Get In The Ark Before It Is Too Late!!!

[GrandizerII]

You suppose wrong. But then again, not surprised you would commit such a non-sequitur.

So maybe a bunch of Middle East desert goat herders wrote it. Don't you think that sounds logical?

More non sequitur. Forgot about the scribes?

[pocaracas]

So maybe a bunch of Middle East desert goat herders wrote it. Don't you think that sounds logical?

More non sequitur. Forgot about the scribes?

Scribes wrote it, ordered by their masters who realized the power of the stories that the goat herders had concocted?

[GrandizerII]

More non sequitur. Forgot about the scribes?

Scribes wrote it, ordered by their masters who realized the power of the stories that the goat herders had concocted?

Possible. It's also possible that some of the scribes were their own masters as well.

[Mudhammam]

The Pope approves of your spirited defense. It's too bad that you don't seem to know that the English wrote the Latin Vulgate as a gift to the Pope. So even if Wycliffe used the Vulgate as source material the Bible was just a fabrication by the English.

Clearly your ability to pull false statements from out of your ass and present them as truths without even attempting to justify your means of acquiring this furtive knowledge rivals the Pope.

So you're claiming that Jerome was an Englishman too now?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate

[Confused Ape]

As I stated before, John Wycliffe and his buddies wrote the Bible. It didn't exist as such before then. And they put in a lot of jokes to indicate that it was all B.S.

Definition of The Torah from Judaism 101.

The word "Torah" is a tricky one, because it can mean different things in different contexts. In its most limited sense, "Torah" refers to the Five Books of Moses: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. But the word "torah" can also be used to refer to the entire Jewish bible (the body of scripture known to non-Jews as the Old Testament and to Jews as the Tanakh or Written Torah), or in its broadest sense, to the whole body of Jewish law and teachings.

If Wycliffe and his buddies wrote the Bible why did the Jews adopt the Old Testament for their religion? What religion did they have before Wycliffe's time?

[Cyberman]

Wow, you wait a week for a reply and half a dozen come along at once:

Rev, would you please address, or at least acknowledge, my question from page 9? I'll reprint it so you don't have to dig for it:

In what way am I deceived, and who (if anyone) has been doing the deceiving? To what purpose?

Thank you. Oh, and if you could formulate your reply in your own words and not copypasta a storybook, that'd be great.

Dear Stimbo,
You obviously are very intelligent and have mastered the English language when compared to me.

Uh oh, soft soap. Get ready for the handjob of a lifetime.

However, if you believe that God is not real and that Jesus never existed then you are deceived.

Please point to a single post where I've said this. If you want to attack a strawman, knock yourself out. Just don't put ny name to it.

Just so we're clear, I am not an atheist because I don't believe your - or any - god doesn't exist. My atheism is based solely on theists not having demonstrated that their pet god does exist. In other words, I am as yet unconvinced that anything you and others tell me about your various gods are true and representative of anything real. Know what would convince me? Evidence. Prove to me that the car you're selling is actually there and I'll consider buying it. Until then, my money stays in my pocket with my belief.

The purpose of Satan is that because He has been condemned he wants to bring down as many with him as possible.

Know what doesn't convince me? Crap like this. Pointing to one part of your mythology to validate another part. Give me something I can get my teeth into, that doesn't come from the storybook. Anything. For crying out loud, this sort of thing ought to be trivial to do, given the claims made about it.

I am pretty sure you will think I am crazy and reject this but this is my answer to your question. Good day.

No, not crazy; that's just your martyr chip talking. It's telling you that the only reason I am “rejecting“ what you say is because I'm dismissing the source and the messenger, not because it's unconvincing.

He hasn't even acknowledged mine yet, and I've asked him twice. I thought he liked me.

I could weep over you.

Not while I still have my strength you won't. I told you, it's very flattering but I'm not buttered that way. Sorry.

100% pure unadulterated doublethink, in the finest Orwellian sense!

Rev, you truly are the gift that keeps on giving! Ever thought of doing standup?

Rather be known as a modern day ambassador of the Lord sent to the atheistforum board with a message of hope and salvation.

If your sole reason for being here is to preach, then leave now. This is a discussion board, not a pulpit. You're not going to find any prey around these parts.

You know what any flood, global or otherwise, would leave behind? I'll give you a clue: it starts with ”e”. And ends with "vidence".

You know what there isn't for your flood? Want another clue?

Perhaps a future discussion

I can't wait.

No seriously, I can't.

So you don't worship a god. You worship a book.

I worship the Lord. The book speaks of Him.

And without the book you'd have no way of knowing anything about this god, its nature or its character - even of concluding that it's a him. Let's put it this way:

If all scientific knowledge were to vanish in some cataclysm, at some point in the future it's reasonable to expect that most, if not all, of the same discoveries (fire, the wheel, gravity etc) and the principles behind them would eventually be rediscovered.

Conversely, if this book of yours and all knowledge of it were wiped from existence, your god would disappear forever.

[Revelation777]

But, it always comes with strings attached.

The problem there is you said "missionaries."

You speak as if that's a good thing. Exploiting the needy, the sick, the poor, the starving by giving them what they need to live and then telling them it's all because of the god YOU believe in that they're being helped, and that they need to accept this god or they'll suffer even in death.

Yeah. Really fucking generous.

Actually that's called coercion. Yeah, your "generous" missionaries are being a bunch of subversive slimeball coercive exploitative thugs, dangling food over the head of those suffering the agony of starvation, and placing it in their hand while pushing your book into the other.

Religion loves to prey on the weak and suffering. If you guys were really doing it for charity, you'd keep your fucking traps shut about your religious bullshit when you're helping these people, and simply let them know what you believe and nothing else. Instead you push your bullshit on them, and what else are they going to think? Are they, in their starving agony, really going to think for themselves? Are you really enlightening them, bringing them into the fold of your lord? Or are you simply snatching people into the shadows before they can begin to see light?

Those of secular charities are true charities. Those of missions are little more than manipulative scumbags, serving their own agenda and cloaking it with the trappings of generosity.

Unbelievable.

We are commissioned to share the gospel with everyone

[pocaracas]

We are commissioned to share the gospel with everyone

Commissioned by whom?

Who directly instructed you to do that?

[Chad32]

It seems odd that an all present deity would need anyone to spread his word anywhere. He's supposedly literally right beside everyone on the planet, yet he can't figure out how to talk to them without a third party present.

[Ryantology]

We are commissioned to share the gospel with everyone

You could say that a virus is commissioned to share the flu, but it lacks both intent and the capacity to know that this is harmful. You don't have those excuses.