RE: The Bible
May 6, 2009 at 3:22 pm
(This post was last modified: May 6, 2009 at 3:30 pm by fr0d0.)
(May 6, 2009 at 5:25 am)Tiberius Wrote: The "rationality" of the Bible is irrelevant here. Rationality is derived from those who interpret it, and in actual fact you seem to understand how irrational the Bible is (i.e. Genesis story / myth) so I'm confused as to why you actually said it was rational. The point, which you seem to be skipping around, is that the people who wrote the Bible did so because they were writing an explanation of the world, how it got there, etc based on the only method they had at the time: stories passed down through the generations.
Rational to you means only facts. You deny yourself any other logic (by that statement).
The people who wrote the bible explain beginnings and endings IN SPIRITUAL LANGUAGE.
(May 6, 2009 at 5:25 am)Tiberius Wrote: How many times did we have to explain this to you last time? Swearing at someone isn't grounds for a ban or a warning. Repeatedly doing so every post might count as grounds for disruption, but everyone is allowed to swear here.
I'm in no doubt thanks. Direct attacks on people are disallowed, quite clearly. I told you to shut up, I get a warning for SPECIFICALLY THAT. You it seems are immune.
(May 6, 2009 at 5:25 am)Tiberius Wrote: Lol, "derogatory terms". You do make me laugh sometimes fr0d0. I've just re-read the posts from yesterday and I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Do you actually know what a derogatory term is?
It appears that you have no clue.
(May 6, 2009 at 5:25 am)Tiberius Wrote: You are well within your rights to say you have more years of experience, but you offer no proof. That is my problem with your assertion. I could easily walk into a conversation and say "Well I have more experience than you so my opinion is better, etc" but it wouldn't be a very good argument if it weren't true now would it. Even if it were true, it doesn't have much bearing on the conversation since a person may have read completely different books on the subject.
The point is Adrian, that it's actually chatpilot asserting what you say and not me.
@ chatpilot:
You mean read it as a skeptic, as non understandable as it's meant to be for the non believer? You fail to point out a single proof of your claims. I'm here waiting believe me. If I could find one contradiction I'd be convinced, but so far I haven't found one. I'm very aware of the reams of skeptic information on the subject. It's all dross chatpilot. Sincerely. And I'm not ignoring anything. I don't shut out any other possibility. Your assertions are all hollow.