Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
"Scripture" is God's word to us in written form.Nathan Poe said:and what exactly is "Scripture"?
No comment.Jase said:Well, someone here can correct me if i'm wrong, but if he did say that, is he wrong as well? He is a Saint afterall and one of Christianity's most devout followers.
Not exactly, but close.Jase said:Wasn't it St. Augustine who said that if the Bible disagrees with science, the Bible is being misinterpreted?
Especially the last, bolded part is important."It not infrequently happens that something about the earth, about the sky, about other elements of this world, about the motion and rotation or even the magnitude and distances of the stars, about definite eclipses of the sun and moon, about the passage of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, of fruits, of stones, and of other such things, may be known with the greatest certainty by reasoning or by experience, even by one who is not a Christian. It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are. In view of this and in keeping it in mind constantly while dealing with the book of Genesis, I have, insofar as I was able, explained in detail and set forth for consideration the meanings of obscure passages, taking care not to affirm rashly some one meaning to the prejudice of another and perhaps better explanation." (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 1:19–20, Chapt. 19 [AD 408]) "With the scriptures it is a matter of treating about the faith. For that reason, as I have noted repeatedly, if anyone, not understanding the mode of divine eloquence, should find something about these matters [about the physical universe] in our books, or hear of the same from those books, of such a kind that it seems to be at variance with the perceptions of his own rational faculties, let him believe that these other things are in no way necessary to the admonitions or accounts or predictions of the scriptures. In short, it must be said that our authors knew the truth about the nature of the skies, but it was not the intention of the Spirit of God, who spoke through them, to teach men anything that would not be of use to them for their salvation." (ibid, 2:9)
I've got the idea that knowing anything about the history of the book you are using as your holy book seems to be considered a sin by a growing number of conservative christians.rmwilliamsll said:It is a specific line of translations beginning with the autographs --- interfacing in the AV96 translation --- and continuing from there thru the Gothic to the English, with the King James as the final version.
Gothic???
60% of the KJV is directly from the Genevan Bible. There is no relationship of the Gothic translation of Ulfilas to any of the texts that either the Genevan Bible translators used or The KJV translators used. where does this stuff come from? is there a little pixie going to conservative churches and leaving tracts on the tables?
Not quite.AV1611VET said:"Scripture" is God's word to us in written form.
Yes, Gothic.rmwilliamsll said:It is a specific line of translations beginning with the autographs --- interfacing in the AV96 translation --- and continuing from there thru the Gothic to the English, with the King James as the final version.
Gothic???
60% of the KJV is directly from the Genevan Bible. There is no relationship of the Gothic translation of Ulfilas to any of the texts that either the Genevan Bible translators used or The KJV translators used. where does this stuff come from? is there a little pixie going to conservative churches and leaving tracts on the tables?
btw.
what is this AV96 translation?
The early church used the LXX and the Greek writings that became the NT until the rise of Latin with the Papacy in Rome(mid to late 4thC), and then it was Jerome's Vulgate.
There is a thread about this topic in GA debate, where AV essentially says the Hebrew scriptures are worthless cause he can't read them. The KJV is the supreme authority.Tomk80 said:I've got the idea that knowing anything about the history of the book you are using as your holy book seems to be considered a sin by a growing number of conservative christians.
What is it with their obsession over the KJV 1611 edition anyway? I mean, newer translations have been made that follow the original jewish and greek much closer than the KJV 1611 version does. Is it the semi-archaic language that is used that gives it some air of authority (same in the Netherlands by the way, where people swear by the 'Staten vertaling'. Doesn't matter it is less accurate and harder to understand then newer versions. It just sounds so much more 'official'.)
Tell that to the prophets of Baal, whom I sure would love to have their meeting with Elijah over again.Beastt said:Not quite.
Scripture is the writing of men with the claim that it was inspired by God. This is the same claim for pretty much every bible written and every god for which a bible has been written.
Pharaoh had the same attitude toward Moses, and paid dearly for sticking to it.You choose to accept this claim for the Christian God and to deny it for all of the rest, including those of which you have no knowledge.
You can say this over and over if that pleases you, John, but the Bible does say the planet is flat. If you don't believe that, there are two things you can do to confirm it. First, find a glossary on geometry terms and look up the word "circle". You'll find that the word "circle" describes a two dimensional object -- flat -- which is circular at its perimeter.JohnR7 said:I know that you are a reasonably intelligent person. The Bible does not say that the planet is flat.
"Urban myths", John? Come now. It's rather difficult to categorize what the church itself taught for over 16-centuries as an "urban myth". If you had proclaimed that the Bible doesn't subscribe to geocentrism 500-years ago, your fellow Bible readers would be bringing marshmallows and hot dogs to a special gathering held in your honor. We could put your name beside that of Giordano Bruno, an Italian philosopher, born in 1548. Unfortunately for him, he subscribed to the Copernican configuration of the solar system and made his beliefs known. So your loving little church held a barbeque in his honor. He died among the flames, tied to a stake in 1600 after being tried and found guilty of heresy, for his anti-biblical beliefs.JohnR7 said:The Bible does not say that the earth is the center of the universe. And so on. INFIDELS try to claim the Bible says these things. They try to propitiate these urban myths to slander and discredit christianity.
Clearly, John, it's not a strawman argument. The church who believed the Bible to be the word of God, strongly defended the Bible's claim that the Earth was flat and stationary at the center of the universe. After 16-centuries, they still wouldn't accept the heliocentric configuration even when presented with the data, much as some today refuse to accept evolution, despite the data being conclusive.JohnR7 said:But all they are doing is knocking down their own strawman arguement.
All you present, John, is nay-saying. I have the history of the church, the events surrounding the eventual defeat of the geocentric world-view and the scripture of the Bible to back up my claims. You have nothing, save your own tenacious beliefs and denials; which is pretty much what we're used to seeing from you -- a lot of talk, zero support.JohnR7 said:Now, as a intelligent person I think that you can do better than this. I think you can set a higher standard of truth and creditability for yourself. But that is up to you if you want to deny the truth and lower yourself to using urban myths to defend your beliefs. Just do not try to put on a pretense that science is in any way associated with this sort of thing. This sort of slander would not even qualify as acceptable political science as far as I am concerned.
It's not an urban myth, John, it's well documented and confirmable history. You can call it a myth if that eases your worries about the true origin of the Bible. But you'll never defeat reality through denial.JohnR7 said:Everyone gets to set their own standard. But I sure would not want to be associated with a standard that is based on urban myths.
It's not a matter of lacking common ground. It's a matter of evidence. I can give you the scripture, show you the depictions based on the original Hebrew, give you the names, dates and fates surrounding the eventual acceptance of heliocentrism by the church and back up every word of it. You can offer nothing except your own need to believe otherwise.JohnR7 said:Ok, well, there is no reason for us to go on with this then. We are just to far apart on what we believe. There just isn't enough common ground.
That is exactly it. The evos chase people off and then they sit around and talk to themselves untell someone else comes along so they can chase them off. In some strange and unexplainable way they think that makes them a winner if people do not want to be around them.rmwilliamsll said:if it wasn't for people like him, we would be talking to ourselves, which is kind of boring and uninteresting. be thankful for his presence otherwise we would have to go to GA for our daily fix of controversial postings.
Let's call the Earth what Jesus called it, shall we?Beastt said:It's not an urban myth, John, it's well documented and confirmable history. You can call it a myth if that eases your worries about the true origin of the Bible. But you'll never defeat reality through denial.
Either that, or I believe the Septuagint is a fake.rmwilliamsll said:i'm getting less and less certain that we even inhabit the same world. perhaps you are a alien on another planet that has monitored electronic communication from earth for the last 50 years and therefore have a substantially truncated understanding of human history.
Ok, lets take a look at your evidence.It's a matter of evidence.
That is not what the Bible is talking about. Circle today would be translated orbit. A guard use to circle around the camp or the city to keep a watch on things. I was a carpenter for 25 years, so I know all about geometry and circles. That is not what the Bible is talking about here. So I am sorry to say you do not have any evidence to back up what your saying. As Peter says:Beastt said:First, find a glossary on geometry terms and look up the word "circle". You'll find that the word "circle" describes a two dimensional object -- flat, which is circular at its perimeter.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?