Updated Bible?

[Chris]

The way I take it, is your neighbor gets a Riding lawn mower and so you want one too

[Chris]

Speaking of the 10 comandments, What do you think God means by this SV?

Ex 20:24 An altar of earth thou shalt make unto me, and shalt sacrifice thereon thy burnt offerings, and thy peace offerings, thy sheep, and thine oxen: in all places where I record my name I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee.

So you think he is pleased with the burning of innocent animals? Then your God is a very wicked God.

[Technosoul]

Quote by: phoenix_fire Quote by: Samildanach God came to me and said the original bible writers were on mushrooms. The bible is actually the diary of mushroom addicts....lots of different one. Its actually a record of all their various trips. Tasteless.

If mushrooms are tasteless why do we eat them so often.

(okay, just kidding and I know what you really mean, although you forgot to say why the idea is tasteless when we do not know how much wine was drank before they started to write, which is a simular type of mind altering consumer item).

However, in spite of the topic being somewhat tasteless relative to our modern day "war on drugs" we find some historical evidence and a number of books that make claims about the influence of mushrooms as well as mind alternating substances such as fungie on wheat during biblical times.

http://breakfornews.proboards44.com/...ead=1134351074

Next is a review by one of those experts about the orgins of the words used in the Bible as well as some interesting meanings for those words, and so forth....

http://www.freedomdomain.com/relig.htm

Here is one of hundreds of reports about mushrooms being used in religious rituals

http://www.maui.net/~jms/chapter6.html

One guy even wrote a book called "the mushroom and the cross" which is often debated in places like this one, and the idea that the word "jesus" was a code word for "mushrooms" - however I do not think that the book offers much real evidence to support it's claim ( I read it once). But the point is, that the idea of natural mind alternating substances being used for religious purposes and that they could influence the writings is not uncommon at all - nor even a new idea. So it is not simply "tasteless" but would be the by-product of modern historical research.

[Ingenious]

Quote by: Saint Vern First of all no it was not "written by man": 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it. 14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1 As such the values inherent in the Word are the same forever. They cannot be changed, and that there is no addition possible says there is neither need nor possibility of such change. That man becomes more evil all the time does not call him right and God wrong. Rather the timeless truth of those values of the Lord call man inherently evil, just as we read in that unchanging Word.

1. Last time I checked, John was a man. Even if you believe that God's "Word" flowed through John, John still wrote it. Also, any author could have claimed to be expressing the Word, but how do you know this is legit? (Don't bother arguing this point, because I already know your argument will be something along the lines of the Bible being the word of God and how it can never be erroneous.)

2. There is a rather substantial list of contradictions found in the Bible, some I doubt you could argue. These contradictions are human mistakes (unless you believe God contradicts himself) which could be contributed to a simple error or passages being lost in translation, which leads me to my next point.

3. The Bible has been translated into numerous languages, and many of the meanings of passages have undoubtedly been lost in translation; yet another human mistake. So how do you know what you are reading is actually what was originally meant?

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: Saint Vern Examples of REALLY BAD TRANSLATIONS found

Vern, you plagiarized that stuff didn't you?
From this site: http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/bacon-niv1.html

If you don't learn how to attribute you will be termed a theif. Not a very good witness of a changed life, now is it?

And pasting whole pages without comment isn't allowed by the Administration here, either. We debate at Volconvo, so you need to learn the ropes if you want to remain a member. Just link the site with a URL and other members will read it or they won't. What we are interested in is members comments, not their ability to paste stuff they think is important.

I am wondering if you are a troll, a slightly less interesting variation of Zealot (now banned)

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: PatrickHenry I am wondering if you are a troll, a slightly less interesting variation of Zealot (now banned)

I'm not.

I've noticed with the advent of online forums that allow people to post anonymously a lot of people have opted for this method of communication. Where once people had to brave the weather and the possibility of being ejected from the town square for bothering passers-by, the web forum is a nice, safe alternative.

[Mr. Jaggers]

I prefer the Geneva Bible, 1st Ed. (1560) to the later King James Version, which, together with the Arthur Golding translation of Ovid's Metamorphoses (1567), are among my most prized books.

[Saint Vern]

Quote by: Mr. Jaggers I prefer the Geneva Bible

It is invalid. It is full of Calvinistic misinterpretations (in the notes), and of course his perversity was based on his worship of Augustine.

[Saint Vern]

Quote by: PatrickHenry Vern, you plagiarized that stuff didn't you? From this site: http://av1611.com/kjbp/articles/bacon-niv1.html If you don't learn how to attribute you will be termed a theif. Not a very good witness of a changed life, now is it? And pasting whole pages without comment isn't allowed by the Administration here, either. We debate at Volconvo, so you need to learn the ropes if you want to remain a member. Just link the site with a URL and other members will read it or they won't. What we are interested in is members comments, not their ability to paste stuff they think is important. I am wondering if you are a troll, a slightly less interesting variation of Zealot (now banned)

So you still are bitter. Whatever.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Ingenious The Bible of Christianity, is said to be inspired by the word of God, and written by man. The Bible was also written ages ago in a time that is totally different from ours with different views of morality and tolerance. I wonder why the Bible hasn't been updated, or at least added on to. Is man no longer inspired by God? Are there no more stories, which the present ages can have an easier time relating to, that canonize God or teach the values of Christianity? Thoughts?

Meh. They can keep the old one. They just need to publish a version that highlights all the stuff that can't happen so the fundies can finally get it straight.

[Saint Vern]

Quote by: Zhavric Meh. They can keep the old one. They just need to publish a version that highlights all the stuff that can't happen so the fundies can finally get it straight.

Specifically what?

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Saint Vern Specifically what?

Where to freakin' start... Basically, all the crap that's impossible and offers no evidence in support. Tons of it.

[Saint Vern]

Quote by: Zhavric Where to freakin' start... Basically, all the crap that's impossible and offers no evidence in support. Tons of it.

So the essence of your response is "All I have to offer is far-left talking points, lacking any substance to respond to the reality of the Bible". Good enough.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Saint Vern So the essence of your response is "All I have to offer is far-left talking points, lacking any substance to respond to the reality of the Bible". Good enough.

Straw man.

Silly me expecting you to actually provide EVIDENCE for the things you claim to be true...

[Saint Vern]

Quote by: Zhavric Straw man. Silly me expecting you to actually provide EVIDENCE for the things you claim to be true...

Actually everything I believe is PROVEN true, but not that truth would interest you. And once again I demand that you specify something for which you falsely claim that no "EVIDENCE" exists. Until you come up with a pair of..."guts"...to do that, your case shall remain one of a frustrated God-hater tolerating no one of a different opinion.

But hey...you gotta use what weapons you have.

:-)

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Saint Vern Actually everything I believe is PROVEN true, but not that truth would interest you. And once again I demand that you specify something for which you falsely claim that no "EVIDENCE" exists.

If you're referring to the bible, then you're wrong. Parts of it have been proven true, but none of the bits that matter. We know that there's a Red Sea. We know where it is and have have tons of evidence that it was around in biblical times.

Not only do we have ZERO evidence that it parted, we don't have any evidence suggesting it's POSSIBLE that it parted.

I saw on the History channel some evidence that had emerged that suggested that Red Sea went through a period a few thousand years ago where it's water level receded due to extended drought and a few other factors. This is most likely the basis of that particular OT myth.

And that's par for the course for the bible. True real world places and a handful of real events & people who are exagerated into myths.

Until you come up with a pair of..."guts"...to do that, your case shall remain one of a frustrated God-hater tolerating no one of a different opinion.

Dude, you didn't even SHOW UP to the Jesus is a Myth threads.

[Saint Vern]

Quote by: Zhavric If you're referring to the bible, then you're wrong. Parts of it have been proven true, but none of the bits that matter. We know that there's a Red Sea. We know where it is and have have tons of evidence that it was around in biblical times.

...as the Bible tells us many times. So your point is none.

[Saint Vern]

Quote by: Zhavric Not only do we have evidence that it parted, we don't have any evidence suggesting it's possible that it parted.

You are wrong. We do have pieces of Pharaoh's equipment under the sea. Nor is it required that what you claim is "possible" be satisifed, because as you would know if you knew anything about the Bible, that was a true act of God. And it happened. You just cannot disprove it or make a case against it.

[Saint Vern]

Quote by: Zhavric you didn't even to the Jesus is a yth threads.

Your irrelevancies are not something that I would notice before I was around this place. Sorry but you are not that significant.

[dreamer]

To me the bible comes across well ab it wrong well here goes, it starts you shall not worship false Gods, Then goes on about how to follow a god the right way. just don't get it. it comes across as a good fable, well some true, and well ab it of mixed spice to heat the read up. But if you wish to follow that god which ever one you are thinking of "good luck" with the challenge of a life it will take a life time and you will still scratch your head.Dreamer