|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 13, 2018 12:28:57 GMT
I love it when a troll becomes so desperate that he has to accuse others of his own maneuvers, just before jumping ship like the rat he really is. But it's nice to know you've decided to spare others the onus of your continued biblical scholarship here. Anyway, it'll leave you more time to play Sherlock Holmes, deducing what my 'true identity' really is. (That Rabbit dude must have forked with your head a-plenty, though that doesn't seem difficult I'll admit.) The funniest part of reading those exchanges is that none of the people you've attempted to convince of your cockamamie 'theory' appear to be buying into it. Looks like you're about as credible elsewhere as you've been here  . The funniest part is that you're still just a mindless twat - who after 8 pages of idiotic pageantry - has yet to make a coherent point other than showing complete ignorance on the subject that's being discussed... Do you still not know what the obvious metaphor is?..... and claim complete innocence in the whole "Will you all just stop" nonsense... And, you still live can't read for shit and just choose to live in a fantasy world as the first two people (out of the three on the thread) bought into it.... The only thing that you have in your favor is Aj vouching for your dumb ass. Rabbit was a braindead idiot who, if you actually read that thread that you are citing, nobody actually liked.... Let that be the warning for you.... because, yes, Virginia, there is Santa Clause... and you're just like him. Catch ya latter, Rabbitghost.  Edit: Let's test my theory. Rabbit spent a day where he was responding to my literal every shit. Let's see if you are as stupid and as pathetic as he is. Begin!  |
|
|
|
Post by general313 on Sept 13, 2018 15:23:33 GMT
Would I be making an unfounded assumption if I thought any participants in this thread were pissed? It is a really stupid thread. Did you mean 'pissed' as in angry or 'pissed' like in affected by alcohol? It looks like both to me. The same sense as what is meant in the thread title, which I had assumed was angry pissed. Though now that you mention it, if Jesus were inebriated the passage might make just as much sense. |
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Sept 13, 2018 16:00:34 GMT
I think only a minority of people would take everything in the Bible as a literal truth. Religious extremists are the only people I think that would since religions can highly influence people to read in only limited amount of aspects that their taught. I personally don't take much difference between reading the Bible and any other piece of literature that can be interpreted by the individual reader differently. These interpretations get discussed, compared, and debated by readers of the same story. It's even true that the authors sometimes didn't intend for their writing to be taken a certain way and that's because a story can have more than one meaning even if the authors themselves weren't consciously aware of them. This can also be true for people within religions that promote their religious texts. If the interpretation can be supported by text than it can't ever be taken as incorrect. Even if you're taught to read something a certain way or taught what the meaning of a certain text is there are still other perspectives out there that can't be discredited as long as if it's still supported by text. This can also true for the Bible. When reading the Bible specifically as a whole take every note of you own interpretations and see if there are any contradictions between those. If they are then find different interpretations. Like you mentioned this process takes years by hundreds of thousands of different people. I don't think many books in general can be 100% agreed upon between everyone and these discussions of meaning and interpretation will always continue. I find your post interesting (most of them here have been), but I have to disagree with you at the first sentence. Most Christian sects do enjoin their followers to take the Bible as literal truth down to the last 'and' and 'the' (apologies to Mary McCarthy), and even if the average theologian doesn't do so--as don't, I'd imagine, most people of an average level of common sense--it doesn't alter the fact that a root foundation of Christian belief lies in the notion that The Word is to be taken very literally indeed, and that it was intended by God, its author, to be. Certainly most forms of 'primitive' Christian sects, while definitely placing their own spin on scripture, frown mightily on attempts by others to 'interpret' or 're-read' any of it as being other than literally true to what's on the printed page.
Well, there it is. I made a living for a long time searching for mistakes, misspellings, typos, badly phrased sentences, wrong words used and the occasional willful alterations. If it happens now, in the age of spell check, just think of how many typos got through in the last 2,000 years.
There are actually famous bibles collectors buy, just for a major typo that completely alters the message. The use of words is fluid, and nothing can be taken as literally true, or even literarily true (see how easy it is to change the meaning of a phrase with one word changed?)
So, to me, every concept put forth in language is subject to interpretation. Just my 2 cents worth...
And, I think the 'Word of God', all of them - Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Rastafarian - are all created by humans. It is the human attempt to make sense of their existence, and that is why I consider myself to be an agnostic atheist. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 13, 2018 16:08:05 GMT
Let's test my theory. Rabbit spent a day where he was responding to my literal every shit. Let's see if you are as stupid and as pathetic as he is. Begin! Ya know--at this point, let me just put it into lingo your drink-soused brain can comprehend:
FUCK OFF ALREADY.
|
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Sept 13, 2018 16:13:04 GMT
Ya know--at this point, let me just put it into lingo your drink-soused brain can comprehend:
FUCK OFF ALREADY.
LOL, you're bitching and moaning about how I can't stop responding to your posts, while being unable to have kept your own sticky fingers off the keyboard for the last several pages. If it's possible to be dumber than a bag of rocks, you are. |
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Sept 13, 2018 16:16:59 GMT
I find your post interesting (most of them here have been), but I have to disagree with you at the first sentence. Most Christian sects do enjoin their followers to take the Bible as literal truth down to the last 'and' and 'the' (apologies to Mary McCarthy), and even if the average theologian doesn't do so--as don't, I'd imagine, most people of an average level of common sense--it doesn't alter the fact that a root foundation of Christian belief lies in the notion that The Word is to be taken very literally indeed, and that it was intended by God, its author, to be. Certainly most forms of 'primitive' Christian sects, while definitely placing their own spin on scripture, frown mightily on attempts by others to 'interpret' or 're-read' any of it as being other than literally true to what's on the printed page.
Well, there it is. I made a living for a long time searching for mistakes, misspellings, typos, badly phrased sentences, wrong words used and the occasional willful alterations. If it happens now, in the age of spell check, just think of how many typos got through in the last 2,000 years.
There are actually famous bibles collectors buy, just for a major typo that completely alters the message. The use of words is fluid, and nothing can be taken as literally true, or even literarily true (see how easy it is to change the meaning of a phrase with one word changed?)
So, to me, every concept put forth in language is subject to interpretation. Just my 2 cents worth...
And, I think the 'Word of God', all of them - Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Rastafarian - are all created by humans. It is the human attempt to make sense of their existence, and that is why I consider myself to be an agnostic atheist.If it were possible to give that post more than one 'like' I would. It couldn't have summed up my own feelings about human-based religions more elegantly. |
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Sept 13, 2018 16:24:27 GMT
Nobody’s perfect.
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Sept 13, 2018 16:25:15 GMT
Enough. Let this thread rest in peace. Just like that poor, poor fig tree....  edit: Is that supposed to be some kind of insult?  |
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Sept 13, 2018 16:32:51 GMT
I've been wanting to post on this subject for a while, given that I worked in the publishing industry for years as an editor and proofreader, but I will let Thomas Paine say it in a much more concise manner than I ever could.
"The continually progressive change to which the meaning of words is subject, the want of a universal language which renders translation necessary, the errors to which translations are again subject, the mistakes of copyists and printers, together with the possibility of willful alteration, are of themselves evidences that human language, whether in speech or in print, cannot be the vehicle of the Word of God."
Well, there it is. I made a living for a long time searching for mistakes, misspellings, typos, badly phrased sentences, wrong words used and the occasional willful alterations. If it happens now, in the age of spell check, just think of how many typos got through in the last 2,000 years.
There are actually famous bibles collectors buy, just for a major typo that completely alters the message. The use of words is fluid, and nothing can be taken as literally true, or even literarily true (see how easy it is to change the meaning of a phrase with one word changed?)
So, to me, every concept put forth in language is subject to interpretation. Just my 2 cents worth...
And, I think the 'Word of God', all of them - Hindu, Buddhist, Christian, Rastafarian - are all created by humans. It is the human attempt to make sense of their existence, and that is why I consider myself to be an agnostic atheist. If it were possible to give that post more than one 'like' I would. It couldn't have summed up my own feelings about human-based religions more elegantly. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 13, 2018 16:53:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Sept 13, 2018 16:59:04 GMT
You're quoting your own shit as shit? Looks like you're finally starting to see the light, lol. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 13, 2018 17:09:34 GMT
You're quoting your own shit as shit? Looks like you're finally starting to see the light, lol. |
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Sept 13, 2018 17:16:34 GMT
You're quoting your own shit as shit? Looks like you're finally starting to see the light, lol. |
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Sept 13, 2018 17:35:21 GMT
You're quoting your own shit as shit? Looks like you're finally starting to see the light, lol. You said it! |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 13, 2018 17:37:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Sept 13, 2018 17:42:04 GMT
They make some good over-the-counter diarrhea meds for that, son. You could also put a Depends over your head, I suppose. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 13, 2018 17:42:41 GMT
They make some good over-the-counter diarrhea meds for that, son. You could also put a Depends over your head, I suppose. |
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Sept 13, 2018 17:54:35 GMT
They make some good over-the-counter diarrhea meds for that, son. You could also put a Depends over your head, I suppose. since all you've posted here for the last 48 hours or so is shit anyway, you could have spared everyone and just reached for that emoji at the outset.
It's a lot more eloquent than anything else you've said.
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Sept 13, 2018 18:00:27 GMT
They make some good over-the-counter diarrhea meds for that, son. You could also put a Depends over your head, I suppose. |
|
|
|
Post by Vegas on Sept 13, 2018 18:04:24 GMT
since all you've posted here for the last 48 hours or so is shit anyway, you could have spared everyone and just reached for that emoji at the outset.
It's a lot more eloquent than anything else you've said.
|
|
.
