Subject:
|
Re: POV-RAY orange color
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 20 Aug 1999 14:31:00 GMT
|
Reply-To:
|
LPIENIAZEK@NOVERA.spamcakeCOM
|
Viewed:
|
1220 times
|
| |
|
|
John Neal wrote:
> Yes, of course it is the work of the body of believers who carry on the message
> (Gospel). The key is that the Gospel has remained intact for two millennia and
> not degenerated into garbage.
That's certainly a matter of interpretation. Were I more than normally
interested in baiting you I'd say GIGO, but I won't. I will merely say
that the Bible is not an easy read and that scholars do a great deal of
debating about what errors various translators introduced, so I think
it's a stretch to claim it as "intact".
I'll ask again. What part of the Bible is allegorical and what part is
literal? How is the unschooled reader to know the difference? Can't
really apply a reasonableness test, because almost nothing it in (even
the parts that I think you are claiming are essentially or completely
true) is amenable to reason, explanation, or the scientific method.
> This is because God's
> Spirit is still active today, guiding and influencing.
Are you stating an opinion here or a verifiable fact? If the latter,
could you provide some proof, please?
--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
lugnet.
NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: POV-RAY orange color
|
| (...) Moot. Doesn't matter. Scholars *have* studied the Bible critically and have come up with many illuminating ideas, BUT it only takes you so far. How many times must I say that one *cannot* apply science to that which is untestable BY (...) (25 years ago, 21-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: POV-RAY orange color
|
| (...) I see your point. It wasn't my intention to try to add veracity by saying something like "that many people can't be wrong" I just meant that people still talk about 1 man who lived 2000 years ago and follow his message. Why? (...) Yes, of (...) (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
277 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
