Yet another example of how silly the Bible is...

by Abaddon 82 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Satanus

  LT

  Oh come now. Some of it is allegorical. But putting it's fulfillment off into the distant future doesn't change the nature of the vendiction expressed. Bible students know that jesus is referring to himself, and the principle of christians inheriting authority from jesus after his coming is carried throughout the following part of the nt. The bloody repayment to opposers in revelation is vivid.

  The chance for the returning king to demonstrate his principles of turning the other cheek, loving his enemies is totally forgotten when he comes back in full power.

  SS
• 

  StinkyPantz

  Logansrun-

  Hey, you've gotta love The Flood.

  ((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((The Flood))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))

  Thanks, The Flood. You destroyed all my faith.

  LOL This was too funny!!!
• 

  hooberus

  Here is some information on the Ark from a Christian scientific perspective

  http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/noah.asp
• 

  rem

  Here is some information on the Ark from a Christian scientific perspective

  Here is some equally scientific information from the flat-earther perspective:

  http://www.flat-earth.org/platygaea/faq.html

  rem
• 

  RunningMan

  Rem, that was the most informative site on flat-earth that I have ever seen. I love these gems:

  19. What is the "Springfield Effect"?

  The Springfield Effect is the name given to the phenomenon by which every place named Springfield is hard-linked in hyperspace to every other place of this name. In other words, there is only one place named Springfield, but it is "linked" to various locations in the world.

  20. Does Idaho exist

  No. The existence of Idaho is a lie, fabricated by a conspiracy of cartographers, as is England (see question 10).

  21. What about North Dakota?

  That doesn't exist either.

  I have been to both North Dakota and Idaho, and can personally testify that neither one of them exists.

  This looks like it would make a good article in Awake!
• 

  LittleToe

  Bradley:
  Don't tell the wife, she'll cite it in the divorce papers

  SS:
  I stand by what I said, in reference to that quoted text. It's a parable, not an allegory.
  I never said anything about future prophetic fulfillment, just that it's a story with a moral tale.
  You are putting words in my mouth, and quoting scripture out of context.

  I also never said that there weren't passages that are more in line with your claim. It's just that the one you based your case on was weak.
• 

  Satanus

  LT

  Here is a link to a list of scriptures, some prophesying a king of the jews to come to rule israel and the whole earth. Some, from the nt suggesting that his disciples thought he was a king. Some carrying on this idea, even after he was gone. They indicate to me that the king in the parable was jesus. If you disagree, please submit your candidate. If you think the parable doesn't apply in this way at all, then why not explain it?

  Right.

  http://www.learnbible.net/topical/070.htm

  There ya go.

  SS
• 

  Swickley

  Talking snake + Eve eats apple + Sins of Adam transferred to mankind + Angels and women copulate to produce giants + Noah’s flood + Jonah + Moses parts Red sea + Jesus born of a virgin + Jesus’ miracles + Jesus dying to cancel Adams sin + many many more fables = the whole bible is silly

  Do you really and honestly believe, that the whole world is in a world of #hit, because a talking snake, told a naked woman, to eat a piece of fruit?

  BEWARE OF STUPID PEOPLE IN LARGE GROUPS

  You guys/gals are great! I am enjoying your comments so much.

  Swickley
• 

  LittleToe

  SS:
  I did explain it, and it's called a parable in the text. Btw, I think you forgot to add the link, just as I forgot to add a smiley emoticon at the end of my last post to you

  Parable
  A comparison; a similitude; specifically, a short fictitious narrative of something which might really occur in life or nature, by means of which a moral is drawn; as, the parables of Christ .

  Allegory
  1. A figurative sentence or discourse, in which the principal subject is described by another subject resembling it in its properties and circumstances. The real subject is thus kept out of view, and we are left to collect the intentions of the writer or speaker by the resemblance of the secondary to the primary subject.

  2. Anything which represents by suggestive resemblance; an emblem.

  3. (Paint. & Sculpt.) A figure representation which has a meaning beyond notion directly conveyed by the object painted or sculptured. Syn. -- Metaphor; fable. -- Allegory, Parable. An allegory differs both from fable and parable, in that the properties of persons are fictitiously represented as attached to things, to which they are as it were transferred. . . . A figure of Peace and Victory crowning some historical personage is an allegory. I am the Vine, ye are the branches" [John xv. 1-6] is a spoken allegory. In the parable there is no transference of properties. The parable of the sower [Matt. xiii. 3-23] represents all things as according to their proper nature. In the allegory quoted above the properties of the vine and the relation of the branches are transferred to the person of Christ and His apostles and disciples." C. J. Smith. An allegory is a prolonged metaphor. Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress" and Spenser's Faërie Queene" are celebrated examples of the allegory.
• 

  frankiespeakin

  The Flood account in Genesis, can not rightly be interpreted as global. One has to be reasonable, and realize that Noah or whoever wrote genesis had no idea what the "earth" was.

  When the ancient book of Genesis speaks about the "earth" it is speaking of dry land.

  Why does everyone read the bible with 20th century concepts, and not use a little insight and recognize that it was originally written to people with far different concepts than we have today. I would figure some like Abbadon would know better, since he seems to know some science.

  To even imply that genesis is talking about the whole earth(in our modern concepts), displays a lack of reasonableness. If you are reading an ancient document to properly understand it you have to understand the original audience, and what they thought and how they veiwed things.

  To think that God would comunicate to an ancient people in our 20th century concepts and not their is shows a lack of comon disernment. I thought you guys rejected fundamentalism and all its non-sense.