Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I can't help but think of babybird's posts as a series of meaningless twitterings. Any posts about "faith' in a discussion of the credibility of the nativity stories are irrelevant.
to you, perhaps, yes. But then, you seek to "prove" the "facts" in what should be understood as a parable, a mythology meant to convey unassailable Truth across Eras of Time, to the people trapped in them. Wadr. And if it is not for you, then be blessed, and have a good day. You are not being even asked to pick it up. You are perfect, just like you are.
Indeed my old cabbage. It's just meaningless drivel to most here.
see here that you seek to include others into your pov, and are ever-so-quick to pounce on any opportunity to do so...to what end? to ignore the ones who have not spoken, yet may not agree? To invalidate them? To invalidate any truth that has been conveyed; if not to you, then to others? Or is it to pet yourself, Raf? Since you have not done any of the others; since it was not even necessary for me to post this, but for you? To diminish "me," and elevate Yourself? But i forgive you, ok?
You cannot make a blanket statement that "the Bible is not meant to be taken literally."
The Bible is not meant to be taken literally.
see that that is strictly the position of those who hold the Book as their God, who nonetheless cannot even read It, and who worship a Snake on a Pole, even though they do not grasp either Salvation, nor the easily discovered end of the Nehushtan worshippers, placed in the Book for all to see, even if those who claim to already be in the Promised Land cannot.
Dead straight, , and that Matthias who was deposed had seen the Malak of YHWH at the altar as he performed his ministration, and he did later then have a dream of his wife, (which caused him to become ritually impure for the great day of the fast, Yom Kippurim, which was the day following his night-dream, when Yoseph ben Ellem stood in his place for that one day). And when he was suspected in the golden eagle episode, (along with the other Matthias who was burned alive), Herod deposed him. And he went into the wilderness, counting all as loss, (sound familiar?), and became a Nazarite rebel leader, and was likely elected by the rebels themselves as their Kohen Gadol, (and Yohanan was "born"). But when he was finally immersed himself there was fire on the Yarden River, and all his hair was burned off, (for he was an hairy man like Eliyahu), an everything changed again, (forever).
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
Yes, it was a ritual impurity (Josephus doesn't say what ) that disqualified for Yom Kippur, so a pinch hitter had to be sent in and, as you say he was implicated for involvement in the matter of the eagle statue on the temple and removed by Herod or perhaps Archelaus.
Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken.
you two could be extremely dangerous. i would stay quiet as long as you can
take the Bible as literally as you like; educate and regale me with lessons containing direct quotes from Adam, or Eve, if that is your wont. You do not have to change, for me. And you do not ever have to change, if you don't want to. It is us that must reap what we sow.
Which is of course often taken to mean some kind of curse, just like "i hope you get what you deserve," when it is in fact a blessing, "Have it your way."
There is no condemnation in those who are in Christ.
(which you may interpret, or allow a Fundie to interpret for you)
and now, if i could, i would like to ask you a question--that a plant i have, in a cheap garden center dark green pot, just asked me--how does this plant, the root of this plant, "know" that there is soil beneath the pot, and "know" to break the ("solid," no holes in it) bottom of the pot, and find the nourishment of the soil beneath it?
to you, perhaps, yes. But then, you seek to "prove" the "facts" in what should be understood as a parable, a mythology meant to convey unassailable Truth across Eras of Time, to the people trapped in them. Wadr. And if it is not for you, then be blessed, and have a good day. You are not being even asked to pick it up. You are perfect, just like you are.
Ok. I get that. The fact is that apologetics often tries to argue the Bible as reliable historical fact, especially the Gospels. Or, at least enough to underpin the Christian beliefs about who Jesus was, what he did and said and that he rose in solid form after being dead.
If you are not interested in the matter as (debated) historical fact but as symbolis, metaphor or whatever, then we have nothing to argue about as I am not interested in that aspect very much, and am certainly not going to have my views changed by discussion about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbyrd009
Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken.
I am happy to stand alone, though Raffs' assistance is much appreciated. The quote I'd use is Plato (claiming to quote Socrates) "It is easy to withstand Socrates; it is the truth that you cannot withstand".
Quote:
you two could be extremely dangerous. i would stay quiet as long as you can
I think both of us would take that a great big compliment. And (being a garrulous old bod) I would observe that, if the claims of Christianity and the matter of Bible reliability are true, there is nothing to be fearful of in discussing it. The ongoing demands that we treat it like eggshell porcelain merely makes me think that, deep down, they know it don't stack up.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 11-20-2016 at 02:32 PM..
Ok. I get that. The fact is that apologetics often tries to argue the Bible as reliable historical fact, especially the Gospels. Or, at least enough to underpin the Christian beliefs about who Jesus was, what he did and said and that he rose in solid form after being dead.
and so, a valid interpretation there is that you seek to suppress your best evidence of the state of another's heart, others hearts, rather than use that information to your advantage, all the while smiling in their face, and saying "thank you." Why not be as clever as a fox, and as harmless as a dove? and then come teach us, me, how?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
If you are not interested in the matter as (debated) historical fact but as symbolis, metaphor or whatever, then we have nothing to argue about as I am not interested in that aspect very much, and am certainly not going to have my views changed by discussion about it.
fair enough. i do not know what i am talking about, anyway. Who says he knows does not yet know as he ought
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
The quote I'd use is Plato (claiming to quote Socrates) "It is easy to withstand Socrates; it is the truth that you cannot withstand".
Look, I know you are depending on Egypt, that splintered reed of a staff, which pierces the hand of anyone who leans on it
but then, coming from Esau and all, you might find some salt for that...
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
I would observe that, if the claims of Christianity and the matter of Bible reliability are true, there is nothing to be fearful of in discussing it. The ongoing demands that we treat it like eggshell porcelain merely makes me think that, deep down, they know it don't stack up.
please see my first reply in this post.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) that disqualified for Yom Kippur, so a pinch hitter had to be sent in and, as you say he was implicated for involvement in the matter of the eagle statue on the temple and removed by Herod or perhaps Archelaus.
And (being a garrulous old bod) I would observe that, if the claims of Christianity and the matter of Bible reliability are true, there is nothing to be fearful of in discussing it. The ongoing demands that we treat it like eggshell porcelain merely makes me think that, deep down, they know it don't stack up.
