It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: In4ormant
a reply to: DaathSader
YOU said it didn't stand up to scrutiny. I asked you to elaborate YOUR stated position. I didn't demand anything.
You seem to just enjoy denouncing religion.
originally posted by: DaathSader
originally posted by: In4ormant
originally posted by: DaathSader
originally posted by: In4ormant
originally posted by: forthelove
a reply to: TerryMcGuire
And which version is supposed to be correct? That is my point, it is all a crock.
If you believe that then why are you wasting your time with it?
Are you just wanting to belittle the beliefs of others?
You don't like free speech?
I don't find what the op is doing to be belittling anyone.
Is pointing out something contradictory in a religion that swears it is the one true religion on earth belittling?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof and the proof is towards the negative for Christianity so they hate scrutiny because they know it doesn't add up.
Not the op's fault. You are even trying to belittle someone FOR belittling someone and don't even notice how silly it is to do such a thing with such a superior attitude.
lol.
Who is they?
What scrutiny?
I am a Christian and not sure why you believe I have to provide proof of anything.
Scrutiny is when you examine something to determine if it is true. When you scrutinize Christianity from an unbiased perspective it doesn't stand up (to scrutiny).
I didn't ask you to prove anything I am saying that the proof doesn't exist.
I guarantee you would ask me to prove how it ISN'T true if I didn't type this though.
THEY always do (Christians), and offer as proof a book that has no corroboration.
And many contradictions.
originally posted by: DaathSader
originally posted by: Plotus
Your purpose to come here was never for illumination but to sew division and mock wasn't it now. I can scarcely see any other reason for your OP. Being the author of "All religion is fake" bears witness of your disdain of God or religion. I suggest you proclaim any answer you want and head on down the road a Victor.
Why so hostile? It is a legitimate contradiction and if it is making you mad enough to respond with accusations my guess is that you don't understand and are equally confused about the contradiction and even more mad that you can't properly answer.
originally posted by: DaathSader
a reply to: ChesterJohn
Out of curiosity, how does a person "rightly divide the word of truth."
And who commanded that? I have never heard of this before.
Please explain what dividing the word of truth means.
And who gets what part of the word of truth when it is divided?
originally posted by: DaathSader
a reply to: schuyler
I actually do have a great deal of knowledge of the contents in the Bible which is why I only take it as allegory, because the writers weren't writing history that was how people taught back then.
Mythology was something that united people and gave them incentive to learn and grow.
The trouble starts when people consider it history because it no longer makes sense in that form.
originally posted by: In4ormant
originally posted by: DaathSader
a reply to: ChesterJohn
Out of curiosity, how does a person "rightly divide the word of truth."
And who commanded that? I have never heard of this before.
Please explain what dividing the word of truth means.
And who gets what part of the word of truth when it is divided?
They have to explain those statements and you don't yours?
What set of rules are you playing by?
originally posted by: DaathSader
originally posted by: In4ormant
originally posted by: DaathSader
a reply to: ChesterJohn
Out of curiosity, how does a person "rightly divide the word of truth."
And who commanded that? I have never heard of this before.
Please explain what dividing the word of truth means.
And who gets what part of the word of truth when it is divided?
They have to explain those statements and you don't yours?
What set of rules are you playing by?
I already did explain you are just trying to bug me now. You have my answer already.
Rules? I am allergic.
originally posted by: In4ormant
originally posted by: DaathSader
a reply to: schuyler
I actually do have a great deal of knowledge of the contents in the Bible which is why I only take it as allegory, because the writers weren't writing history that was how people taught back then.
Mythology was something that united people and gave them incentive to learn and grow.
The trouble starts when people consider it history because it no longer makes sense in that form.
Why do you doubt they were writing history? Where did you get this information?
originally posted by: DaathSader
originally posted by: In4ormant
originally posted by: DaathSader
a reply to: schuyler
I actually do have a great deal of knowledge of the contents in the Bible which is why I only take it as allegory, because the writers weren't writing history that was how people taught back then.
Mythology was something that united people and gave them incentive to learn and grow.
The trouble starts when people consider it history because it no longer makes sense in that form.
Why do you doubt they were writing history? Where did you get this information?
I read the Bible. It's not history. Go to any library or book store and go to the history section.
No Bibles. Because religion is not history. There is one true history but thousands of religions. I doubt any of them are history.
originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: DaathSader
The way that God rightly divides about people groups 1Cor 10:32, by using the who, what, when, where, why, which and how questions. Historical context must be kept in its own context.
I guess God didn't get your memo that the race issue was solved already.
1 Corinthians 10:32 Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God: