DLH

Actually they considered the stepson, son-in-law, adopted son etc. to be the son. That is just the way they expressed it.

DLH

Actually the title god only implies mighty and or venerated. Not respect. The Bible refers to many gods that its writers and Jehovah himself had no respect for. Tammuz, Dagon, Baal, Ashtoreth, Idols ...

The English word Bible is from the Latin from the Greek biblia, meaning 'little books," which is derived from biblos, a word that describes the inner part of the papyrus plant which produced a primitive form of paper. The Phoenician city of Gebal, which was famous for its paper making was called by the Greek "Byblos."

Various writings, scrolls, books were called biblia. Jerome called the collection now commonly known as the Bible Bibliotheca Divina - the Divine Library.

Your attempt to show contempt actually only demonstrates your uninformed position. The bronze age Goat herders outsmarted you.

thentian

Okay! Maybe I ought to call on you to substantiate that, but I don´t think it´s worth anyone´s time, so I´ll concede on this one.

Cheers!

Reason

Russellite arrogance. Gotta love it!

DLH

You know ...

Often I hear the outspoken skeptic cry if it is inspired by God why couldn't he get it right. That is kind of, well, short sighted.

The Bible was dictated by God only in a sense, because much of it is people telling what happened as God oversees their writing. He allows people to give their own account of events they witnessed. The Gospels of Matthew, Luke, John and Mark are not the Gospel of God. This allows us to see their perspective, because no one sees everything the same. That isn't to say that they were not under inspiration when it was being written but to say they were allowed to give their personal witness. It is actually a good thing.

Most of the so called contradictions can be dispelled even to the satisfaction of most skeptics. Through careful consideration. Most of the actual inconsistancies and contradictions that are there have to do with numbers from the copying errors that can be discovered through ancient manuscripts. Through comparison if at the least, to acknowledge them.

DLH

Never heard of him.

But as for the Romans hanging Christ Jesus it was not a Roman cross, it was a Hebrew torture stake. Yeah.

Reason

I assume you mean the stauros, which is correct. So, Jeebus on a sick it is.

However, hanging malefactors on a stauros has its origins with the Phoenicians, from whom the Greeks and Romans borrowed the practice.

DLH

I have never and will never be a part of any organized religion. Not a Russellite, Jehovah's Witness or "Bible Student (Charles Taze Russell Branch)"

What ... uh ... what is "the good old pros ton theon argument?"

DLH

The Greek stauros and xylon, the Latin Crux. At Ezra 6:11 the Septuagint uses the word xylon which Paul also uses at Galatians 3:13. There can be no doubt that the Roman Cross, a phallic symbol, was not meant at Ezra 6:11. But only a stake like the Hebrews used. Stauros and crux can mean both cross or simple one piece upright stake.

The Cross was introduced into Christendom by the emporer Constantine.

Reason

Your argument style is similar, you cite many of the same references (e.g. Diaglott), deny the trinity, assert that Jeebus was "a god," etc., all of which is right out of the Russellite playbook. Ergo, my (presumably erroneous) assumption.

...kai o logos en pros ton theon... (...and the word was with the god...)