The Faith & Religion mega Thread

Is 9:7
Isn't it also true that although war was verily celebrated in ancient times, it has been diminished from Christ's birth until now, when it's thought shameful, and we hardly have theatres of war except movie theatres and schools?

I voted Firm Believer... more specifically, Christian.

Originally Posted by bluegospel Is 9:7 Isn't it also true that although war was verily celebrated in ancient times, it has been diminished from Christ's birth until now, when it's thought shameful, and we hardly have theatres of war except movie theatres and schools?

Again, your willful ignorance of history shows.

Originally Posted by TB0ne ...and we're back to circular reasoning and ignoring historical fact. To put it differently: (bible != god) also (BibleAuthor != god) && (BibleAuthor >1) Because it's in the bible doesn't mean god said it. If God DID say it, it's certainly true...but since you don't know what God said, and we know the authorship of the book in question is suspect, full of translation errors, and was voted upon/edited for content, things in it are highly doubtful.

There is very little convincing criticism against the authenticity of the Bible even in the links you've cited in the past.

Moderator note: Please keep the discussion free of personal attacks.

The Scriptures have always been addressed to the ears of all, to the understanding of a remnant, who will survive great destruction.

There you go again. Talking down to and riding the crap out of others. Also threatening that those who don't understand will not remain .ie. be obliterated (and the others get eternal life?).

OK

Originally Posted by TB0ne Again, your willful ignorance of history shows.

Back it up T. Who do you know who celebrates war? Other than some extremists Muslim and perhaps guerilla parties here or there nobody celebrates war. In ancient times war was quite often idolized and celebrated daily, even by majorities.

Merged with the Mega-Thread.

@bluegospel: You would do yourself a favor if you would study the history of your religion.

Originally Posted by TobiSGD Merged with the Mega-Thread. @bluegospel: You would do yourself a favor if you would study the history of your religion.

Which one, for there are many--but one perfect history.

Originally Posted by bluegospel Back it up T. Who do you know who celebrates war?

Not to make this sound like a personal attack (it isn't), but people like YOU typically do. Those "fine, good, 'christians'", who typically love it when others get killed, and celebrate those who kill doctors at womens clinics, and other similar acts. Those who said that the tragedy in Haiti was the work of god, because they 'deserved it'. That's who.

Other than some extremists Muslim and perhaps guerilla parties here or there nobody celebrates war.

Sorry, but that's wrong and incredibly naive. There are just as many 'extremists' in your 'christian' definition than there are in the muslim religion, and in pretty much ANY OTHER religion.

And you (again) display your willful ignorance of history (and in this case, current events), by saying guerilla groups ENJOY war. They don't, and often times feel forced into action against the ruling party. In many cases, the soldiers themselves are forced to fight, or they'll be killed themselves. They certainly don't 'celebrate' it.

In ancient times war was quite often idolized and celebrated daily, even by majorities.

Nope, it never has been in ANY culture. War may have been NECESSARY, and preparing for it also necessary, but no one WANTED to go to war, ever.

Originally Posted by bluegospel Which one, for there are many--but one perfect history.

This makes no logical sense in response to the statement "You would do yourself a favor if you would study the history of your religion."

To break it down, since you obviously didn't understand it:

• "Which one, for there are many?"

  That would be "the history of christianity" (i.e. YOUR religion, in the context of the statement)

• "but one perfect history"

  ...which apparently no one else knows but you, since ANY serious study of history doesn't jib with what you say.

To make it simpler: if numerous people say "Hey, Frank Wilson wrote this book", chances are he did, if no one else can prove/claim otherwise. Fast forward 1000 years, and the historical fact is Frank Wilson wrote that book. No matter how much you argue, believe, split hairs, etc., it's still true...that's called HISTORY and SCIENCE. Neither requires belief..it's just true.

If many serious scholars and historians point at a book of the bible and say "Hey, this has multiple authors spanning this large period of time here"...it does. No matter how much you WANT it to be otherwise...it isn't. See how that works?

Of course the Bible was written by scores of authors. Each book has its author. And yes, there was probably commentary added much later and accepted as canon. That doesn't negate that each book was co-authored by man and God, or that the committees who finalized what was canon were supervised by God. There's very little evidence in the Scriptures themselves and even in the historical record that strongly suggests the Bible is not authentic.

Originally Posted by bluegospel Of course the Bible was written by scores of authors. Each book has its author.

..and typically MORE than one author, sometimes written decades/centuries after the events described.

And yes, there was probably commentary added much later and accepted as canon.

Nope...not "probably"; DEFINITELY, and it's documented, historical fact. There are also many books of the bible that were OMITTED in their entirety, passages that were re-written to favor the church and/or denigrate others. Those are also facts.

That doesn't negate that each book was co-authored by man and God, or that the committees who finalized what was canon were supervised by God.

The committees were not 'supervised by god' any more (or less), than some guy who fills potholes on the road. They're not special...not then, and not now. They acted in their own self-interest.

There's very little evidence in the Scriptures themselves and even in the historical record that strongly suggests the Bible is not authentic.

Again, you display willful ignorance of history. There is a MOUNTAIN of evidence, in the documents themselves and in the historical record, that says otherwise.

Originally Posted by TB0ne ..and typically MORE than one author, sometimes written decades/centuries after the events described. Nope...not "probably"; DEFINITELY, and it's documented, historical fact. There are also many books of the bible that were OMITTED in their entirety, passages that were re-written to favor the church and/or denigrate others. Those are also facts. The committees were not 'supervised by god' any more (or less), than some guy who fills potholes on the road. They're not special...not then, and not now. They acted in their own self-interest. Again, you display willful ignorance of history. There is a MOUNTAIN of evidence, in the documents themselves and in the historical record, that says otherwise.

Then why have the links you've posted so far provided not even a shred of your claim to "mountains" of evidence?

Originally Posted by bluegospel Then why have the links you've posted so far provided not even a shred of your claim to "mountains" of evidence?

They have...but no one can make you understand them, or let you believe them. People have pointed you to LOTS of verifiable data, all of which you ignore.

Again, you display willful ignorance. That is, you are shown things, but refuse to believe/understand them, because they conflict with what you 'think' is true. You can educate people, but intentional ignorance/stupidity cannot be fixed.