The dangers of faith

[Mr Greene]

I'll just leave this here...

[Cyberman]

Well, I think his congregation learned a valuable lesson.

I suspect that is a forlorn hope.

Yes, I expect the consensus was that "God" had its reasons. The human capacity for rationalisation is another one of those infinite resources. If only we could tap it as an energy source.

[Godscreated]

Depends if you think faith is foolish. Without a doubt those people had faith, far bigger than a mustard seed. Yet they sank.

Faith is not foolish, it can lead to eternal life, foolishness leads to eternal destruction. To test God is a foolish thing, especially when someone does it for the purpose of self serving.

GC

---

Actually I saw it as sad, when people have the Bible and then put their meaning to it, it will always cost them.

Yeah, as if you don't do the same thing all the fucking time.

"But my meanings I get out of it are the real ones!"

And you would know that how exactly?

Please show me when I've done what you have accused me of doing, you're the prosecutor so bring your proof.

You are trying to put a baited question in my mouth and then expect me to answer it, you're stupider than I thought.

GC

[Jackalope]

Being utterly wrong about certain things carries a high price.

If those things concern the ability to walk on water or enter a lion enclosure then apparently so.


Personally the most I expect God to do for me is make me feel better when I feel bad. Which, since a few weeks ago, I've not been doing. So far my experiment with atheism kinda sucks. . I'm still waiting for the payoff!

I'm not aware that there is one.

[Esquilax]

Please show me when I've done what you have accused me of doing, you're the prosecutor so bring your proof.

All of your posts, ever and forever, where they concern the bible. Unless you're intimating that you believe the way you've interpreted the scriptures are wrong?

[Angrboda]

Actually I saw it as sad, when people have the Bible and then put their meaning to it, it will always cost them. By the way Jacob(smooth) do you really think God should comfort the foolish, seems in the story you posted He doesn't.

Yeah, as if you don't do the same thing all the fucking time.

"But my meanings I get out of it are the real ones!"

And you would know that how exactly?

Please show me when I've done what you have accused me of doing, you're the prosecutor so bring your proof.

You are trying to put a baited question in my mouth and then expect me to answer it, you're stupider than I thought.

(color and emphasis added)

---

Ask and you shall receive:

I don't know the answer, which is why I ask it. So your answer is no? Why don't you believe in them?

The book of Mormon was written by a conman, well know for his dishonesty. There is no historical records to back up any of the book. It is also called an addition to the Bible, the Bible states there shall be no additions. It also is in conflict with the Bible.

(emphasis mine)


This turns out to be your interpretation of a passage in John which exegesis shows to be an incorrect interpretation. (see below)

How do you know when the Book of John was written. How do you know when the Book of Revelation was written, no originals so an exact dating is impossible at this time. What prophets and exactly what did they think?

. . . .

Anyway, this is rather moot, anyway, because the author of Revelations didn't specifically refer to "the bible," as the bible did not exist at that time. I must confess to being ignorant of Koine Greek, but even though it's not clear what the author is referring to in the text, because the bible didn't exist at the time Revelations was written, he most likely is referring to something else. (And no, it doesn't matter if God is the author of those words; the reference is still uncertain.)

The English word Bible is from the Latin biblia, from the same word in Medieval Latin and Late Latin and ultimately from Koine Greek τὰ βιβλία ta biblia "the books" (singular βιβλίον biblion).

Medieval Latin biblia is short for biblia sacra "holy book", while biblia in Greek and Late Latin is neuter plural (gen. bibliorum). It gradually came to be regarded as a feminine singular noun (biblia, gen. bibliae) in medieval Latin, and so the word was loaned as a singular into the vernaculars of Western Europe. Latin biblia sacra "holy books" translates Greek τὰ βιβλία τὰ ἅγια ta biblia ta hagia, "the holy books".

The word βιβλίον itself had the literal meaning of "paper" or "scroll" and came to be used as the ordinary word for "book". It is the diminutive of βύβλος bublos, "Egyptian papyrus", possibly so called from the name of the Phoenician sea port Byblos (also known as Gebal) from whence Egyptian papyrus was exported to Greece. The Greek ta biblia (lit. "little papyrus books") was "an expression Hellenistic Jews used to describe their sacred books (the Septuagint).

The word in the interlinear bible I'm looking at is βιβλίου, bibliou, and appears to be singular, likely referring to the book of Revelation itself. Maybe you or Drich can weigh in and explain the finer points of Koine Greek to those of us like myself who are ignorant of such things.

(color and emphasis added)


Your move, ex-lax.

[Bad Writer]

Kudos for using an old question of mine thrown at GC some time ago. Even more so for tossing in that when Revelation was written that there was no Bible in its current form. Wasn't that book also the first of a series written by that John fellow?

[Godscreated]

[quote='Godschild' pid='577950' dateline='1389074540']

Please show me when I've done what you have accused me of doing, you're the prosecutor so bring your proof.

You are trying to put a baited question in my mouth and then expect me to answer it, you're stupider than I thought.(color and emphasis added)

Those who are tripping like colors.

---

Ask and you shall receive:

The book of Mormon was written by a conman, well know for his dishonesty. There is no historical records to back up any of the book. It is also called an addition to the Bible, the Bible states there shall be no additions. It also is in conflict with the Bible. (emphasis mine)

You call that evidence for your case, seems the truth of what I stated goes in my favor. You need to prove what I said above is wrong, just presenting it means nothing for your case.

This turns out to be your interpretation of a passage in John which exegesis shows to be an incorrect interpretation. (see below)

What verse, here we go again with you throwing out an idea without a reference, John wrote five books you know.

Anyway, this is rather moot, anyway, because the author of Revelations didn't specifically refer to "the bible," as the bible did not exist at that time.

What does that have to do with things I've said, I mean really, are you serious. You think I did not know that Revelations was written before the Bible was put together in it's modern day form, get real. It was Jesus who said the word of God could not be changed, so when a man writes something he pulled out of his self serving and delusional mind it's not God's word and is not to be taken as such. Luke21:33 and Mark 13:31Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. Matthew 5:18 For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. The Book of Mormon takes away from the law, that's what this deluded man intended.

I must confess to being ignorant of Koine Greek, but even though it's not clear what the author is referring to in the text, because the bible didn't exist at the time Revelations was written, he most likely is referring to something else. (And no, it doesn't matter if God is the author of those words; the reference is still uncertain.)

Certainly it matters, God inspired the words of the Bible, don't you think He being omniscient would know what books would make up the Bible. You're barking up the wrong tree (passage), Jesus words from the Gospels satisfies my statement.

The word in the interlinear bible I'm looking at is βιβλίου, bibliou, and appears to be singular, likely referring to the book of Revelation itself. Maybe you or Drich can weigh in and explain the finer points of Koine Greek to those of us like myself who are ignorant of such things.(color and emphasis added)

I'll leave that one to Drich, I do not have a Greek reference with me. Well I do have an old Vines here and Biblion is singular but could refer to an entire book such as the Bible. Maybe Drich will help out .

Your move, ex-lax.

I believe I've stated my case sufficiently.

GC

[Jacob(smooth)]

Depends if you think faith is foolish. Without a doubt those people had faith, far bigger than a mustard seed. Yet they sank.

Faith is not foolish, it can lead to eternal life, foolishness leads to eternal destruction. To test God is a foolish thing, especially when someone does it for the purpose of self serving.

GC

So they sank not because they had inadequate faith but because they were testing God?

I mean I have, in the past, prayed for God to reveal himself to me. The bible tells us to. When does this become testing God?

[Fenix]

the Bible states there shall be no additions. It also is in conflict with the Bible.

GC

What is your standing on the 'missing' chapters of the bible?