The Jesus Freaks Will Hate This

[FatAndFaithless]

Jesus (The Word of God made flesh) has always confused people with his speech.

No shit. Why couldn't "The Word" simply be explicitly clear and understandable without 30,000 different interpretations?

[Faith No More]

If you read the Bible, clearly after God made man in the first chapter it states clearly in the second chapter.

Genesis 2
4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

In other words, there was not a physical human being on the earth.

Holy mental gymnastics, Batman!

[Esquilax]

The Bible has existed long before my "argument"...

And to answer your question, Jesus (The Word of God made flesh) has always confused people with his speech.

Uh uh, no. No, no, no. Nope. Not gonna do it: stop just assuming that your position is the correct one and any disagreement is just down to an inability to comprehend on our part, and do something no christian has ever done before. Apply the fucking outsider test: you have quoted a few parts of the bible by now, one of which paints the language therein as highly obscure, nigh unto illegibility. In another, you present the language as to be taken precisely literally. These two positions are in direct contradiction; which is it? Do we interpret the language, or take it literally?

To an outsider looking in, one who is unwilling to imbue you with the right to determine what each individual verse means simply because you say so, this is little more than cherry picking and fiat reinterpretation to suit your agenda. You, like most christians who involve themselves in these arguments, are perfectly willing to tell us what you think certain verses mean, but are remarkably tight lipped when it comes to explaining how you came to believe the verse means that, and why you think this was the original intent of the passage.

But I'm sure as hell not going to take "because I said so," as a reason to believe you, and if you're just going to assume that you're right whenever you reply, nobody is going to get anywhere. Explain yourself, don't just presuppose that you're obviously in the right.

[Huggy Bear]

No, I don't. When I take into consideration that he has had to provide answers such as those to a population of people who not only continue to think the answer is "magic", they can't even comprehend why his answers make sense as an alternative. Hell, there's probably few of us on this forum who could. Its amazing to me that people like Krauss, Degrasse Tyson, Dawkins, and other professionals are able to refrain from using pejoratives and continue calling them "religious people". I think it's arrogant to presume that a really old text written by primitive men have all the answers, and I think it's foolish not to acknowledge the wisdom being offered by modern day Physicists, Astronomers, and Biological Scientists. The religious have a sense of arrogance that these well-learned people couldn't dream of achieving, because scientist are always searching for knowldege and the search presupposes the existence of that which is unknown. The religious people think they have all the answers and call it arrogance when those bad answers have to be continuously pointed out by those who take the time to learn.

To try and explain what was here before the universe is the epitome of arrogance, why would the laws of physics apply outside the known universe? The proper and honest answer to what existed before the universe is "I don't know".

I as a Christian don't claim I know everything, I just believe what the Bible says about it, there's a difference.

Also, those "primitive" people were a lot smarter than you think if the ancient Mayan and Egyptian cultures are any indication, we still to this day cannot figure out how the pyramids were built.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_ge...etry_1.htm

The Great Pyramid is aligned with Machu Picchu, the Nazca lines and Easter Island along a straight line around the center of the Earth, within a margin of error of less than one tenth of one degree of latitude.



Other sites of ancient construction that are also within one tenth of one degree of this line include:

Perseopolis, the capital city of ancient Persia

Mohenjo Daro, the ancient capital city of the Indus Valley

the lost city of Petra.

The Ancient Sumerian city of Ur and the temples at Angkor Wat are within one degree of latitude of this line.

You think This is just coincidence? or did the ancients know something we've now become ignorant of?

[The Valkyrie]

No, I don't. When I take into consideration that he has had to provide answers such as those to a population of people who not only continue to think the answer is "magic", they can't even comprehend why his answers make sense as an alternative. Hell, there's probably few of us on this forum who could. Its amazing to me that people like Krauss, Degrasse Tyson, Dawkins, and other professionals are able to refrain from using pejoratives and continue calling them "religious people". I think it's arrogant to presume that a really old text written by primitive men have all the answers, and I think it's foolish not to acknowledge the wisdom being offered by modern day Physicists, Astronomers, and Biological Scientists. The religious have a sense of arrogance that these well-learned people couldn't dream of achieving, because scientist are always searching for knowldege and the search presupposes the existence of that which is unknown. The religious people think they have all the answers and call it arrogance when those bad answers have to be continuously pointed out by those who take the time to learn.

To try and explain what was here before the universe is the epitome of arrogance, why would the laws of physics apply outside the known universe? The proper and honest answer to what existed before the universe is "I don't know".

I as a Christian don't claim I know everything, I just believe what the Bible says about it, there's a difference.

Also, those "primitive" people were a lot smarter than you think if the ancient Mayan and Egyptian cultures are any indication, we still to this day cannot figure out how the pyramids were built.

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_ge...etry_1.htm

The Great Pyramid is aligned with Machu Picchu, the Nazca lines and Easter Island along a straight line around the center of the Earth, within a margin of error of less than one tenth of one degree of latitude.



Other sites of ancient construction that are also within one tenth of one degree of this line include:

Perseopolis, the capital city of ancient Persia

Mohenjo Daro, the ancient capital city of the Indus Valley

the lost city of Petra.

The Ancient Sumerian city of Ur and the temples at Angkor Wat are within one degree of latitude of this line.

You think This is just coincidence? or did the ancients know something we've now become ignorant of?

Sounds more like ancient alien conspiracy nonsense, to me.

[Huggy Bear]

The Bible has existed long before my "argument"...

And to answer your question, Jesus (The Word of God made flesh) has always confused people with his speech.

Uh uh, no. No, no, no. Nope. Not gonna do it: stop just assuming that your position is the correct one and any disagreement is just down to an inability to comprehend on our part, and do something no christian has ever done before. Apply the fucking outsider test: you have quoted a few parts of the bible by now, one of which paints the language therein as highly obscure, nigh unto illegibility. In another, you present the language as to be taken precisely literally. These two positions are in direct contradiction; which is it? Do we interpret the language, or take it literally?

To an outsider looking in, one who is unwilling to imbue you with the right to determine what each individual verse means simply because you say so, this is little more than cherry picking and fiat reinterpretation to suit your agenda. You, like most christians who involve themselves in these arguments, are perfectly willing to tell us what you think certain verses mean, but are remarkably tight lipped when it comes to explaining how you came to believe the verse means that, and why you think this was the original intent of the passage.

But I'm sure as hell not going to take "because I said so," as a reason to believe you, and if you're just going to assume that you're right whenever you reply, nobody is going to get anywhere. Explain yourself, don't just presuppose that you're obviously in the right.

I can't explain it to you any simpler than I already have. To answer the question of "what is the image of God", you must find out what "God" IS, and the bible clearly answers that.

John 4:24
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Therefore to be made in Gods image is to be made spirit.
You speak of applying logic, it doesn't get more logical than that.

How God chooses to express himself is his prerogative, it is not for everyone to know everything.

Numbers 12
6 And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the Lord will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.
7 My servant Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house.
8 With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the Lord shall he behold:

---

Sounds more like ancient alien conspiracy nonsense, to me.

Funny, you're the only one that brought up aliens.
My point was, Ancient people were a lot smarter than you guys realize.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The thing is, were not required to try to explain everything about the bible, Just believe it.

That's right. Religious faith requires one to abdicate his or her intellectual curiosity and ability to ask questions.

Reason and faith cannot coexist. One must either compartmentalize thought processes, as some scientists do, or completely abandon reason as an epistemology, which is clearly what Buggy here has done ... until he gets sick and goes to the doctor rather than engages in prayer.

---

If you drop a needle, the best way to find it is to get on your knees and look for it, you find God the same way.

It's that simple...

I used a vacuum cleaner, then searched the bag on my workbench. There was no god to be found. How'd that crafty little fuck get away?!

[Huggy Bear]

The thing is, were not required to try to explain everything about the bible, Just believe it.

That's right. Religious faith requires one to abdicate his or her intellectual curiosity and ability to ask questions.

Reason and faith cannot coexist. One must either compartmentalize thought processes, as some scientists do, or completely abandon reason as an epistemology, which is clearly what Buggy here has done ... until he gets sick and goes to the doctor rather than engages in prayer.

Where does the Bible tell you not to utilize doctors?

Jeremiah 8:22
Is there no balm in Gilead; is there no physician there? why then is not the health of the daughter of my people recovered?

In case you haven't learned, doctors can't heal, they only assist nature.
Put a cut on a dead body, try to get a doctor to heal it and see how it works out...

Any Doctor that claims to heal is a quack.

[Norman Humann]

Did you see that? The point went right over his head! Amazing!

[Huggy Bear]

You'd first have to have a point in order for someone to miss it.