|
I bet you don't know this one
|
 RE: I bet you don't know this one
June 26, 2014 at 7:57 pm
(This post was last modified: June 26, 2014 at 8:00 pm by Mr Greene.)
![[Image: picard-facepalm-hd-672x372.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.theacerbicwitter.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2014%2F03%2Fpicard-facepalm-hd-672x372.jpg) I'm wondering if this some variant of reverse Poe... Quote:I don't understand why you'd come to a discussion forum, and then proceed to reap from visibility any voice that disagrees with you. If you're going to do that, why not just sit in front of a mirror and pat yourself on the back continuously?-Esquilax Evolution - Adapt or be eaten. 
Ref. Post #20: It's interesting that you mentioned the New Testament as being in fragments. This is what they looked like. http://www.dts.edu/read/wallace-new-test...t-century/
I stand by my contention that the English wrote the Bible. Before they did that all people had were a few scraps of deteriorating manuscripts. 
If Jules Verne had written it, at least it might have made a bit of sense.
No God, No fear.
Know God, Know fear.
I think that the English wrote parts of it as a joke. That's why it has so many discrepancies. Would a truly deity-inspired book be so full of B.S.? And don't forget that the English had their own native religion traditions. So they had a motive for sabotaging the foreign Christian religion.
 RE: I bet you don't know this one
June 27, 2014 at 12:16 am
(This post was last modified: June 27, 2014 at 12:16 am by Mudhammam.)
(June 26, 2014 at 10:49 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: I think that the English wrote parts of it as a joke. That's why it has so many discrepancies. Would a truly deity-inspired book be so full of B.S.? And don't forget that the English had their own native religion traditions. So they had a motive for sabotaging the foreign Christian religion. Huh? What does the fact that the Bible is mythological have to do with your erroneous unsubstantiated claim that the Wycliffe translation is anything but the first Bible transcribed into the English language?
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
Do you have an earlier English translation?
(June 27, 2014 at 12:22 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Do you have an earlier English translation? Re-read my last post and you'll know the answer to that because I've said it half a dozen times already.
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
(June 27, 2014 at 12:27 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:(June 27, 2014 at 12:22 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Do you have an earlier English translation? Will you be so kind as to highlight what you consider to be an earlier English translation? Your assistance will be appreciated. (June 27, 2014 at 12:42 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:(June 27, 2014 at 12:27 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Re-read my last post and you'll know the answer to that because I've said it half a dozen times already. Who said there was an earlier English translation?
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza
 (June 25, 2014 at 8:20 pm)Pickup_shonuff Wrote:(June 25, 2014 at 7:46 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Seems like a terrible lot of arithmetic to go through to establish something people already know... Wait .. does that mean that those who believe in God are always right irrespective of logic since they're carrying HIS word? (Probably not.) |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
