It's time to update the Bible

[the_human_being]

You could technically update the bible with popular Christians from history. The New Testament outside the Gospels mostly dealt with the early spreading of Christianity. You can always extend the available information.

I updated mine a while back. I installed some of those chapter markers so I could get to the Books more easily. Really helped.

 

[Alt_Ascendant]

It's time to update the Bible as creationism is clearly wrong. We should replace the clearly made up fairly tale with the theory of Evolution.

God can be said to have developed evolution as his tool to make life on earth and to make his pride in joy humanity through it. The Bible needs to explain that the earth came together because god was a master of math and physics!!! He used his knowledge to put things together...

God didn't want his pride in joy to eat the apple of the tree of knowledge as he didn't want us to have this ability! But we did it anyways and became what we're today!!! Sea level raised as the ice age ended caused a great flood around 10 thousand years ago ending many a coastal city...People had to go to higher ground.

People warred before this great ice age ending sea level rise and warned and separated once again afterwards into our own separate klans(nations)...Israel of course could remain an important part of this.

What I am saying is the bible needs to be modernized with the reality! Teaching something to our children that is clearly made up with stuff that goes against reality is bad for civilization.

Dear Lord...it's a story. The Biblical writers were trying to spin an already familiar tale to their benifit. It doesn't need to be "changed". That's just absurd.
1) The creation story is actually very good literature. Also, depending on how you look at it, I guess you could interpret "let there be light" as the Big Bang.
2) Well...you're half right about the Noah stuff. During the last Ice Age, ocean levels rose and flooded what is now the Persian Gulf, or "Eden". To the people who lived there, the flood indeed consume their entire world and everyone they knew. When they reached dry land, they propagated that tale to the people they knew. That's why just about all of the Mesopotamian cultures have a flood story.


Are you suggesting we shouldn't let our children read Dr. Seuss? That's clearly against reality and yet it is highly reccommended.

 

[ding]

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

And how will you do that exactly?

"beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise"
Your argument is circular in that the conclusion is contained in the premise. Had knowers not arisen there wouldn't be anyone to know about it, so it didn't "happen". You are using the fact of your question to prove its necessity. Further, your statement "the moment time came into existence" annihilates itself by virtue of there being no "moment" available for time to come into being if time doesn't exist.

The mistake religious primitives make is failing to assign religion its proper sphere. There is no a priori requirement that the question of the birth of the universe is a religious question. It might be. It might not be. But to assert a religious dogma upfront about it and then spend all your time teleologically trying to fit the empirical world into your dogma is counterproductive and self-defeating.

No offense, but your logic is extremely flawed. Do you believe that humans arose through natural processes or by a creative act by God?

 

[BreezeWood]

were they christians who canonized your book in the 4th century

My book? What book is that?

.

It's time to update the Bible as creationism is clearly wrong.

That's up to Christians, not you.

My book? What book is that?

you might refer yourself to a doctor about your amnesia, to help explain the subject matter you are discussing in reference with others when called upon ... I'm not your keeper, christian.

.

I'm not a Christian. Feeling kinda stupid right about now, aren't you. Call your doctor.

.
It's time to update the Bible as creationism is clearly wrong.

That's up to Christians, not you.

we'll try it again ---


were they christians who canonized (the) book in the 4th century ...

.

 

[cnelsen]

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

And how will you do that exactly?

"beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise"
Your argument is circular in that the conclusion is contained in the premise. Had knowers not arisen there wouldn't be anyone to know about it, so it didn't "happen". You are using the fact of your question to prove its necessity. Further, your statement "the moment time came into existence" annihilates itself by virtue of there being no "moment" available for time to come into being if time doesn't exist.

The mistake religious primitives make is failing to assign religion its proper sphere. There is no a priori requirement that the question of the birth of the universe is a religious question. It might be. It might not be. But to assert a religious dogma upfront about it and then spend all your time teleologically trying to fit the empirical world into your dogma is counterproductive and self-defeating.

No offense, but your logic is extremely flawed. Do you believe that humans arose through natural processes or by a creative act by God?

 

[ding]

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

And how will you do that exactly?

"beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise"
Your argument is circular in that the conclusion is contained in the premise. Had knowers not arisen there wouldn't be anyone to know about it, so it didn't "happen". You are using the fact of your question to prove its necessity. Further, your statement "the moment time came into existence" annihilates itself by virtue of there being no "moment" available for time to come into being if time doesn't exist.

The mistake religious primitives make is failing to assign religion its proper sphere. There is no a priori requirement that the question of the birth of the universe is a religious question. It might be. It might not be. But to assert a religious dogma upfront about it and then spend all your time teleologically trying to fit the empirical world into your dogma is counterproductive and self-defeating.

No offense, but your logic is extremely flawed. Do you believe that humans arose through natural processes or by a creative act by God?

Cat go your tongue?

 

[Brynmr]

were they christians who canonized your book in the 4th century

My book? What book is that?

.

It's time to update the Bible as creationism is clearly wrong.

That's up to Christians, not you.

My book? What book is that?

you might refer yourself to a doctor about your amnesia, to help explain the subject matter you are discussing in reference with others when called upon ... I'm not your keeper, christian.

.

I'm not a Christian. Feeling kinda stupid right about now, aren't you. Call your doctor.

.
It's time to update the Bible as creationism is clearly wrong.

That's up to Christians, not you.

we'll try it again ---


were they christians who canonized (the) book in the 4th century ...

.

You might refer yourself to a doctor about your amnesia

 

[cnelsen]

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

And how will you do that exactly?

"beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise"
Your argument is circular in that the conclusion is contained in the premise. Had knowers not arisen there wouldn't be anyone to know about it, so it didn't "happen". You are using the fact of your question to prove its necessity. Further, your statement "the moment time came into existence" annihilates itself by virtue of there being no "moment" available for time to come into being if time doesn't exist.

The mistake religious primitives make is failing to assign religion its proper sphere. There is no a priori requirement that the question of the birth of the universe is a religious question. It might be. It might not be. But to assert a religious dogma upfront about it and then spend all your time teleologically trying to fit the empirical world into your dogma is counterproductive and self-defeating.

No offense, but your logic is extremely flawed. Do you believe that humans arose through natural processes or by a creative act by God?

How are you going to say my logic is flawed without saying how it is flawed? As for the creative act of God--what do you mean when you say "God"?

 

[ding]

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

And how will you do that exactly?

"beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise"
Your argument is circular in that the conclusion is contained in the premise. Had knowers not arisen there wouldn't be anyone to know about it, so it didn't "happen". You are using the fact of your question to prove its necessity. Further, your statement "the moment time came into existence" annihilates itself by virtue of there being no "moment" available for time to come into being if time doesn't exist.

The mistake religious primitives make is failing to assign religion its proper sphere. There is no a priori requirement that the question of the birth of the universe is a religious question. It might be. It might not be. But to assert a religious dogma upfront about it and then spend all your time teleologically trying to fit the empirical world into your dogma is counterproductive and self-defeating.

No offense, but your logic is extremely flawed. Do you believe that humans arose through natural processes or by a creative act by God?

How are you going to say my logic is flawed without saying how it is flawed? As for the creative act of God--what do you mean when you say "God"?

By walking you through your error. Do you believe that humans arose through natural processes or by a creative act by God?

 

[cnelsen]

You cannot dispute that the laws of nature are such that at the moment space and time came into existence, beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

And how will you do that exactly?

"beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise"
Your argument is circular in that the conclusion is contained in the premise. Had knowers not arisen there wouldn't be anyone to know about it, so it didn't "happen". You are using the fact of your question to prove its necessity. Further, your statement "the moment time came into existence" annihilates itself by virtue of there being no "moment" available for time to come into being if time doesn't exist.

The mistake religious primitives make is failing to assign religion its proper sphere. There is no a priori requirement that the question of the birth of the universe is a religious question. It might be. It might not be. But to assert a religious dogma upfront about it and then spend all your time teleologically trying to fit the empirical world into your dogma is counterproductive and self-defeating.

No offense, but your logic is extremely flawed. Do you believe that humans arose through natural processes or by a creative act by God?

How are you going to say my logic is flawed without saying how it is flawed? As for the creative act of God--what do you mean when you say "God"?

By walking you through your error. Do you believe that humans arose through natural processes or by a creative act by God?

Point out the flaw in my logic, if you can.

 

[keepitreal]

It's time to update the Bible as creationism is clearly wrong. We should replace the clearly made up fairly tale with the theory of Evolution.

God can be said to have developed evolution as his tool to make life on earth and to make his pride in joy humanity through it. The Bible needs to explain that the earth came together because god was a master of math and physics!!! He used his knowledge to put things together...

God didn't want his pride in joy to eat the apple of the tree of knowledge as he didn't want us to have this ability! But we did it anyways and became what we're today!!! Sea level raised as the ice age ended caused a great flood around 10 thousand years ago ending many a coastal city...People had to go to higher ground.

People warred before this great ice age ending sea level rise and warned and separated once again afterwards into our own separate klans(nations)...Israel of course could remain an important part of this.

What I am saying is the bible needs to be modernized with the reality! Teaching something to our children that is clearly made up with stuff that goes against reality is bad for civilization.

You fucking turd...the reality we're living in now....
The reason everything is so fucked up and perverser by the day
is because we have removed God and His Word.

 

[cnelsen]

It's time to update the Bible as creationism is clearly wrong. We should replace the clearly made up fairly tale with the theory of Evolution.

God can be said to have developed evolution as his tool to make life on earth and to make his pride in joy humanity through it. The Bible needs to explain that the earth came together because god was a master of math and physics!!! He used his knowledge to put things together...

God didn't want his pride in joy to eat the apple of the tree of knowledge as he didn't want us to have this ability! But we did it anyways and became what we're today!!! Sea level raised as the ice age ended caused a great flood around 10 thousand years ago ending many a coastal city...People had to go to higher ground.

People warred before this great ice age ending sea level rise and warned and separated once again afterwards into our own separate klans(nations)...Israel of course could remain an important part of this.

What I am saying is the bible needs to be modernized with the reality! Teaching something to our children that is clearly made up with stuff that goes against reality is bad for civilization.

You fucking turd...the reality we're living in now....
The reason everything is so fucked up and perverser by the day
is because we have removed God and His Word.

Actually, here's why YOU are the fucking turd.

You say: We have removed God so things are perverse.

I say: By your statement you posit a previous condition wherein God had not yet been removed by us. And since "things" become more perverse with the removal of God, we can infer that when God was present, things were less perverse. But the removal of God was itself a perversity, was it not, and the biggest perversity, in fact, it being responsible for all the subsequent perversities. So if God's presence reduces perversity, how could the greatest perversity occur when God was present?

You have no answer of course, so I will solve this paradox for you.

The paradox is a result of your primitive conception of God and His Word. There is no "His Word" just like there is no magic science rock. The Bible is just a book. A regular book. There are no such things as magic books.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

God's word doesn't evolve, moron

You think the Bible you read is the exact same transcript word for word that was written some 1500 years ago?

 

[yiostheoy]

God's word doesn't evolve, moron

You think the Bible you read is the exact same transcript word for word that was written some 1500 years ago?

There are many Protestants and Catholics who believe the Bible was written by the Hand Of God reaching down from Heaven with quill and ink in English.

 

[yiostheoy]

You fucking turd...the reality we're living in now....
The reason everything is so fucked up and perverser by the day
is because we have removed God and His Word.

Wash your mouth out with soap.

 

[yiostheoy]

It's time to update the Bible as creationism is clearly wrong. We should replace the clearly made up fairly tale with the theory of Evolution.

God can be said to have developed evolution as his tool to make life on earth and to make his pride in joy humanity through it. The Bible needs to explain that the earth came together because god was a master of math and physics!!! He used his knowledge to put things together...

God didn't want his pride in joy to eat the apple of the tree of knowledge as he didn't want us to have this ability! But we did it anyways and became what we're today!!! Sea level raised as the ice age ended caused a great flood around 10 thousand years ago ending many a coastal city...People had to go to higher ground.

People warred before this great ice age ending sea level rise and warned and separated once again afterwards into our own separate klans(nations)...Israel of course could remain an important part of this.

What I am saying is the bible needs to be modernized with the reality! Teaching something to our children that is clearly made up with stuff that goes against reality is bad for civilization.

Dear Lord...it's a story. The Biblical writers were trying to spin an already familiar tale to their benifit. It doesn't need to be "changed". That's just absurd.
1) The creation story is actually very good literature. Also, depending on how you look at it, I guess you could interpret "let there be light" as the Big Bang.
2) Well...you're half right about the Noah stuff. During the last Ice Age, ocean levels rose and flooded what is now the Persian Gulf, or "Eden". To the people who lived there, the flood indeed consume their entire world and everyone they knew. When they reached dry land, they propagated that tale to the people they knew. That's why just about all of the Mesopotamian cultures have a flood story.


Are you suggesting we shouldn't let our children read Dr. Seuss? That's clearly against reality and yet it is highly reccommended.

Correct.

The significant authors were Moses, Samuel, Ezra, and Nehemiah for the O.T., and Luke, Paul, and John for the N.T.

They were all politically motivated in some major way.

This does not detract from the ultimate validity of JHVH and of Jesus, however it does result in a lot of exaggeration.

 

[Avatar4321]

I disagree. We need to actually live the bible. Not change it.

When was the last time you studied the bible? When was the last time you sought God? Or experimented on applying the doctrine of Christ in your life?

God can transform and magnify our lives if we will let Him.

 

[cnelsen]

It's time to update the Bible as creationism is clearly wrong. We should replace the clearly made up fairly tale with the theory of Evolution.

God can be said to have developed evolution as his tool to make life on earth and to make his pride in joy humanity through it. The Bible needs to explain that the earth came together because god was a master of math and physics!!! He used his knowledge to put things together...

God didn't want his pride in joy to eat the apple of the tree of knowledge as he didn't want us to have this ability! But we did it anyways and became what we're today!!! Sea level raised as the ice age ended caused a great flood around 10 thousand years ago ending many a coastal city...People had to go to higher ground.

People warred before this great ice age ending sea level rise and warned and separated once again afterwards into our own separate klans(nations)...Israel of course could remain an important part of this.

What I am saying is the bible needs to be modernized with the reality! Teaching something to our children that is clearly made up with stuff that goes against reality is bad for civilization.

Dear Lord...it's a story. The Biblical writers were trying to spin an already familiar tale to their benifit. It doesn't need to be "changed". That's just absurd.
1) The creation story is actually very good literature. Also, depending on how you look at it, I guess you could interpret "let there be light" as the Big Bang.
2) Well...you're half right about the Noah stuff. During the last Ice Age, ocean levels rose and flooded what is now the Persian Gulf, or "Eden". To the people who lived there, the flood indeed consume their entire world and everyone they knew. When they reached dry land, they propagated that tale to the people they knew. That's why just about all of the Mesopotamian cultures have a flood story.


Are you suggesting we shouldn't let our children read Dr. Seuss? That's clearly against reality and yet it is highly reccommended.

Correct.

The significant authors were Moses, Samuel, Ezra, and Nehemiah for the O.T., and Luke, Paul, and John for the N.T.

They were all politically motivated in some major way.

This does not detract from the ultimate validity of JHVH and of Jesus, however it does result in a lot of exaggeration.

Be honest. Was Jonah really just a cad who had to come up with a story for his somewhat credulous wife to account for a three-day bender he went on with a couple of hot strippers from Ninevah?

 

[keepitreal]

I can not wait to get off from work ^

 

[ding]

Pre-destined? Of course I can dispute that.

And how will you do that exactly?

"beings that know and create were pre-destined to eventually arise"
Your argument is circular in that the conclusion is contained in the premise. Had knowers not arisen there wouldn't be anyone to know about it, so it didn't "happen". You are using the fact of your question to prove its necessity. Further, your statement "the moment time came into existence" annihilates itself by virtue of there being no "moment" available for time to come into being if time doesn't exist.

The mistake religious primitives make is failing to assign religion its proper sphere. There is no a priori requirement that the question of the birth of the universe is a religious question. It might be. It might not be. But to assert a religious dogma upfront about it and then spend all your time teleologically trying to fit the empirical world into your dogma is counterproductive and self-defeating.

No offense, but your logic is extremely flawed. Do you believe that humans arose through natural processes or by a creative act by God?

How are you going to say my logic is flawed without saying how it is flawed? As for the creative act of God--what do you mean when you say "God"?

By walking you through your error. Do you believe that humans arose through natural processes or by a creative act by God?

Point out the flaw in my logic, if you can.

You just proved it for me, lol.