Freethought & Rationalism Archive

David Henson · 01-28-2009, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schneibster

First and foremost, they'd be "inquads." Or whatever the correct latin thingie is.

Wow! I don't know what to say ...

David Henson · 01-28-2009, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Elphick

It seems you got the idea to start this thread from an article at Answers in Genesis, posted January 26.

I don't know if I answered this, but I have never been to Answers in Genesis. I never do online research.

WVIncagold · 01-28-2009, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DLH

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

If only you guys were backstage when all these restrictions were made up, you might have a lot less respect for them. Probably these were done to maintain the power of the priesthood in addition to whatever social function they had.

You people know almost absolutely nothing about the Bible, don't you?

What do you mean "you people!?"

Nero's Boot · 01-28-2009, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DLH

Quote:

Originally Posted by lpetrich

I shouldn't have to try to figure such things out. If the Bible was written so obscurely that one can't figure out what many of its words mean, then it is a poor candidate for a universal message.

Oh! I see! Its God's fault. Never heard that one before, that is impressive. Those Bronze age goat herders were clever little rascals, eh?

No no, DLH; it's never YHWH's fault. No matter what he does, no matter how badly he screws up, no matter how utterly absurd and unscientific and inaccurate his scripture is, it's never his fault.

--I've said it before, I'll say it again: That is one sweet con YHWH has going on NB

WCH · 01-28-2009, 12:31 PM

No science to see here... BC&H can have it.

bacht · 01-28-2009, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WCH

No science to see here... BC&H can have it.

gee thanks...

David Henson · 01-28-2009, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bacht

Quote:

Originally Posted by WCH

No science to see here... BC&H can have it.

gee thanks...

If I would have posted it here they would have moved it over there. It is their way of discouraging and sort of regaining that control they don't have the guts or sense to posses in the real world.

Toto · 01-28-2009, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DLH

Quote:

Originally Posted by bacht

gee thanks...

If I would have posted it here they would have moved it over there. It is their way of discouraging and sort of regaining that control they don't have the guts or sense to posses in the real world.

Nope. I think if you search this forum, you will find a variety of threads on this sort of argument - e.g. here.

Mike Elphick · 01-29-2009, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DLH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Elphick

It seems you got the idea to start this thread from an article at Answers in Genesis, posted January 26.

I don't know if I answered this, but I have never been to Answers in Genesis.

In which case I apologise, but it looked more than just coincidence...

Quote:

I never do online research.

What a waste of a fantastic resource.

Analyst · 01-29-2009, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by premjan

If only you guys were backstage when all these restrictions were made up, you might have a lot less respect for them. Probably these were done to maintain the power of the priesthood in addition to whatever social function they had.

"Those who like the law or sausages should never watch either being made".

This seems like the worst combination of both!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-28-2009, 12:31 PM	#25
WCH Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Toronto Posts: 6,290	No science to see here... BC&H can have it.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.