If there is one mistake in a book, then EVERYTHING in the book is wrong

[Syriusly]

I found a mistake in one of these encyclopedias. Therefore, according to atheists, all of the information therein is wrong and so I used them to start a bonfire since

I think you are confusing 'atheists' with the voices in your head.

 

[K9Buck]

Perhaps your hearing is bad?

Perhaps, but I think my reading is ok.

 

[K9Buck]

I think you are confusing 'atheists' with the voices in your head.

And I think you're too obsessed sucking Obama's cock to think straight.

 

[Syriusly]

Nope. But if a group claims the book is infallible and can't be questioned- and has demonstrable mistakes- then the claim of infallibility is clearly wrong.

Gee, all you atheists were MUTE when one of your comrades said that, if the bible has one thing in it that's untrue, then ALL of it is untrue. Strange.

Since you haven't quoted anyone and I haven't seen anyone make that claim- it pretty much seems like this is just your pure invention. Which isn't strange at all.

 

[K9Buck]

Nope. But when a book has MANY, well, that makes an honest man think.

I've been assured by the universe-caused-itself atheists that if the bible has ONE mistake, then ALL of it is wrong.

"I've been assured by the universe-caused-itself atheists that if the bible has ONE mistake, then ALL of it is wrong"

No you haven't.

You just made that up.

You are a conservative so you can't help but lie.

There are many flaws in the bible

And the parts of the bible that are acceptable (don't kill, don't steal) are NOT "FROM THE BIBLE" at all.

They are from hammurabi

or the greeks

who came up with those ideas LONG before they christians STOLE THEM and claimed them as their own.

You ok? Did I hurt your twat?

 

[Syriusly]

I think you are confusing 'atheists' with the voices in your head.

And I think you're too obsessed sucking Obama's cock to think straight.

LOL- why am I not surprised you always come back to your sexual fantasies? Why exactly are you fantasizing about me sucking Obama's cock?

I mean your fantasies are your fantasies- I just wondered why you felt a need to share your sexual fantasies here.

 

[BULLDOG]

Right, atheists?

If you find one mistake in a book it means the book isn't infallible.

Technically, God is infallible and God's Word is infallible. Man's understanding of it and your perception of their understanding of it are two different things.

If that book has obvious mistakes, and it is also the word of God, what does that mean?

 

[BULLDOG]

Right, atheists?

If you find one mistake in a book it means the book isn't infallible.

Fair statement.

If you find one mistake in a book, and the book is the word of god, it means the word of god isn't infallible.
If god's word isn't infallible, then god isn't infallible.
If god isn't infallible, then god isn't god.
If you find one mistake in that book, god isn't god.

 

[DOTR]

Right, atheists?

Puritan atheists. Make sure you know what you are dealing with.

But just for conversations sake..what mistake have you found?

 

[DOTR]

Nope. But when a book has MANY, well, that makes an honest man think.

I've been assured by the universe-caused-itself atheists that if the bible has ONE mistake, then ALL of it is wrong.

Well... If you contend that the Bible is the infallable word of God; then yes. But atheists know it’s not . As a book it’s fine. When taken as divine scripture; it’s a hot mess...

All Christians do maintain that the Bible is the infallible word of God. But not all claim it is inerrant. A subtle difference but vital.

 

[ding]

Right, atheists?

If you find one mistake in a book it means the book isn't infallible.

Technically, God is infallible and God's Word is infallible. Man's understanding of it and your perception of their understanding of it are two different things.

If that book has obvious mistakes, and it is also the word of God, what does that mean?

Man's interpretation of it and your perception of their interpretation of it doesn’t make it wrong.

 

[ding]

Right, atheists?

.
If there is one mistake in a book, then EVERYTHING in the book is wrong

why reserve the obvious to atheists, you believe all theists are as gullible as you ... a little gratuitous referring to forgeries as mistakes at least for the 4th century christian bible.

no, one mistake, necessarily does not make a religion wrong.

Can you tell me how these so called forgeries were done, who did them, when did they do them and what evidence you have to back up your unfounded allegations?

.

Can you tell me how these so called forgeries were done, who did them, when did they do them and what evidence you have to back up your unfounded allegations?

why do you keep repeating yourself, somehow makes your 24000 documents relevant.

Christianity in the 4th century was dominated in its early stage by Constantine the great and the First Council of Nicaea of 325, which was the beginning of the period of the First seven Ecumenical Councils (325–787), and in its late stage by the Edict of Thessalonica of 380, which made Nicene Christianity the state church of the Roman Empire.

(they) spent the entire 4th century writing the christian bible, those that crucified an innocent man and used their crime to further their cause. bing the decendant.

What evidence do you have?

 

[BreezeWood]

Nope. But when a book has MANY, well, that makes an honest man think.

I've been assured by the universe-caused-itself atheists that if the bible has ONE mistake, then ALL of it is wrong.

Well... If you contend that the Bible is the infallable word of God; then yes. But atheists know it’s not . As a book it’s fine. When taken as divine scripture; it’s a hot mess...

All Christians do maintain that the Bible is the infallible word of God. But not all claim it is inerrant. A subtle difference but vital.

.

All Christians do maintain that the Bible is the infallible word of God. But not all claim it is inerrant. A subtle difference but vital.

But just for conversations sake..what mistake have you found?

- are you being serious ...

"Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works." 2 John 1:9-11

throughout the 4th century christian bible there are inexplicable dogmas in deliberation of political objectives not associated w/ religion and are responsible for the uninterrupted history of persecution and victimization of the innocent from that time period to the present day. having no connection to the 1st century whatsoever.

 

[BULLDOG]

Right, atheists?

If you find one mistake in a book it means the book isn't infallible.

Technically, God is infallible and God's Word is infallible. Man's understanding of it and your perception of their understanding of it are two different things.

If that book has obvious mistakes, and it is also the word of God, what does that mean?

Man's interpretation of it and your perception of their interpretation of it doesn’t make it wrong.

Back up a little bit. One of the main excuses I hear is that there is no problem with the Bible because even though it was compiled from many different ancient scrolls, and the choice of which scrolls were used or discarded was a mostly political choice, God guided the compilers so that they chose the right materials to represent his word. After all that, to say there is just a difference in interpretation makes the claimed of divine guidance a waste of time.

 

[ding]

Right, atheists?

If you find one mistake in a book it means the book isn't infallible.

Technically, God is infallible and God's Word is infallible. Man's understanding of it and your perception of their understanding of it are two different things.

If that book has obvious mistakes, and it is also the word of God, what does that mean?

Man's interpretation of it and your perception of their interpretation of it doesn’t make it wrong.

Back up a little bit. One of the main excuses I hear is that there is no problem with the Bible because even though it was compiled from many different ancient scrolls, and the choice of which scrolls were used or discarded was a mostly political choice, God guided the compilers so that they chose the right materials to represent his word. After all that, to say there is just a difference in interpretation makes the claimed of divine guidance a waste of time.

I’m not talking about the canonization. I am talking about the authors themselves and your understanding of what they wrote.

Divinely inspired but still written by imperfect men. Let’s take Genesis for example. The first 11 chapters are man’s understanding of the answers to the origin questions, historical events and selected wisdoms in an allegorical manner so that they could be easily remembered and passed down orally.

 

[ding]

there are inexplicable dogmas in deliberation of political objectives not associated w/ religion

Can you prove it?

 

[BULLDOG]

If you find one mistake in a book it means the book isn't infallible.

Technically, God is infallible and God's Word is infallible. Man's understanding of it and your perception of their understanding of it are two different things.

If that book has obvious mistakes, and it is also the word of God, what does that mean?

Man's interpretation of it and your perception of their interpretation of it doesn’t make it wrong.

Back up a little bit. One of the main excuses I hear is that there is no problem with the Bible because even though it was compiled from many different ancient scrolls, and the choice of which scrolls were used or discarded was a mostly political choice, God guided the compilers so that they chose the right materials to represent his word. After all that, to say there is just a difference in interpretation makes the claimed of divine guidance a waste of time.

I’m not talking about the canonization. I am talking about the authors themselves and your understanding of what they wrote.

Divinely inspired but still written by imperfect men. Let’s take Genesis for example. The first 11 chapters are man’s understanding of the answers to the origin questions, historical events and selected wisdoms in an allegorical manner so that they could be easily remembered and passed down orally.

I'm not sure how you can not be talking about canonization when discussing the Bible. Everything in it has been canonized by virtue of being included.

 

[Vastator]

If you find one mistake in a book it means the book isn't infallible.

Technically, God is infallible and God's Word is infallible. Man's understanding of it and your perception of their understanding of it are two different things.

If that book has obvious mistakes, and it is also the word of God, what does that mean?

Man's interpretation of it and your perception of their interpretation of it doesn’t make it wrong.

Back up a little bit. One of the main excuses I hear is that there is no problem with the Bible because even though it was compiled from many different ancient scrolls, and the choice of which scrolls were used or discarded was a mostly political choice, God guided the compilers so that they chose the right materials to represent his word. After all that, to say there is just a difference in interpretation makes the claimed of divine guidance a waste of time.

I’m not talking about the canonization. I am talking about the authors themselves and your understanding of what they wrote.

Divinely inspired but still written by imperfect men. Let’s take Genesis for example. The first 11 chapters are man’s understanding of the answers to the origin questions, historical events and selected wisdoms in an allegorical manner so that they could be easily remembered and passed down orally.

For the overwhelming majority of the contributing writers of the texts that came to comprise the Bible; the original authors, dates of writing, and locations of the authors of said writings, and the same for the translators of the aforementioned writing are wholly unkown. Nearly all of the writings are impossible to both substantiate, or corroborate. Which makes them next to useless for intellectual pursuit.

 

[ding]

Technically, God is infallible and God's Word is infallible. Man's understanding of it and your perception of their understanding of it are two different things.

If that book has obvious mistakes, and it is also the word of God, what does that mean?

Man's interpretation of it and your perception of their interpretation of it doesn’t make it wrong.

Back up a little bit. One of the main excuses I hear is that there is no problem with the Bible because even though it was compiled from many different ancient scrolls, and the choice of which scrolls were used or discarded was a mostly political choice, God guided the compilers so that they chose the right materials to represent his word. After all that, to say there is just a difference in interpretation makes the claimed of divine guidance a waste of time.

I’m not talking about the canonization. I am talking about the authors themselves and your understanding of what they wrote.

Divinely inspired but still written by imperfect men. Let’s take Genesis for example. The first 11 chapters are man’s understanding of the answers to the origin questions, historical events and selected wisdoms in an allegorical manner so that they could be easily remembered and passed down orally.

For the overwhelming majority of the contributing writers of the texts that came to comprise the Bible; the original authors, dates of writing, and locations of the authors of said writings, and the same for the translators of the aforementioned writing are wholly unkown. Nearly all of the writings are impossible to both substantiate, or corroborate. Which makes them next to useless for intellectual pursuit.

The fact that you hold this to a different standard to other events in antiquity is remarkable.

Nothing even comes close. Not in numbers, timing or accuracy.

 

[Vastator]

If that book has obvious mistakes, and it is also the word of God, what does that mean?

Man's interpretation of it and your perception of their interpretation of it doesn’t make it wrong.

Back up a little bit. One of the main excuses I hear is that there is no problem with the Bible because even though it was compiled from many different ancient scrolls, and the choice of which scrolls were used or discarded was a mostly political choice, God guided the compilers so that they chose the right materials to represent his word. After all that, to say there is just a difference in interpretation makes the claimed of divine guidance a waste of time.

I’m not talking about the canonization. I am talking about the authors themselves and your understanding of what they wrote.

Divinely inspired but still written by imperfect men. Let’s take Genesis for example. The first 11 chapters are man’s understanding of the answers to the origin questions, historical events and selected wisdoms in an allegorical manner so that they could be easily remembered and passed down orally.

For the overwhelming majority of the contributing writers of the texts that came to comprise the Bible; the original authors, dates of writing, and locations of the authors of said writings, and the same for the translators of the aforementioned writing are wholly unkown. Nearly all of the writings are impossible to both substantiate, or corroborate. Which makes them next to useless for intellectual pursuit.

The fact that you hold this to a different standard to other events in antiquity is remarkable.

Nothing even comes close. Not in numbers, timing or accuracy.

I hold it to the same standards.