Protestantism

» _Boanerges_ - “You’re Not Objective So Your Opinion Doesn’t Count”

In response to “You’re Not Objective So Your Opinion Doesn’t Count” posted by pink101:

The article is quite simplistic...

its basically revealing the intolerant mind.. which states, if you are not "objective" you opinion doesn't count...

Its fairly simple to toss aside bias - for what it really is...

Can people be objective when it comes to the Bible? I find this question to be one the most unintelligent questions asked... If I really need to explain why.. only proves the objective-less-ness of the person asking the question...

ponder it some....

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» pink101 - Bible As An Example of Darwinism

In response to "You're Not Objective So Your Opinion Doesn't Count" posted by _Boanerges_:
.
Can people be objective when it comes to the Bible? I find this question to be one the most unintelligent questions asked... If I really need to explain why.. only proves the objective-less-ness of the person asking the question...
.
It appears then, that you can be objective in any discussion of the Bible.
.
Let's get your objective answer to the claim that the Bible expresses the theories of literary evolution in its structure. Does the Bible express itself as an example of Darwinism in literature?
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - Bible As An Example of Darwinism

In response to Bible As An Example of Darwinism posted by pink101:

Let's get your objective answer to the claim that the Bible expresses the theories of literary evolution in its structure.

What are your references to such a claim?

Does the Bible express itself as an example of Darwinism in literature?

I do not understand your question... because, to start, the Bible does not "express itself".. It reveals itself... ...

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» pink101 - Reference

In response to Bible As An Example of Darwinism posted by _Boanerges_:
.
What are your references to such a claim?
.
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/no...
.
Will you now send this question to the dust bin?
.

.
I see you are going to and fro this morning. Looking for things to devour?
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - Reference

In response to Reference posted by pink101:

quoting the reference: ""It is likely that such books developed from folktales or legends," (Craddock)."

Will you now send this question to the dust bin?

laughing.. of course...

I see you are going to and fro this morning. Looking for things to devour?

naa.. just getting ready for work! thought you could use a little "knowledge" today..

The reference you offered suggests the Bible - evolves.. However, this statement can easily be dismissed as unfounded. For starters, we have over 5000 NT manuscripts to prove the original language. Which brings us to the next item - translation. Translation is not what is inspired, but is only language translated into another culture.

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» pink101 - Reference

In response to Reference posted by _Boanerges_:

.
Translation is not what is inspired, but is only language translated into another culture.
.
You mean that the Bible evolves through language. Is that what you mean to say?
.
Interesting you should see that as a fact.
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - Reference

In response to Reference posted by pink101:

You mean that the Bible evolves through language. Is that what you mean to say?

I said - the NT has over 5000 NT transcripts to verify its authenticity. Translations are simply translations. A true person of inquiry would do as I have done, as Brother Jones has done, as Brian has done, and as countless millions have done. Study the original texts available. Once they have done that, they will realize that the translations are quite accurate.

When referencing translations, it would be required to mention which translations you refer to, for all are different as they are translated to fit their religious evolution..... such as the Jehovah Witness's for example....

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» pink101 - Reference

In response to Reference posted by _Boanerges_:

.
A true person of inquiry would do as I have done, as Brother Jones has done, as Brian has done, and as countless millions have done. Study the original texts available. Once they have done that, they will realize that the translations are quite accurate.
.
And, where did you find these "original texts"? Did you study them for hours, weeks, months, or years? Could you just give an estimate?
.
When referencing translations, it would be required to mention which translations you refer to, for all are different as they are translated to fit their religious evolution..... such as the Jehovah Witness's for example....
.
So you, once again, admit to evolution regarding the Bible. And, then, how is it that "the Jehovah Witness's" are an example of the evolution you claim?
.
.

-- posted by pink101

» _Boanerges_ - Reference

In response to Reference posted by pink101:
And, where did you find these "original texts"? Did you study them for hours, weeks, months, or years? Could you just give an estimate?
Did I say "original texts".. No, I did not. I said: "we have over 5000 NT manuscripts to prove the original language.
After 6 yrs of study, it was my conclusion that the biblical transcripts are quite accurate...
It is not hard to find the Biblical manuscripts of antiquity.
how is it that "the Jehovah Witness's" are an example of the evolution you claim?
Well.. the question I would ask you is - what are the basic differences between Christianity and Jehovah Witness's? Once you know that, only could your question be answered in a true, objective way. Methinks you need to know what Jehovah Witness's teach, in comparison to Christianity.

-- posted by _Boanerges_

» pink101 - Reference

In response to Reference posted by _Boanerges_:

.
Well.. the question I would ask you is - what are the basic differences between Christianity and Jehovah Witness's?
.
It's not my statement, Wendell, it's yours. You bear the burden of proof.
.

-- posted by pink101