BajaNomad

To Doug"

 Pages:  1    3    5  ..  7

Iflyfish - 6-10-2012 at 09:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Lee
I've stayed out of this fray but now wonder why anyone here needs to ARGUE and DEBATE religion or politics ANY FURTHER?

What is wrong with all of you?

Isn't there a forum somewhere where you can espouse your silliness?

Politics and religion go hand in hand: both corrupt and misguided and meant to fool the masses -- who are obviously easily fooled.

IF any of you nomads NEED to discuss either religion or politics, take it to OT or somewhere else.

Otherwise, carry on.

That is all.

And remember, HAVE FUN! Don't be so serious!


Quote:
Originally posted by Lee
I've stayed out of this fray but now wonder why anyone here needs to ARGUE and DEBATE religion or politics ANY FURTHER?

What is wrong with all of you?

Isn't there a forum somewhere where you can espouse your silliness?

Politics and religion go hand in hand: both corrupt and misguided and meant to fool the masses -- who are obviously easily fooled.

IF any of you nomads NEED to discuss either religion or politics, take it to OT or somewhere else.

Otherwise, carry on.

That is all.

And remember, HAVE FUN! Don't be so serious!


Wow, you read the whole thing!! Here on Nomads!! and you read the whole thing?! Hmmm, wonder why? You do seem to have a perspective on the matter and state it in a, might I say, forthrightly! The subject must be important to you as well as others given that this thread has over 6,000 hits. I have found this discussion enlightening, informative, civil and FUN! Thanks for sharing your perspective, one I am certain is shared by many of the over 12,000 eyes that have viewed this thread.

Iflyfish

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 09:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Iflyfish
Quote:
Originally posted by Osprey
OMG. Thanx flyguy


What!!?? A religious experience Osprey? Or was the OMG simply an expression of some orgasmic experience you were having at the time. I have found myself uttering exactly the same phrase at times of mostly shared bliss, or at least when I was led to believe they were shared. How was it for you? Your welcome, it was ok for me.

Iflyfishshakingmyheadsometimes


I think we should all be using OMZ (Oh My Zeus) instead of OMG. Part of my reason for that is that the abrahamic god is too bogged down influencing football games and reality shows, in addition to sorting through millions of mumbled prayers every day. We can ease his workload by worshipping some of the other gods, even though that violates the first commandment :)

paranewbi - 6-10-2012 at 10:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Hi Ken;

You do quote correctly from the Old Testament. I am glad you have read some. What you may not understand is that God chose the descendants of Abraham to carry forth the message that came to the whole world on the sacrifice of his son Jesus Christ. The ‘laws’ as quoted by you and much more were in place to assure to some extent that the carrying forth of the message would meet with some success as the ability of man on his own was very limited, and actually so if you read of the tribes in the world at that time and how they conducted themselves outside of the intervention of God. (Much as the world at this time is progressing so ‘beautifully’ and ‘naturally’ now, yahoo! [sarcasm]).

Simply stated; The Jews were chosen to carry the word of God and the subsequent “Good News” that came with the Cross and the release of the burden of the ‘law’ as per your quotes (‘The vale was torn’). The Jews were not chosen to Salvation and yes some of them are not in heaven. The laws were there to help the Jews to have a modicum of longevity (wow! Only civilization still here! Even though many have tried to get rid of them). If you look at Leviticus you will find how to get rid of mold on the walls of your house without getting sick! Thank you God!

This of course is an answer to your quoting a portion of the Bible we as Christians know we are no longer held to (and by the way, yes the admonishment to carry the laws was valid as you quote from Mathew, but please take note that most quotes out of context are deceptive and you will find that Christ’s disciples picked grain on the Sabbath and that answer to your context can be found in many places other than the isolation you choose to quote it as, let’s be sincere here if not in agreement please).

Your opinion is just that as mine is of course just mine. Argument is how reasonable men reason with each other. Proof is how the unreasonable are reasoned with. Outside of that it is foolishness that causes a dialogue.
I can offer you some references to reason with you by much greater minds than mine if you need it intellectually. U2U me if you are interested.

If not, then I would like to say God Bless you Bajafun777! I hope to meet you one day!


Thanks paranewbi, but, like other religious people, you state things with certainty that you could not possibly know. If there was any evidence for what you state absolutely, I would consider it. Lacking evidence for the supernatural, I will take my comfort from the natural world, which is much more beautiful than any of the religious stories I have heard.

Spare me your blessings and your prayers, but I would enjoy meeting you sometime. We would have a spirited discussion :)


Sorry Ken, I neither Blessed you nor did I say that I would pray for you...I would do neither.
I also did not say I would like to meet you. I did offer some reponses with the same referance you used for your quotes and made no claim of absolution other than to use the same book you used and reasoned as to why the laws you quoted were necessary in the context that they were written from that same book.

I pray for 'one another' as the Bible states and you are not 'one' or 'another' in the context that directive was given and whom it was given to...not because I particularly care or don't care for you. An open heart to Jesus is who I would pray for and for Bajafun777 because she/he is 'one' and 'another' from what I can discern in her writting. And I Blessed Bajafun777 for the same reasons. Not you Ken.
I could not give you something you so succcinctly reject. And neither can God.
I know that does not bother you.

DENNIS - 6-10-2012 at 10:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Lee
Isn't there a forum somewhere where you can espouse your silliness?



Did you really mean to say this, Lee?? Because you followed it up with this:
Quote:

Politics and religion go hand in hand: both corrupt and misguided and meant to fool the masses -- who are obviously easily fooled.


Then....you went back to this:
Quote:

IF any of you nomads NEED to discuss either religion or politics, take it to OT or somewhere else.




Now....I' am confused. Which way do you want things to be? :lol::lol:

Iflyfish - 6-10-2012 at 10:11 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Quote:
Originally posted by Iflyfish
Quote:
Originally posted by Osprey
OMG. Thanx flyguy


What!!?? A religious experience Osprey? Or was the OMG simply an expression of some orgasmic experience you were having at the time. I have found myself uttering exactly the same phrase at times of mostly shared bliss, or at least when I was led to believe they were shared. How was it for you? Your welcome, it was ok for me.

Iflyfishshakingmyheadsometimes


I think we should all be using OMZ (Oh My Zeus) instead of OMG. Part of my reason for that is that the abrahamic god is too bogged down influencing football games and reality shows, in addition to sorting through millions of mumbled prayers every day. We can ease his workload by worshipping some of the other gods, even though that violates the first commandment :)


I'll try Ken, I will earnestly try, but I fear of distracting with OMZ, OMZ 'cause they might respond with "WTF??!! Shut up and get to it!!" One could utter OMHG, Oh MY Holy Ghost, but that could freak out others in earshot. What about OMA, don't forget Aphrodite! In the Greek Pantheon of course the possibilities are endless. Sometimes I guess we could utter OMS, Oh My Sisyphus, which unfortunately could be understood to mean, "hurry up and get this thing over with". Come to think of it I think I will stay with the tried and true OMG, but to each his/her own deity.

Iflyfishwithbaccusandaphrodite

Iflyfish - 6-10-2012 at 10:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Hi Ken;

You do quote correctly from the Old Testament. I am glad you have read some. What you may not understand is that God chose the descendants of Abraham to carry forth the message that came to the whole world on the sacrifice of his son Jesus Christ. The ‘laws’ as quoted by you and much more were in place to assure to some extent that the carrying forth of the message would meet with some success as the ability of man on his own was very limited, and actually so if you read of the tribes in the world at that time and how they conducted themselves outside of the intervention of God. (Much as the world at this time is progressing so ‘beautifully’ and ‘naturally’ now, yahoo! [sarcasm]).

Simply stated; The Jews were chosen to carry the word of God and the subsequent “Good News” that came with the Cross and the release of the burden of the ‘law’ as per your quotes (‘The vale was torn’). The Jews were not chosen to Salvation and yes some of them are not in heaven. The laws were there to help the Jews to have a modicum of longevity (wow! Only civilization still here! Even though many have tried to get rid of them). If you look at Leviticus you will find how to get rid of mold on the walls of your house without getting sick! Thank you God!

This of course is an answer to your quoting a portion of the Bible we as Christians know we are no longer held to (and by the way, yes the admonishment to carry the laws was valid as you quote from Mathew, but please take note that most quotes out of context are deceptive and you will find that Christ’s disciples picked grain on the Sabbath and that answer to your context can be found in many places other than the isolation you choose to quote it as, let’s be sincere here if not in agreement please).

Your opinion is just that as mine is of course just mine. Argument is how reasonable men reason with each other. Proof is how the unreasonable are reasoned with. Outside of that it is foolishness that causes a dialogue.
I can offer you some references to reason with you by much greater minds than mine if you need it intellectually. U2U me if you are interested.

If not, then I would like to say God Bless you Bajafun777! I hope to meet you one day!


Thanks paranewbi, but, like other religious people, you state things with certainty that you could not possibly know. If there was any evidence for what you state absolutely, I would consider it. Lacking evidence for the supernatural, I will take my comfort from the natural world, which is much more beautiful than any of the religious stories I have heard.

Spare me your blessings and your prayers, but I would enjoy meeting you sometime. We would have a spirited discussion :)


Sorry Ken, I neither Blessed you nor did I say that I would pray for you...I would do neither.
I also did not say I would like to meet you. I did offer some reponses with the same referance you used for your quotes and made no claim of absolution other than to use the same book you used and reasoned as to why the laws you quoted were necessary in the context that they were written from that same book.

I pray for 'one another' as the Bible states and you are not 'one' or 'another' in the context that directive was given and whom it was given to...not because I particularly care or don't care for you. An open heart to Jesus is who I would pray for and for Bajafun777 because she/he is 'one' and 'another' from what I can discern in her writting. And I Blessed Bajafun777 for the same reasons. Not you Ken.
I could not give you something you so succcinctly reject. And neither can God.
I know that does not bother you.


I am glad you have posted this. This post alludes to the bifurcation, US/THEM, Saved/Unsaved, US/OTHER, I'm OK/Your NOT OK, and is the basis of the use of religion to justify the damning/extermination of those who are Other. We are all in this together friend.

Iflyfish

Ateo - 6-10-2012 at 10:21 AM

This is an example of how your religion is separating you from others. This quote below seems a little passive-aggressive towards Ken if you ask me.
Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi


Sorry Ken, I neither Blessed you nor did I say that I would pray for you...I would do neither.
I also did not say I would like to meet you. I did offer some reponses with the same referance you used for your quotes and made no claim of absolution other than to use the same book you used and reasoned as to why the laws you quoted were necessary in the context that they were written from that same book.

I pray for 'one another' as the Bible states and you are not 'one' or 'another' in the context that directive was given and whom it was given to...not because I particularly care or don't care for you. An open heart to Jesus is who I would pray for and for Bajafun777 because she/he is 'one' and 'another' from what I can discern in her writting. And I Blessed Bajafun777 for the same reasons. Not you Ken.
I could not give you something you so succcinctly reject. And neither can God.
I know that does not bother you.

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 10:36 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Hi Ken;

You do quote correctly from the Old Testament. I am glad you have read some.

Sorry Ken, I neither Blessed you nor did I say that I would pray for you...I would do neither.
I also did not say I would like to meet you.


Ooops, sorry I offended you paranewbi, and here I thought you wanted to meet me, now upon rereading your post I see you really wanted to meet Bajafun777 :). Silly me.

I don't know whether you were trying to be insulting when you said "I am glad you have read some", but in any event I have in fact read ALL of the bible. Actually, reading the bible cover to cover when I was a teenager was a major factor in my lifelong atheism (I am 72). I found it to be an evil, repulsive book. Like Penn Jillette says, "reading the bible is the fast track to atheism". I would still like to meet you, but I guess that would be too christian for you to choke down :)

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Ken Bondy]

Secular Science vs. Religious "Science"

DianaT - 6-10-2012 at 10:48 AM

OMZ Kansas has become the new Tennessee ---

Sorry, but while I respect everyone's right to believe in whatever religion they choose, if I had children in Kansas I would move.

This morning I read this Gravity is Really Intelligent Falling Controlled by God and Jesus

This may be a bit off the direction of the discussion, but I thought some of you might like reading this.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]

Osprey - 6-10-2012 at 10:50 AM

This whole thread leads us to the thought that words are important. Some very religious people repeat what they think is important to make an indelible impression on the person they need to convince.

I've done it myself.

A few times, in the company of desireable young women my very first word is Jorge -- I speak clearly and distinctly while I admonish "Darlin' please remember my name because in about an hour you'll be screaming it over and over."

paranewbi - 6-10-2012 at 11:03 AM

The written word is sometimes lacking in the spirit of the context because it is in the eye of the beholder. I have not offered anything I have written in the spirit of insult, passive, agressive nor in any other context than to have a civil discourse as some would accuse me. I cannot void how others take it in their view just as how others cannot void how I read their content. But I have not called others names, nor discounted their beliefs, I have only responded based upon that which can be responded to in the realm of my understanding of what they cited or quoted. I am actually pleased that Ken has read some, I derive from that it is not in my interest to urge him to read more or read it right. Once again I am glad you have read some Ken...I could not say all at the time because that was not revealed so I offered what was evident in acknowledgment or your ability to converse on that level at least.

It would seem disengenous to portray a less than 100% continuity in the presentation of my beliefs and by sticking only to what I believe and have a level of knowledge in...the Bible, is as genuine as I can be. Christ did not chase those who refused his message and conversed with those who were receptive. And on the contrary he did not hate them and actually wept over them, but he did not pursue them when they walked away. It is in this same spirit I bid those who do not wish to hear, and bring no thoughts of harm to them.

I would say Ken that there has been much discovered about the content of the Bible in recent times that tend to lend an intelectual validity to the content. It was in that frame of which I offered some referances to an intelectual answer to some of those statements posted earlier as to 'supernatural' content. Your age of declared cover to cover reading and your age today seems to have maybe not allowed for the realization of those scholarly writings that are available today concerning the Bible.

DENNIS - 6-10-2012 at 11:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Ooops, sorry I offended you paranewbi, and here I thought you wanted to meet me, now upon rereading your post I see you really wanted to meet Bajafun777 :). Silly me.



Thas OK, Ken. I'll meet you.
By the way....did I tell you they tore down the round, frond roofed restaurant between Ensenada and Maneadero? I remember you used to mention that place.

Does this qualify as a hijack? I sure hope so. All of this nonsense is Skeet's fault....and he doesn't even know it.

paranewbi - 6-10-2012 at 11:12 AM

Illyfish.
I am not in anything all together with you.
Please do not tell me what I am.
Yes, I am not afraid to say those words either.
I am not one of you.
The reason I say this is because of the one thing that seperates the God of the Bible from all other 'religions'.
I am forgiven.

Mexitron - 6-10-2012 at 11:16 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DianaT
OMZ Kansas has become the new Tennessee ---

Sorry, but while I respect everyone's right to believe in whatever religion they choose, if I had children in Kansas I would move.

This morning I read this Gravity is Really Intelligent Falling Controlled by God and Jesus

This may be a bit off the direction of the discussion, but I thought some of you might like reading this.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]


What a beauty of a theory..."intelligent falling" :lol:

Ateo - 6-10-2012 at 11:19 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
The written word is sometimes lacking in the spirit of the context because it is in the eye of the beholder. I have not offered anything I have written in the spirit of insult, passive, agressive nor in any other context than to have a civil discourse as some would accuse me. I cannot void how others take it in their view just as how others cannot void how I read their content. But I have not called others names, nor discounted their beliefs, I have only responded based upon that which can be responded to in the realm of my understanding of what they cited or quoted. I am actually pleased that Ken has read some, I derive from that it is not in my interest to urge him to read more or read it right. Once again I am glad you have read some Ken...I could not say all at the time because that was not revealed so I offered what was evident in acknowledgment or your ability to converse on that level at least.

It would seem disengenous to portray a less than 100% continuity in the presentation of my beliefs and by sticking only to what I believe and have a level of knowledge in...the Bible, is as genuine as I can be. Christ did not chase those who refused his message and conversed with those who were receptive. And on the contrary he did not hate them and actually wept over them, but he did not pursue them when they walked away. It is in this same spirit I bid those who do not wish to hear, and bring no thoughts of harm to them.

I would say Ken that there has been much discovered about the content of the Bible in recent times that tend to lend an intelectual validity to the content. It was in that frame of which I offered some referances to an intelectual answer to some of those statements posted earlier as to 'supernatural' content. Your age of declared cover to cover reading and your age today seems to have maybe not allowed for the realization of those scholarly writings that are available today concerning the Bible.


Are you saying there are new writings in the last 50 years that'll clear this up? Please let us know what they are. If there was a god don't you think he'd post an updated bible? I'm not being sarcastic nor am I joking. She could delete the old testament and clear up the contradictions for a start.:)

DianaT - 6-10-2012 at 11:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Mexitron
Quote:
Originally posted by DianaT
OMZ Kansas has become the new Tennessee ---

Sorry, but while I respect everyone's right to believe in whatever religion they choose, if I had children in Kansas I would move.

This morning I read this Gravity is Really Intelligent Falling Controlled by God and Jesus

This may be a bit off the direction of the discussion, but I thought some of you might like reading this.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]


What a beauty of a theory..."intelligent falling" :lol:


The article left me speechless and that is not easy to do! :yes: :biggrin:

paranewbi --- knowing the truth with a capital T and knowing the one and only correct reading of the bible, simply ends the conversation and the exchange of thoughts and ideas, IMHO

vandenberg - 6-10-2012 at 11:29 AM

Always put your hand on the Good Book when in a motel room before you turn on the porn channel. That's why they're there.:biggrin::biggrin:

Barry A. - 6-10-2012 at 11:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DianaT

--- Barry, the founders of the US were mostly a part of the liberal religious traditions of the time. They were Diests and children of the enlightenment ---- they were not the fundamentalist Christians that some like to think they were. Even George Washington, while claiming to be an Anglican did not take communion.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]


Diane----------You appear to be assuming things, and projecting thoughts in my mind that don't exist and interpretations of what I wrote that are incorrect---------I never mentioned "fundamentalist Christians", and have no problems or disagreements with what you wrote above in general------and, I stand by what I originally wrote. I believe that this Nation was founded ( & settled) on Christian-Judeo principals, defined in it's broadest sense. You can nit-pick that if you like, but it does not change my conclusions.

Barry

DianaT - 6-10-2012 at 11:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
Quote:
Originally posted by DianaT

--- Barry, the founders of the US were mostly a part of the liberal religious traditions of the time. They were Diests and children of the enlightenment ---- they were not the fundamentalist Christians that some like to think they were. Even George Washington, while claiming to be an Anglican did not take communion.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]


Diane----------You appear to be assuming things, and projecting thoughts in my mind that don't exist and interpretations of what I wrote that are incorrect---------I never mentioned "fundamentalist Christians", and have no problems or disagreements with what you wrote above in general------and, I stand by what I originally wrote. I believe that this Nation was founded ( & settled) on Christian-Judeo principals, defined in it's broadest sense. You can nit-pick that if you like, but it does not change my conclusions.

Barry


Sorry, I did not mean to indicate that you were referring to fundamentalists --- but too many people today do, and I would argue that this country was founded far more on Roman and Greek traditions and the philosophies of the Enlightenment with the Judeo-Christian principles a small part as was the influence of the Iroquois Nation.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 11:42 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
The written word is sometimes lacking in the spirit of the context because it is in the eye of the beholder. I have not offered anything I have written in the spirit of insult, passive, agressive nor in any other context than to have a civil discourse as some would accuse me. I cannot void how others take it in their view just as how others cannot void how I read their content. But I have not called others names, nor discounted their beliefs, I have only responded based upon that which can be responded to in the realm of my understanding of what they cited or quoted. I am actually pleased that Ken has read some, I derive from that it is not in my interest to urge him to read more or read it right. Once again I am glad you have read some Ken...I could not say all at the time because that was not revealed so I offered what was evident in acknowledgment or your ability to converse on that level at least.

It would seem disengenous to portray a less than 100% continuity in the presentation of my beliefs and by sticking only to what I believe and have a level of knowledge in...the Bible, is as genuine as I can be. Christ did not chase those who refused his message and conversed with those who were receptive. And on the contrary he did not hate them and actually wept over them, but he did not pursue them when they walked away. It is in this same spirit I bid those who do not wish to hear, and bring no thoughts of harm to them.

I would say Ken that there has been much discovered about the content of the Bible in recent times that tend to lend an intelectual validity to the content. It was in that frame of which I offered some referances to an intelectual answer to some of those statements posted earlier as to 'supernatural' content. Your age of declared cover to cover reading and your age today seems to have maybe not allowed for the realization of those scholarly writings that are available today concerning the Bible.


Thanks for your thoughts paranewbi. With all due respect (OMZ I love that phrase, it has so many wonderful nuances), I don't think you are saying anything. You are simply assuming that the bible is true, and with that premise you move on to "prove" something. There is a phrase for that, "garbage in, garbage out". The bible is true because it says it is true. Doesn't fly.

As to my understanding of the bible, my bible study didn't end with my first teenage reading more than 50 years ago. I would stack my "bible study" library up against most trained bible scholars. I must admit that my interests have tended towards the history of the bible, which is absolutely fascinating. It is astonishing that such a fundamentally evil book, which advocates slavery, genocide, sacrificing numerous small animals, killing your kids for talking back to you, killing homosexuals, killing people who work on weekends, killing, killing, killing ad nauseum, has had such a stranglehold on so many people. One thing I learned in my studies of the bible, is that there are thousands of versions in existence. I own four copies of the "King James" version, and each is different. Some differences are substantial, others editorial. But the fact remains is that nobody knows what the original version said, it doesn't exist. So much for "written by the creator of the universe."

Please refer me to some writings which will enlighten me on what the bible really means. I will enthusiastically pursue them.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Ken Bondy]

paranewbi - 6-10-2012 at 11:46 AM

ateo- an interesting and easy reading by a non-believer, large city reporter and trained attorney- Lee Strobel. You can research him on the net and follow through with readings of those scholars he sought out. Sorry, nothing will 'clear this up' and to state why would only draw a misunderstanding. We take from it what we want.

Diana T - a sentiment I don't agree with. My studies and personal experiance have led to me to a conclusion that is undeniable and to waffle on ones own discovery is what ends truth and allows relativism. Sorry 1 + 1 does equal 2. Maybe read the above authors own discovery.

vandenberg- long time ago when my friends' mother learned that I was a Christian, she exclaimed to me that she had read the Bible and found it to be the most pornographic book she had ever read. Maybe you should open it with that hand and click off the porno :0)

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 11:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Ooops, sorry I offended you paranewbi, and here I thought you wanted to meet me, now upon rereading your post I see you really wanted to meet Bajafun777 :). Silly me.



Thas OK, Ken. I'll meet you.
By the way....did I tell you they tore down the round, frond roofed restaurant between Ensenada and Maneadero? I remember you used to mention that place.

Does this qualify as a hijack? I sure hope so. All of this nonsense is Skeet's fault....and he doesn't even know it.


Thanks DENNIS. I am so glad you are willing to meet me. I was really getting depressed.

Yes you did tell me about that restaurant, I think it was called Mariscos Sinaloenses. I was sorry to hear it is gone, it was a favorite stop on our trips in the early 2000s.

All the best and thanks again,

++Ken++

DENNIS - 6-10-2012 at 11:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Yes you did tell me about that restaurant,



Yeah....I knew I had. Just going for a convenient diversion. :lol:

standingwave - 6-10-2012 at 11:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Illyfish.
I am not in anything all together with you.
Please do not tell me what I am.
Yes, I am not afraid to say those words either.
I am not one of you.
The reason I say this is because of the one thing that seperates the God of the Bible from all other 'religions'.
I am forgiven.


whew!
self forgiveness works for me (well, sometimes) I wholeheartedly recommend it.
so, paranewbi.... what planet are you from? seriously. You say to Iflyfish "I am not in anything all together with you." But Iflyfish is talking about being human on earth, you deny even that amount of commonality.
So, alien, where's your planet? And why are so many of you here, making such a mess out of mine.

Barry A. - 6-10-2012 at 11:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DianaT
Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
Quote:
Originally posted by DianaT

--- Barry, the founders of the US were mostly a part of the liberal religious traditions of the time. They were Diests and children of the enlightenment ---- they were not the fundamentalist Christians that some like to think they were. Even George Washington, while claiming to be an Anglican did not take communion.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]


Diane----------You appear to be assuming things, and projecting thoughts in my mind that don't exist and interpretations of what I wrote that are incorrect---------I never mentioned "fundamentalist Christians", and have no problems or disagreements with what you wrote above in general------and, I stand by what I originally wrote. I believe that this Nation was founded ( & settled) on Christian-Judeo principals, defined in it's broadest sense. You can nit-pick that if you like, but it does not change my conclusions.

Barry


Sorry, I did not mean to indicate that you were referring to fundamentalists --- but too many people today do, and I would argue that this country was founded far more on Roman and Greek traditions and the philosophies of the Enlightenment with the Judeo-Christian principles a small part as was the influence of the Iroquois Nation.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]


As I read the founding writings and documents of this Country, and observe inscriptions on our most important Monuments, I see no mention of the "Iroquois Nation", but I see significant mention of Judeo-Christian basic phylosophy---------the comparison or inference is specious, at least to me.

Having said that, I have great respect for the Iroquois Nation, and always have.

Further, as an example of where I am coming from, I agree & revere some things that the Progressives state they stand for, and I very much disagree with many other things they say they stand for------------so I continue to resist those things that I don't approve of on their agenda---------but I don't condemn Progressives to the point of wanting to eliminate them--------like Christians (and Athiests), they are a part of our society, like it or not, and they do contribute. I except that, and try to embrace their good ideas, of which there are many, but will continue to resist where I think they are wrong.

Barry

paranewbi - 6-10-2012 at 12:08 PM

Standingwave- once again staying true to my beliefs. It does not require explanation other than what is written in the Bible. I do declare that this is what I base my life on...as a work in progress (to be truthful) and for a person who has read the bible to question my statements would lead me to believe they have not read the Bible.

If a person has not read the Bible then I do not expect they would understand the context of the statement.

I did not respond in the way you received it and I can't do anything about that. I am not a 'member' of this world and do not believe anyone on this planet can change the course it is on. In that frame I do not participate in man's endeavour to 'make' it to mans liking.

I even surf with some Brothers who SUP their way into the waves...although I don't, and by the way they would say the same to you. Just as you choose to SUP, they would say they are not one of you and would request not to be included in your endeavours.

Also, if someone would like to state that this is why many have suffered for not being 'one of my kind', take note that has worked both ways, ask Nero.

Cypress - 6-10-2012 at 01:11 PM

It's a beautiful world! Tomorrow is another day. The fish may or may not be biting, the sun may or may not be shining, but life is good. And all you atheists, agnostics, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhist? Enjoy it!:biggrin:

wessongroup - 6-10-2012 at 01:16 PM

Ditto's ..

Ateo - 6-10-2012 at 01:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
ateo- an interesting and easy reading by a non-believer, large city reporter and trained attorney- Lee Strobel. You can research him on the net and follow through with readings of those scholars he sought out. Sorry, nothing will 'clear this up' and to state why would only draw a misunderstanding. We take from it what we want.


Yeah, I know of Lee Strobel the apologist. A rebuttal to every Strobel assertion can be found at:

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=The_Case_for_Ch...

DianaT - 6-10-2012 at 01:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi


Diana T - a sentiment I don't agree with. My studies and personal experiance have led to me to a conclusion that is undeniable and to waffle on ones own discovery is what ends truth and allows relativism. Sorry 1 + 1 does equal 2. Maybe read the above authors own discovery.



OK, so you believe you know the truth.

A couple of questions, which "books" do you believe should be included in the bible?

Which translation of which books do you follow?

Which version of which translation do you follow?

Upon whom do you depend on for knowing the correct reading of the bible?

Whose interpretation of the bible do you think is correct, the Catholics, the Lutherans, the Evangelicals, the Baptist, the Amish or who?

If there is one correct reading, translation, and interpretation, there must be a lot of people who consider themselves Christian who are wrong?

Curious.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]

STOP THE INSANITY

Lee - 6-10-2012 at 02:07 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
Quote:
Originally posted by Lee
Isn't there a forum somewhere where you can espouse your silliness?



Did you really mean to say this, Lee?? Because you followed it up with this:
Quote:

Politics and religion go hand in hand: both corrupt and misguided and meant to fool the masses -- who are obviously easily fooled.


Then....you went back to this:
Quote:

IF any of you nomads NEED to discuss either religion or politics, take it to OT or somewhere else.


Now....I' am confused. Which way do you want things to be? :lol::lol:


In a perfect world? Politics and religion would go away and stay away. This forum has been sullied.

The way it is is Skeet's way. Bible-toting, bible-thumping preaching NOB righteous moral turpitude. Skeet likes it that way. It's his thread.

DianaT - 6-10-2012 at 02:12 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.


As I read the founding writings and documents of this Country, and observe inscriptions on our most important Monuments, I see no mention of the "Iroquois Nation", but I see significant mention of Judeo-Christian basic phylosophy---------the comparison or inference is specious, at least to me.

Having said that, I have great respect for the Iroquois Nation, and always have.

Barry


Several historians believe that the main influence of the Iroquois Nation on the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution was its idea of a confederation and the interaction between the members and the whole.

Can you point to some of the original documents and writings that are a part of the Judeo-Christian tradition?

The most basic document, the Declaration of Independence talks about inalienable rights granted by a creator---not God, albeit in the first paragraph it does refer to Natures' God. That entire concept was quite radical and a product of the Enlightenment. And that is just the beginning. And Jefferson's idea of a Creator was not a Christian type god.

Yes, some of the moral teachings of Christianity, Judiism, along with the ancient philosophers influenced the thoughts of the founding fathers, but not so much the religious parts. For example, what is known as the Jefferson Bible is a good little book---lots of good moral teachings and none of the fantasy.

And look at the buildings, statues and other early structures in Washington DC and they certainly point to Greek and Roman influence.

I would be interested to hear what writings etc. to which you are referring?

Thanks, D



[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]

Barry A. - 6-10-2012 at 02:25 PM

Well, Diane, that is a fair question-----------I just thought that the EVERYBODY knew of them, but then I am guilty of "assuming", a sin by my own rantings in the past.

I do not know the answer off the top of my head, but I have seen them quoted often in e-mails and such, but I would have to research it to really give you any cites or links. This is always a problem for me as when I am satisfied that I "know something" I ALWAYS forget the source of that info------a huge handi-cap, for sure.

You got me, for now. :o

Barry

On Edit: Well, that was easier than I thought------
Try this link:

http://religiousliberty.com/article-washington-dc-monuments....

Here is another link, tho not directly from "documents" necessarily:

http://www.shadesofgrace.org/2010/05/05/is-america-a-christi...

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Barry A.]

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Barry A.]

Iflyfish - 6-10-2012 at 02:28 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Illyfish.
I am not in anything all together with you.
Please do not tell me what I am.
Yes, I am not afraid to say those words either.
I am not one of you.
The reason I say this is because of the one thing that seperates the God of the Bible from all other 'religions'.
I am forgiven.


Do you draw breath, eat, sleep, dream, love, work, play, grapple with the meaning of life? Did Jesus breath, eat, sleep, dream, love, work, play and grapple with the meaning of life? /Did the Buddha also do these things. If so then we are all human and they and you are one of us. We are called the Homo-sapiens.

In my study of Theology there is a very well established school fo thought that we are all human and loved by god and that the bible is a work of allegory and metaphor that points to universal truths about the spiritual journey that we are all engaged in. From that perspective it would be heresy to view yourself as superior to others and in fact in doing so your rejection of others could well exclude them from the love of god as manifest through you.

There is a view that the spiritual journey is like a walk up a mountain where there are various viewpoints as one climbs the mountain, places where we stop and have different perspectives. There are of course many translations of the bible but they all seem to contain a variation of the following passage: When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. This perspective is one that acknowledges that we have different understandings and perspectives as we grow, age, mature. The "Truth" then at one stage may be far different than at another stage. Did not Jesus go into the dessert to meditate? Did this meditation not transform him? Did not the Buddha meditate under a tree and attain his enlightenment? Did this meditation not transform him? You speak of forgiveness as a static and not dynamic process.

You say "Please do not tell me what I am" and then go on to tell me that you are "I am not one of you" and therefore tell me what I am. Isn't it Hubris to say that you can determine who is and who isn't forgiven? You walk on some rather thin theological ice there amigo but I forgive you.

Iflyfish

Skipjack Joe - 6-10-2012 at 02:33 PM

As stated earlier - nobody should be put in a position of having to defend their own belief system.

In the end neither side convinced the other of anything. Just harsh feelings.

Barry A. - 6-10-2012 at 02:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Skipjack Joe
As stated earlier - nobody should be put in a position of having to defend their own belief system.

In the end neither side convinced the other of anything. Just harsh feelings.


Sorta like political discussions--------so frustrating.

Barry

vgabndo - 6-10-2012 at 02:37 PM

Barry's comment about the religious quotes all over our history along with a previous allegation by someone else that our founding fathers were guided by Jesus Christ reminded me of this bit of history from Thomas Jefferson. The majority of the founders were deists. This is my piece about taking things out of context. From the Jefferson Memorial...

"I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

Jefferson, the deist, was speaking of a movement among Christians to attack the separation of church and state as specified in the first amendment. He was speaking of the hostility shown him by the priesthood during his campaign for the Presidency!

Here's the actual context from his letter to Benjamin Rush Sept. 23 1800.

I promised you a letter on Christianity, which I have not forgotten. On the contrary, it is because I have reflected on it, that I find much more time necessary for it than I can at present dispose of. I have a view of the subject which ought to displease neither the rational Christian nor Deists, and would reconcile many to a character they have too hastily rejected. I do not know that it would reconcile the genus irritabile vatum who are all in arms against me. Their hostility is on too interesting ground to be softened. The delusion into which the X. Y. Z. plot shewed it possible to push the people; the successful experiment made under the prevalence of that delusion on the clause of the constitution, which, while it secured the freedom of the press, covered also the freedom of religion, had given to the clergy a very favorite hope of obtaining an establishment of a particular form of Christianity thro' the U. S.; and as every sect believes its own form the true one, every one perhaps hoped for his own, but especially the Episcopalians & Congregationalists. The returning good sense of our country threatens abortion to their hopes, & they believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: & enough too in their opinion, & this is the cause of their printing lying pamphlets against me, forging conversations for me with Mazzei, Bishop Madison, &c., which are absolute falsehoods without a circumstance of truth to rest on; falsehoods, too, of which I acquit Mazzei & Bishop Madison, for they are men of truth.

end of quote

Those who would create some justification of the present entanglement of our government, and the beliefs of some of it's citizens, (IN GOD WE TRUST) (One nation under God) by suggesting that the founders didn't know they were writing a godless constitution is just uninformed. Neither of these falsehoods can pass the Lemon test under PRESENT law.

"Every analysis in this area must begin with consideration of the cumulative criteria developed by the Court over many years. First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances or inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster and excessive government Entanglement with religion." Chief Justice Burger, 1971

On the other hand why the heck does the most powerful entity of all time need an endorsement on our money?

And, finally, regarding "OMZ", it kind of takes the immediate zing out of the bumper snicker: OMG GOP WTF.:lol:

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by vgabndo]

Barry A. - 6-10-2012 at 02:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by vgabndo
Barry's comment about the religious quotes all over our history along with a previous allegation by someone else that our founding fathers were guided by Jesus Christ reminded me of this bit of history from Thomas Jefferson. The majority of the founders were deists. This is my piece about taking things out of context. From the Jefferson Memorial...

"I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

Jefferson, the deist, was speaking of a movement among Christians to attack the separation of church and state as specified in the first amendment. He was speaking of the hostility shown him during his campaign for the Presidency by the priesthood!

Here's the actual context from his letter to Benjamin Rush Sept. 23 1800.

I promised you a letter on Christianity, which I have not forgotten. On the contrary, it is because I have reflected on it, that I find much more time necessary for it than I can at present dispose of. I have a view of the subject which ought to displease neither the rational Christian nor Deists, and would reconcile many to a character they have too hastily rejected. I do not know that it would reconcile the genus irritabile vatum who are all in arms against me. Their hostility is on too interesting ground to be softened. The delusion into which the X. Y. Z. plot shewed it possible to push the people; the successful experiment made under the prevalence of that delusion on the clause of the constitution, which, while it secured the freedom of the press, covered also the freedom of religion, had given to the clergy a very favorite hope of obtaining an establishment of a particular form of Christianity thro' the U. S.; and as every sect believes its own form the true one, every one perhaps hoped for his own, but especially the Episcopalians & Congregationalists. The returning good sense of our country threatens abortion to their hopes, & they believe that any portion of power confided to me, will be exerted in opposition to their schemes. And they believe rightly; for I have sworn upon the altar of god, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. But this is all they have to fear from me: & enough too in their opinion, & this is the cause of their printing lying pamphlets against me, forging conversations for me with Mazzei, Bishop Madison, &c., which are absolute falsehoods without a circumstance of truth to rest on; falsehoods, too, of which I acquit Mazzei & Bishop Madison, for they are men of truth.

end of quote

Those who would create some justification of the present entanglement of our government, and the beliefs of some of it's citizens, (IN GOD WE TRUST) (One nation under God) by suggesting that the founders didn't know they were writing a godless constitution is just uninformed. Neither of these falsehoods can pass the Lemon test under PRESENT law.

"Every analysis in this area must begin with consideration of the cumulative criteria developed by the Court over many years. First, the statute must have a secular legislative purpose; second, its principal or primary effect must be one that neither advances or inhibits religion; finally, the statute must not foster and excessive government Entanglement with religion." Chief Justice Burger, 1971

On the other hand why the heck does the most powerful entity of all time need an endorsement on our money?

And, finally, regarding "OMZ", it kind of takes the immediate zing out of the bumper snicker: OMG GOP WTF.:lol:


Vag, my friend---------go back to the bottom of page 12 and see my links on my reply to Diane.

Thanks, Barry

vgabndo

DianaT - 6-10-2012 at 02:44 PM

Is it any wonder Texas took Jefferson out of the history books? Skeet would have never approved of Jefferson. :lol::lol:

paranewbi - 6-10-2012 at 02:48 PM

Simply Illyfish we disagree.

Wow!

toneart - 6-10-2012 at 02:50 PM

My dogma just barked!

So now, after checking in, I am overwhelmed by the Littany that is The BajaNomad. Happy Sunday to y'all! :saint:

I truly appreciate all of the thought that has gone into this discussion. Such eloquence!

For all the pages of exchange I have formed an opinion: :?: That's it.
Interesting the contrast between those with open minds and those whose religious constraints serve as conversation stoppers, as DianaT pointed out.

Ya know...thems in they resolve surely believe that what they believe is not open for any other possibilities. Blind Faith is Absolute! Period! End of conversation! However, being human belies the Absolute and betrays their "not one of you" stance, and so they amble on, pedantically. Hallelujah!

Try as I might, I cannot find Jesus on The BajaNomad. But I did meet a guy in Baja named Heysoos. :spingrin:

Barry A. - 6-10-2012 at 02:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by toneart
My dogma just barked!

So now, after checking in, I am overwhelmed by the Littany that is The BajaNomad. Happy Sunday to y'all! :saint:

I truly appreciate all of the thought that has gone into this discussion. Such eloquence!

For all the pages of exchange I have formed an opinion: :?: That's it.
Interesting the contrast between those with open minds and those whose religious constraints serve as conversation stoppers, as DianaT pointed out.

Ya know...thems in they resolve surely believe that what they believe is not open for any other possibilities. Blind Faith is Absolute! Period! End of conversation! However, being human belies the Absolute and betrays their "not one of you" stance, and so they amble on, pedantically. Hallelujah!

Try as I might, I cannot find Jesus on The BajaNomad. But I did meet a guy in Baja named Heysoos. :spingrin:


Which is exactly why I remain an AGNOSTIC. :tumble:

Barry

Cypress - 6-10-2012 at 02:55 PM

Heysoos? ;D

Iflyfish - 6-10-2012 at 03:20 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Simply Illyfish we disagree.


Indeed and I appreciate your response. Good men/women can and do disagree and this is normal and natural and is why it is dangerous for one group to bifurcate human beings into US/Them.

I was challenging this viewpoint as a dangerous slippery slope and one mankind has slid down many, many times. Ethnocentrism is dangerous in that is can be used to support the annihilation of other human beings by dehumanizing them as has happened through out history. One of the first steps taken in waging war is to dehumanize the enemy, who Pogo said is us.

I appreciate your sharing so clearly your perspective on these matters and your civility in doing so. I think you have well represented a perspective on this issue and there are a wide range of them.

I also appreciate the postings of other thoughtful people who have disagreed and challenged your views as you have challenged others perspectives. These are very hard issues to discuss and not have the discussion devolve into some form of name calling and diatribe. I am relieved to see this discussion in this public forum, one that I believe we have to again have as a nation if we are to climb out from under the increasingly fundamentalist reactionary dialogue that seems to choke our public dialogue.

It is refreshing to see the postings of Diana T and vgabndo who provide us with an historical perspective on the interplay of religion and the founding of our society. I have read the letters between Jefferson and Adams where they question "what are the real words of Jesus in the Bible" and concluding that they were few and those that they did identify spoke of love and letting go of fear and worry. I have of course truncated their dialogue but you might find it fascinating. I have learned from these and other postings on this thread.

Iflyfishinhopeformorecivildialogueandrespectinoursociety

DianaT - 6-10-2012 at 03:22 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
Well, Diane, that is a fair question-----------I just thought that the EVERYBODY knew of them, but then I am guilty of "assuming", a sin by my own rantings in the past.

I do not know the answer off the top of my head, but I have seen them quoted often in e-mails and such, but I would have to research it to really give you any cites or links. This is always a problem for me as when I am satisfied that I "know something" I ALWAYS forget the source of that info------a huge handi-cap, for sure.

You got me, for now. :o

Barry

On Edit: Well, that was easier than I thought------
Try this link:

http://religiousliberty.com/article-washington-dc-monuments....

Here is another link, tho not directly from "documents" necessarily:

http://www.shadesofgrace.org/2010/05/05/is-america-a-christi...

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Barry A.]

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Barry A.]


Barry, read the first link again. Not one of the things they talk about was built during the founding of the US----some were built and influenced by later times in the US when we were in one of the several religious revival periods, similar to today when some wanted to try and claim this is a Christian nation---- and the quotes are NOT from the founders. This site is about religious statements made on buildings at a later time, but it is not about the founding principles of the nation.

The second site is a typical religious revisionist history where the quotes have been edited, taken out of context and misused---a lot based on the work of David Barton whose work has been debunked over and over. He is one of Glenn Beck's favorite people. His work, like all propaganda is full of half truths, misquotes, and distortions. Just for starters, check out the full story about the 1782 Aitken Bible.

In so many ways I feel like the old Burnt Over District has spread over the nation, but this too shall pass. Or on second thought, maybe not since the Burnt Over District is where Joseph Smith started his religion with a little help from the visions of Cornplanter--- OMZ --- please stop it!





[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]

Iflyfish - 6-10-2012 at 03:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by toneart
My dogma just barked!

So now, after checking in, I am overwhelmed by the Littany that is The BajaNomad. Happy Sunday to y'all! :saint:

I truly appreciate all of the thought that has gone into this discussion. Such eloquence!

For all the pages of exchange I have formed an opinion: :?: That's it.
Interesting the contrast between those with open minds and those whose religious constraints serve as conversation stoppers, as DianaT pointed out.

Ya know...thems in they resolve surely believe that what they believe is not open for any other possibilities. Blind Faith is Absolute! Period! End of conversation! However, being human belies the Absolute and betrays their "not one of you" stance, and so they amble on, pedantically. Hallelujah!

Try as I might, I cannot find Jesus on The BajaNomad. But I did meet a guy in Baja named Heysoos. :spingrin:


I have met many Jesuses in Mexico and some Mary's too. most have been wonderful!

Iflyfish

Iflyfish

DianaT - 6-10-2012 at 03:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Iflyfish
Quote:
Originally posted by toneart
My dogma just barked!

So now, after checking in, I am overwhelmed by the Littany that is The BajaNomad. Happy Sunday to y'all! :saint:

I truly appreciate all of the thought that has gone into this discussion. Such eloquence!

For all the pages of exchange I have formed an opinion: :?: That's it.
Interesting the contrast between those with open minds and those whose religious constraints serve as conversation stoppers, as DianaT pointed out.

Ya know...thems in they resolve surely believe that what they believe is not open for any other possibilities. Blind Faith is Absolute! Period! End of conversation! However, being human belies the Absolute and betrays their "not one of you" stance, and so they amble on, pedantically. Hallelujah!

Try as I might, I cannot find Jesus on The BajaNomad. But I did meet a guy in Baja named Heysoos. :spingrin:


I have met many Jesuses in Mexico and some Mary's too. most have been wonderful!

Iflyfish

Iflyfish


In Honduras many of our students were named Jesus Maria and many were named Maria Jesus ---very, very popular names! :yes:

DENNIS - 6-10-2012 at 04:00 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DianaT
In Honduras many of our students were named Jesus Maria and many were named Maria Jesus ---very, very popular names! :yes:



Only a name to us, but a devotion applied to the recipient in the minds of the parents.
They crossed themselves as they made their gift of naming their child, I'm sure.
How wonderful and nice.

vgabndo - 6-10-2012 at 04:04 PM

Rick, your use of the term "slippery slope" reminded me of this blog which comes to me every day, and this offering which may be of interest to many in this discussion.

http://jonathanturley.org/2012/06/09/the-slippery-slope/

I found it worth reading.

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 04:21 PM

paranewbi I am going to post this again because you may have missed it, we both posted at about the same time. Or maybe you are not speaking to me anymore :) I am sincerely interested in your response to my request in the last sentence:
___________________________________________
Thanks for your thoughts paranewbi. With all due respect (OMZ I love that phrase, it has so many wonderful nuances), I don't think you are saying anything. You are simply assuming that the bible is true, and with that premise you move on to "prove" something. There is a phrase for that, "garbage in, garbage out". The bible is true because it says it is true. Doesn't fly.

As to my understanding of the bible, my bible study didn't end with my first teenage reading more than 50 years ago. I would stack my "bible study" library up against most trained bible scholars. I must admit that my interests have tended towards the history of the bible, which is absolutely fascinating. It is astonishing that such a fundamentally evil book, which advocates slavery, genocide, sacrificing numerous small animals, killing your kids for talking back to you, killing homosexuals, killing people who work on weekends, killing, killing, killing ad nauseum, has had such a stranglehold on so many people. One thing I learned in my studies of the bible, is that there are thousands of versions in existence. I own four copies of the "King James" version, and each is different. Some differences are substantial, others editorial. But the fact remains is that nobody knows what the original version said, it doesn't exist. So much for "written by the creator of the universe."

Please refer me to some writings which will enlighten me on what the bible really means. I will enthusiastically pursue them.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Ken Bondy]

Barry A. - 6-10-2012 at 04:23 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DianaT
Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
Well, Diane, that is a fair question-----------I just thought that the EVERYBODY knew of them, but then I am guilty of "assuming", a sin by my own rantings in the past.

"I do not know the answer off the top of my head, but I have seen them quoted often in e-mails and such, but I would have to research it to really give you any cites or links. This is always a problem for me as when I am satisfied that I "know something" I ALWAYS forget the source of that info------a huge handi-cap, for sure.

You got me, for now. :o

Barry

On Edit: Well, that was easier than I thought------
Try this link:

http://religiousliberty.com/article-washington-dc-monuments....

Here is another link, tho not directly from "documents" necessarily:

http://www.shadesofgrace.org/2010/05/05/is-america-a-christi...

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Barry A.]

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Barry A.]


Barry, read the first link again. Not one of the things they talk about was built during the founding of the US----some were built and influenced by later times in the US when we were in one of the several religious revival periods, similar to today when some wanted to try and claim this is a Christian nation---- and the quotes are NOT from the founders. This site is about religious statements made on buildings at a later time, but it is not about the founding principles of the nation.

The second site is a typical religious revisionist history where the quotes have been edited, taken out of context and misused---a lot based on the work of David Barton whose work has been debunked over and over. He is one of Glenn Beck's favorite people. His work, like all propaganda is full of half truths, misquotes, and distortions. Just for starters, check out the full story about the 1782 Aitken Bible.

In so many ways I feel like the old Burnt Over District has spread over the nation, but this too shall pass. Or on second thought, maybe not since the Burnt Over District is where Joseph Smith started his religion with a little help from the visions of Cornplanter--- OMZ --- please stop it!





[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DianaT]


Diane-------I have no idea what the "1782 Aitken Bible" is, and have no idea what you are talking about in the last paragraph, and I have never studied Religion (frankly, it never occurred to me to do that).

This conversation reminds me of why I NEVER have any Religious conversations with my two kids ages 52 and 48, both of which are 'born-again Christians', both very happy, both very successful, both pretty educated (one a highschool teacher/CPA, and the other a Lawyer) and their "beliefs" and " faith" is something I would not dream of messing with-------I never mess with success and happness in others as it is too precious!!!

Again, my personal experience trumps the so-called wisdom of others.

I choose to believe this is a God-oriented Country based on everything I see and read, not-with-standing the doubters who wish to tarnish or destroy that "belief" for reasons only they can attempt to explain. Either way, it's just not that important to me.

Carry on.

Barry

Ateo - 6-10-2012 at 04:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
paranewbi I am going to post this again because you may have missed it, we both posted at about the same time. Or maybe you are not speaking to me anymore :) I am sincerely interested in your response to my request in the last sentence:
___________________________________________
Thanks for your thoughts paranewbi. With all due respect (OMZ I love that phrase, it has so many wonderful nuances), I don't think you are saying anything. You are simply assuming that the bible is true, and with that premise you move on to "prove" something. There is a phrase for that, "garbage in, garbage out". The bible is true because it says it is true. Doesn't fly.

As to my understanding of the bible, my bible study didn't end with my first teenage reading more than 50 years ago. I would stack my "bible study" library up against most trained bible scholars. I must admit that my interests have tended towards the history of the bible, which is absolutely fascinating. It is astonishing that such a fundamentally evil book, which advocates slavery, genocide, sacrificing numerous small animals, killing your kids for talking back to you, killing homosexuals, killing people who work on weekends, killing, killing, killing ad nauseum, has had such a stranglehold on so many people. One thing I learned in my studies of the bible, is that there are thousands of versions in existence. I own four copies of the "King James" version, and each is different. Some differences are substantial, others editorial. But the fact remains is that nobody knows what the original version said, it doesn't exist. So much for "written by the creator of the universe."

Please refer me to some writings which will enlighten me on what the bible really means. I will enthusiastically pursue them.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by Ken Bondy]


Pretty sure he'll refer you to Lee Strobel, or some other apologist, like he did to me.

And Ken, come on -- that bad stuff is the OLD Testament. :lol:

When god sent himself back to earth as Jesus to die for our sins, all that negative old testament stuff got thrown out the window. God corrected his previous mistakes.....

DENNIS - 6-10-2012 at 04:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ateo
When god sent himself back to earth as Jesus to die for our sins, all that negative old testament stuff got thrown out the window. God corrected his previous mistakes.....


What is "Original Sin?"
They say I was born with sins on my soul.
Wassup with that? I didn't do anything.




.

[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DENNIS]

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 04:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by ateo
When god sent himself back to earth as Jesus to die for our sins, all that negative old testament stuff got thrown out the window. God corrected his previous mistakes.....


Not really ateo:). Jesus said that every word of that nasty old testament stuff must be observed until the end of the world (Matthew 5:18). Christians like to dance around that but it's right there in the bible so it must be true.

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 05:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
What is "Original Sin?"
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DENNIS]


Second only to the concept of "hell" as the most evil, immoral idea ever forced by christianity on the human race.

Ateo - 6-10-2012 at 05:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Quote:
Originally posted by ateo
When god sent himself back to earth as Jesus to die for our sins, all that negative old testament stuff got thrown out the window. God corrected his previous mistakes.....


Not really ateo:). Jesus said that every word of that nasty old testament stuff must be observed until the end of the world (Matthew 5:18). Christians like to dance around that but it's right there in the bible so it must be true.


Yep, you ARE correct!!! I usually pull that one out right after I hear the "that's the old testament" statement......

and don't forget the verse before Matthew 5:18 -

Matthew 5:17...

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them."

willardguy - 6-10-2012 at 05:24 PM

stephen hawkings "the grand design" made perfect sense to me. :light:

Barry A. - 6-10-2012 at 05:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
What is "Original Sin?"
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DENNIS]


Second only to the concept of "hell" as the most evil, immoral idea ever forced by christianity on the human race.


"------forced by Christianity on the human race"?????????? Really????? Were you "forced", Ken???? I am sure that this has happened if you say so, but I must admit I have never personally seen any examples of it happening-------just these reports by some, and lots of allegations. If you were actually "forced" I can now sorta understand your animosity towards the organized aspects of Religion--------but not your feelings towards the faithful who number in the millions. Much of what you have written in this thread is so far from the "Ken Bondy" that I have long read on this Board that I am truly amazed!!!!

"forced" is truly a strong accusation--------I served in the Church as an Accolite in my youth, but certainly was never "forced" to believe anything, and soon left the Church as not relevant to my life. There were never any repercussions for that decision, from anybody.

Barry

paranewbi - 6-10-2012 at 05:43 PM

Ken I reviewed my 13 bibles including the KJV, NKJV, 21st Century KJV, and 10 others and in no version do I find the words "until the end of the world". A check of Stongs does not include in the greek a translation for 'end of the world' in the original greek. I also reviewed several scholastic books on the Sermon on the Mount and did not see that referance.

What I have found is 'until all is finished', '...accomplished', '...fullfilled', all of them fitting in the current teaching of addressing Jesus' further declarations that only he can fullfill the love of sacrificing himself for attonement of man. This is well known as having occured at the cross and the splitting of the vale that covered the Holy of Holy's in the temple. According to the Bible this gave man access to a relationship through Jesus which was lost at man's behest when he took on the knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden.

This as I state here is the circle of context that is derived from the total Bible in both a near and far analysis of further text in the Bible where this issue is addressed.

You may be citing the further text that addresses those who refuse reconciliation to God that was made possible on the Cross and in that context are still under the judgement of the law(s)...even if you think of murder, than you have murdered, etc...

Of course I do not share your view on the terribleness of the Old Testament and expect that you do not share my view of the above.
But to Ateo, I do agree with you in part where you say 'got thrown out the window' although not as pertaining to any 'mistake' by God. I feel a loving God gave man the opportunity to choose just what he (man) desired.

Some have a problem with my declaration of 'not one of you' and knowing the Bible as some here do, those should be able to validate the multiple citations of the directive that followers of Christ are not to be of this world, commune with the unbelieving, drawn into the temptations of....
Once again in the pursuit of presenting myself as consistent in my beliefs and with my declarations of following the Word of God of the Bible, surely you would not expect me to state anything else. It does not mean I don't have compassion for non-believers and as those who know me would attest to, I would be first to help anyone in need as I do daily.

bufeo - 6-10-2012 at 05:43 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS...What is "Original Sin?"
They say I was born with sins on my soul.
Wassup with that? I didn't do anything...


I was so indoctrinated that on my first day at school (1943) when the teacher asked me what state I was born is, I replied, "I was born in the state of sin and misery."

Allen R

Ateo - 6-10-2012 at 05:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.

"forced" is truly a strong accusation--------I served in the Church as an Accolite in my youth, but certainly was never "forced" to believe anything, and soon left the Church as not relevant to my life. There were never any repercussions for that decision, from anybody.

Barry


I believe the Native Americans would be a good example of beliefs being forced upon a group of people. Not sure if the whole "Original Sin" thing was around at that time or had yet to be invented, but there was definitely some forcing going on, forcing that ended in deaths of thousands.

Nowadays, religion in the Western world has been neutered so it no longer has the power to force beliefs, which is a step in the right direction.;D

bufeo - 6-10-2012 at 05:47 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi.... It does not mean I don't have compassion for non-believers and as those who know me would attest to, I would be first to help anyone in need as I do daily.


I know that you directed this to Ken, but I, too, have that same compassion for you believers.

Allen R

Barry A. - 6-10-2012 at 05:56 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by bufeo
Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi.... It does not mean I don't have compassion for non-believers and as those who know me would attest to, I would be first to help anyone in need as I do daily.


I know that you directed this to Ken, but I, too, have that same compassion for you believers.

Allen R


NOW we are gettin somewhere---------compassion from both sides---------that's good. :O

Barry

Ateo - 6-10-2012 at 06:05 PM

I will also jump on the compassion bandwagon. Beliefs are deeply ingrained and while discussing them it's important to try and understand the other persons perspective and thought process. A book I read recently sheds a ton of light on the topic of belief and how we come to those beliefs. We're barely even conscious of the process...........kind of crazy.

The Believing Brain by Michael Shermer.

I strongly recommend it. Cut and Past from a website:

Shermer shows how dependent our beliefs are on a multitude of subjective, personal, emotional and psychological factors; how belief systems are “formed, nourished, reinforced, changed and extinguished”; how belief systems operate ”with regard to belief in religion, the afterlife, God, extraterrestrial, conspiracies, politics, economics and ideologies”;

And finally how we know which beliefs are true and which are false.

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 06:11 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
What is "Original Sin?"
[Edited on 6-10-2012 by DENNIS]


Second only to the concept of "hell" as the most evil, immoral idea ever forced by christianity on the human race.


"------forced by Christianity on the human race"?????????? Really????? Were you "forced", Ken???? I am sure that this has happened if you say so, but I must admit I have never personally seen any examples of it happening-------just these reports by some, and lots of allegations. If you were actually "forced" I can now sorta understand your animosity towards the organized aspects of Religion--------but not your feelings towards the faithful who number in the millions. Much of what you have written in this thread is so far from the "Ken Bondy" that I have long read on this Board that I am truly amazed!!!!

"forced" is truly a strong accusation--------I served in the Church as an Accolite in my youth, but certainly was never "forced" to believe anything, and soon left the Church as not relevant to my life. There were never any repercussions for that decision, from anybody.

Barry


Barry the concepts of hell and original sin have been forced by christianity on millions of innocent children for centuries. It's a form of child abuse and has done irreparable harm.

Barry A. - 6-10-2012 at 06:18 PM

OK, Ken----I will take your word for it. I personally have NEVER seen any of it, tho I have read about it, but always had my doubts-------as I often do about the written and stated 'word'. So many Agenda's out there, even way back when.

Barry

paranewbi - 6-10-2012 at 06:23 PM

'Barry the concepts of hell and original sin have been forced by christianity on millions of innocent children for centuries. It's a form of child abuse and has done irreparable harm'

You stand corrected Barry, Ken has discounted your experiance. :0

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 06:30 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Ken I reviewed my 13 bibles including the KJV, NKJV, 21st Century KJV, and 10 others and in no version do I find the words "until the end of the world". A check of Stongs does not include in the greek a translation for 'end of the world' in the original greek. I also reviewed several scholastic books on the Sermon on the Mount and did not see that referance.

What I have found is 'until all is finished', '...accomplished', '...fullfilled', all of them fitting in the current teaching of addressing Jesus' further declarations that only he can fullfill the love of sacrificing himself for attonement of man. This is well known as having occured at the cross and the splitting of the vale that covered the Holy of Holy's in the temple. According to the Bible this gave man access to a relationship through Jesus which was lost at man's behest when he took on the knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden.


OK paranewbi ya got me. I was paraphrasing. I might have to go to confession. I checked my four bibles and in Matthew 5:18 one says "...until all is fulfilled...", two say "...until all be fulfilled..." and one, TNAB, says "...until all things have taken place...". Are you seriously trying to say that those are NOT synonyms for "..until the end of the world..."??

That also detracts from the point, which was that jesus never refuted a single word of the old testament, including slavery, and here in Matthew he emphasizes that everything in the old testament must be observed.

Ateo - 6-10-2012 at 06:44 PM

Ok. Now can anyone explain to me why this thread is titled To Doug"?
What's with the " ??

:biggrin:

Before starting a thread that'll be seen by 7000 people, try and check your title first.

[Edited on 6-11-2012 by ateo]

paranewbi - 6-10-2012 at 06:51 PM

Ken, Jesus did many things and as John acknowledged the recounting of them would fill many volumes. Yes I am serious when we need to have accuracy in our dialogue.

And no, if you return to the Greek or other texts of the Bible of which there were hundreds within the first century after Christs' rising, as well as common languages...none of the citations both you and I have validated, are synonymous with 'until the end of the world' and as I have stated does not fit in with the near or the far context of all associated scripture.

You have made some broad statements validated only by your assurances in another post of the damage done by the forcing children to heed to their parents teaching, yet have cited not authority other than you own to declare it to be truth...yet you protest other's who offer their experiance and observances and sometimes quote correctly their sources.

Not to turn this thread but to counter your broad unauthoritative statement:
I would offer that the nearly 70 million babies who have been sucked out of the womb with no choice has done much more damage to our children in this country. And you can google that statistic...as well as the reported 813,000 abortions cited on the CDC site for the year 2003 alone. That is a fact of harm.

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 06:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
OK, Ken----I will take your word for it. I personally have NEVER seen any of it, tho I have read about it, but always had my doubts-------as I often do about the written and stated 'word'. So many Agenda's out there, even way back when.

Barry


Barry it was forced on me, by my parents, when I was a kid. I was told I was born a "sinner" and if I didn't believe, without evidence, in an unseen person named jesus, who died 2000 years ago to forgive my sins (but didn't really die, i didn't really get that), my loving god would send me to a place called "hell" where I would be tortured by fire forever. But he does love me. This was all extremely stressful and I didn't fully recover from that until I began to seriously examine religion as a teenager, including a thorough reading of the bible, and came to realize that religion was just a massive scam.

I don't know what to say about expressing my opinions about religion. I'm sorry to shock you. In the ten years I've been a Nomad I have, in fact, taken the bait on religion a few times and I guess you missed those. My primary interest in the Nomad board is the love of Baja (I live vicariously here) and photography. Nonetheless I think I have a right to express my opinion on any subject being discussed. Considering how dangerous religion is, I believe it should be criticized at every opportunity.

Ken Bondy - 6-10-2012 at 07:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Not to turn this thread but to counter your broad unauthoritative statement:
I would offer that the nearly 70 million babies who have been sucked out of the womb with no choice has done much more damage to our children in this country. And you can google that statistic...as well as the reported 813,000 abortions cited on the CDC site for the year 2003 alone. That is a fact of harm.


paranewbi I am not going to take your bait on abortion, except to say that I find it curious that religious people seem to have much more concern for the life of a 150-cell blastocyst with no nervous system, than they do for the life of a fully developed human being, as in, for example, an abortion doctor.

Sam Harris, in "The End of Faith", points out the very large number of early fetuses that are aborted naturally, often without the knowledge of the mother. Thus god, if he/she exists, is the greatest abortionist of all.

DENNIS - 6-10-2012 at 08:33 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Jesus did many things


How many things did Jesus do? Did he verifiably work? What does anybody, even today, in the Middle East do? Seems like all they do is wander around in those stupid robes or ride around in pickups throwing rocks at one thing or another.

What do Greeks do? Why is their unemployment rate affecting the world? Is there a shortage of OUZO and METAXA? I don't think so.

What do the Spaniards do? What do they contribute to the world? Why are they causing the price of gas to rise?

My world has turned to nonsense.

Skeet....help.

Lee - 6-10-2012 at 09:24 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
My world has turned to nonsense.

Skeet....help.


Too late. Skeet can't help. Told you this would happen.

DENNIS - 6-10-2012 at 09:55 PM

I should have listened to you, Lee. Maybe next time, amigo.

mulegemichael - 6-10-2012 at 10:10 PM

skeet has already helped...and right now he's helping more..at least to me...thanks skeet, for not commenting.

Debra - 6-11-2012 at 12:10 AM

Wow! How ironic. Skeeter started this with a good-by and may have (I hope not) missed a really great discussion!

I was really impressed that this thread could keep a great dialog going ( for the most part, I almost stopped reading it a couple of times) without breaking down into name calling and angry nonsence that sometimes happens. I hate to sound maternal, but, GOOD JOB NOMADS!


I'm with (I think it was Barry A.) and will keep my opions to myself, but, I have to say, though I don't agree with everything said, I did enjoy reading this thoughful exchange, Thanks!

And in defence of Skeeter, I have exchanged (over many years) U2s and emails with him and he is a really great person at heart, he sometimes goes abit overboard on the board and is (IMHO) misunderstood at times with somethings he says in the heat of the moment. I as a rule don't go to OT, so I can't comment on anything that might be said there.

paranewbi - 6-11-2012 at 03:39 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
Ken, Jesus did many things and as John acknowledged the recounting of them would fill many volumes. Yes I am serious when we need to have accuracy in our dialogue.

And no, if you return to the Greek or other texts of the Bible of which there were hundreds within the first century after Christs' rising, as well as common languages...none of the citations both you and I have validated, are synonymous with 'until the end of the world' and as I have stated does not fit in with the near or the far context of all associated scripture.

You have made some broad statements validated only by your assurances in another post of the damage done by the forcing children to heed to their parents teaching, yet have cited not authority other than you own to declare it to be truth...yet you protest other's who offer their experiance and observances and sometimes quote correctly their sources.

Not to turn this thread but to counter your broad unauthoritative statement:
I would offer that the nearly 70 million babies who have been sucked out of the womb with no choice has done much more damage to our children in this country. And you can google that statistic...as well as the reported 813,000 abortions cited on the CDC site for the year 2003 alone. That is a fact of harm.


As my last offering and with sympathy to all of those fellow Nomads who have patiently waded through all of these postings:

Ken; You need not respond to my citation of facts and authority they were derived from. That was merely an exercise in responding to your unfounded statements as pointed out above. I don't say this with glee or frothing at the mouth, it is a pointing out of the necessity when engaging in discussions that are in response to stated hatred for what some feel is a valid document, there must be a foundation laid for every accusation.

You did later relate an accounting of your experience and from where you have drawn your conclusions and I will not dispute the validity of that experience as it is your own. But to extrapolate that experience into a broad generalization (which was countered by another Nomad) and count that generalization as fact is harmful. There can be no counter to self proclaimed statements that in themselves find validity.

I have only responded, in hopefully a scholarly way, with corrections you have acquiesced to, and citations of the material you admittedly misquoted. A paraphrased quote based on a declared synonym relation is no quote at all. It was necessary to correct that in a clinical manner to not mislead those who would read this and be led to accept it as true.

The posting above of mine that pointed out another false argument of yours (generalization) was finished with another commentary on your declaration of what has harmed our children. It was merely an illustration of using factual material to bolster a counter to your claim. Other than to declare my belief in a document supporting the existence of God, I have tried hard to keep this from a personal, tit for tat, in order to have an opportunity to share some insight often maligned by the induction of personal (and perhaps emotional) declarations.

I have not spiritualized my statements in order to avoid the emotional and self supporting validity that imposes. I felt the requirement here was to approach this intellectually as I sensed there was great emotion involved in dealing with a stated hatred. If we start at hatred we end at hatred.

Ken Bondy - 6-11-2012 at 07:08 AM

paranewbi

"...your unfounded statements..."?????? Wow, what a spectacular example of the pot calling the kettle black. Your entire argument is circular, totally based on your unfounded allegation that the bible is true (solely because it says it is), yet you call my statements "unfounded"???

And if all you've got is a nitpicking argument that "until the end of the world" is not synonomous with "until all things have taken place" or "until all is fulfilled", well, you just don't have much ammunition. Have you noticed that there are even significant variations from bible to bible in this verse? Is the bible misquoting itself?

Plus you conveniently ignore the main point of that discussion, that jesus never reputed, refuted, or disagreed with anything in the old testament, including slavery. To the contrary, he says every word must be observed.

Of course my personal childhood experience about having "original sin" and "hell" forced on me can be extrapolated to children in general. Come on, paranewbi, that's just common sense. Do you really think it's a good thing to tell a small child that he/she will be barbequed in some horrible place if he/she doesn't believe in some imaginary person? That's simply child abuse.

I don't understand much of your last post "I have not spiritualized my statements" (what the hell does that mean???), but I would like to know more specifically which of MY statements were "unfounded". You seem to feel that your circular arguments (the bible is true because it says it is true) should stand unchallenged, but when I offer an opinion based upon specific citations from your bible, or other opinions based on my own personal experience or simply common sense, they are unfounded??

Even though I could not possibly disagree with you more, I appreciate that you have kept the dialogue civil. You do a better job than most religious apologists.

[Edited on 6-11-2012 by Ken Bondy]

Ken Bondy - 6-11-2012 at 08:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SFandH
Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Plus you conveniently ignore the main point of that discussion, that jesus never reputed, refuted, or disagreed with anything in the old testament, including slavery. To the contrary, he says every word must be observed.


Interesting point. For the sake of discussion, let's assume Jesus the man existed.

What was available to read 2000 years ago? How many people of the carpenter variety could read 2000 years ago? If the Old Testament was available (Dead Sea scrolls?), how does it differ from the Bible of today? Did the local Jewish scholars read the scrolls? Did Jesus listen to what the scholars had to say?


[Edited on 6-11-2012 by SFandH]


Not much SFandH. Very few people were literate 2000 years ago. People thought the earth was flat, the sun revolved around the earth, and nobody knew about the germ theory of disease. As the early christian religion was spread through the Middle East, the bible was copied manually from place to place by "scribes", people in the local area who could read and write. These scribes made errors in their copies of the bible, intentional and unintentional. That's why there have been literally thousands of different versions of the bible. Since the original version of the document does not exist, no one knows what it says. So much for the bible being written by the creator of the universe. Bart Ehrman's book "Misquoting Jesus" addresses this in fascinating detail.

DENNIS - 6-11-2012 at 08:23 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
So much for the bible being written by the creator of the universe. Bart Ehrman's book "Misquoting Jesus" addresses this in fascinating detail.


In all of my years, including seven of which were spent in a Catholic school, I never heard that God wrote the bible. Inspired it...yes. Wrote it...no.

SFandH - 6-11-2012 at 08:25 AM

Yes, the literalists are the most ___________ (I can't think of the correct word) of all believers. But, in making your argument, you were being a literalist.

Ken Bondy - 6-11-2012 at 08:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
So much for the bible being written by the creator of the universe. Bart Ehrman's book "Misquoting Jesus" addresses this in fascinating detail.


In all of my years, including seven of which were spent in a Catholic school, I never heard that God wrote the bible. Inspired it...yes. Wrote it...no.


I've often heard it both ways DENNIS, "written" and "inspired". Those who have noticed all the errors and contradictions in the bible tend to say "inspired", those who think it is inerrant tend to say "written". But does that REALLY change my point about the existence of thousands of different versions of the bible over the centuries??

DENNIS - 6-11-2012 at 08:46 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
But does that REALLY change my point about the existence of thousands of different versions of the bible over the centuries??


I'm sure not. Even within the Catholic Church, they have periodic Ecuminical Counsels to bring the Church along with the times.....something Fundamentalist Islam will never consider. That's why they wither away in the stone ages.

Ken Bondy - 6-11-2012 at 09:05 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
But does that REALLY change my point about the existence of thousands of different versions of the bible over the centuries??


I'm sure not. Even within the Catholic Church, they have periodic Ecuminical Counsels to bring the Church along with the times.....something Fundamentalist Islam will never consider. That's why they wither away in the stone ages.


They might be "withering away in the stone age", but as they gain access to nuclear weapons I think they will become more noticeable.

Barry A. - 6-11-2012 at 09:12 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
Quote:
Originally posted by DENNIS
Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
But does that REALLY change my point about the existence of thousands of different versions of the bible over the centuries??


I'm sure not. Even within the Catholic Church, they have periodic Ecuminical Counsels to bring the Church along with the times.....something Fundamentalist Islam will never consider. That's why they wither away in the stone ages.


They might be "withering away in the stone age", but as they gain access to nuclear weapons I think they will become more noticeable.


Either that, or more likely they will screw-up and blow themselves up!?!?!?!?!?

Barry

paranewbi - 6-11-2012 at 09:26 AM

It's ok Ken. I don't require a response any longer. I would say that I did find the need to refute some of what you have said and that is only why I jumped in here. Failure to do so leads others to perhaps mistakenly accept what you advocate, much like your offering of Bart Erhman's book which has been disputed by some scholars who have shown without Biblical intervention, and only applying the methods used by secular historical researchers (which Erhman ignores), the fallacious arguments Bart uses to sale his book, although you would not be interested in reading them because of their 'apologists' label they are given.

I do find quizzical your passionate stance and war against something, which in your view seems to not exist (God) or perhaps in not the way you like. Why bother if the God of the Bible does not exist? And if you simply do not wish to follow a God you acknowledge exist because of his cruelty, and chose to war against that God, I would take care to not poke him with a stick.

As for me, yes I do exactly believe in the existence of the God of the Bible…that must be very clear. I have not forced my view on anyone and I feel I have done well in explaining my beliefs. Whether that is accepted, really has no bearing on calling someone out when they have stated wrongly, a subject I can clarify and feel just as passionately about as you do.

For others who wish to pursue an in depth study of the counter arguments, I did offer Lee Strobel because of his entertaining way of drawing the reader into a subject of research he conducted because he felt much as Ken does. He does offer scholarly material to refute most of what has been posted here that concerns the historical evidence for the existence of Jesus and declared errors/contradictions, as well as other readings that might be hard for the average person to stay awake through, much as I struggled myself with.

DENNIS - 6-11-2012 at 09:27 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
Either that, or more likely they will screw-up and blow themselves up!?!?!?!?!?

Barry


We can only hope. Some will pray as well. :biggrin:

Iflyfish - 6-11-2012 at 09:42 AM

Ken states "Do you really think it's a good thing to tell a small child that he/she will be barbequed in some horrible place if he/she doesn't believe in some imaginary person?"

Or actually BBQ people? Who gave us the burning of the Gnostics? Who gave us the Crusades? Who gave us the Inquisition? Who gave us the witch burnings? Who gave us the Conquest of Mexico and Latin America and it's "Mission System" where native people were enslaved, blessed by priests, and then executed.

Much evil has been done in the name of religion and still is being done. Good has also been and is being done in the name of religion. Millions of lives have been lost over the centuries in the name of religion, by true believers, who operated and operate with a sense of impunity because they cherry pick and take literally their "sacred text". I personally am afraid of any "true believer" as their minds are not open and they can easily divide the world into them/us, saved/unsaved, shia/sunni, catholic/protestant, good/bad etc. The most rigid of the "true believers" are the most dangerous. There is no negotiating with a true believer of any stripe, its us vs. them and woe to those who are them when these true believers hold power.

Religion is imposed upon the young by their parents and then the child has to somehow deal with that which they are given to deal with. Some are given constraining, judgmental, cruel and abusive exposure to religion. Some are exposed in a more benign way and actually benefit from their exposure.

My early experience in church taught me about philosophy, art, music, hypocrisy, kindness, gossip, guilt and belonging in addition to what a tuna casserole is (I went for the potato chips). I went to a Prep School and studied Theology, studied the classics, had PhD professors for my high school classes and learned how to organize my thoughts and how to study. I learned music composition and art/music appreciation and took classes in the same. I learned Latin which was very useful in my work in the medical field. I also learned that there are pedophiles in the midst of the clergy. I learned that people have argued over centuries how many angels would fit on the head of a pin. I learned that a single person, Luther, could turn over the world by challenging authority and orthodoxy and that each person had the responsibility to challenge the orthodoxy of their time and to sort out their own relationship to the god they understood. I also learned that the Protestant Reformation created a great deal of destruction along with its liberation from orthodoxy. I also learned that great religious ideas get codified and then institutionalized into a new orthodoxy and that the institutions that develop around those codifications become profit centers.

I treated a woman over a couple of years. She was abandoned by her adoptive Missionary parents to a spinster woman from the church while they went off to save the "heathens in Africa". The woman who was left in her charge was cruel and sadistic and started to inflict severe physical punishment and torture when she hit puberty. At the end of her therapy she told me that she had been told of the love of god, in this case Jesus, nearly every day for her entire life but never knew what that meant till she experienced love in the context of our therapeutic relationship. There is a lot to ponder in her very compelling story. She actually gained a sense of peace and resolution and again started to go to church.

In another case I diagnosed a Catholic, the guilt was not only on the alter, she went on and on about her agonizing guilt and I said "your a Catholic, right?" and she recoiled like I had shot her. She in that instant put together what might have taken years to unwind. I am not claiming any virtue in recounting this, only describing the power that religious hypnotism can have on people and how that spell can be broken and another reality emerge. I did not treat her for a prolonged time, that insight was enough to start her personal liberation from guilt.

Again, I don't think that we can separate our theology from our individual history and psychology. I think we can see this in the histories that people have been kind enough to share with us here in this thread. Some of us are given larger bags of rocks to carry with us through life. Sometimes rocks can also be useful. Depends doesn't it?

Iflyfish

woody with a view - 6-11-2012 at 09:44 AM

WOW! ^^^^^^Post of the day^^^^^^

Pompano - 6-11-2012 at 09:52 AM

Ahoy Skeet! Are you still around?

Say...would you mind changing the title of this thread?

From: "To Doug"

To: "To God"


Just saying...you might agree with the idea. :rolleyes:

Ken Bondy - 6-11-2012 at 10:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by paranewbi
I do find quizzical your passionate stance and war against something, which in your view seems to not exist (God) or perhaps in not the way you like. Why bother if the God of the Bible does not exist? And if you simply do not wish to follow a God you acknowledge exist because of his cruelty, and chose to war against that God, I would take care to not poke him with a stick.


paranewbi (do you have a real name? That is tedious to type)

My "passionate stance" isn't so much a war against a non-existent god. Rather it is a recognition of how dangerous all religions are. I believe religion must be criticized at every opportunity. I apologize if some of the following explanation is repeated from previous posts.

If religion didn’t have any effect on the real world, I wouldn’t care what silly nonsense you believed in. It’s all imaginary, but if you want to fall for a scam like religion, knock yourself out. But religion does in fact affect the real world; it has an amazing stranglehold on people. It is the single most dangerous thing in the world today. When large groups of people believe fervently in different supernatural philosophies, all incompatible and each without a shred of evidence; and when each different philosophy requires, through its magic “holy” books, that believers in a different supernatural philosophy must be killed, the future of civilization is at risk. Killing non-believers has largely gone out of fashion in the more developed Western world, but in other parts of the world, where believers are told they will be lavishly rewarded in some imaginary afterlife for such killing, it is still very popular.

I have been an atheist since I was a teenager. I decided that religion was a scam when I started seriously examining it as a kid. The silly supernatural stories just didn’t make sense. People told me that I was born a sinner (an unimaginably evil concept), however a person named jesus died to forgive all my prenatal sins. Yet at the same time they told me that this jesus person didn’t really die. It was all very puzzling. I also wondered why the creator of the universe needed so much “worship”. If he/she existed, he/she seemed awfully insecure. I thought that a god who offered not a shred of evidence for his/her existence, yet who would barbecue me for eternity just for not believing in him/her, regardless of what other good things I did in my life, was too cruel and immoral to be real.

The major turning point in my path towards atheism, however, came when I actually sat down and read the bible, cover to cover, discovering that it was a vicious, evil and repulsive book, full of genocide and slaughter, telling me that I should keep slaves, kill anyone who works on weekends, kill anyone who believes in some other imaginary god, and that virgin women who are raped must marry their rapist (I’m not kidding, it’s in Deuteronomy 22:28-29). I was astonished to read that the creator of the universe got peeed at humanity (which he/she allegedly created in the first place), and killed everyone (except one breeding pair from each species) in a great flood, including innocent children. Religious people thought all that really happened, and that somehow it was aall good thing. I started to wonder if all the people who had been telling me how great the bible was had ever actually read it.

So I became a lifelong atheist, but I was not an evangelistic atheist. Now I have come to realize how dangerous religion really is, and how its existence does in fact affect you, me, and everyone else on the planet. It is time that religion is openly criticized and held to the same standards of rationality as is every other aspect of human existence. The historical prohibition of criticizing religion must end. Only when the absurdity of religion is exposed will it begin to lose its stranglehold on so many people.

Religion now poses the single greatest threat to the future of life on earth. It wasn’t always that way. Truly religious people have been killing each other in the name of imaginary gods for millennia, even before the organized killings of the Crusades and the Inquisition. But in the past they have killed on a relatively limited, finite basis using the contemporary tools available (swords, spears, burning at stakes, hangings, aggressive torture, lions, and more recently, flying airplanes into buildings.) In the early times, and up to the first part of the 20th century, infectious diseases such as plagues, cholera, smallpox, malaria and typhus actually posed more of a threat to the survival of human life than did religion. But the balance of power has changed. Science has largely controlled the spread of infectious disease, and they now present much less of a threat to society than they did in previous centuries. On the other hand, religious people now have access to nuclear weapons, and those weapons can be used to kill on a scale unimaginable in human history. It is entirely feasible that nuclear weapons, used in the hands of the truly religious, will end all life on earth.

I hope this will help you to better understand my "passionate stance" paranewbi. Perhaps this quotation by J. Anderson Thomson, Jr., MD, from "Why We Believe in God(s)" will add further clarity:

"Anything we can do, no matter how small, to loosen fundamentalist religion's grasp on humanity strikes a blow for civilization and boosts the chances for a truly global society - and perhaps even for our species' long-term survival"

Barry A. - 6-11-2012 at 10:16 AM

Ken---------Even as an Agnostic, I fear for what might replace "religion" in our world. There is an obvious "need" for something. (tho I don't understand that)

I hope your quest for change brings about something better.

Barry

SFandH - 6-11-2012 at 10:41 AM

Iflyfish, or anybody else,

Is the belief in the supernatural a key ingredient of 12 step programs used to overcome addictions? If so, how does it help?

[Edited on 6-11-2012 by SFandH]

woody with a view - 6-11-2012 at 10:50 AM

i gave up on religion when i finished 6th grade (maybe earlier!) in catholic school. if i need something to believe in, well, i believe i'll have another beer....:light:

Ken is right. why do people have to beat themselves up in the hopes that they'll be forgiven? just live your life and treat people right. nobody is perfect (tho i'm pretty close, just ask me!)......

DENNIS - 6-11-2012 at 10:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Ken Bondy
I have been an atheist since I was a teenager. I decided that religion was a scam when I started seriously examining it as a kid. The silly supernatural stories just didn’t make sense.


It's not for everybody, Ken. Some people have a serious need to believe and their beliefs are an important part of their life.
I don't buy into the far-fetched mumbo Jumbo either and because of that, I hit my period of skepticism at a young age....never to overcome that. [I didn't try, really]
I do have to say this.....a person who lives a life guided by the good tenets of a religion will have an advantage over one who has to sort it out in this day and age.
What, for instance, would "Honesty" mean to a person who only has for a guide the daily life around us? Virtue is a learned quality and religion can be a good teacher.

Again....it's not for everybody and everybody can take it or leave it. At least, that's the way it is in our society.

In one more hour, I'll begin my daily devotions at Our Lady of Sharky's and I'll toss back a couple to the salvation of all Nomad souls. :lol:


.

[Edited on 6-11-2012 by DENNIS]

BajaGringo - 6-11-2012 at 10:51 AM

Always a difficult subject to comment on in open forums but since I logged on and caught up with a thread (that I thought was about skeeter saying goodbye) that morphed into something that deeply interests me, I will add my dos centavos. I agree with Shari and others who have expressed their gratitude that such a topic could remain fairly civil and in that light I will post my own feelings. I do so not to sway any here one way or another but to simply express my own heartfelt beliefs.

I was raised in "organized religion" and attended religious schools through most of high school. At some point in time I began to question my faith, mainly as an extrapolation of questions I had of religion, some of those same questions well stated by many here in this thread. At some point I abandoned my religion. I self-interpreted that as my own questioning as to the very existence of God.

But then a funny thing happened and which runs contrary to the arguments used by some here who question God's existence. It was my education in science - specifically nuclear physics that brought me back. There is an order to everything in this universe and I cannot explain it any other way than by intelligent design. I accept the big bang theory as to the origins of this universe in which we exist but that does not explain away the creation of the highly dense mass of energy that existed just moments before the big bang event. Where did that come from? It is impossible for me to believe or accept that anything else than intelligent design was at work at that singularity.

I am not a religious man. In fact I challenge any of those here who claim to be religious to find the word religion in the Bible. It doesn't exist. Religion was of mans creation, not God's. And man has managed to screw that up quite well on his own throughout time. To find fault with religion and equate that with finding fault with God however, is a mistake IMHO.

Did God write the Bible? I doubt it but I do believe that it is the inspired word of God, written by man and edited throughout the centuries by religions. As I came to understand how the Bible was put together and the process they used to include/eliminate texts, my belief in that regard was only reenforced. That's why we don't often hear about the gospel of Saint Thomas.

Today, I believe in God with all my heart and soul. After what Cristina and I went through last year, that belief today is only stronger. One doctor wanted to pronounce me dead and Cristina actually died on the operating table when her heart stopped. I came through that experience with a revelation that is very personal and I would consider sharing with anyone here in person, should the opportunity present itself. My belief in God however, is not filtered through any specific religion.

For those of you who choose not to believe, I respect that. I once walked in your shoes...

Iflyfish - 6-11-2012 at 10:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Barry A.
Ken---------Even as an Agnostic, I fear for what might replace "religion" in our world. There is an obvious "need" for something. (tho I don't understand that)

I hope your quest for change brings about something better.

Barry


One would hope, as I gather that Ken does, that "religion" could be replaced with reason, compassion and understanding, all noble goals and qualities evident in human beings and to be found in believers and non believers alike.

I believe that the values codified in religious doctrine human values and will continue to exist even if you eliminate religion.

I think John Lennon said it well.

Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people living for today

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace

You, you may say
I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRhq-yO1KN8

Iflyfish

paranewbi - 6-11-2012 at 10:55 AM

Hmmmm....Pol Pot, Stalin, Maio, Hitler (really does anybody on this board think we fought someone other than evil?...not Christian).

Another falacious argument of religions horrible suffering cast on mankind that I need to counter. The above men caused or directly influenced the demise of 10's of millions (some say 60 million collectively) with their 'contemporary tools' in a short span of 60 some years.

It would all just be blissfull on earth if we just stopped believing in any thing other than man.
Better yet, without evil men, maybe there would be no God!
But than who amongst us has not shamed themselves in their actions or their thoughts...oops we are them.

woody with a view - 6-11-2012 at 10:56 AM

and with that we can close this thread.....

P.S. glad you made it, God or no.
 Pages:  1    3    5  ..  7