Does the Pope know what he's talking about?
-
RichardM1 wrote:
I will take your word on both sides of that statement
Don't get your panties bunched, I'm just pointing out that I have passed puberty (with flying colors) and he seems to have gone directly from being a preteen to menopause without passing anything but gallstones.
RichardM1 wrote:
Faith is the belief in a deity, an internal thing that may have external manifestations.
Okay, I got you: deism vs theism. I realise you were brought up in the One True Church, but it's my impression that modern Catholic Theology accepts the possibility that there are other paths to Heaven and other foods to eat on Friday, as well.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
I realise you were brought up in the One True Church,
No. I was brought up Catholic. Now I'm non-denominational Evangelical Christian. There is no fanatic like a convert. :laugh:
Oakman wrote:
Okay, I got you: deism vs theism.
More like thought life vs ritual, internal vs external, personal vs institutional.
Oakman wrote:
gallstones
Is that what we call BS now?
Silver member by constant and unflinching longevity.
-
RichardM1 wrote:
therefore the Bible is flawed
Don't put words in my mouth. I said it was ghostwritten and I think there's more evidence - some of it internal - than your dealing with, but even if Mark wrote it, he was a man, he had an agenda, he had a memory that wasn't perfect and he put his shoes on, one foot at a time. In otherwords it's flawed because it is manmade. Do you mean Aramaic and Attic Greek? You are a true scholar.
RichardM1 wrote:
I know people who KNOW the KJ (as originally dictated by God translated) is what God meant
Well given that there's textual evidence to suggest that Shakespeare wrote the words for the final adaptation - which is what it really is - I'm will to grant the chance of divine inspiration, if not guidance. His words will outlast every authentic translation written since.
RichardM1 wrote:
I believe that is a description of an absolute truth in our universe.
Absolute truth would be, I believe, as deadly as absolute zero.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
RichardM1 wrote: therefore the Bible is flawed Don't put words in my mouth.
I didn't I was talking about arguments I had heard from people.
Oakman wrote:
In otherwords it's flawed
Stop putting words in your mouth ;P
Oakman wrote:
he was a man, he had an agenda, he had a memory that wasn't perfect and he put his shoes on, one foot at a time
I figure if God is able to create the Universe, has a detailed understanding of the application of quantum mechanics at all levels, has already figured out Grand Unification, set the the whole process in motion that lead to Christ coming at the right time, a minor thing like having people write what He wants them to, when He wants them to, is no big deal. Same with translations, they are as correct as God wants them to be - I know some are wrong, and I check things out, but I have faith that God is doing things the way He wants.
Oakman wrote:
You are a true scholar.
No, but I've seen one on TV. OT was written in Hebrew, with just a few Aramaic chapters in the whole thing. NT in mainly Greek, with just a touch of Aramaic, but I use the Greek translations of the Aramaic. (except things like "Abba - Father").
Oakman wrote:
Absolute truth would be, I believe, as deadly as absolute zero.
Absolutely certain of that, are we?
Silver member by constant and unflinching longevity.
-
Oakman wrote:
RichardM1 wrote: therefore the Bible is flawed Don't put words in my mouth.
I didn't I was talking about arguments I had heard from people.
Oakman wrote:
In otherwords it's flawed
Stop putting words in your mouth ;P
Oakman wrote:
he was a man, he had an agenda, he had a memory that wasn't perfect and he put his shoes on, one foot at a time
I figure if God is able to create the Universe, has a detailed understanding of the application of quantum mechanics at all levels, has already figured out Grand Unification, set the the whole process in motion that lead to Christ coming at the right time, a minor thing like having people write what He wants them to, when He wants them to, is no big deal. Same with translations, they are as correct as God wants them to be - I know some are wrong, and I check things out, but I have faith that God is doing things the way He wants.
Oakman wrote:
You are a true scholar.
No, but I've seen one on TV. OT was written in Hebrew, with just a few Aramaic chapters in the whole thing. NT in mainly Greek, with just a touch of Aramaic, but I use the Greek translations of the Aramaic. (except things like "Abba - Father").
Oakman wrote:
Absolute truth would be, I believe, as deadly as absolute zero.
Absolutely certain of that, are we?
Silver member by constant and unflinching longevity.
RichardM1 wrote:
having people write what He wants them to, when He wants them to, is no big deal.
That's certainly logical, though it took you awhile to list your a priori. But just because it's internally consistent, doesn't mean it reflects or explains the universe. Doesn't mean it doesn't, of course, just that it all has to be taken on belief. The Wiccans "Summerland" is equally consistant and logical, too - and requires a number of a priori. I've sometimes wondered if the LDS church's theology falls apart if you don't believe Christ became a Flying Serpent in South America. That's the problem with logical constructs.
RichardM1 wrote:
Absolutely certain of that, are we?
Closest approximation is as far as I go ever with being certain, In this case I don't think there's enough evidence to use the word at all. Nonetheless I liked the phrase.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
RichardM1 wrote:
having people write what He wants them to, when He wants them to, is no big deal.
That's certainly logical, though it took you awhile to list your a priori. But just because it's internally consistent, doesn't mean it reflects or explains the universe. Doesn't mean it doesn't, of course, just that it all has to be taken on belief. The Wiccans "Summerland" is equally consistant and logical, too - and requires a number of a priori. I've sometimes wondered if the LDS church's theology falls apart if you don't believe Christ became a Flying Serpent in South America. That's the problem with logical constructs.
RichardM1 wrote:
Absolutely certain of that, are we?
Closest approximation is as far as I go ever with being certain, In this case I don't think there's enough evidence to use the word at all. Nonetheless I liked the phrase.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Oakman wrote:
Closest approximation is as far as I go ever with being certain, In this case I don't think there's enough evidence to use the word at all. Nonetheless I liked the phrase.
I grant you, you said "I believe" to qualify the statement :)
Oakman wrote:
though it took you awhile to list your a priori.
First logical place. We only got on Bible authenticity in the round before this. As far as internal consistency, I can't talk to Wiccan beliefs, but there are hard revisions in the LDS cannon that lead one to question its authority, and major disagreements between the OT/NT and the Mormon specific books. Internal consistency is not as easy as it looks. Now if you talk FSM, it takes it to an art form. edit Nice conversation, I appreciate it. Have a good weekend. /edit
Silver member by constant and unflinching longevity.