Total Posts:124|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

What they meant.

bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2014 10:27:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

There is no god-inspired interpretations of the Bible. So if the language is vague or seems to be contradicted by other verses then we are SOL if it was truly a god-inspired message.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2014 10:31:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/20/2014 10:27:49 AM, Skepticalone wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

There is no god-inspired interpretations of the Bible. So if the language is vague or seems to be contradicted by other verses then we are SOL if it was truly a god-inspired message.

None of the indoctrinated will get it.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
birdlandmemories
Posts: 4,140
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2014 10:31:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Dur...
Ashton
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/20/2014 10:44:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/20/2014 10:31:55 AM, birdlandmemories wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Dur...

Thanks............LMFAO
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
uncle-creepy
Posts: 26
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
uncle-creepy
Posts: 26
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2014 2:39:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.

And I'm sure that,among some of those millions that you speak of,are atheists who own Bibles themselves.Perhaps you should seek one of them out for "infallible" interpretations.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/26/2014 4:08:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/26/2014 2:39:29 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.

And I'm sure that,among some of those millions that you speak of,are atheists who own Bibles themselves.Perhaps you should seek one of them out for "infallible" interpretations.

There's actually an interesting point to be made there. Atheists don't tend to have the same width of diversity among Bible interpretations. If I'd never heard of Dr. Seuss and someone I trusted completely handed me a copy of "The Cat in the Hat", and told me that it was a message from an all-powerful ruling creator of the universe, (were I to believe them), I would most certainly read the book with a different understanding than was intended by the author. However, if I simply pick the book up and read what it says, I'm far more likely to receive the same message as anyone else who simply reads it without the preconceptions. Christians have an extremely diverse set of interpretations of the Bible because they're all trying to make it fit the mold offered for it. They're looking for mystical wisdom, unconditional love, objective morality, and an accurate history of the formation of Earth and the universe.

The Bible contains none of the above. But Christians still claim to find such things within the Bible, no matter how many phrases they have to ignore, no matter how many verses they need to re-write, no matter how many words they must substitute for other words, and no matter how much they have to distort both the claims of the book, and the findings of science.

If you want to gain the maximum understanding of any book, read it for what it is... for what it says, and not with the intent of trying to make it fit your preconceptions. You'll find the biggest difference between the Bible and "The Cat in the Hat", is that the authors of the text later selected for inclusion in the Bible (by a council of no authority), were trying to be serious.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Arasa
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 6:31:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

If the bible is the word of God, then what the authors meant is absolutely critical. Because to misinterpret the meaning of a passage, would be to misread the word of God. To take every word of the bible literally, and not apply the interpretive meaning, would surely make you the critic sound more than slightly silly to those around you.

August Rasa, a 4:53 mind
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 9:01:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/26/2014 4:08:41 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:39:29 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.

And I'm sure that,among some of those millions that you speak of,are atheists who own Bibles themselves.Perhaps you should seek one of them out for "infallible" interpretations.

There's actually an interesting point to be made there. Atheists don't tend to have the same width of diversity among Bible interpretations.

That's because the majority of them (on here at least) are afflicted with what has been styled a sort of "selective autism" which renders them temporarily incapable of recognizing literary genres. They're like the "RainMen" of Biblical interpretation. After all, it says "the moon shall be turned to blood". They think that means that the moon will (or has been) turned into a nice combination of RBC's, WBC's, platelets, etc. If not, then the Bible isn't true.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
debateuser
Posts: 1,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 11:02:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 9:01:36 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/26/2014 4:08:41 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:39:29 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.

And I'm sure that,among some of those millions that you speak of,are atheists who own Bibles themselves.Perhaps you should seek one of them out for "infallible" interpretations.

There's actually an interesting point to be made there. Atheists don't tend to have the same width of diversity among Bible interpretations.

That's because the majority of them (on here at least) are afflicted with what has been styled a sort of "selective autism" which renders them temporarily incapable of recognizing literary genres. They're like the "RainMen" of Biblical interpretation. After all, it says "the moon shall be turned to blood". They think that means that the moon will (or has been) turned into a nice combination of RBC's, WBC's, platelets, etc. If not, then the Bible isn't true.

The Bible only has one interpretation before science exposes them. Then back to the drawing board. Lol they will say that their interpretation is correct now. Just take a look at interpretation s in this century alone not to mention many centuries.
Scientific Errors In Religion : Atheists are right that religion is a myth

Read this topic on below link:

http://www.debate.org...
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 11:50:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 11:02:08 PM, debateuser wrote:
At 9/1/2014 9:01:36 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/26/2014 4:08:41 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:39:29 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.

And I'm sure that,among some of those millions that you speak of,are atheists who own Bibles themselves.Perhaps you should seek one of them out for "infallible" interpretations.

There's actually an interesting point to be made there. Atheists don't tend to have the same width of diversity among Bible interpretations.

That's because the majority of them (on here at least) are afflicted with what has been styled a sort of "selective autism" which renders them temporarily incapable of recognizing literary genres. They're like the "RainMen" of Biblical interpretation. After all, it says "the moon shall be turned to blood". They think that means that the moon will (or has been) turned into a nice combination of RBC's, WBC's, platelets, etc. If not, then the Bible isn't true.

The Bible only has one interpretation before science exposes them. Then back to the drawing board. Lol they will say that their interpretation is correct now. Just take a look at interpretation s in this century alone not to mention many centuries.

Lord, you think that Christians as a group believed that the moon would literally be turned into blood, but science came to the rescue?
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/1/2014 11:57:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 11:50:07 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/1/2014 11:02:08 PM, debateuser wrote:
At 9/1/2014 9:01:36 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/26/2014 4:08:41 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:39:29 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.

And I'm sure that,among some of those millions that you speak of,are atheists who own Bibles themselves.Perhaps you should seek one of them out for "infallible" interpretations.

There's actually an interesting point to be made there. Atheists don't tend to have the same width of diversity among Bible interpretations.

That's because the majority of them (on here at least) are afflicted with what has been styled a sort of "selective autism" which renders them temporarily incapable of recognizing literary genres. They're like the "RainMen" of Biblical interpretation. After all, it says "the moon shall be turned to blood". They think that means that the moon will (or has been) turned into a nice combination of RBC's, WBC's, platelets, etc. If not, then the Bible isn't true.

The Bible only has one interpretation before science exposes them. Then back to the drawing board. Lol they will say that their interpretation is correct now. Just take a look at interpretation s in this century alone not to mention many centuries.

Lord, you think that Christians as a group believed that the moon would literally be turned into blood, but science came to the rescue?

Perhaps I was wrong, but I always thought this was a reference to a lunar eclipse.
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 12:25:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 6:31:40 PM, Arasa wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

If the bible is the word of God, then what the authors meant is absolutely critical. Because to misinterpret the meaning of a passage, would be to misread the word of God. To take every word of the bible literally, and not apply the interpretive meaning, would surely make you the critic sound more than slightly silly to those around you.

August Rasa, a 4:53 mind

That's the whole point. It doesn't matter at all what the author meant, it only matters what god meant and that would be what god's words say.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
debateuser
Posts: 1,094
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 2:05:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 11:50:07 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/1/2014 11:02:08 PM, debateuser wrote:
At 9/1/2014 9:01:36 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/26/2014 4:08:41 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:39:29 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.

And I'm sure that,among some of those millions that you speak of,are atheists who own Bibles themselves.Perhaps you should seek one of them out for "infallible" interpretations.

There's actually an interesting point to be made there. Atheists don't tend to have the same width of diversity among Bible interpretations.

That's because the majority of them (on here at least) are afflicted with what has been styled a sort of "selective autism" which renders them temporarily incapable of recognizing literary genres. They're like the "RainMen" of Biblical interpretation. After all, it says "the moon shall be turned to blood". They think that means that the moon will (or has been) turned into a nice combination of RBC's, WBC's, platelets, etc. If not, then the Bible isn't true.

The Bible only has one interpretation before science exposes them. Then back to the drawing board. Lol they will say that their interpretation is correct now. Just take a look at interpretation s in this century alone not to mention many centuries.

Lord, you think that Christians as a group believed that the moon would literally be turned into blood, but science came to the rescue?

Christians did believe the earth was flat, God on a throne and many more myths. Lol
Scientific Errors In Religion : Atheists are right that religion is a myth

Read this topic on below link:

http://www.debate.org...
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 4:07:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/1/2014 9:01:36 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/26/2014 4:08:41 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:39:29 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.

And I'm sure that,among some of those millions that you speak of,are atheists who own Bibles themselves.Perhaps you should seek one of them out for "infallible" interpretations.

There's actually an interesting point to be made there. Atheists don't tend to have the same width of diversity among Bible interpretations.

That's because the majority of them (on here at least) are afflicted with what has been styled a sort of "selective autism" which renders them temporarily incapable of recognizing literary genres. They're like the "RainMen" of Biblical interpretation. After all, it says "the moon shall be turned to blood". They think that means that the moon will (or has been) turned into a nice combination of RBC's, WBC's, platelets, etc. If not, then the Bible isn't true.

And idiots seeking for the Bible to be true, lean so far the other direction, that a day defined as the period between evening and morning, becomes 10,000 years if it suits their purposes, because obviously, the period between evening and morning is WRONG. God making the sun becomes God clearing the vapor in the atmosphere... the vapor the Bible never mentions. "Let there be light" becomes "let there be heat and light", because otherwise you have plants growing in temperatures suitable for a resistance-free superconductor.

Give me ANY child's fairytale and the latitude and license Christians take with the Bible, and I can make an equally credible argument for that fairytale book, being an ultimate and accurate message from the creator of the universe. All one has to do is practice a level of dishonesty, in which you get to claim whatever you read, as meaning whatever you want. And that's why Christians try to berate people who read what the Bible actually says. "Of course it doesn't mean what is says! That would be ridiculous!"
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 4:32:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 4:07:58 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/1/2014 9:01:36 PM, annanicole wrote:
At 8/26/2014 4:08:41 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:39:29 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.

And I'm sure that,among some of those millions that you speak of,are atheists who own Bibles themselves.Perhaps you should seek one of them out for "infallible" interpretations.

There's actually an interesting point to be made there. Atheists don't tend to have the same width of diversity among Bible interpretations.

That's because the majority of them (on here at least) are afflicted with what has been styled a sort of "selective autism" which renders them temporarily incapable of recognizing literary genres. They're like the "RainMen" of Biblical interpretation. After all, it says "the moon shall be turned to blood". They think that means that the moon will (or has been) turned into a nice combination of RBC's, WBC's, platelets, etc. If not, then the Bible isn't true.

And idiots seeking for the Bible to be true, lean so far the other direction, that a day defined as the period between evening and morning, becomes 10,000 years if it suits their purposes, because obviously, the period between evening and morning is WRONG. God making the sun becomes God clearing the vapor in the atmosphere... the vapor the Bible never mentions. "Let there be light" becomes "let there be heat and light", because otherwise you have plants growing in temperatures suitable for a resistance-free superconductor.

I was under the strange impression that sunlight and heat kinda go hand-in-hand. It sure seems that way.

You need to go back and educate us on this imaginary council that convened, argued for 42 years, then unanimously voted "aye" in favor of Matthean authorship. You haven't found it yet. You haven't even found a hint of it yet. Even your fellow atheists are having a tough time finding it. Yet such a claim was the centerpiece of your "evidence" against authorship by Matthew the apostle! If that's the best you can do, well ... so be it.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 4:56:49 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 4:32:03 AM, annanicole wrote:
Even your fellow atheists are having a tough time finding it.

To whom do you refer?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 5:15:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 4:56:49 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/2/2014 4:32:03 AM, annanicole wrote:
Even your fellow atheists are having a tough time finding it.

To whom do you refer?

Any and all atheists who've tried to help out the boy with his wild claim regarding "this imaginary council that convened, argued for 42 years, then unanimously voted 'aye' in favor of Matthean authorship."

He's certainly well on-the-record that such a thing happened, sometime, somewhere, somehow. I even gave the place where he thinks he sees it. Perchance you can step in and help out - but I rather doubt it.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 5:27:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 5:15:35 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/2/2014 4:56:49 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/2/2014 4:32:03 AM, annanicole wrote:
Even your fellow atheists are having a tough time finding it.

To whom do you refer?

Any and all atheists who've tried to help out the boy with his wild claim regarding "this imaginary council that convened, argued for 42 years, then unanimously voted 'aye' in favor of Matthean authorship."

Besides the fact that you are in the wrong thread, if you return to the correct thread you will probably discover that none have.

Now go back where your argument is already dead, this resurrection has failed.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,785
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 5:29:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 5:27:22 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/2/2014 5:15:35 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/2/2014 4:56:49 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/2/2014 4:32:03 AM, annanicole wrote:
Even your fellow atheists are having a tough time finding it.

To whom do you refer?

Any and all atheists who've tried to help out the boy with his wild claim regarding "this imaginary council that convened, argued for 42 years, then unanimously voted 'aye' in favor of Matthean authorship."


Besides the fact that you are in the wrong thread, if you return to the correct thread you will probably discover that none have.

I KNOW none have. I know that none will, either.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 6:11:38 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 5:15:35 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/2/2014 4:56:49 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/2/2014 4:32:03 AM, annanicole wrote:
Even your fellow atheists are having a tough time finding it.

To whom do you refer?

Any and all atheists who've tried to help out the boy with his wild claim regarding "this imaginary council that convened, argued for 42 years, then unanimously voted 'aye' in favor of Matthean authorship."

He's certainly well on-the-record that such a thing happened, sometime, somewhere, somehow. I even gave the place where he thinks he sees it. Perchance you can step in and help out - but I rather doubt it.

Anna has a serious problem when it comes to math. For some, it's easy to see that a council which convened in 325CE for the first time, with the goal of unifying Christianity, and didn't emerge with a canon they could agree upon until 367CE, accounts for a period of 42-years. Perhaps she believes the opening ceremonies ran a little long?

Maybe the fate of Marcion upon arguing with the inclusion of the Old Testament, or Marcion's suggestion of 11 writings of Paul and the Gospel of Luke don't suggest to her that all were not in agreement. Perhaps the Muratorian Canon, the Canon of Origen, the Canon of Eusebius, the Canon of Athanasius and the Canon of the Third Synod of Carthage suggest a fun-loving, cohesive total agreement on which books should be included in the Bible.

And granted, the Muratorian Canon contains 22 of the 27 books of New Testament today - at least, as much as can be read, as the fragment is a "fragment", and is damaged. However, it also lists he Wisdom of Solomon as canonical, and the Apocalypse of Peter. It strictly rejects the Pauline Letters to Laodicea and to Alexandria as forgeries.

Origen accepts the four canonical gospels and the Epistle to the Hebrews, one undisclosed letter of Peter, with the possibility of a second, one letter of John, with the possibility of two others, and the Apocalypse of John. He also, however addresses a problem with the book of Hebrews, while accepting it as canonical, yet expressing the opinion that Paul was not the author.

It can be noted among the writings of Eusebius that some 200-250 years after the earliest surviving Christian writings, it was not uncommon to find vibrant debates over the books to be included in the canon, even within orthodox circles. This - to Anna - appears as complete and total unity and harmony in the selection of the "divine works". Eusebius categorizes the books into a list of "acknowledged books", "disputed books", "spurious books" and "rejected books". In the acknowledged works are included the four gospels, Acts of the Apostles, the epistles of Paul, the first epistle of John and that of Peter, the Apocalypse of John.

Only to one unwilling to see the conflict does this appear to be harmonious agreement without a cause given for rejection or dispute.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Rasputin45
Posts: 35
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 6:18:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

Arguing that the Bible is a god inspired book is troublesome to begin with. The book is a compiled library of contradictory books as you may well know and it has been translated and corrupted by the powerful if it was not bad enough. I'd like to know why any deity would allow their message to get disfigured in the first place. If one was so powerful, why would weak humanity even dare to twist the words?
Grigori Rasputin (James FRJ Hall)
Untertan des "bersicht. Hageln Sie ihm!

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com...
Arasa
Posts: 380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 9:50:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 12:25:24 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/1/2014 6:31:40 PM, Arasa wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

If the bible is the word of God, then what the authors meant is absolutely critical. Because to misinterpret the meaning of a passage, would be to misread the word of God. To take every word of the bible literally, and not apply the interpretive meaning, would surely make you the critic sound more than slightly silly to those around you.

August Rasa, a 4:53 mind

That's the whole point. It doesn't matter at all what the author meant, it only matters what god meant and that would be what god's words say.

So then, God cannot be symbolic in his words? We are to take it as literal that God is the wife of Israel, that Israel is God's literal child, etc?

August Rasa, a 4:53 mind
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 10:07:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Even if the new testament was the Word of God, no Christians could ever obey it. They can't even obey their own religious laws the the Vatican put into action hundreds of years ago.
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 10:08:54 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 10:07:01 AM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Even if the new testament was the Word of God, no Christians could ever obey it. They can't even obey their own religious laws the the Vatican put into action hundreds of years ago.

Thank you for your support.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/2/2014 10:29:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/2/2014 10:08:54 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/2/2014 10:07:01 AM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Even if the new testament was the Word of God, no Christians could ever obey it. They can't even obey their own religious laws the the Vatican put into action hundreds of years ago.

Thank you for your support.

Your welcome my friend. I know that God has indirectly taught you that Christians have no clue who God is or what He "meant" to say in the Bible. You speak more truth in this forum than any Christian does.
Sooner
Posts: 1,012
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/12/2015 5:19:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 8/26/2014 2:30:09 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:51:12 AM, uncle-creepy wrote:
At 8/26/2014 1:32:13 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 8/20/2014 9:38:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
I'm sorry but if the bible is the word of god then what the authors MEANT is absolutely meaningless.

It's what your freakin' god MEANT.

Deal with it.

Where are our infallible interpreters of the bible?

It seems to me that you're just looking to argue with someone.Are you that lonely or bored where you feel an irresistable urge to troll on here?

And,should some "infallible interpreter" turn up,it isn't like you would take them seriously anyway...

Um yeah because s/he would be one of millions with millions of conflicting interpretations.

Besides the discussion involves whether the authors intent matters in interpreting a book that is purportedly the word of god as some interpreters claim.

------
Books are made by man. God reveals however he wishes through whatever he wishes. Even Jesus attacked much of the Old Testament as if it were nonsense. He didn't write anything in the New Testament either. He simply was who he was and comes to those who seek him, giving them revelation in his own way on his terms despite any books. He is not a religion. He simply is. Study up much? I'd have got you on that one when I was 12. Wanna throw another slowball genius? Or are you too busy using multiple user names?
Ignoring problems doesn't make them go away.