[Someone mentions that man may have altered the bible. A piranha attack ensues...]
Pick a side.
God's word is pure and it says so. Whatever imperfect man has done with it is not the issue, if it is not perfect we have no way of knowing what to believe.
Belief cannot be based on experience, that's how we got mormonism and every other unbiblical pseudo christian system on the planet.
46 comments
God's word is pure and it says so.
And we know that it is the truth, because it's god's word, and we know it's God's word because it says so, and round and round the logic goes, where it stops, no-one knows.
if it is not perfect we have no way of knowing what to believe.
Then do SCIENCE, because IT WORKS.
Hate to break it to you, Sparky, but the Catholic church revised the bible several times throughout history even when it was the only Christian denomination before Protestantism came along and divided it up among thousands of different denominations all claiming to have the one true interpretation of the bible. Not only that, but the bible was made up by superstitious goat herders in the first place.
God's word is pure and it says so
image
if it is not perfect we have no way of knowing what to believe
Gravity is one of the biggest mysteries in all of science. We don't actually know how it works. That said, I'm not about to step off of any buildings because we know enough about gravity to know that's a a bad idea. Not having perfect knowledge doesn't mean we don't have any way of knowing anything.
Belief cannot be based on experience
So were you one of those kids that burned his hand on the stove and then stuck his hand back on the stove the next day?
A. "f it is not perfect we have no way of knowing what to believe."
1. Check bible for information regarding bats.
Yeah, because choosing which texts to include and hiding the rest doesn't count as 'editing to reflect my own beliefs', does it OnceWasLost?
The truth is, we do know the bible to be an extraordinarily incomplete text, due to the fact that people are still finding pieces of it. If you want to believe that something this half-assed is perfect, then humans in general must be utterly fucking godly.
Belief cannot be based on experience, that's how we got mormonism and every other unbiblical pseudo christian system on the planet.
You know, I should just take stock in the company that makes irony meters.
As a person who likes to study history, I find the Fundie apologetics for the bible to be amoungst my favorite of their outlandish views.
The funniest thing to me is that christianity is an old religion. There are in 2000 years you can get a LOT of analysis. Even non-catholics have to admit that with 1000 years of organized study you can develop pretty through analysis of a text.
Thats why 2 centuries ago people understood that the listed authors of the gospels were almost certiantly not the actual authors. Thats why 2 centuries ago people understood that the Gospels were the last part of the new testiment to be written and all the letters (except acts) came first.
The cardinals never denied that the collection of works that forms the bible was selected from a larger list of "inspired" works after nicaea.
The commite that put together the King James Bible never denied that they were putting together a poetic translation of latin texts. They certiantly didn't think they were "correcting" the texts.
Even bronze age hebrew peoples didn't believe that angels guided every penstroke of the authors of the old testiment. The pharasees and Sudacees both acknoledged that their texts could contain human flaws.
Basically, western civ should be mandatory in high schools because even a little understanding of history can totally make you see right through the craziest fundie.
"..we have no way of knowing what to believe". Your senses? Your brain? Your reason? Your experience? Working it out for yourself?
Also, if Christians really think the Bible is "perfect", why don't they do as the Muslims do with the Koran and only read it in the original languages? Surely even a translation is a sort of alteration and deviation from God's perfect unchangeable word?
Hey, Sparky, I've got an ancient book of my own, which insists that it's true and totally from God. It says you're a complete fucking idiot, and it's my religious duty to chuck rocks at your head. You believe that too, right?
"Belief cannot be based on experience, that's how we got mormonism and every other unbiblical pseudo christian system on the planet."
Well there goes another almost new irony meter, looks like this one took out most of the containment bunker as well. Sigh...time to get started stacking sandbags again.
image
"If you don't believe in God, you believe in nothing," part 54,000,000.
I would really like to find this silly taffy-head's pastor, and wallop him with a canoe paddle. It's not nice to take advantage of the simple.
By the way, OnceWasLost, your mother texted me. It says: u wrnt lost we ditched u.
"Whatever imperfect man has done with it is not the issue, if it is not perfect we have no way of knowing what to believe. "
So you might as well believe the Koran.
"
So my belief that the sun rises in the east based on experience isn't true?
I would be crucified if I were to even suggest this in my church, but: The Bible itself is NOT the Word of God...it CONTAINS the words of God, and the words of people, the words of demons, the words of angels, even the words of a donkey...and the Word of God is not entirely contained in the KJV Bible.
Belief cannot be based on experience
Wait what? WHAT? So you don't believe everything you see? Because you experienced it. But since "belief cannot be based on experience" (seriously, what?) you don't believe a thing that you see? Only what you read. Which by the way involves seeing.
@ VioletBeauregarde
The Bible itself is NOT the Word of God...it CONTAINS the words of God, and the words of people, the words of demons, the words of angels, even the words of a donkey...and the Word of God is not entirely contained in the KJV Bible.
I'd be interested to hear the apologetics behind your claims. They could lead the way to a new and potentially minable fundie quote deposit.
no no no, you're doing it wrong. what you're supposed to say is that, in all likelihood, the bible has been altered, but since all things happen according to god's divine plan, then any alterations actually made the bible exactly perfect for that time, where the bible before that alteration wouldn't've been perfect. after all, it is the *living* word of god.
"God's word is pure and it says so. Whatever imperfect man has done with it is not the issue, if it is not perfect we have no way of knowing what to believe "
If. [/Spartan Laconic Wit]
In my experience - especially reading the Bible cover-to-cover in my teens - 'belief' is bullshit that has absolutely no right to exist in the mindsets of normal, sane people:
'A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything '
-Friedrich Nietzsche
I only accept facts , based on hard, solid, physical evidence. Your so-called 'God's Word'. Pics, or it didn't happen.
You have no way of knowing. Period . Why? The Bible: It does the thinking for you.
How do you yourself know it's 'perfect', Always IsLost? Like I say: If you don't know it is, yet I know for a fact it's the worst-written piece of BS fiction ever conceived, and I've read some real doozies in my time; even the fetid sewage dredged up by the 10,000th-rate hack that was L. Ron Hubbard - "Battlefield Earth" - is like Arthur C. Clarke's & Isaac Asimov's best in comparison
Unbiblical except for it all being based on the same texts, principles, and faith. BTW Mormons are also a sect of Christianity, and like every other bunch of jackasses that praise the lawd they think they're the only 'true' Christians.
"if it is not perfect we have no way of knowing what to believe." image
That is what the Bible says, yes. But I imagine you probably only read the KJV, which -- even if everything you say is true -- is an imperfect translation. If you were truly devoted to learning exactly what God's word says, you would learn Biblical Hebrew, Aramaic, and Koine Greek.
Consider Romans 5:2
Apart from the fact it's clearly nonsense (no-one ever found 'glory in tribulations') the same word in the Greek original is translated as 'rejoyce' in one sentence and 'glory' in rthe other. How can that be 'perfect'?
The KJV used to include Apocrypha such as the Book of Enoch. The Epistle of Jude still quotes Enoch so why's it no longer included? How can that be 'perfect'?
The truth told, KJV isn't 'perfect' at all, it's a dog's breakfast translation of a half-random collection of Greek, Hebrew and Latin folk-tales into seventeenth-century English, all done with an ulterior motive of keeping the Puritans happy*. There's no reason to get fetishistic about it, that'd be dangerously close to bibliolatry.
*A waste of time in itself as the Puritan's God didn't approve of happiness, much as the Raptureites are determined to see only the worst of everything. I swear, you could show the likes of OnceWasLost a peacock and they'd only see its ugly feet.
Even if God's word claims it's pure, how can you verify those claims?
If I were to write a holy book for an as-yet-unnamed deity, and in that book write that the deity spoke and proclaimed that this is its divine word, pure and incorruptible, would that make it true? Or would that just be a book I, a mortal man, went ahead and wrote with my own hand?
"God's word is pure and it says so."
- And yet, God's word gives two conflicting days on which the crucifixion took place.
- Actually, it kind of is.
- How about believing in what gets tangible results?
- Have you ever read the Book of Acts (hint: its in the bible)? Paul's experience is what turned him from a persecutor of Christians into their most enthusiastic missionary.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
