the so fallible Bible

[xpastor]

xpastor,

You made the classic mistake but that's not your fault, almost everyone made the same one. Let me explain: ...

God exists. Sadly, however, he is an evil cunt.

That's why there are so many versions of his word.
That's why there is so much suffering in the world.
That's why there are so many conflicting religions.
That's why there are so many people ready to kill in his name.
That's why he won't let me finish this po

Help! Does someone know this guy's real-world address so that we can call 911 and dispatch an ambulance?
hock:

[Ryantology]

So, that's what? The Cherry Pickers' Bible?

Seems more like the Unanimous Consent Bible.

Oh, so you all agree that you like specific iterations of your favorite works of fiction? Isn't that just special.

I don't know why you guys bother picking one version or another, because you only take away from it what you want to take away from it. You could do that from any version at all.

[Minimalist]

So, that's what? The Cherry Pickers' Bible?

Seems more like the Unanimous Consent Bible.

But it is far from unanimous. As XP pointed out, there are all sorts of bibles - each claiming to be the word of your fucking god, btw, - which exclude all the ones not in green.

[John V]

Hello John, I'm fine, thanks. Prostate cancer appears to be completely gone, PSA readings of zero 3 years in a row.

It's the same chart that was in the article I cited. In other words, you are giving each tradition a veto over all the others since by definition, a book is not green across the board if one of them voted against it. In effect, this means a Protestant veto since in the vast majority of cases they have cast the lone dissenting vote.

You say veto, I say unanimous consent.

Tobit, Judith, Wisdom, Sirach, Baruch, and the Letter of Jeremiah are all endorsed by every non-Protestant church, as are the "additions" to Esther and Daniel, which are not accepted in the Protestant canon. Two others (Manasseh and Psalm 151) are blackballed only by the western tradition, Protestant and RC. Even where one tradition stands alone, as the Ethiopian does, in backing 4 additional chapters for Lamentations, how do you know that this ancient and isolated church has not preserved a text the others have missed.

I don't know, and I'd be willing to consider these others. I've never had to, though, as I've never heard of a significant doctrine that's based solely on these other books.

Giving Protestants a blackball vote is not good enough. You need clear and principled criteria to determine what is the Word of God and what is not. Otherwise, why would anyone pay attention?

They've been paying attention for thousands of years now, so apparently a lot of people disagree with you.

[Ryantology]

Seems more like the Unanimous Consent Bible.

But it is far from unanimous. As XP pointed out, there are all sorts of bibles - each claiming to be the word of your fucking god, btw, - which exclude all the ones not in green.

If God wanted those other books in the canon, he wouldn't have allowed their proponents to suffer death and persecution and marginalization and theft at the hands of the establishment. Obviously.

[max-greece]

xpastor,

You made the classic mistake but that's not your fault, almost everyone made the same one. Let me explain: ...

God exists. Sadly, however, he is an evil cunt.

That's why there are so many versions of his word.
That's why there is so much suffering in the world.
That's why there are so many conflicting religions.
That's why there are so many people ready to kill in his name.
That's why he won't let me finish this po

Help! Does someone know this guy's real-world address so that we can call 911 and dispatch an ambulance?
hock:

Its all OK- he cut my internet off but fortunately he does know a damn thing about 4G.

Thanks for the concern.

[Beta Ray Bill]

I've said this before.

If there was only one true God, why would he not spread his word to every corner of the Earth so that despite language and culture, his word would be infallible to whoever read it, whenever they did. He is omnipotent, remember, a factor that Christians on this forum seem to forget again and again. Free will? Hogwash. Ifgiving up my free will could save someone's life, I'd throw it away. There are more important things than free will. God would know this. He is omniscient, another factor Christians don't grasp. He would know that humans would rather have love instead of free will, and when you see how much pain and suffering there is in this world, despite of faith in God, he either doesn't care, or doesn't exist.

I choose the latter. No all-knowing, all-powerful, all-loving being could let the world be as it is today, even for the sake of free will, which is of little value when put to the test.

[Doubting Thomas]

What kind of free will argument can anyone make to explain all the starving children in Ethiopia being allowed to suffer when there's an all-loving god looking over them?

[John V]

As the bible doesn't portray God as all-loving, I take it you're discussing another god.

---

Ifgiving up my free will could save someone's life, I'd throw it away. There are more important things than free will.

Spare me the drama. Plenty of atheists here find money to buy booze and pot while children are starving elsewhere.

[Beta Ray Bill]

As the bible doesn't portray God as all-loving, I take it you're discussing another god.

---

Spare me the drama. Plenty of atheists here find money to buy booze and pot while children are starving elsewhere.

You know God has done a lot of attrocities in the Bible. You just don't want to recognize them as such.

Plenty of pot-head Christians, too. I promise you. You are not superior to anyone.