Posts by Viviane

174

The Bible is NOT Error-Free

by FusionTheism in

for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.

but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?

why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?

Viviane

If the Bible is not inspired then it is a bunch of lies when it records the accounts about God's communication with man.

Yeah, you pretty much it the nail on the head there.

If it is inspired, it means that there is personal accountability with one's conduct to the God of the Bible .

So you're in favor of a rapist being able to buy his rape victim and rape her as often as he likes? You're in favor of the death penalty for eating shrimp and bacon? Hmm... didn't peg you as the pro-rape, anti-bacon kind.

Well, that's Christian logic for you. The Bible is either lies or you're pro-rape and anti-bacon. Of course, however, we know the Bible is a bunch of lies because bacon is goddamn delicious.

174

The Bible is NOT Error-Free

by FusionTheism in

for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.

but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?

why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?

Viviane

I like this. First, claim "People don't know what a word means", like this...

Simon, you like many others don't know what inspired means

Then, proceed to tell us what someone, who you've never met, talked to, nor who wrote down what he meant, actually meant, like this...

When Paul wrote that All scripture is inspired, he meant that the preChristian writings got their ideas from events that had to do with God and his people of the past, along with the inspired prophets.

Paul never said that's what he meant and there is no way for you to have any knowledge indicating what you wrote. It seems as if you made that up to fit a narrative. Perhaps you need to re-read your post and apply it to yourself.

174

The Bible is NOT Error-Free

by FusionTheism in

for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.

but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?

why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?

Viviane

Wondering is the beginning of science,learning and throwing off ignorance and superstition. I wish you best in your quest.

16

What is their position on IVF?

by voodoo lady in

for example, if a married couple had fertility issues relating to the male partner's sperm, could they use a donor?.

is it frowned upon in a more general sense because people should be preaching rather than procreating?.

Viviane

If you believe the Adam and Eve story to be true, the entire human population is the product of incest... soooo..

Wouldn't that actually be a really weird and fun form of masturbation? Basically, Adam farked himself?

174

The Bible is NOT Error-Free

by FusionTheism in

for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.

but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?

why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?

Viviane

No, what's sad and pathetic is the fact that you think throwing insults will make up for posts lacking in substance.
You like to ride the high wave using insults. Little, very little.

No one has insulted you. Pretending to be a victim to cover up your derp is sad and pathetic.

174

The Bible is NOT Error-Free

by FusionTheism in

for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.

but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?

why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?

Viviane

i read that greek was the lingua franca, like english today in the region, some type of aramean was spoken as daily language, hebrew was only used in the worship.... so jesus must have spoken greek .. i think.

I never said anything about Aramaic. Anyway, read up on it. Your post was the equivalent of this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NP0mQeLWCCo

174

The Bible is NOT Error-Free

by FusionTheism in

for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.

but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?

why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?

Viviane

It's not clever or funny to mask your ignorance in derp. It's just sad and pathetic.

174

The Bible is NOT Error-Free

by FusionTheism in

for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.

but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?

why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?

Viviane

You like to ride the merry-go-round. Your post above makes little sense. Try again.

That's because you don't know much about the Bible.

10

Google: most accurate bible in the world

by enigma1863 in

i just googled "most accurate bible in the world" and got new world translation as the answer.

comments?

Viviane

That's like claiming you've got the prettiest turd in the septic tank.

174

The Bible is NOT Error-Free

by FusionTheism in

for many christians, the bible is viewed as the 100% error-free, perfect book straight from god, where every single word was carefully chosen by god for a reason.

but, usually, when you have a discussion on the topic, these christians will end up saying that only the original copies written directly from the hands of the prophets and apostles were error-free, and all manuscript copies since then are subject to copyist mistakes and other errors.. since zero original copies are in existence, how do we know the originals were error-free?

why should we think the originals should be error-free to begin with?

Viviane

The Synaptic Gospels are accounts of Jesus' sayings and acts gathered from eyewitnesses and faithful disciples and should not be expected to perfectly coincide chronologically or in every detail.

Well, they aren't, not unless Jesus was making puns in Greek to people that didn't speak Greek. Does that seem like something Jesus would do?