Why Should Jesus Love Me?

“A Universal Cause”

Since: Feb 09

The Cosmos

#527578 Apr 30, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
How are you, Peace?
Hey Chess, remember me... Irrira? Not that I was never a pw. Howz the house now, and yourself?

Since: Jul 08

Columbus, OH

#527579 Apr 30, 2013
Peace_Warrior wrote:
<quoted text>
Hey Chess, remember me... Irrira? Not that I was never a pw. Howz the house now, and yourself?
I do.

The house is done and I am well.

Thanks for asking.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#527580 Apr 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Noted that Catholicism is falling in Mexico and neglected to add that it's because Protestantism is rising.
Thank you for your opinion. You have not established that the rise in Protestantism accounts for the attrition of Catholics. In fact, the opposite can be shown. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Mexi... :

"Roman Catholics are 82.7% of the total population, down from 96% in 1970." That's a drop of about 13.3%. The pie chart at the top of the same page indicates that the fraction of non-Catholic Christians is 9.7%. Even if that number were 0% in 1970, it still only accounts for 2/3 of the lost Catholics.

This is the kind of thing that you don't do. You just blurt out unsupported opinions.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Mexico is over 95% Christian
Thank you for your opinion.

The same pie chart contradicts you.

“A Universal Cause”

Since: Feb 09

The Cosmos

#527581 Apr 30, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
I do.
The house is done and I am well.
Thanks for asking.
Good to see you!
Can't forget OYE...?
Some folks we remember well.
Glad you are safe and well... thru time!
You're welcome Chess, and g'nite from across the oceans.
6-30pm Tues here.[ Booked up 2nite.]

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#527582 Apr 30, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
Incorrect.

The root word for raqiya` is raqa, which means to spread or hammer out something such as one does with metal. That ancient Hebrews believed that is exactly what was done is obvious from Job 37:18: "Has thou with him spead out the sky, which is strong, and as a molton looking glass."

This also is the interpretation given to the word in the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures known as the Septuagint, which preceded the canonical Christian writings by a couple hundred years and is sometimes quoted in the Christian scriptures.
There the Greek word stereoma, which indicates firmness, was used. And it is this Greek word from whence the Latin word firmamentum originates.

Firmamentum is used in the Vulgate, Jerome's 4th century Latin Bible, for the shell supposedly encasing the Earth. And the English word firmament, of course, derives from the Latin. It is the word used in the 15th century KJV. Obviously, the word firmament suggest firmness or solidity.

It is only in modern times, now that science has demonstrated the problems with the concept of a solid encasement, that some English translations of the Christian canon have tried to downplay the meaning of the original Hebrew.

But it is not merely that these passages *can* be taken to refer to a firm encasement but that they were intended to be taken that way and were in fact taken that way by believers for a couple millennia.

And they still should be taken that way by those who are being honest with themselves.
Nice post.

You smoked Riverside Redneck despite his years of extra study of his bible. Somehow, he still doesn't seem to know what it says.

It's a beautiful thing to see the Christians revising their religion to conform with the products of rational skepticism - science, and the rational ethics of secular humanism. They have been forced to reject most of their ethics, and apart from the flat earthers and the creationist throwbacks, all of their "science." Today, they call them old law and allegory, respectively.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#527583 Apr 30, 2013
Clearwater wrote:
Dung. Christian trash. Gee I can't understand why anyone would question you when you say you don't hate. Sad that.
Hate is too strong a word for that, but let's stipulate to it. If it is hate, it is hate returned for hate.

And like the other Christians here, you only find fault with the unbeliever's reaction, not the Christian whose "deceitful worm" comment earned him those remarks. That kind of prejudice - that double standard, that essential unfairness - is the hate here.

I don't like what your church teaches you. I don't like the kind of people it produces. I will say so as often as you give me cause to, and in the language of my choice.

What makes you think that you deserve better?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#527584 Apr 30, 2013
trifecta1 wrote:
Most Christians in the U.S are here in the south. And almost all, got guns.
How proud you must be.
http://www.websophist.com/Gun_TotingBibleThum... [image]

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#527585 Apr 30, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text> Just as well, you're only making a fool out of yourself trying to argue over something that you are not Blessed to understand.
Thanks. Your contribution has been added to the bottom of the list :

REASONS GIVEN ON TOPIX WHY SKEPTICS AREN'T QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON THE BIBLE

[1] I took the scripture out of context. It means something other than what it says (context and implied meaning never supplied).
[2] I don't understand literary criticism
[3] It's an allegory, not literal.
[4] It's literal, not an allegory.

[snip]

[25] You have no reference in the knowledge of God to know our experience in Christ Jesus. The Word has to be embedded in one's heart, and that can come from God only.
[26] You're asking me to give you a four year bible study course on Topix?
[27] Dont fall in the trap of being a one verse wonder. You need to understand the passage and true meaning of the verse.
[28] You're only making a fool out of yourself trying to argue over something that you are not Blessed to understand.

That's three more in less than a week!

Riverside Redneck was incredulous when I claimed that I compiled this list from the comments by people like you - number 28 - and him - numbers 26 and 27 - over the years.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#527586 Apr 30, 2013
blind man n the bleachers wrote:
Yes, he is unchanging.
Your god is evolving with man. Apparently, he no longer commands you to not suffer witches, nor hovers above in the clouds.

Job 22:14 - "Thick clouds veil him, so he does not see us as he goes about in the vaulted heavens."

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#527587 Apr 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I've heard that's the latest fashionable fad amongst skeptic circles.
However, they are quote different and Genesis was written first.
Here are some major dissimilarities:
EE records "successive generations of gods and goddesses" who are subject to typical weaknesses such as hunger, thirst, and sex drive; Genesis records but one God, though He had company of unspecified nature (Gen. 1:26), with no such weaknesses.
The EE is a creation account to some extent, but most of it is devoted to describing a battle between the god Marduk (the "creator" as such) and Tiamat the goddess (who ends up being the raw material of creation), and to other non-creation issues, so that after tally, only about a third of it is on the subject of creation.
EE played a political and cultic role in the Babylonian religion and explained Marduk's rise to chief god of Babylon; Genesis does not mention Israel, Jerusalem, or the Temple, and served no cultic function [Sarna, Understanding Genesis, 9; I would suggest that this points to the Genesis account being more original].
You are a shameless plagiarist.
http://www.tektonics.org/af/babgenesis.html

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#527588 Apr 30, 2013
http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/T0N0LOR...
RiversideRedneck wrote:
What lies? Care to elaborate or will you continue to play like karl with your amazing one-liners?
The above was the fourth of five consecutive posts, all one or two liners except for the one with plagiarized material.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#527589 Apr 30, 2013
Anon wrote:
When most of your audience has the IQ of a sandal, I thinks it's safe to say they will interpret everything quite literally
LOL.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#527590 Apr 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I agree with what you're implying, that most of the people in BC were pretty ignorant. That's why I do believe that the bible is inspired by the hand of God. What other explanation is there?
What other explanation is there? It's obvious that the bible was written by those ignorant people. It's replete with errors born of that ignorance, which is why people like you who have the benefit of modern scientific understanding are forced to call it allegory.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#527591 Apr 30, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks. Your contribution has been added to the bottom of the list :

REASONS GIVEN ON TOPIX WHY SKEPTICS AREN'T QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON THE BIBLE

[1] I took the scripture out of context. It means something other than what it says (context and implied meaning never supplied).
[2] I don't understand literary criticism
[3] It's an allegory, not literal.
[4] It's literal, not an allegory.

[snip]

[25] You have no reference in the knowledge of God to know our experience in Christ Jesus. The Word has to be embedded in one's heart, and that can come from God only.
[26] You're asking me to give you a four year bible study course on Topix?
[27] Dont fall in the trap of being a one verse wonder. You need to understand the passage and true meaning of the verse.
[28] You're only making a fool out of yourself trying to argue over something that you are not Blessed to understand.

That's three more in less than a week!

Riverside Redneck was incredulous when I claimed that I compiled this list from the comments by people like you - number 28 - and him - numbers 26 and 27 - over the years.
I'm liking your posts from the past few days more than those in the past. I especially enjoyed your post regarding neuroscience.

I remember something extremely stupid said to me once:
"You are an atheist because you wish to rebel against god."

Yeah, I'm atheist because I want to rebel against the thing that doesn't exist.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#527592 Apr 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Cuneiform tablets have been discovered as far back a 3,500 BC, so Genesis could have very well have first been written 5,500 years ago.

Moses' lifetime was calculated at being during 1391–1271 BC, so there's no way he would've known what generations of Adam were. There's also no way he would've known what happened.

Either God told Moses all of it, or Adam knew how to write in cuneiform also.

Either on makes sense to me. If Adam wrote his book of generations in cuneiform, Moses could read it. Moses was educated in 'all the wisdom of the Egyptians', and was strong in words and in deeds.

Genesis 5:1 says: "This is the book of the generations of Adam." This suggests that the that art of writing was known within the lifetime of Adam. It's absurd to think that God would allow this sacred information to the fraile mid of humans, there's no way they could remember it all.
It's absurd to think that the story of Adam and Eve is real.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#527593 Apr 30, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>Being "born" homosexual is not celibacy when you engage in sexual acts with the other person, and no one is "born" that way.
Were you born heterosexual?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#527594 Apr 30, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>Just as well, you're only making a fool out of yourself trying to argue over something that you are not Blessed to understand.
But god made us that way.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#527595 Apr 30, 2013
LAWEST100 wrote:
<quoted text>What do you THINK it is?
Fictional.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#527596 Apr 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>We must be. Here we are, over 5,000 years later, still debating it.....
Either that, or god is pretty stupid.

OR...

The men who wrote the bible were pretty stupid. Or, more accurately, ignorant.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#527597 Apr 30, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>What lies?

Care to elaborate or will you continue to play like karl with your amazing one-liners?
You know as we'll as I do.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 min Patrick Daniels 591,331
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 4 min RiccardoFire 4,767
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 5 min Buck Crick 841,553
I want to watch my wife flirt and get picked up... (Aug '12) 12 min LoveGback 81
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 24 min Charlie Sheen 271,464
*** All Time Favorite Songs *** (Dec '10) 25 min razz58 2,491
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 33 min Just Think 100,199
More from around the web