>ABOUT THE BIBLE

[New10.]

it is correctly ass_u_med that the story is incorrectly interpreted

because

the interpretation is made by
fallible people (= the sinners) who are vulnerable to errancies,

fallacies,

misleadingness

But not necessarily false or misleading.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."

ABOUT THE BIBLE
By New 10
X

I am not a bible scholar nor have I read the bible,but I have read books by

Scholar's who have read the Bible. It would seem to me
that words spoken two thousand years ago would have a different meaning
today. From its translation from Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, Latin, English
during the course of history these past two thousand years there is some
words that get lost in translation. One other factor that we must take into
consideration and that is the Nicene counsel in the forth century that took
votes of what portion of the bible will be kept or discarded. Another aspect
we must take into consideration, there were further changes in the bible by
Monks sitting in their Monastery scriptorium rewriting worn out bibles to
fit their religious and political views of their time. This is also true
about the King James Version that used the king James English that changed
the meanings of words. Just like each religious denomination does today to
slant the meaning towards their denomination and interpretation of the
Bible. Since the nineteen fifties religious denominations have changed the
meaning of the bible yet again to extricate the vulgar language from the
Bible. Did you know there was a time in the later part of the nineteenth
century there were parts of the bible thought to be too pornographic and was
censored by the moral police of the time? The truth be known, no one really
knows what the bible means. I see the Bible as a work of myth, fable and
folklore. Not any different then the stories found in the Grimm's brothers
fairytales.
If you are not an etymologist, you don't know what the Bibles says
or

means either.

.

*****

[Michael]

Post by New10.
I am not a bible scholar nor have I read the bible

Interesting.

For your information, it's usually better to read something before
proclaiming yourself an expert on it.

Michael.

[R***@kc.rr.com]

It does seem rather strange you'd be spouting off so about somethign oyu've
never acrtually read for yourself...

Sorta weakens your argument considerably don'tcha htink?

Post by New10.

it is correctly ass_u_med that the story is incorrectly interpreted

because

the interpretation is made by
fallible people (= the sinners) who are vulnerable to errancies,

fallacies,

misleadingness

But not necessarily false or misleading.
duke
*****
Matthew 22
14"For many are invited, but few are chosen."

ABOUT THE BIBLE
By New 10
X
I am not a bible scholar nor have I read the bible,but I have read books by
Scholar's who have read the Bible. It would seem to me
that words spoken two thousand years ago would have a different meaning
today. From its translation from Aramaic, Hebrew, Greek, Latin, English
during the course of history these past two thousand years there is some
words that get lost in translation. One other factor that we must take into
consideration and that is the Nicene counsel in the forth century that took
votes of what portion of the bible will be kept or discarded. Another aspect
we must take into consideration, there were further changes in the bible by
Monks sitting in their Monastery scriptorium rewriting worn out bibles to
fit their religious and political views of their time. This is also true
about the King James Version that used the king James English that changed
the meanings of words. Just like each religious denomination does today to
slant the meaning towards their denomination and interpretation of the
Bible. Since the nineteen fifties religious denominations have changed the
meaning of the bible yet again to extricate the vulgar language from the
Bible. Did you know there was a time in the later part of the nineteenth
century there were parts of the bible thought to be too pornographic and was
censored by the moral police of the time? The truth be known, no one really
knows what the bible means. I see the Bible as a work of myth, fable and
folklore. Not any different then the stories found in the Grimm's brothers
fairytales.
If you are not an etymologist, you don't know what the Bibles says
or
means either.
.

*****

[Jeremy]

Post by R***@kc.rr.com
It does seem rather strange you'd be spouting off so about somethign oyu've
never acrtually read for yourself...
Sorta weakens your argument considerably don'tcha htink?

That logic, if taken to its logical conclusion, would allow only biblical
scholars to debate or dispute the allegations of Christians.

If an uneducated hayseed has the right to make allegations in support of his
views on God, then so does anyone else.

The issue, in my view is not what YOU believe. You can believe in the
Man-In-The-Moon, for all anyone cares. The bone of contention is the threat
to our society that results from pushy religionists that use every possible
venue to IMPOSE their idology upon those of us that have not embraced the
same religious principles.

From Mormons and Jehovas Witnesses knocking on my door, to religious
broadcasters that constantly tell everyone that I am destined for eternal
punishment for not having "Accepted Jesus," to sidewalk evangelists that
interrupt me on the sidewalk, or blast their silly message to my unwilling
ears by using bullhorns, you folks have become really irritating.

And you invariably moan and whine that YOU are the ones being persecuted! I
don't know whether you actually believe that, or if you use it just to set
the rest of us off-balance.

I would support legislation that would restrict your right to bother
others--similar to the laws that regulate telemarketers. You may not
believe this, but there are many people that find your evangelizing
intrusive, obnoxious, insulting and rude.

And before you ask me to "prove" that Jesus wasn't the "Son of God," I would
ask you to "prove" that he ever existed at all! If you'd care to check the
scholarly literature, you will find that there is serious doubt that any
such person ever lived, and that the stories made up about his alleged
divinity actually were thought up long after the time that he was supposed
to have lived.

I suggest that you do a Google search and read Thomas Paine's classic work,
"Common Sense." It will give you some food for thought. You should open
your minds up to the other side of the argument--if your doctrines are
sound, they will withstand scrutiny.

And, if you DARE, have a look at the writings of Robert Ingersoll.
Ingersoll died over a century ago, but he was conversant with the Bible, and
he point out many inconsistencies and absurdities. You won't be hearing
anything like that in church this Sunday.

Use the brain that your creator gave you, and weigh the arguments for
yourself.

http://www.positiveatheism.org/tochingr.htm