomneak]

what, exactly, isn't coherent within the text itself,

How about the bit about a talking snake? That should be a clue that you are reading fiction.

 

[DLH]

what, exactly, isn't coherent within the text itself,

How about the bit about a talking snake? That should be a clue that you are reading fiction.

Not actually a talking snake. Or in the case of Balaam, talking donkey. Now in the case of the snake, or serpent, its obviously the spirit being later known as Satan, using the serpent as a puppet. In the case of Balaam's ass, the spirit being, or angel, is actually revealed to be as such. Numbers 22:22-35 / 2 Peter 2:15, 16. Interestingly, at Numbers 22:22 the word satan first appears in the Bible, and it is in application to a righteous angel sent on behalf of Jehovah God, since the Hebrew word satan simply means resister or adversary. The angel was an adversary or resisting Balaam.

 

[DLH]

I could be mistaken, but I think this NobleSavage is a different person than the one who posted at the SAB. Are you the guy at the SAB with multiple aliases that would go back and delete all of his posts?

I see. Thanks for the correction on Noble Savage, and yes, I am the one and . . . well . . . only, in effect, of whom you speak, but I no longer act like the idiot you may recall. I don't have time for such nonsense.

 

[none]

pfft, don't get ahead of yourself.. I am still waiting for you to admit God is a metaphor for gravity in Genesis 1:1 and in Genesis 1:2-5 morning and evening are a metaphor for dog years

 

[DLH]

Before any discussion of sacred text can occur, you must show that there is such a thing as sacred text. If your text is not sacred, then only the infidel perspective is relevant.

That's a peculiar line of reasoning. Since sacred is dependent upon the beholder whatever then is deemed sacred is therefore, sacred. For example, in the Bible a "sacred pillar" was likely an idol of a false god. (Exodus 23:24 / 2 Kings 3:2; 10:27)

sacred, an adjective, connected with God or a god or dedicated to a religious purpose and so deserving veneration. "sacred rites" synonyms: holy, hallowed, blessed, blest, consecrated, sanctified, dedicated, venerated, revered "only the priest was allowed to approach this most sacred place" religious rather than secular. "sacred music" synonyms: religious, spiritual, devotional, church, churchly, ecclesiastical "sacred music" (of writing or text) embodying the laws or doctrines of a religion. "a sacred Hindu text"

Can you show: A) That there is such a thing as sacred text; and B) That the Bible is such a text?

For me to specifically do as you ask I suppose I would have to have your definition of "sacred" because I think that we are at odds regarding that. But really, read some of the posts made by your colleagues here and its pretty obvious, isn't it. The Quran is discussed and then the majority of posts on the first page of this forum are dedicated to brief nonsensical childlike blurbs on the Bible. I'm not a Christian, by the way. I've never belonged to any religion.

You might be happy to presume that the Bible is sacred; but I see no reason to elevate it above the other purportedly sacred texts that abound in the world. The Bible, Quaran, Grunth, Gita, Kojiki, Book of Mormon, Egyptian Book of the Dead, and many others have been claimed as sacred texts, but many of them claim to be the ONLY such text, so they can't all be sacred; But it is perfectly possible that none of them are.

That's a typical statement of an uninformed skeptic. Most of those texts arguably don't make a claim to be divinely inspired, which is the real problem here, I think.

 

[ideologyhunter]

DLH, welcome. We all want you to get acquainted with the works of another member, Syed. Do look him up. You have a remarkable affinity with him, with only one insubstantial deviation that I detect. You & Syed would get along swimmingly. As for the ur-god Jehovah that you speak of, he behaves too much like the swinish satrap of a Mideast rump-state to impress most of us, these days.

 

[DLH]

DLH, welcome. We all want you to get acquainted with the works of another member, Syed. Do look him up. You have a remarkable affinity with him, with only one insubstantial deviation that I detect. You & Syed would get along swimmingly. As for the ur-god Jehovah that you speak of, he behaves too much like the swinish satrap of a Mideast rump-state to impress most of us, these days.

This is a tough room.

- - - Updated - - -

pfft, don't get ahead of yourself.. I am still waiting for you to admit God is a metaphor for gravity in Genesis 1:1 and in Genesis 1:2-5 morning and evening are a metaphor for dog years

Let's go back to the topic. The vindication of Jehovah God's name through the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus. What do you think that might mean?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The Bible is a terribly misunderstood work. Misrepresented by Christendom and slandered by the heathen, it is unfortunate that the meaning of the Bible is obscured by what amounts to little more than political propaganda from each side. If we set this aside, and we take an honest look at the Bible, it would do a service to the believer and the unbeliever alike. The meaning of the Bible, being harmonious from Genesis to Revelation, can be summed up in one brief phrase....

If we are God's chosen people, then why in the fuck does it suck so much?!

Just to make it clear, that is the message for the Old Testament.

The message for the New Testament was "We are a serious church, give us your money."