After 400 years, KJV Bible still influential

Mar 5, 2011 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Jackson Sun

The King James Bible was first printed in 1611 as part of an effort by King James I to release a Bible that would unify the church.

Comments (Page 3)

Showing posts 41 - 59 of59
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:

“Trying to figure it all out!”

Since: Mar 11

jackson tn

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Mar 14, 2011
 
Dickens wrote:
<quoted text>Why is "God did it" the easiest answer? I can't see where it would be any easier than "the Big Bang did it" or "Evolution did it", etc. Care to elaborate?
God did it tends to be the easiest answer because it requires no more searching. It's easy and comfortable to take what your parents tell you is truth rather than questioning it.

“Trying to figure it all out!”

Since: Mar 11

jackson tn

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Mar 14, 2011
 
Dickens wrote:
None The Less wrote, "Your post is a good example of how religion is a crutch."

You say that like "crutch" is a bad word. What's so wrong with a crutch, after all? If a man is wounded or sick or weak, a crutch is a helpful thing and the man would be foolish not to depend on one. From a believer's point of view, Man is indeed wounded and sick and weak unto death, and Jesus lovingly offers Himself as a crutch for Man to lean on.

Have you heard the old hymn, "Leaning, leaning, leaning on the everlasting Arms?"
Well it creates false hope. A crutch used for an injury is tangible. If you lean on faith you will eventually fall over. Faith is not a tangible crutch.

“Reason's Greetings!”

Since: Feb 11

Pale Blue Dot

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Mar 14, 2011
 
I just want to interject a problem with using quotes of people from days of yore, especially people that were involved in politics. Because of the power that the churches had over people like labeling them heretics, blasphemers, or the threat of excommunication these political people had to maintain a very pro-religious public profile. Otherwise, their political and professional careers would be finished.

For example, today we often hear that this country was founded on religion. Well, yes and no. Granted that many of the founding fathers were of the christian faith in public, their private letters and correspondence many times told a different story.

Anyone can google it, and you may be surprised at the disdain and hostility many times shown towards christianity. Some to look for are the private letters by Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, especially the private correspondence between Adams and Jefferson.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#44
Mar 14, 2011
 
MrDesoto1 wrote:
I just want to interject a problem with using quotes of people from days of yore, especially people that were involved in politics. Because of the power that the churches had over people like labeling them heretics, blasphemers, or the threat of excommunication these political people had to maintain a very pro-religious public profile. Otherwise, their political and professional careers would be finished.
For example, today we often hear that this country was founded on religion. Well, yes and no. Granted that many of the founding fathers were of the christian faith in public, their private letters and correspondence many times told a different story.
Anyone can google it, and you may be surprised at the disdain and hostility many times shown towards christianity. Some to look for are the private letters by Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, especially the private correspondence between Adams and Jefferson.
I second your motion, MrDesoto1

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#45
Mar 14, 2011
 
Cant deny this wrote:
I think you as a person have two choices, you will live and die with no faith and you and the people you love will disappear or you will live and die with faith and you will live on in another way along with the people you love.
What you propose is a false dichotomy. You cannot choose to MAKE a place just because you BELIEVE and WANT it to exist. The two real choices are one, you can accept that you have one very exiting life to enjoy or two, you can trick yourself in to thinking this life doesn't matter because you will be immortal if you accept something from an ancient book.
Cant deny this wrote:
I dont understand how a person can live with the stress of life working 40 hours or more weekly trying to build a decent life with a house car wife and children and know it is all for nothing because you will die in a few years and your life and work will simply disappear.
Why would you say such an insulting thing. Assume your grandfather and/or father passes away. Do you suddenly forget they ever existed? Certainly not, everything they ever taught you continues on. They live on through you. Yes, the brain which contained their mind has stopped functioning but claiming that the things they worked for just disappear is absurd.

What it boils down to is real life not being what we want it to be. You can either get over your failed expectations and work with what you have or you can wrap yourself in the denial of religion and wishful thinking. I for one have accepted my fate and plan on living this one life to the fullest.
Dickens

Ripley, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#46
Mar 14, 2011
 
MrDesoto1 wrote:
I just want to interject a problem with using quotes of people from days of yore, especially people that were involved in politics. Because of the power that the churches had over people like labeling them heretics, blasphemers, or the threat of excommunication these political people had to maintain a very pro-religious public profile. Otherwise, their political and professional careers would be finished.
For example, today we often hear that this country was founded on religion. Well, yes and no. Granted that many of the founding fathers were of the christian faith in public, their private letters and correspondence many times told a different story.
Anyone can google it, and you may be surprised at the disdain and hostility many times shown towards christianity. Some to look for are the private letters by Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, especially the private correspondence between Adams and Jefferson.
I don't think you'll find any sources that say our country was founded on religion. It was founded on "religious freedom"...the freedom of each individual to believe and worship as his conscience dictated. The early settlers upon these shores were a people leaving the old world of state-ordered religion and the persecution that came by defying such religion. A great many of America's pioneers were protestants seeking refuge from the Roman Catholic Church. Our Founding Fathers wanted to establish a nation where men would be free to believe or not to believe as they saw fit.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#47
Mar 14, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

Dickens wrote:
<quoted text>
Why is "God did it" the easiest answer? I can't see where it would be any easier than "the Big Bang did it" or "Evolution did it", etc. Care to elaborate?
Allow me to explain the difference.

Nobody says "the Big Bang did" anything, rather the Big Bang describes the event itself.

Evolution describes a process which can be explained. It is not a force or mind with intent.

Lastly, we can show through the expansion of the universe that the Big Bang almost certainly happened. We can show through fossil record and comparative DNA how all animals are related at approximately how far back they split into different species.

When someone says God did it, it answers nothing. It doesn't explain HOW or make any predictions. Think of it as a place holder. There is no difference between "God did it" and "I don't know" but "God did it" is the end of the journey for the faithful, saying "I don't know" is just the beginning for the scientist.
Dickens

Ripley, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#48
Mar 14, 2011
 
MrDesoto1 wrote:
I just want to interject a problem with using quotes of people from days of yore, especially people that were involved in politics. Because of the power that the churches had over people like labeling them heretics, blasphemers, or the threat of excommunication these political people had to maintain a very pro-religious public profile. Otherwise, their political and professional careers would be finished.
For example, today we often hear that this country was founded on religion. Well, yes and no. Granted that many of the founding fathers were of the christian faith in public, their private letters and correspondence many times told a different story.
Anyone can google it, and you may be surprised at the disdain and hostility many times shown towards christianity. Some to look for are the private letters by Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, especially the private correspondence between Adams and Jefferson.
I don't think it is necessary to look into the private letters of the 3 men you named. Each one was were quite outspoken and took little precaution in publishing their opinions. They didn't have to...the Roman Catholic Church was not firmly entrenched here and posed no threat to them in this land of religious freedom. They were Deists, and did not adhere to any "revealed" doctrine. In varying degrees, these 3 took issue with Christianity, that is true. I know of no accounts where any of the men I quoted, those who professed faith in God, ever renounced their professions or watered down their faith in any way. If you can prove me wrong, I will welcome the correction. I would not want to include in my list of the famous men of faith any who were practiced duplicity.

“Trying to figure it all out!”

Since: Mar 11

jackson tn

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#49
Mar 14, 2011
 
Dickens wrote:
<quoted text>I don't think it is necessary to look into the private letters of the 3 men you named. Each one was were quite outspoken and took little precaution in publishing their opinions. They didn't have to...the Roman Catholic Church was not firmly entrenched here and posed no threat to them in this land of religious freedom. They were Deists, and did not adhere to any "revealed" doctrine. In varying degrees, these 3 took issue with Christianity, that is true. I know of no accounts where any of the men I quoted, those who professed faith in God, ever renounced their professions or watered down their faith in any way. If you can prove me wrong, I will welcome the correction. I would not want to include in my list of the famous men of faith any who were practiced duplicity.
Well I don't personally see the point. Other than trying to correct freethinkers post of intelligence versus faith. Of course it is possible to be intelligent and still believe in god. It's also possible to be intelligent and not why a toilet flushes. It's irrelevant at best....but I know you was just addressing his post. However I tend to think when people say that with religion there is lack of intelligence it is more in reference to not being openminded to other alternatives....which I see tons of examples on these forums alone. By the way.....do you know why a toilet flushes? Lol
Dickens

Ripley, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#50
Mar 14, 2011
 

Judged:

1

FreeThinker82 wrote:
<quoted text>
Allow me to explain the difference.
Nobody says "the Big Bang did" anything, rather the Big Bang describes the event itself.
Evolution describes a process which can be explained. It is not a force or mind with intent.
Lastly, we can show through the expansion of the universe that the Big Bang almost certainly happened. We can show through fossil record and comparative DNA how all animals are related at approximately how far back they split into different species.
When someone says God did it, it answers nothing. It doesn't explain HOW or make any predictions. Think of it as a place holder. There is no difference between "God did it" and "I don't know" but "God did it" is the end of the journey for the faithful, saying "I don't know" is just the beginning for the scientist.
I can accept that "the Big Bang almost certainly happened"...that could have been the supersonic reverberating inhalation of breath that my God took as He spoke the universe into being.

I can accept DNA evidence that proves all earth's creatures are related...from the tiniest microbe to the great white whale, the same Father sired us all.
Dickens

Ripley, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#51
Mar 14, 2011
 
Nonetheless wrote:
<quoted text>
Well I don't personally see the point. Other than trying to correct freethinkers post of intelligence versus faith. Of course it is possible to be intelligent and still believe in god. It's also possible to be intelligent and not why a toilet flushes. It's irrelevant at best....but I know you was just addressing his post. However I tend to think when people say that with religion there is lack of intelligence it is more in reference to not being openminded to other alternatives....which I see tons of examples on these forums alone. By the way.....do you know why a toilet flushes? Lol
I'd like to hear you explain "openminded to other alternatives". What exactly does that phrase mean?

I will go out on a limb here and say I think the force of gravity is what makes a toilet flush. But what do I know of such mundane things?!

“Trying to figure it all out!”

Since: Mar 11

jackson tn

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#52
Mar 14, 2011
 
Dickens wrote:
<quoted text>I'd like to hear you explain "openminded to other alternatives". What exactly does that phrase mean?

I will go out on a limb here and say I think the force of gravity is what makes a toilet flush. But what do I know of such mundane things?!
For instance those who refuse to let go of the thought that we all come from 2 people, that the earth was completely flooded, that the end of the world was predicted 2000 years ago by desert dwellers, etc etc.

Gravity definitely plays the main role in causing the water to go down the drain....but then what keeps all of it from leaving the bowl? And why does it seem to "suck" everything down?

The answers are irrelevant. The point is we take things for granted. Just because we think we know something or someone has given us an answer does not mean we shouldn't seek the truth for ourselves. And before you say that's what you have done because you "feel" god.....ask yourself what that feeling would be if you, just for a second, decided god was imaginary? Would these feelings be emotional responses in your brain or would you still assume a supernatural being is influencing you?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#53
Mar 14, 2011
 
Dickens wrote:
<quoted text>
I can accept that "the Big Bang almost certainly happened"...that could have been the supersonic reverberating inhalation of breath that my God took as He spoke the universe into being.
I can accept DNA evidence that proves all earth's creatures are related...from the tiniest microbe to the great white whale, the same Father sired us all.
Breath? Really?
In other words, it was magic. See how everything you just said is a non-answer. Guess not...and that's the problem.

Please reference God of the gaps.

“Trying to figure it all out!”

Since: Mar 11

jackson tn

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#54
Mar 14, 2011
 
FreeThinker82 wrote:
<quoted text>Breath? Really?
In other words, it was magic. See how everything you just said is a non-answer. Guess not...and that's the problem.

Please reference God of the gaps.
It is a fascinating psychological phenomenon how people justify their belief in ancient answers. This is what interests me most about the subject. I can't help but be awestruck by the human brain and it's ability to influence our judgement based on emotion.
Dickens

Ripley, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#55
Mar 14, 2011
 
FreeThinker82 wrote:
<quoted text>
Breath? Really?
In other words, it was magic. See how everything you just said is a non-answer. Guess not...and that's the problem.
Please reference God of the gaps.
My answers are no more "magic" than yours. I honestly don't see how you can keep a straight face when you say a Big Bang brought the universe into being.

Maybe I was being a little too poetic in my response but I have no problem using my imagination in picturing the moment of conception for our universe, for what else do the scientists use when they theorize it all began with a Big Bang.

I say it's possible everything began with a Big Bang or a huge Whoopti Do or a whisper...I just don't rule out God as the force behind it. You say Big Bang but can't explain what set it in motion and you stop there...you are unwilling to say that Something god-like could have initiated it all.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#56
Mar 15, 2011
 
Dickens wrote:
<quoted text>
My answers are no more "magic" than yours. I honestly don't see how you can keep a straight face when you say a Big Bang brought the universe into being.
Maybe I was being a little too poetic in my response but I have no problem using my imagination in picturing the moment of conception for our universe, for what else do the scientists use when they theorize it all began with a Big Bang.
I say it's possible everything began with a Big Bang or a huge Whoopti Do or a whisper...I just don't rule out God as the force behind it. You say Big Bang but can't explain what set it in motion and you stop there...you are unwilling to say that Something god-like could have initiated it all.
I don't know if just can't see the difference or you don't want to. I'll give you the long answer after I get to work.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#57
Mar 15, 2011
 
Dickens wrote:
My answers are no more "magic" than yours. I honestly don't see how you can keep a straight face when you say a Big Bang brought the universe into being.
I can keep a straight face because science has a decent approximation about how it happened. I've made many references to these possibilities. I can say, with a straight face, that they might not be entirely correct or describe every detail. Hell, we might never be able to know for sure. I can at least admit that and it is not by any definition magic. Your position holds that a MIND a BEING with PURPOSE and WILL just spoke (without a mouth/air/vocal cords BTW) and it happened. That is hocus-pocus nonsense and I honestly don't see how you say that with a straight face.
Dickens wrote:
Maybe I was being a little too poetic in my response but I have no problem using my imagination in picturing the moment of conception for our universe, for what else do the scientists use when they theorize it all began with a Big Bang.
I'm sorry you are under the misapprehension that scientist just used their imagination to "come up with" the Big Bang, like they just pulled it out of their ass. The Big Bang theory is result of Edwin Hubble's discovery of an expanding universe. He discovered this by showing a correlation between the distance of objects and their Doppler shift into the red. Now, if almost every galaxy is moving away from every other galaxy it means that at some point in the past (approximately 13.7 billion years) everything was together. If everything was compressed together and then expanded extremely extremely fast then you have a bang. BTW, the Big Bang was originally a derogatory term coined by a angry Christian cosmologist who insisted that the stead state (eternal) universe was correct.
Dickens wrote:
I say it's possible everything began with a Big Bang or a huge Whoopti Do or a whisper...I just don't rule out God as the force behind it. You say Big Bang but can't explain what set it in motion and you stop there...you are unwilling to say that Something god-like could have initiated it all.
I rule it out because you are taking a chain of events, which if watched in reverse, become simpler and simpler until you have something smaller than an atom and then interject the unfounded notion that something infinitely complex started it. You offer no explanation of where this MIND originated or how it originated, it just IS because you want it to be. Then you insist on making it anthropomorphic with descriptions of IT speaking/breathing the universe into existence. On top of that your claim is without any evidence to show it is even necessary. You are just exploiting a gap in our scientific knowledge and shoehorning in your personal deity. Again, your proposition that "God caused it" really explains nothing. That is why I am unwilling to accept something god-like initiated it at this time; NO EVIDENCE, NO NEED.
ThomasA

Gadsden, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#58
Mar 15, 2011
 
Dickens wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think you'll find any sources that say our country was founded on religion. It was founded on "religious freedom"...the freedom of each individual to believe and worship as his conscience dictated. The early settlers upon these shores were a people leaving the old world of state-ordered religion and the persecution that came by defying such religion. A great many of America's pioneers were protestants seeking refuge from the Roman Catholic Church. Our Founding Fathers wanted to establish a nation where men would be free to believe or not to believe as they saw fit.
And how did our founding fathers treat the native Americans in the new world? They demanded they accept Christianity or die. They demanded that the Indians wear clothes and act like them or else. There's a problem today with our Christian brothers still demanding that people at large live by Christian standards and Biblical teachings or get treated like the Indians.
Dickens

Ripley, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#59
Mar 15, 2011
 
ThomasA wrote:
<quoted text>And how did our founding fathers treat the native Americans in the new world? They demanded they accept Christianity or die. They demanded that the Indians wear clothes and act like them or else. There's a problem today with our Christian brothers still demanding that people at large live by Christian standards and Biblical teachings or get treated like the Indians.
You are right, Thomas, our founding fathers did treat the native Americans abominably. But I don't think it was so much about demanding the Indians accept Christianity as it was about taking their land from them. The terrible "Trail of Tears" wasn't the result of early America trying to browbeat Indians into becoming Christians...it was all about moving them off their land so Americans could have it.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 41 - 59 of59
|
next page >
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Freed-Hardeman University Discussions

Search the Freed-Hardeman University Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Shannon, Haynes engaged to marry (Jan '14) Jan '14 jnhan 1
Michael dunnavant (Nov '13) Nov '13 Just wondering 1
El Dorado Minister Named Harding University Vic... (Apr '13) Apr '13 roboblogger2 1
FHU's annual Bible Lectureship begins Sunday, f... (Feb '13) Feb '13 JustChristian 1
Lectureship a signature event for FHU, community (Feb '11) Feb '13 JustChristian 2
Local briefs: Woman shot on Gordon Street; man ... (Dec '12) Dec '12 amazing 1
Social Clubs- Who's the best? (Nov '12) Nov '12 clubbasher 1
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••