Open letter to Christians

[Nihilist Virus]

...Which transforms a bunch of ridiculous evil fables cobbled together by a bunch of bronze-age goat herders into something preachers can use to gain power of the poor idiots that believe what they are told...

Actually the Bible was written by racist, sexist, conquesting, genocidal, slave-driving rapists. They weren't goat herders... or if they were, they were certainly quite terrible at breeding goats. Rememer Genesis 30:37-39.

I'm guessing you didn't recite that one at the dinner table either.

[drfuzzy]

...Which transforms a bunch of ridiculous evil fables cobbled together by a bunch of bronze-age goat herders into something preachers can use to gain power of the poor idiots that believe what they are told...

Actually the Bible was written by racist, sexist, conquesting, genocidal, slave-driving rapists.  They weren't goat herders... or if they were, they were certainly quite terrible at breeding goats.  Rememer Genesis 30:37-39.

I'm guessing you didn't recite that one at the dinner table either.  

Oh yeah, apparently god says that if you have sex while looking at stripes, your children will be striped.  Xtians should try that one.  Human zebras would be awesome.     I don't know why folks latch onto "goat-herders".  They had goats, (striped, speckled and spotted ones) they had sheep, camels, donkeys, oxen . . .

[Nihilist Virus]

[Simon Moon]

My name is a reference to the fact that I do not believe in logical axioms as being absolutely true.  But thanks for the disgusting comment. You represent your savior well.  He condemned dining with sinners and of course encouraged all who would listen to judge others.

Your name associates you with tearing everything down, don't dodge the definition of what you claim to be. Don't blame the truth for your hurt feelings.

Proof that you have no subtlety of thought.

There have long been different types of nihilism (metaphysical nihilism, epistemological nihilism, existential nihilism just to name 3).

But no. You have you own (low information) idea of what nihilism is, and you're going to stick with it. No matter how wrong you are.

Not surprised. But always disappointed.

[Nihilist Virus]

Your name associates you with tearing everything down, don't dodge the definition of what you claim to be. Don't blame the truth for your hurt feelings.

Proof that you have no subtlety of thought.

There have long been different types of nihilism (metaphysical nihilism, epistemological nihilism, existential nihilism just to name 3).

But no. You have you own (low information) idea of what nihilism is, and you're going to stick with it. No matter how wrong you are.

Not surprised. But always disappointed.

Not to mention that, as I said, by his logic his own name associates himself with genocide, torture, and various other atrocities committed at the behest of his deity.

[GrandizerII]

And sons of Josiah: the first-born Johanan, the second Jehoiakim, the third Zedekiah, the fourth Shallum.

Notice the word "first-born"? That's in the Young's Literal Translation, and all other English translations I've checked have the term "first-born" as well.

So this means the list is meant to be chronological in order by age.

No, that only means that Johanan is the "first-born."  And we know that "first-born" can either be first-born chronologically, or it can be a term referring to a title of preeminence (birth right), or both.  Either way, the term "first-born" does not have a necessary bearing on the rest of the list.

Ok, have it your way, but this argument is problematic, as this implies anything goes and your position is right no matter what. That's why parsimony is such a good principle.

[Nihilist Virus]

No, that only means that Johanan is the "first-born."  And we know that "first-born" can either be first-born chronologically, or it can be a term referring to a title of preeminence (birth right), or both.  Either way, the term "first-born" does not have a necessary bearing on the rest of the list.

Ok, have it your way, but this argument is problematic, as this implies anything goes and your position is right no matter what. That's why parsimony is such a good principle.

Don't let him fool you. The ISV says explicitly that the sons are listed in order, and orangebox21 has seemingly given up on the idea of defining what the Bible is after two subpar efforts. So if the ISV is indeed really a Bible, and if it says that the sons are given in order of birth, then the contradiction I proposed stands.

[Angrboda]

The original text appears to support Nihilist Virus' point.

http://biblehub.com/interlinear/1_chronicles/3-15.htm

[GrandizerII]

Ok, have it your way, but this argument is problematic, as this implies anything goes and your position is right no matter what. That's why parsimony is such a good principle.

Don't let him fool you.  The ISV says explicitly that the sons are listed in order, and orangebox21 has seemingly given up on the idea of defining what the Bible is after two subpar efforts.  So if the ISV is indeed really a Bible, and if it says that the sons are given in order of birth, then the contradiction I proposed stands.

Not fooled at all. Just tired of dealing with the word games orangebox typically likes to play. He/she does that in every exchange I've had with him. There's no intellectual honesty.

[drfuzzy]

Don't let him fool you.  The ISV says explicitly that the sons are listed in order, and orangebox21 has seemingly given up on the idea of defining what the Bible is after two subpar efforts.  So if the ISV is indeed really a Bible, and if it says that the sons are given in order of birth, then the contradiction I proposed stands.

Not fooled at all. Just tired of dealing with the word games orangebox typically likes to play. He/she does that in every exchange I've had with him. There's no intellectual honesty.

Bible "Apologetics" and intellectual honesty are mutually exclusive terms.