FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-23-2004, 06:50 AM   #11
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 117
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tentmaker
So which translation is the one that God got it right in? Tell me which one you believe is the infallible "word of God" and I'll show you a dozen quick places relating to foudational doctrines in which other major translations differ. You obviously haven't spent too much time comparing translations or studying Hebrew and Greek Texts. You're one of those who swallow every lie your preacher passes on. Been there, done that. But no more. Hope you wise up too. So what's your brew, er Bible translation?
youve GOT to be kidding me pal
I use like 18 translations and compare them ALL.
And they ALL say Jesus taught hell. (unless youve some foreign translation Ive not heard of)

please dont try to smokescreen to make it look like Im unstudied here, ok?
Present your PROOF or kindly move on.
And I dont go to and preacher, sorry to disapoint you.

Do yourself a favor.
When you can show PROOF that Jesus didnt teach hell, then by all means, Im all ears.....till then youll have to deal with the texts
Follower of Christ is offline  
Old 11-23-2004, 07:42 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: On the path of evolution
Posts: 577
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel
You should check out this article. It might change your perspective on hell.
From the page
Quote:
The Bible describes hell primarily in relational terms--it is 'away from' God. Therefore, it involves banishment from his presence, his purposes, and his followers
Is that a promise? Woohoo! :Cheeky:

Sorry for derailing. I will now go stand in a corner in shame.
Chamaeleon is offline  
Old 11-23-2004, 07:50 AM   #13
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,077
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Follower of Christ
.....till then youll have to deal with the texts
And both of you have to deal with the fact that there are no complete texts whatsoever of the New Testament dated within 200 years of the suggested dates of the alleged existence of Jesus. Check any number of threads over in BC&H for the facts.

We've all heard the ' I was an atheist for {insert large number here} years until {God, Jesus, Allah, other unsubstantiated deity} personally revealed itself to me' claim. Nobody believes it but you.
Sparrow is offline  
Old 11-23-2004, 07:53 AM   #14
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Indianaplolis
Posts: 4,998
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Follower of Christ
Wow.
Ive no intention of reading all that, but was the guy pushing universalism ?

If so, it blows my mind how much explaination has to be used in order to do away with what Jesus actaully said.
A trait common to all xian doctrine.
Jedi Mind Trick is offline  
Old 11-23-2004, 08:01 PM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 35
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tentmaker
So which translation is the one that
God got it right in?
Tell me which one you believe is the infallible "word of God"
If you mean the Bible translation, I take all of them, it is only
translation.

Quote:
and I'll show you a dozen quick places relating to
foudational doctrines in which other major translations differ.
Thankyou, I do envy your kind always, this is what I am really lacking,
but I only look at the meaning of it. Only a little bit though what I can
use in life, the rest maybe next time God willing.

Quote:
You obviously haven't spent too much time
comparing translations or studying Hebrew and Greek Texts.
You right I don't, once I understand it than I use it.

Quote:
You're one of those who swallow every lie your preacher
passes on. Been there, done that. But no more.
Hope you wise up too.
I forgive them if they are wrong because when they did/do it
they believe it was either right or acceptable way to do it, I can't
blame others as they only following certain ways that they know.
Beside God uses different way in judging them, they are responsible
for their own action, I can't judge them, I have no right to do so.

Quote:
So what's your brew, er Bible translation?
I have few but I use KJV, but translation is meaningless to me to be
honest, I am not very picky with that. I just look at the meanings,
I think I pick up what Jesus (AS) meant.
Btw I was born from muslim family but I don't see christians as
outsider, we never do that. The Qur'an treats christians and jews as
the people of book with respect, and God knows who are others.
We are as muslim men allow to marry jews or christians, it tell a lot of
words, a picture is worth thousand words they say.

Peace to you.
smithy is offline  
Old 11-23-2004, 09:48 PM   #16
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 35
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smithy
If you mean the Bible translation, I take all of them, it is only
translation.
Err moderator I think I made a blunder here, I replied tentmaker (Gary)
private post to Follower of Christ, sorry for that and please delete
this #1992519/ #15 , thanks.

But wait a minute, No no way I am alaways right I will prove it right
here, yap tentmaker was wrong.

1.This forum is public property.
Yes anyone can jump in and join the club. One point for me.

2.Personal addressing must be done in private.
Right, I think the Judge will nod me on this.

3.The moderator act nothing, that means my post is approved.
As you can see, the internet old dog is hard to kill.

4.
There is not a single objection from any poster.
The last nail in the coffin for tentmaker if he dare to make a protest.
But there is one more, it is weak but confincing.

5.I am a muslim and he is christian and we are at war at the forum.
Of course I will quote any verse where the Judge probably never check it.
Pretty weak but it's ok.

Right, now can you see who you are dealing with?

"Once a man do lie, he need ten more lies to make
the first lie sound like the truth
"
and I am not going to do that.

Sorry tentmaker I did not see that.

Now I am relief.
smithy is offline  
Old 11-23-2004, 10:34 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Posts: 619
Default Never have so many said so much about so little!!!

and this goes for this thread AND all other discussions on any specific christian myth...

"You Cain't Pray a lie"
Mark Twain in Huckleberry Finn
LeeBuhrul is offline  
Old 11-24-2004, 12:44 PM   #18
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bli Bli
Posts: 3,135
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Follower of Christ
Wow.
Ive no intention of reading all that, but was the guy pushing universalism ?

If so, it blows my mind how much explaination has to be used in order to do away with what Jesus actaully said.
Hmmm..if universlaism was not accepted almost across the board by the early church then why would the following be true?

Quote:
"In the first five or six centuries of Christianity there were six theological schools, of which four (Alexandria, Antioch, Caesarea, and Edessa, or Nisibis) were Universalist, one (Ephesus) accepted conditional immortality; one (Carthage or Rome) taught endless punishment of the wicked. Other theological schools are mentioned as founded by Universalists, but their actual doctrine on this subject is not known."

"The Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge"
by Schaff-Herzog, 1908, volume 12, page 96
judge is offline  
Old 11-24-2004, 01:04 PM   #19
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Tucson, Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,242
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Follower of Christ
<snip hellfire>
Whoa. You seem positively excited. Did you experience a little woody from posting that. The concept of us atheists burning gets you going, does it?
Jeremy Pallant is offline  
Old 11-24-2004, 01:56 PM   #20
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 220
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by judge
Hmmm..if universlaism was not accepted almost across the board by the early church then why would the following be true?
Judge, with the exception of Carthage, the schools from that excerpt all belonged to the Eastern Church. You've missed a key sentence from immediately prior to your quote:
Quote:
In the West [universalism] had fewer adherents and was never accepted by the Church at large.
So universalism was accepted almost "across the board" in the East, but never in the West; and thus never across the board in the early church in general.
Notsri is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:15 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.