It's time to update the Bible

[ding]

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?

Be honest do you really believe that beings that know and create didn't arise as a result of natural processes which were controlled by the laws of nature which came into existence the moment space and time were created?

 

[Penelope]

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.

You may have, but I still live by the Christian philosophy , my morals were instilled from youth, hard to just turn them off.

 

[Penelope]

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.

Which part of the Bible do you want to live??

 

[Penelope]

I can not wait to get off from work ^

Wow, you have time to post on a message forum at work, seems to me you are stealing from your employer.

 

[cnelsen]

Dude, it is too early to do metaphysical battle with a sentence fielding three generations of subordinate reflexive clauses! I'll start with the grandson: on what do you base your assumption space and time were "created"? Aren't you just falling into the ol' anthropomorphism trap?

 

[cnelsen]

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.

Which part of the Bible do you want to live??

I wasn't asked, but I always thought it would be cool to have a friend who could turn water into wine. Good wine, at that.

 

[ding]

Dude, it is too early to do metaphysical battle with a sentence fielding three generations of subordinate reflexive clauses! I'll start with the grandson: on what do you base your assumption space and time were "created"? Aren't you just falling into the ol' anthropomorphism trap?

No. Let's start with you only have two choices; beings that know and create were created through a creative act of God or they arose through natural processes. Which one do you believe?

 

[cnelsen]

Dude, it is too early to do metaphysical battle with a sentence fielding three generations of subordinate reflexive clauses! I'll start with the grandson: on what do you base your assumption space and time were "created"? Aren't you just falling into the ol' anthropomorphism trap?

No. Let's start with you only have two choices; beings that know and create were created through a creative act of God or they arose through natural processes. Which one do you believe?

What do you mean when you say "God"? If you take the word to mean something like "Father in Heaven, Supreme Creator", then you are asking me whether I believe Our Creator created us. That is why I asked you to say what you mean by the word "God".

 

[ding]

Dude, it is too early to do metaphysical battle with a sentence fielding three generations of subordinate reflexive clauses! I'll start with the grandson: on what do you base your assumption space and time were "created"? Aren't you just falling into the ol' anthropomorphism trap?

No. Let's start with you only have two choices; beings that know and create were created through a creative act of God or they arose through natural processes. Which one do you believe?

What do you mean when you say "God"? If you take the word to mean something like "Father in Heaven, Supreme Creator", then you are asking me whether I believe Our Creator created us. That is why I asked you to say what you mean by the word "God".

Dodge all you want the question remains. There are only two choices. Which is it?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

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?

Did I say that? Why no I didn't. God's word as in law doesn't evolve. Good grief at times it's better to stay quiet...this would have been one of those times for you.

 

[cnelsen]

Dude, it is too early to do metaphysical battle with a sentence fielding three generations of subordinate reflexive clauses! I'll start with the grandson: on what do you base your assumption space and time were "created"? Aren't you just falling into the ol' anthropomorphism trap?

No. Let's start with you only have two choices; beings that know and create were created through a creative act of God or they arose through natural processes. Which one do you believe?

What do you mean when you say "God"? If you take the word to mean something like "Father in Heaven, Supreme Creator", then you are asking me whether I believe Our Creator created us. That is why I asked you to say what you mean by the word "God".

Dodge all you want the question remains. There are only two choices. Which is it?

Please. Who's dodging? You claim my logic is flawed, but won't say how. You pose a question and then limit the possible answers to two without saying why that number. On top of that, you specify what the two possible answers can be. But that still isn't enough. Between the two answers (to the biggest question there is) you've limited me to, when I ask you to define the terms, you refuse to do even that.

And I'm the one ducking the question? More likely you are ducking the answer.

You don't trust your own position enough to truly engage in an open and mutual search for understanding. Because of the primitive state of our religious understanding, the tactic probably mirrors your own internal thought process. Potentially very dangerous.

We need a religious revolution like we had a scientific revolution--shift the foundations, as it were. Here's one possible shift: perhaps the question of universal existence isn't a religious question at all.

 

[BreezeWood]

Dude, it is too early to do metaphysical battle with a sentence fielding three generations of subordinate reflexive clauses! I'll start with the grandson: on what do you base your assumption space and time were "created"? Aren't you just falling into the ol' anthropomorphism trap?

No. Let's start with you only have two choices; beings that know and create were created through a creative act of God or they arose through natural processes. Which one do you believe?

What do you mean when you say "God"? If you take the word to mean something like "Father in Heaven, Supreme Creator", then you are asking me whether I believe Our Creator created us. That is why I asked you to say what you mean by the word "God".

Dodge all you want the question remains. There are only two choices. Which is it?

Please. Who's dodging? You claim my logic is flawed, but won't say how. You pose a question and then limit the possible answers to two without saying why that number. On top of that, you specify what the two possible answers can be. But that still isn't enough. Between the two answers (to the biggest question there is) you've limited me to, when I ask you to define the terms, you refuse to do even that.

And I'm the one ducking the question? More likely you are ducking the answer.

You don't trust your own position enough to truly engage in an open and mutual search for understanding. Because of the primitive state of our religious understanding, the tactic probably mirrors your own internal thought process. Potentially very dangerous.

We need a religious revolution like we had a scientific revolution--shift the foundations, as it were. Here's one possible shift: perhaps the question of universal existence isn't a religious question at all.

.

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

We need a religious revolution like we had a scientific revolution--shift the foundations, as it were.

" The difficulty in determining the biblical canon is that the Bible does not give us a list of the books that belong in the Bible. Determining the canon was a process conducted first by Jewish rabbis and scholars and later by early Christians. Ultimately, it was God who decided what books belonged in the biblical canon. A book of Scripture belonged in the canon from the moment God inspired its writing. It was simply a matter of God’s convincing His human followers which books should be included in the Bible ".

^ quote is just a random search - How and when was the canon of the Bible put together?


... in the 4th century

I'm inspired by the Almighty to return their religion back to the spoken word as the path for acceptance to the Everlasting as its primary source than as a referral to a written document that has not fulfilled its primary purpose.

being canonized in the 4th century is not in their christian book (bible) and is therefore itself an aberration without annotation that precludes its authenticity and with proper disclosure, it being accepted at the time became legitimately an editable document for its duration once in concurrence as a continuing process.


the fact is Matthew has a legitimate claim whether fundamentalist christians like it or not.
.

 

[Brynmr]

You pose a question and then limit the possible answers to two without saying why that number.

I don't think there's another possibility other than the 2 choices presented. If you can think of another choice I'd like to hear it.

 

[Brynmr]

No. Let's start with you only have two choices; beings that know and create were created through a creative act of God or they arose through natural processes. Which one do you believe?

I'm going with the latter.

 

[cnelsen]

You pose a question and then limit the possible answers to two without saying why that number.

I don't think there's another possibility other than the 2 choices presented. If you can think of another choice I'd like to hear it.

Our existence could be explained by the circularity of time acting from a central ubiquity.

Think of it this way. Imagine you are a smart, intellectually curious person living in the 16th Century and for the the second time in your life you witness the ravages of an influenza epidemic. You gather information from far and wide and notice that both epidemics seemed to explode one day, gallop across the continent, then just as quickly disappear. Now, since neither you nor anyone else on the planet has ever considered the idea of germs, explaining this is tough. But something has to be causing it, though, and you notice that both epidemics occurred in the winter, and some research indicates historically that that's when they occur, and because the epidemics cover such wide distances so quickly you deduce they must come from someplace high up, or whatever (this is off the top of my head), and you determine that it must be true that warmth from the sun passing through ice in the atmosphere unlocks poisonous vapors that settle on the populations below, triggering influenza.

And say your theory was the only one anyone in the world had ever been able to come up with.

One day, you are arguing with your neighbor about the cause of flu epidemics and you say either my theory is correct or epidemics are caused by demons. Which do you believe. And your neighbor says, well define demons. And you say, no, those are your two choices. Knowing what we know now about germ theory, what is the most correct position your neighbor can take?

 

[ding]

Dude, it is too early to do metaphysical battle with a sentence fielding three generations of subordinate reflexive clauses! I'll start with the grandson: on what do you base your assumption space and time were "created"? Aren't you just falling into the ol' anthropomorphism trap?

No. Let's start with you only have two choices; beings that know and create were created through a creative act of God or they arose through natural processes. Which one do you believe?

What do you mean when you say "God"? If you take the word to mean something like "Father in Heaven, Supreme Creator", then you are asking me whether I believe Our Creator created us. That is why I asked you to say what you mean by the word "God".

Dodge all you want the question remains. There are only two choices. Which is it?

Please. Who's dodging? You claim my logic is flawed, but won't say how. You pose a question and then limit the possible answers to two without saying why that number. On top of that, you specify what the two possible answers can be. But that still isn't enough. Between the two answers (to the biggest question there is) you've limited me to, when I ask you to define the terms, you refuse to do even that.

And I'm the one ducking the question? More likely you are ducking the answer.

You don't trust your own position enough to truly engage in an open and mutual search for understanding. Because of the primitive state of our religious understanding, the tactic probably mirrors your own internal thought process. Potentially very dangerous.

We need a religious revolution like we had a scientific revolution--shift the foundations, as it were. Here's one possible shift: perhaps the question of universal existence isn't a religious question at all.

Then it's settled. You don't believe beings that know and create arose through natural processes. You believe in a creative act of God. Gotcha.

 

[keepitreal]

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.

God does not leave us, we leave Him
He gave us free choice and our choices have consequences.
Our reality is the result of the consequences of our choices

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.

If we lived our lives according to His Word,
how different things would be.
I know when I apply His Word to my life, I am better off
Believe what you will, I don't have to account for you.

The Bible isn't a fairy tale that needs an update.

 

[Weatherman2020]

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.

Can someone translate moonbat into English for us?

 

[Weatherman2020]

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.

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

Tell you what, get the muzzies to update the Koran, as killing infidels is clearly wrong, and then we'll work on the Bible.

Notice the anti-Christians never ever say anything negative about Islam.

 

[Ernie S.]

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.

Let's update Gone With the Wind, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and all of Shakespeare, while we're at it, you dunce.