49 Unique Guild Members 14 Level 100 characters 401 Website/Forum Members 0 Posts in 24 hours 0 Posts in 7 days 84313 Total Posts Nelthilta is the last poster
49 Unique Guild Members 14 Level 100 characters 401 Website/Forum Members 0 Posts in 24 hours 0 Posts in 7 days 84313 Total Posts Nelthilta is the last poster
rofl Adam consciously disobeyed God just as much as Eve did. Too many Christians need to get it through their heads that they'll never make sense to the world until they actually read and understand scripture.
Do they not realize that strong women, by God's command, several times lead Israel away from imminent disaster, such as Ester, Judge Deborah, and Judith.
What is wrong with a woman teaching a man? Sure there are some subjects that are inappropriate for women to teach men, but really if they know something some men don't, then why not teach. Women being submissive to men is mostly aimed at leadership in the family body. Just like any other body has a clear chain of command. I mean what guild is run smoothly with two completely equal leaders?
But even on the subject of marriage, men aren't supposed to be slave drivers that have a lapdog wife to satisfy their every whim. That makes no sense. This piece of scripture explains it best.
Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church, and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. he who loves his wife loves himself. For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church; however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
- Ephesians 5:21-33
Pretty much this says, women be submissive to the your husbands, and husbands put the needs of your wife ahead of your own.
1. Adam and Eve never existed. 2. "women be submissive to the your husbands, and husbands put the needs of your wife ahead of your own" is archaic thinking.
---- "The Ultimates 2 for me is a little bit of everything. Grand adventure, intricate conspiracies, epic visuals, and simply an amazing comic. Separate from the reality it mirrors, The Ultimates 2 is an example of what comics can do in the hands of a writer and artist unafraid to unleash the limits of their abilities." -ComicCritique.com
Never in my life has anyone made such a convincing case. I lol that you can make statements like this then tell me that *I'm* the one blinded by faith.
rofl Adam consciously disobeyed God just as much as Eve did. Too many Christians need to get it through their heads that they'll never make sense to the world until they actually read and understand scripture.
Do they not realize that strong women, by God's command, several times lead Israel away from imminent disaster, such as Ester, Judge Deborah, and Judith.
What is wrong with a woman teaching a man? Sure there are some subjects that are inappropriate for women to teach men, but really if they know something some men don't, then why not teach. Women being submissive to men is mostly aimed at leadership in the family body. Just like any other body has a clear chain of command. I mean what guild is run smoothly with two completely equal leaders?
But even on the subject of marriage, men aren't supposed to be slave drivers that have a lapdog wife to satisfy their every whim. That makes no sense. This piece of scripture explains it best.
Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church, and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. he who loves his wife loves himself. For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh." This mystery is a profound one, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church; however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
- Ephesians 5:21-33
Pretty much this says, women be submissive to the your husbands, and husbands put the needs of your wife ahead of your own.
1. Adam and Eve never existed. 2. "women be submissive to the your husbands, and husbands put the needs of your wife ahead of your own" is archaic thinking.
---- "The Ultimates 2 for me is a little bit of everything. Grand adventure, intricate conspiracies, epic visuals, and simply an amazing comic. Separate from the reality it mirrors, The Ultimates 2 is an example of what comics can do in the hands of a writer and artist unafraid to unleash the limits of their abilities." -ComicCritique.com
I think I'll go one step further than "Adam and Eve never existed." and say that the Bible sucks, it is totally historically inaccurate. The Old Testament was written by the scribes for the elite, the others couldn't even read. There are two different evolutionary stories. Most of the stuff was written pretty late which takes away credibility blah blah blah.
Now that doesn't mean that the bible isn't very morally or theologically accurate, it's just that it can be taken 1000 different ways for 1000 different people. This then makes me wonder, what kind of a fucked up, backwards thinking community takes these passages literally enough to ban perfectly good female teachers from teaching? I can see if they wanted to ban her from driving...
Ok first off, I did run this by my Bible study last night and we all did some research and found that in the context of the first few chapters of 1 Timothy, Paul does not mean classroom teaching. When Paul and the other writers of the New Testament use the word we translate as teach, they usually mean teaching from the pulpit. This means women should be not made ministers/preachers/pastors. And traditionally, men have always filled that role anyway. He isn't saying women can't be classroom teachers like history, math, English, etc.
As for the Bible being historically inaccurate, rofl where exactly were you when Lurther, Soulman, Chezzin (copy/paste) and I were all still posting and debunking this popular claim in the "proof of God" thread? Camera was the only one willing to actually criticize our points of view then, while everyone else stayed quiet, cept Chops who trolled that thread with great pride. ;D
What I find funny about your reasoning is you demonstrate the randomness of your opinion on the matter by first saying
Quote
"I think I'll go one step further than "Adam and Eve never existed." and say that the Bible sucks, it is totally historically inaccurate. The Old Testament was written by the scribes for the elite, the others couldn't even read"
Then you go on to say
Quote
Now that doesn't mean that the bible isn't very morally or theologically accurate, it's just that it can be taken 1000 different ways for 1000 different people.
How exactly is it totally historically inaccurate, written by scribes for only elites, yet at the same time be morally/theologically accurate? If something is morally and theologically accurate, then it must be rooted in reality, yet you say the Bible is just a fantasy world.
Before I actually take time to post about it, if I were to give you tangible and quantifiable geological, archaeological, and independent historical accounts that confirm of the Bible's accounting of events, would you read it with an open mind? Or would I be wasting my time only to get a knee-jerk one-line response telling me how stupid and blinded by faith I am?
shit I knew I shouldn't have posted. Pretty much no it doesn't have to be reality to have worth, even though the story isn't accurate it reflects the Hebrews at the time and their faith. Pretty much people who want to disprove can't come up with evidence that the Bible didn't happen and you can't come up with proof that the Bible did happen, I'm no archeologist so have fun finding proof. The Bible is not a waste of time, but if you believe God exists (which I do), it doesn't matter if the Bible was there, it's not necessary to have faith.
oh yeah and, lol people with imaginary friends are stupid mr. blinded by faith (shit that's more than one line) /knee-jerk
I'd say the lord of the rings has a fairly reasonably good message, and no one is suggesting it happened.
And I'd say Atlas Shrugged has the best message of any fiction story, though that's probably as contraversial as suggesting the bible stories really happened.
Self-reliance is paramount to all beliefs.
---- If the Da Vinci Code, a murder-mystery novel, threatens your beliefs, then your beliefs are weak and should be threatened.
Well in this case I will not spend the time to make a case for the historical accuracy of the Bible. I won't really be able to do much here because quite frankly I am woefully outnumbered at the moment, lol. All my allies have since stopped posting here.
In the end, though, you need to be willing to have an open mind, and I of course can't force that on you. I would recommend at least reading Genesis - Exodus before jumping to conclusions.
Not to be bogged down by some of the stuff that might seem confusing, but to at least get the flavor and the style of the presentation Moses put forth.
Did he mean Genesis and Exodus to be fictional accounts to illustrate a set of points? If so, what, specifically was he trying to illustrate and why? Or was he really presenting a historical chronicle of event leading up to the point he compiled his writings and records? If so, why was it so important for him to chronicle the events he did?
I am not out to hide or cover anything up. I'm confident that if you actually read the first two books of the Bible with at least an open mind to learn, you will come to the latter conclusion in the above paragraph.
So like Chops pointed out, a book can deliver a good moral/theological lesson and not be based in historical fact. Aesop wrote a bunch of fables (all made up) that delivered some pretty good messages.
Quote
Get the flavor and the style of the presentation Moses put forth.
Did he mean Genesis and Exodus to be fictional accounts to illustrate a set of points? If so, what, specifically was he trying to illustrate and why? Or was he really presenting a historical chronicle of event leading up to the point he compiled his writings and records? If so, why was it so important for him to chronicle the events he did?
I dunno, maybe the same reason the Greeks fabricated their whole multi-deity belief system to describe the origins of the world. Did the Greeks mean for what we now call mythology to illustrate a set of points? If so, what were they trying to illustrate and why? Or was mythology really presenting a historical chronicle of events leading up to Greek times? If so, why was it important for the Greeks to chronicle the events they did?
We all have questions. Some of us, in absence of answers, fabricate stories of how things came to be. The Greeks did, and Moses did.
Starsonis -- your post above is probably the single most intelligent contribution to a discussion I've ever seen you make. Grats.
Cerebus:
2. "women be submissive to the your husbands, and husbands put the needs of your wife ahead of your own" is archaic thinking.
Means:
Men need to go down on their woman regularly so that women will return the favor.
I dunno, maybe the same reason the Greeks fabricated their whole multi-deity belief system to describe the origins of the world. Did the Greeks mean for what we now call mythology to illustrate a set of points? If so, what were they trying to illustrate and why? Or was mythology really presenting a historical chronicle of events leading up to Greek times? If so, why was it important for the Greeks to chronicle the events they did?
rofl Rade I love how your arguments like this one above often sound like a giant wet fart.
How much do you know about the polytheistic systems of Greece and Rome? Greek mythology, that has no common goal, no consistent message of any type, and therefore no actual answers. It was all about catering to individual interests and selfish inclinations. This is why there are so many polytheistic religions and why there are so few monotheistic ones.
The Bible tells us how the world began, why it is the way it is, what man is here for, what the fate of man and the world is, why it is all going to happen this way, and on top of this, it tells us how to reconcile with our creator. A complete accounting and explanation of the world.
I would say a comparison between the two is wholly without merit.
Quote
We all have questions. Some of us, in absence of answers, fabricate stories of how things came to be. The Greeks did, and Moses did.
Yet you stand there fabricating your own reality. A reality where truth and knowledge is for the weak and ignorance and apathy is for the strong and wise? First you create this backwards system of judgment, and then sit there immune to that very judgment you lay on everything else?
The Bible tells us how the world began, why it is the way it is, what man is here for, what the fate of man and the world is, why it is all going to happen this way, and on top of this, it tells us how to reconcile with our creator. A complete accounting and explanation of the world.
So because the Bible expands on its fabricated stories more than the Greeks did, it's clearly more correct.
Quote
Quote
We all have questions. Some of us, in absence of answers, fabricate stories of how things came to be. The Greeks did, and Moses did.
Yet you stand there fabricating your own reality. A reality where truth and knowledge is for the weak and ignorance and apathy is for the strong and wise?
You have that exactly backwards. You are quoting a book and claiming truth and knowledge. I'm claiming absence of knowledge and saying you don't know the truth any more than I do. Ignorance and apathy is all the Bible provides since it answers all life's questions for you. The answers are wrong, but at least you can be ignorant and apethic as to the questions going forward.
Calculus is a neat kind of math. A lot can be achieved, a lot of answers obtained with its use. We could sit around discussing Calculus. It can be taught from one person to another, or to a class. Independent of discussion or classroom setting, you could open a Calculus book and read it and learn it for yourself. So far, learning Calculus is identical to learning Biblical teaching. Discussion, classroom, independent study, etc.
But here's the catch. Independent of a Calculus teacher, a discussion group, or a Calculus book, it is possible (see: Sir Isaac Newton) to rediscover Calculus, to prove its validity, existence, and correctness.
Independent of Christian teaching, forums, and the Bible, prove it to be true. Ready... go.
Calculus is a neat kind of math. A lot can be achieved, a lot of answers obtained with its use. We could sit around discussing Calculus. It can be taught from one person to another, or to a class. Independent of discussion or classroom setting, you could open a Calculus book and read it and learn it for yourself. So far, learning Calculus is identical to learning Biblical teaching. Discussion, classroom, independent study, etc.
But here's the catch. Independent of a Calculus teacher, a discussion group, or a Calculus book, it is possible (see: Sir Isaac Newton) to rediscover Calculus, to prove its validity, existence, and correctness.
Independent of Christian teaching, forums, and the Bible, prove it to be true. Ready... go.
So now you've gone from equating polytheism to Christianity, to equating an infinite intelligence Creator to a mathematical formula and induction? Rade you've gotta be smarter than this. lol
So because the Bible expands on its fabricated stories more than the Greeks did, it's clearly more correct.
Yet again you prove you fabricate your own reality and will continue to live in ignorance. Remember this is not ignorance because you disagree with me, it is ignorance because you irresponsibly call the Bible a fabrication without evaluating its content. It's amazing you can possibly think you sound smart making these kinds of cases
So because the Bible expands on its fabricated stories more than the Greeks did, it's clearly more correct.
Yet again you prove you fabricate your own reality and will continue to live in ignorance. Remember this is not ignorance because you disagree with me, it is ignorance because you irresponsibly call the Bible a fabrication without evaluating its content. It's amazing you can possibly think you sound smart making these kinds of cases
Perhaps he has evaluated it's content, and has found the stories in the bible to be as ridiculous as those of Ancient Greek (people living to hundreds of years old, parting the red sea, the entire earth covered in Water, reviving the dead? - Those all require either direct Divine Intervention, or a modification of Physics). The words in the Bible have been translated and retranslated, such that the original written words may very well not mean what the King James Bible says. In any case, people find all sorts of differernt meaning when interpreting the bible, and have done so to justify many different things.
The bible is supposedly the inspired word of god, something neither you, no I can ever prove or disprove, and that's his point. But, and I'm sure you hear this a lot, when making a claim, the burden of proof is on the believer, not the disbeliever. As such, without the Bible as a circular reference, you could never "discover" christianity, and as such, it means you have faith that the Bible is indeed the word of god. Without that faith, the Bible is just a high selling fiction book.
---- If the Da Vinci Code, a murder-mystery novel, threatens your beliefs, then your beliefs are weak and should be threatened.
Perhaps he has evaluated it's content, and has found the stories in the bible to be as ridiculous as those of Ancient Greek (people living to hundreds of years old,
People lived longer because the world was a different place before the Flood. If you're interested I could give you my scientific theory on why people were able to live so long pre-flood.
Quote
parting the red sea, the entire earth covered in Water, reviving the dead? - Those all require either direct Divine Intervention, or a modification of Physics). The words in the Bible have been translated and retranslated, such that the original written words may very well not mean what the King James Bible says. In any case, people find all sorts of differernt meaning when interpreting the bible, and have done so to justify many different things.
I hear this translated/retranslated argument every time this debate occurs haha. Here is a chart that should give you a general understanding of how the Bible has been translated over the past 2000 years:
That chart was on Wikipedia but the link is broken so I'll link answers.com
The Bible version I read is the NIV. It was a fresh translation from the original Hebrew. There was no translating and retranslating. However, the King James Version would be more along the lines of what you describe, a translation of a translation of a translation. But researchers who have audited the words of both version have found almost no actual content discrepancies.
The case you seem to be making is the Bible started as a true story then somehow became something fantastical and of a legend and completely different than when it was originally written. You are comparing translation of the written word to rumor distortion. Whipser something into someone's ear they whisper into another's etc etc. Eventually the story is nothing the same.
However, it doesn't work that way in the written word, because you have records of what was written and you can compare. In oral tradition, there is nothing like this, that is why oral recounting from person to person slowly becomes rumor. We found the Dead Sea Scrolls which are extraordinarily old yet confirm the accuracy of our translations of much of the Old Testament.
for more information. It uses carbon dating as evidence of its age which i dont agree with but they were also able to identify the period it was written based on the dialect used.
Quote
The bible is supposedly the inspired word of god, something neither you, no I can ever prove or disprove, and that's his point. But, and I'm sure you hear this a lot, when making a claim, the burden of proof is on the believer, not the disbeliever. As such, without the Bible as a circular reference, you could never "discover" christianity, and as such, it means you have faith that the Bible is indeed the word of god. Without that faith, the Bible is just a high selling fiction book.
This is an interesting way of putting it. I admit I don't have answer for every point people make and this is one I've not really heard worded this way. lol grats on that!
I'll have to consider why this argument isn't convincing to me and get back to you on this. Don't get cocky though >;D
