TOTALLY GEEKED!

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

RE: 27% of Democrats Want Global Warming Doubters Prosecuted

Tinydancer · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
Absolutely true, and part of why I don't believe the Bible is word-for-word the complete thoughts of God either. I don't know what the human beings that wrote and edited it added to or subtracted from it.

Exactly what kind of Christian are you? It seems you only believe in the feel good parts of Christianity. The Bible is the word of God, even the hard parts.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Tinydancer wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
Absolutely true, and part of why I don't believe the Bible is word-for-word the complete thoughts of God either. I don't know what the human beings that wrote and edited it added to or subtracted from it.
Exactly what kind of Christian are you? It seems you only believe in the feel good parts of Christianity. The Bible is the word of God, even the hard parts.

THIS is what he said.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

They won't believe the Bible, but will accept the Global Warming Nonsense, hook, line and sinker, lol.

Tinydancer · Guru

flan327 wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
Absolutely true, and part of why I don't believe the Bible is word-for-word the complete thoughts of God either. I don't know what the human beings that wrote and edited it added to or subtracted from it.
Exactly what kind of Christian are you? It seems you only believe in the feel good parts of Christianity. The Bible is the word of God, even the hard parts.
THIS is what he said.
flan

I know what he said but he's wrong. Christianity is Christianity because we believe the Bible comes from God. He may be practicing some kind of christianity light but it's not real.

huskerbb · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
Absolutely true, and part of why I don't believe the Bible is word-for-word the complete thoughts of God either. I don't know what the human beings that wrote and edited it added to or subtracted from it.

Nothing. God commanded that nothing be added or subtracted.

Galatians 1:6-12

huskerbb · Guru

weltschmerz wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
Are all the laws in Leviticus to be followed, or just some of them? How about consulting horoscopes, planting different seeds in the same field, eating shellfish, touching pork, men cutting the hair on the sides of their heads or eating fruit of a tree planted less than 4 years ago?
- weltschmerz

__________________________

That depends on a person's belief of the Bible itself.

Is it the true word-for-word record of God, or is it divine inspiration from God with some human bias thrown in because humans were writing it? If you believe the second option to be the case, as I do, then no. However, if you believe the first case to be true, then you have to take another step to decide which ones should be followed. That step being: is it something that was later changed by the New Testament? For example, in the New Testament (Mark 7:19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats {KJV}) all foods were declared clean, thus removing the prohibition on their consumption found in Leviticus
Humans also decided that the Gnostic texts were not to be included, like the Gospel of Mary and the Apocryphon of John.

Yeah. more than 200 bishops of the early church (with only NINE dissenting) who had spent their entire lives studying the word of God. Until you have done that, you have zero credibility to dispute their work.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Yup.

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

huskerbb wrote:
weltschmerz wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
Are all the laws in Leviticus to be followed, or just some of them? How about consulting horoscopes, planting different seeds in the same field, eating shellfish, touching pork, men cutting the hair on the sides of their heads or eating fruit of a tree planted less than 4 years ago?
- weltschmerz

__________________________

That depends on a person's belief of the Bible itself.

Is it the true word-for-word record of God, or is it divine inspiration from God with some human bias thrown in because humans were writing it? If you believe the second option to be the case, as I do, then no. However, if you believe the first case to be true, then you have to take another step to decide which ones should be followed. That step being: is it something that was later changed by the New Testament? For example, in the New Testament (Mark 7:19 Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats {KJV}) all foods were declared clean, thus removing the prohibition on their consumption found in Leviticus
Humans also decided that the Gnostic texts were not to be included, like the Gospel of Mary and the Apocryphon of John.
Yeah. more than 200 bishops of the early church (with only NINE dissenting) who had spent their entire lives studying the word of God. Until you have done that, you have zero credibility to dispute their work.

Yup.

WYSIWYG · Guru

So, it isn't true. Or you dont' know what is "true" and what isn't ,then why pay any more attention to it than you do Charles Dickens?
- Lady Gaga Snerd

________________________

My belief is that it's the truth as best as men could tell it. It's just not all from God. It's a mix of God's thoughts and Man's reality, or Man's perception of reality at least, at the time.

As to Mr. Dickens, I don't believe him to have been inspired by God. He's a good storyteller, but his stories aren't Biblical quality.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

So, did we ever decide if people who disagree with global warming should be prosecuted or not?

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Of course they should. You must cobform to their thinking.

huskerbb · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
So, it isn't true. Or you dont' know what is "true" and what isn't ,then why pay any more attention to it than you do Charles Dickens?
- Lady Gaga Snerd

________________________

My belief is that it's the truth as best as men could tell it. It's just not all from God. It's a mix of God's thoughts and Man's reality, or Man's perception of reality at least, at the time.

As to Mr. Dickens, I don't believe him to have been inspired by God. He's a good storyteller, but his stories aren't Biblical quality.

But that's ridiculous. If it is perception, then of course it can be changed when new perceptions come along, and it is therefore useless.

To Christians, the Bible is more than a collection of stories. Non-Christians can believe what they want to.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:

So, it isn't true. Or you dont' know what is "true" and what isn't ,then why pay any more attention to it than you do Charles Dickens?

- Lady Gaga Snerd

________________________

My belief is that it's the truth as best as men could tell it. It's just not all from God. It's a mix of God's thoughts and Man's reality, or Man's perception of reality at least, at the time.

As to Mr. Dickens, I don't believe him to have been inspired by God. He's a good storyteller, but his stories aren't Biblical quality.

So, there are "God's thoughts" there? Ok. Which ones are "God's thoughts" and which ones aren't?
Is John 3:16 "God's thought" or man's? So, then there are certain passages you deem to be God's thoughts, so presumably you would take the very thoughts of God very, very seriously? But, if man's then not so much. Could you please highlight a Bible so that I can know which thoughts are God's?

huskerbb · Guru

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:

So, it isn't true. Or you dont' know what is "true" and what isn't ,then why pay any more attention to it than you do Charles Dickens?

- Lady Gaga Snerd

________________________

My belief is that it's the truth as best as men could tell it. It's just not all from God. It's a mix of God's thoughts and Man's reality, or Man's perception of reality at least, at the time.

As to Mr. Dickens, I don't believe him to have been inspired by God. He's a good storyteller, but his stories aren't Biblical quality.

So, there are "God's thoughts" there? Ok. Which ones are "God's thoughts" and which ones aren't?
Is John 3:16 "God's thought" or man's? So, then there are certain passages you deem to be God's thoughts, so presumably you would take the very thoughts of God very, very seriously? But, if man's then not so much. Could you please highlight a Bible so that I can know which thoughts are God's?

Ooo! Ooo! Pick me, pick me! <raising and waving hand enthusiastically>

WYSIWYG · Guru

Exactly what kind of Christian are you? It seems you only believe in the feel good parts of Christianity. The Bible is the word of God, even the hard parts.
- Tinydancer

_______________________________

I apologize for missing this earlier.

I am the kind that believes God loves his children and wouldn't make it so their lives are full of suffering and torment for no reason. I don't just believe in the "feel good" parts though. I believe that God can be a terrible foe to those that persecute us that believe in Him. I just don't believe he would cause pain unjustly.

I agree that the Bible is the word of God, but I also know it was written and edited by men. Their biases are more likely to be in it than not, especially since God gave man free will. To me, that means he wouldn't just take over someone and puppet them to be His "ghost writer". He would give them the knowledge (in dream form or some other fashion) and then they would write it down interpreting it as best they could, but, as I said, including a little of their own biases in it.

WYSIWYG · Guru

But that's ridiculous. If it is perception, then of course it can be changed when new perceptions come along, and it is therefore useless.

To Christians, the Bible is more than a collection of stories. Non-Christians can believe what they want to.
-huskerbb

____________________________

I agree that the Bible is "more than a collection of stories". But you must agree that perception comes into play anytime one person writes something and another person reads it. Now multiply that by how many times the Bible has been edited to different versions (including at least one with more books than others, the Catholic Bible)

Christians manage to believe what they want to as well. Ever heard of "Cafeteria Christians"?

WYSIWYG · Guru

So, there are "God's thoughts" there? Ok. Which ones are "God's thoughts" and which ones aren't?
Is John 3:16 "God's thought" or man's? So, then there are certain passages you deem to be God's thoughts, so presumably you would take the very thoughts of God very, very seriously? But, if man's then not so much. Could you please highlight a Bible so that I can know which thoughts are God's?
- Lady Gaga Snerd

___________________________

God will make known to you which are which, if you have faith in Him.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

So God cant even ensure an accurate text?

WYSIWYG · Guru

I'm certain that He could. If he took away the free will of the person he had doing the writing for Him. Or if He wrote it himself without using a person.

huskerbb · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
But that's ridiculous. If it is perception, then of course it can be changed when new perceptions come along, and it is therefore useless.

To Christians, the Bible is more than a collection of stories. Non-Christians can believe what they want to.
-huskerbb

____________________________

I agree that the Bible is "more than a collection of stories". But you must agree that perception comes into play anytime one person writes something and another person reads it. Now multiply that by how many times the Bible has been edited to different versions (including at least one with more books than others, the Catholic Bible)

Christians manage to believe what they want to as well. Ever heard of "Cafeteria Christians"?

The "different versions"--aren't. They differ remarkably little, and those are differences in syntax, using more modern language, etc.. there are virtually no differences in substance.

as to the Catholic Bible--

the Bible was settled on at the Coucil of Nicaea in 325 and a few succeeding councils and diets in the 4th century. Atnthe Council of Nicaea, more than TWO HUNDRED church bishops agreed on what the Bible was to be and what the Christian faith was. Only nine dissented, and nearly all of those later recanted.

The he apocrypha was not added to the Bible until nearly 500 years later. At any rate, it doesn't really contain much that would contradict the rest of the Bible. It makes vague references to purgatory, but is hardly proof text for that belief.

huskerbb · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
So, there are "God's thoughts" there? Ok. Which ones are "God's thoughts" and which ones aren't?
Is John 3:16 "God's thought" or man's? So, then there are certain passages you deem to be God's thoughts, so presumably you would take the very thoughts of God very, very seriously? But, if man's then not so much. Could you please highlight a Bible so that I can know which thoughts are God's?
- Lady Gaga Snerd

___________________________

God will make known to you which are which, if you have faith in Him.

God tells us that they are all his word. You are defining what a cafeteria Christian is. "Well, God says this in the Bible, but this other verse is just man made."

That is an absurd position to take.

WYSIWYG · Guru

If you say so, huskerbb. You are evidently one of the many supreme arbiters of who and what can and cannot be Christian.

People like you in every church I attended, when I was still looking for a Denomination, are why I am no longer affiliated with any particular denomination. For you it seems to not be about God's love of us. For you it's all about your belief of "this is how to follow Christianity and if you don't agree, you are wrong".

Headshake.

And people wonder why attendance at churches is dropping and people are leaving the faith.

chef · Guru

WYS - The Bible very clearly spells out what being a Christian is and isn't. Husker is absolutely correct whether you like it or not.

WYSIWYG · Guru

God tells me that it's not all his word. So I will have to disagree with what he says God tells "us". Or am I not a part of "us"?

chef · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
God tells me that it's not all his word. So I will have to disagree with what he says God tells "us". Or am I not a part of "us"?

The bolded, alone, tells me that you are not a Christian. The Bible is the word of God. Denying that goes against the very essence of what it means to be a Christian. Cherrypicking what you want to follow or have be true is not Christian.

WYSIWYG · Guru

I'm not Lutheran or Catholic or Methodist or any other specific denomination, but, That doesn't mean I am not Christian. I believe that God's word is God's word. I just don't believe that the Bible is God's word verbatim, as he spoke it. I believe it's an interpretation by the men that wrote it, and later edited it at Nicaea, of His intent, but with some of their own biases and phobias included.

Tinydancer · Guru

Sounds like you made up your own religion to me.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
I'm not Lutheran or Catholic or Methodist or any other specific denomination, but, That doesn't mean I am not Christian. I believe that God's word is God's word. I just don't believe that the Bible is God's word verbatim, as he spoke it. I believe it's an interpretation by the men that wrote it, and later edited it at Nicaea, of His intent, but with some of their own biases and phobias included.

According to you there are no words, so how can it be God's Word if it is not God's Word?

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
God tells me that it's not all his word. So I will have to disagree with what he says God tells "us". Or am I not a part of "us"?

So God's Word is some sort of feeling that you get. God's Word for you is not a written word such as the Bible but some feeling that you get? Then, you aren't getting "words" so why call them words?

chef · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
I'm not Lutheran or Catholic or Methodist or any other specific denomination, but, That doesn't mean I am not Christian. I believe that God's word is God's word. I just don't believe that the Bible is God's word verbatim, as he spoke it. I believe it's an interpretation by the men that wrote it, and later edited it at Nicaea, of His intent, but with some of their own biases and phobias included.

The bolded and the red contradict each other.

huskerbb · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
I'm not Lutheran or Catholic or Methodist or any other specific denomination, but, That doesn't mean I am not Christian. I believe that God's word is God's word. I just don't believe that the Bible is God's word verbatim, as he spoke it. I believe it's an interpretation by the men that wrote it, and later edited it at Nicaea, of His intent, but with some of their own biases and phobias included.

They were more than 200 men who had devoted their lives to studying the word of God. So your "biases and phobias" are right and theirs are wrong?

Bawhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahaha

-- Edited by huskerbb on Wednesday 25th of November 2015 12:03:00 PM

WYSIWYG · Guru

The bolded and the red contradict each other.
- chef

___________________________

I disagree. You see it as a discrepancy because you call the whole Bible "God's Word". I don't see it as a discrepancy because I recognize the hand of man in some of the writing, so I don't see the whole book as God's word.

Can I suggest that we agree to disagree?

chef · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
The bolded and the red contradict each other.
- chef

___________________________

I disagree. You see it as a discrepancy because you call the whole Bible "God's Word". I don't see it as a discrepancy because I recognize the hand of man in some of the writing, so I don't see the whole book as God's word.

Can I suggest that we agree to disagree?

No. I see it as a discrepancy because it is a discrepancy. The Bible is God's word and to say you believe "God's word is God's word" then turn around and say you don't believe the Bible is God's word (verbatim, as He spoke it) is a contradiction.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

Well. Yes and no.

See the original was in languages of the region. Aramaic as an example.

And most of us use the King James Version.

And yes, some things are not verbatim due to translation.

And there are caveats that God allowed, like divorce. That is a construct of man. God allowed the exception of adultry.

Paul wrote most of the Bible. Paul, the one who was Saul. The one who literally persecuted, tortured and killed Christians. The one God structure blind on the road. That one.

And he wrote a great bit of it in prison.

A lot of what people have trouble with is the parts that call out sins. Labels them. Makes people aware of the ones they are guilty of.

And as a whole, we really do have trouble with authority figures.

Is the Bible the word for word, undeniable word of God?

No. Not every single word.

Is it what God put on man's heart and does it carry the same weight as God's actual word? Yes. Without a doubt.

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

WYSIWYG wrote:
God tells me that it's not all his word. So I will have to disagree with what he says God tells "us". Or am I not a part of "us"?

IMHO, if you think God is telling you the Bible is not ALL his word, then I believe you are really listening to the devil.

God does not lie.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:

The bolded and the red contradict each other.

- chef

___________________________

I disagree. You see it as a discrepancy because you call the whole Bible "God's Word". I don't see it as a discrepancy because I recognize the hand of man in some of the writing, so I don't see the whole book as God's word.

Can I suggest that we agree to disagree?

Soooo, you have no biases and can purely determine which part of the Bible is God and which part is not God? So, perhaps since you have that gift, you should edit the Bible for the rest of us!

chef · Guru

just Czech wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
God tells me that it's not all his word. So I will have to disagree with what he says God tells "us". Or am I not a part of "us"?
IMHO, if you think God is telling you the Bible is not ALL his word, then I believe you are really listening to the devil.
God does not lie.

I agree.

huskerbb · Guru

WYSIWYG wrote:
The bolded and the red contradict each other.
- chef

___________________________

I disagree. You see it as a discrepancy because you call the whole Bible "God's Word". I don't see it as a discrepancy because I recognize the hand of man in some of the writing, so I don't see the whole book as God's word.

Can I suggest that we agree to disagree?

This is religion. Of course not.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

chef wrote:
just Czech wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
God tells me that it's not all his word. So I will have to disagree with what he says God tells "us". Or am I not a part of "us"?
IMHO, if you think God is telling you the Bible is not ALL his word, then I believe you are really listening to the devil.
God does not lie.
I agree.

I didn't read his remarks as saying that God was lying, but rather that, with men involved in the writing of the Bible, there is the possibility of minor errors.

flan

huskerbb · Guru

flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
just Czech wrote:
WYSIWYG wrote:
God tells me that it's not all his word. So I will have to disagree with what he says God tells "us". Or am I not a part of "us"?
IMHO, if you think God is telling you the Bible is not ALL his word, then I believe you are really listening to the devil.
God does not lie.
I agree.
I didn't read his remarks as saying that God was lying, but rather that, with men involved in the writing of the Bible, there is the possibility of minor errors.
flan

Ok, let's go with that theory.

Who are these men, then? They are men that devoted their entire lives to the study and preaching of God's word. Who is more likely to make an error? Them, or you?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

But humans are fallible.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

flan327 wrote:

But humans are fallible.

flan

Then so is she. So, why would her picking and choosing somehow be more accurate?

Tinydancer · Guru

WYSIWYG is not practicing Christianity. He may think he is but he disavows the very things that make Christianity what it is. He can continue to call himself whatever he'd like but those of us who are Christians will know the truth and those who don't know will agree with what he says because it makes it easier for them to accept. The Bible is called the Word Of God for a reason even if you don't understand.

huskerbb · Guru

flan327 wrote:
But humans are fallible.

flan

Sure, but who would be more "fallible" doing brain surgery--someone who has read one or two books on the subject, or someone who has went through medical school, specialized in brain surgery, and spent the last 30 years doing hundreds of surgeries?

This is no different. Who is likely to be more "fallible"? Someone with a cursory knowledge of what is in the Bible 2,000 years after the fact, or someone who has devoted their lives to studying it? Someone who may have even walked with Christ, himself, or got first hand accounts of Christ on Earth?

When you tell me that you'd rather have some salesman that stayed at the Holiday Inn Express last night perform brain surgery on you over the Chief surgeon at some prestigious hospital, then I'll give your point some credibility.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Thursday 26th of November 2015 12:44:51 PM

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

huskerbb wrote:
flan327 wrote:
But humans are fallible.

flan
Sure, but who would be more "fallible" doing brain surgery--someone who has read one or two books on the subject, or someone who has went through medical school, specialized in brain surgery, and spent the last 30 years doing hundreds of surgeries?
This is no different. Who is likely to be more "fallible"? Someone with a cursory knowledge of what is in the Bible 2,000 years after the fact, or someone who has devoted their lives to studying it? Someone who may have even walked with Christ, himself, or got first hand accounts of Christ on Earth?

When you tell me that you'd rather have some salesman that stayed at the Holiday Inn Express last night perform brain surgery on you over the Chief surgeon at some prestigious hospital, then I'll give your point some credibility.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Thursday 26th of November 2015 12:44:51 PM

But they were so darn cute!

evileye

flan

huskerbb · Guru

flan327 wrote:
huskerbb wrote:
flan327 wrote:
But humans are fallible.

flan
Sure, but who would be more "fallible" doing brain surgery--someone who has read one or two books on the subject, or someone who has went through medical school, specialized in brain surgery, and spent the last 30 years doing hundreds of surgeries?
This is no different. Who is likely to be more "fallible"? Someone with a cursory knowledge of what is in the Bible 2,000 years after the fact, or someone who has devoted their lives to studying it? Someone who may have even walked with Christ, himself, or got first hand accounts of Christ on Earth?

When you tell me that you'd rather have some salesman that stayed at the Holiday Inn Express last night perform brain surgery on you over the Chief surgeon at some prestigious hospital, then I'll give your point some credibility.

-- Edited by huskerbb on Thursday 26th of November 2015 12:44:51 PM
But they were so darn cute!
flan

Yeah, they were good commercials--but that doesn't answer the question.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

flan327 wrote:

But humans are fallible.

flan

Then so is she. So, why would her picking and choosing somehow be more accurate?

OK, is WSY a HE? I didn't know that!

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:

flan327 wrote:

But humans are fallible.

flan

Then so is she. So, why would her picking and choosing somehow be more accurate?

OK, is WSY a HE? I didn't know that!

Yes, I believe WSY is a he. He mentioned his wife once or twice in the past.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

OK, must have missed that.