Born again people are preachers.

[Clockers]

Born again people are preachy and force their new beliefs than people who have followed there faith from childhood. For the latter it a way of life whilst "born again" feel they need everyone to follow what they discovered later on in their life.

Stephen Baldwin is a fascinating housemate.

[Patrick]

Was Stephen Reincarnated?

[King Gizzard]

No because reincarnation is in hinduism!

[letmein]

George Bush was a born again Christian. That should tell you something.

[Sticks]

The term "Born Again Christian" is a tautological error as according to John 3:5 everyone who is a Christian is by definition born again.

[ElProximo]

The term "Born Again Christian" is a tautological error as according to John 3:5 everyone who is a Christian is by definition born again.

Thanks for pointing to that error and yes that has annoyed me for years and years.
It's almost as if they decided to 'trademark' that name for their own usage heh.

More in the USA and more in the 80s/90s it has come to mean a sort of Evangelical Charismatic/kinda sorta usedtabe 'fundamentalistish' side of the spectrum,
and,
really to where it might have been spelled 'Bornagin' as if to make the distinction hehe.

Yeah, I do see what the OP is saying.
What annoys me to no end is meeting and having a discussion with so many of them that goes like this:
- Are you a Christian?
- Yes.
- That doesn't mean anything though.. the question is.. are you born again??
- Right.
- So thats how you get saved.
- Ok thanks.

For some reason they seem to thrive on doing this to us Lutherans, Anglicans, Presbys.
Not RCs. They assume they are not saved.

Anyways, its annoying,
but,
as a general rule almost all of them intend to mean well and are generally sincere.

Baldwin... he is a bit of something different from what we more used to know as the 'Bornagin' type.
He is more a sort of 'emerging church' (i hate some of these titles) 'Rick Warren/Saddleback' and 'California/West Coast Evangelical' type.

I'm sure that is meaningless to most here and even having traveled in those circles and knowing that sub-culture a bit... meh... its hard to pin them all down.
But he isn't a classic 80s era sort of 'Bornagin' type but sorta kinda from that 'world' yeah.

I don't mind him though. At first I assumed I'd dislike him and then tried to be annoyed by him.
Then I saw he was refreshingly realistic and a fairly 'down-to-earth' type of person.
So now he has mostly won me over.

[yousoboo!]

Steven is just passionate about what he believes. If people can't handle it then that's due to their own insecurities.

[letmein]

Steven is just passionate about what he believes. If people can't handle it then that's due to their own insecurities.

Uh, no. It's due to them being offended by his bigotry, and stupidity. Next.

[Niamh.]

I haven't heard him preach to anyone yet and I didn't hear him preaching to anyone on IAC either

[yousoboo!]

Uh, no. It's due to them being offended by his bigotry, and stupidity. Next.

then they are wimps. think about what goes on in the world these days. in the big scheme of things this really is weak minded.

[Stu]

then they are wimps. think about what goes on in the world these days. in the big scheme of things this really is weak minded.
People get annoyed when they see grown adults sprout such clear nonsense on the television. It has nothing to do with being a 'wimp' or being 'insecure'.

How odd.

[yousoboo!]

you get offended very easily.

[Stu]

Who said I was getting offended at this in particular? Relgion as a whole offends me and thus constantly will, but on a baffling level, not a level that makes me want to write to national newspapers.

Your not very good at trying to get this one up on people just because they don't like his religion. First insecure, now whimsical, now easily offended. No, kid. Just don't particularly have a hard on for religion. That's. It.

[ElProximo]

People get annoyed when they see grown adults sprout such clear nonsense on the television. It has nothing to do with being a 'wimp' or being 'insecure'.

How odd.

Being annoyed is hardly a problem. I get annoyed watching Richard Dawkins 'spout' clear nonsense on the television,
but,
Not nearly as annoyed as I get at Cartoon dogs selling me insurance, gay guys redecorating homes or a bunch of 'white liberal guilt' presenters trying to 'out tsk' each other over BNP stories,
but,
so being annoyed is part of the experience.
Don't cry over it.

[Stu]

Being annoyed is hardly a problem. I get annoyed watching Richard Dawkins 'spout' clear nonsense on the television,
but,
Not nearly as annoyed as I get at Cartoon dogs selling me insurance, gay guys redecorating homes or a bunch of 'white liberal guilt' presenters trying to 'out tsk' each other over BNP stories,
but,
so being annoyed is part of the experience.
Don't cry over it.
Err ... who said this was a 'problem'? I'm pretty chilled out. I just believe everything he believes in to be a joke.

Get over it.

[yousoboo!]

What are you watching? He hasn't preached anything yet. You've just taken a dislike to him based on preconceptions.

[ElProximo]

Err ... who said this was a 'problem'? I'm pretty chilled out. I just believe everything he believes in to be a joke.

Get over it.

Well I'm sure he feels the same way about you. So you guys are 'even' now.
Enjoy.

[Niamh.]

While I don't believe what he believes and do think it's a load of rubbish, I do like him and I haven't heard him preaching or trying to force his beliefs on people so I don't see why people are giving out about him. At the end of the day if that's what makes him happy, so what, live and let live!!!

[Stu]

What are you watching? He hasn't preached anything yet. You've just taken a dislike to him based on preconceptions.
He has but that's beside the point. All I'm saying is that I think his beliefs are riddiculous. It's called an opinion. You seem to think I am four inches from the TV screen waiting for him to mention the word 'god' so I can start a national outrage. I really, really don't see your point.

Well I'm sure he feels the same way about you. So you guys are 'even' now.
Enjoy.
Doubt it, considering he dosn't know who I am, but it was a nice attempt.

He came across as a tosser on the Celeb Apprentice, harping on and on about Christian values then cheating in a horribly sneaky way. I think he then owned up to the cheating and screwed his team, because of the Jesus-guilt. I totally expect BB to engineer a situation where he's forced to choose between doing something unChristian in a task to win the shopping budget or refusing to do it and facing the wrath of his housemates.

[Niamh.]

He has but that's beside the point. All I'm saying is that I think his beliefs are riddiculous. It's called an opinion. You seem to think I am four inches from the TV screen waiting for him to mention the word 'god' so I can start a national outrage. I really, really don't see your point.


Doubt it, considering he dosn't know who I am, but it was a nice attempt.

He came across as a tosser on the Celeb Apprentice, harping on and on about Christian values then cheating in a horribly sneaky way. I think he then owned up to the cheating and screwed his team, because of the Jesus-guilt. I totally expect BB to engineer a situation where he's forced to choose between doing something unChristian in a task to win the shopping budget or refusing to do it and facing the wrath of his housemates.

I didn't see Celeb Apprentice but he didn't do any preaching on IAC Usa

[ElProximo]

I totally expect BB to engineer a situation where he's forced to choose between doing something unChristian in a task to win the shopping budget or refusing to do it and facing the wrath of his housemates.

Of course they will. They will do it for their own agenda and spite,
and,
to give people like you that..mmmmm... so good feeling of self-righteous indignation. mm.. so good isn't it?

[Stu]

Of course they will. They will do it for their own agenda and spite
Baldwin presumably knew this which is why he signed up for the show. Nothing at all to do with selling yourself on TV for cash.


and,
to give people like you that..mmmmm... so good feeling of self-righteous indignation. mm.. so good isn't it?
Personally I think attributing your life being saved to being handpicked for sobreity by a cosmic Jewish zombie is righteous self indignaiton but hey, difference of opinion and all that.

[RCW1945]

"Love thy neighbour": isn't that Christian rule number one?
Only one hour into the show someone mentions Barack Obama, SB leaps in with savage attack on same. The word could be hypocrite.

[Niamh.]

"Love thy neighbour": isn't that Christian rule number one?
Only one hour into the show someone mentions Barack Obama, SB leaps in with savage attack on same. The word could be hypocrite.

It was hardly a "savage attack" lol

[ElProximo]

Personally I think attributing your life being saved to being handpicked for sobreity by a cosmic Jewish zombie is righteous self indignaiton but hey, difference of opinion and all that.

That doesn't really make sense but I have no doubt you said it so you could momentarily feel... right.
aka 'righteous'.
Relatively 'right' compared to some others you deem 'wrong'.
Self-righteousness.
Do you see how this works now?

But hey.. you keep on feeling unique and superior believing 'something comes from nothing' and that 'something' was rock sludge mating with a lightning bolt and turning into bats, fish, kangaroos, T-rex, grass and hawks... by happenstance!
:joker:

[RCW1945]

Niamh
What sort of "savage" life you must lead.
On first acquaintance to come out with "horrible", "heading for a disastrous presidency" sounds slightly savage to me.

[Stu]

Actually I don't believe that at all, Proximo. But it's ever so nice of you to assume I am atheist just because I don't believe in the same whack ass, ever edited, multiple version, multiple author collection of fables and political manifestos that Stephen Baldwin believes in.

You may also notice you were guilty of self righteous indignation yourself there Proximo, putting yourself on a pedastal above those foolish atheists. Oops!

[RCW1945]

El P.
Can I politely suggest a course of biochemistry?

[Niamh.]

Niamh
What sort of "savage" life you must lead.
On first acquaintance to come out with "horrible", "heading for a disastrous presidency" sounds slightly savage to me.

lol, ok, terribly savage life I have yeah...........

Listen, Obama is a politician at the end of the day like all the others, I do like him, but it's like he's untouchable, no one is allowed to say a bad word about him!! No body would have been calling it a "savage attack" if it had been any other politician other than Obama!

[arista]

Baldwin is a Bible Freak
he needs to shut his Gob.

[RCW1945]

It rather depends on the form the criticism takes. Horrible was a reference to the man: that his health measures are inoperable or his policy on Afghanistan is unwise would be fine.

[Niamh.]

It rather depends on the form the criticism takes. Horrible was a reference to the man: that his health measures are inoperable or his policy on Afghanistan is unwise would be fine.

Politicians are fair game imo. No one would have batted an eyelid if it was Bush he was talking about!

[ElProximo]

El P.
Can I politely suggest a course of biochemistry?

Sure.
Will it tell me how something can come from nothing?
Will it tell me how rock sludge turned into Hawks and Grass?
Great!
I already have the basic course (which made zero mention of either of those things) so recommend what you will.

[Stu]

Sure.
Will it tell me how something can come from nothing?
Will it tell me how rock sludge turned into Hawks and Grass?
Great!
I already have the basic course (which made zero mention of either of those things) so recommend what you will.
Will The Bible?

Genesis : God made all this ****. The end.

[ElProximo]

Will The Bible?

Genesis : God made all this ****. The end.

It's a helluva lot more rational, logical and scientific than your '0+0 = something' and your 'Nuttindidit' explanation for complex working information systems.

[Stu]

It's a helluva lot more rational, logical and scientific than your '0+0 = something' and your 'Nuttindidit' explanation for complex working information systems.
Again, I don't believe in something coming from nothing. I already told you this. I do believe in some sort of greater cosmic force. Just not your one. And just not your big book of Jewish myths and legends. Sorry.

Of course many books in The Bible describe the earth as being flat, and that stars as being merely dots in the sky that could theoretically rain down on us. And that everything orbits the earth. And numerous other geographical contradictions we now know to be bullshit.

I thought it was meant to be the word of God? You telling me he dosn't know his own construction site?

Want some more? Sweet. So do I :



The Bible is a hodepodge collection of oral history, poetry, legend, myth, geneology, prophesy and visions, some of which date back to nomadic tribes in the Middle East. The problem with oral histories is that they change over time, and there is no way to verify what the original version of any of the accounts in the work might have looked like.

The oral histories that were eventually included in the Bible were written down by different groups of people over centuries, and copied by hand numerous times, introducing changes and inaccuracies in the process as with any text that is copied (witness the variations in Shakespeare's folios).

Numerous versions of chapters that have been included in the Bible by various groups (Jews, Gnostics and Christians) exist, and arbitrary decisions have been made as to which ones to include in what is accepted as the modern Christian version of the Bible. Chapters that have at one time or another been included and then removed from the Bible are called the Apocrypha. Some of these, most notably what are believed to be Gnostic texts, differ radically from the currently accepted version of the Bible.

Both the Old Testament and the New have numerous internal contradictions that render any attempt to deem words of the Bible literally true impossible. For example, there are two different accounts of creation in the Old Testament and major contradictions among accounts of the life of Jesus in the New Testament.

Linguistic and textual analysis of the Bible has demonstrated that some chapters have elisions or additions made by different authors, making a determination of the 'original' or 'true' version of the Bible problematic.

There is ample evidence that some elisions and additions to some chapters were made for political reasons, or to express a religious viewpoint that differed from that held by the original author of the chapter.

Historical sources show that the New Testament is factually inaccurate on matters including the reign of Herod and the Roman census.

[Prole]

Steven is just passionate about what he believes. If people can't handle it then that's due to their own insecurities.

I don't agree. I think Christianity is a sham not because I haven't read the bible, but because I have. I'm happy for Christians to believe their fairy stories but I hate the way they try to foist their patriarchal bullshit on others. I also hate the way they assume they are the only enlightened ones with a monopoly on morality.

[ElProximo]

Want some more? Sweet. So do I :

Yes, you love false analysis, contrived 'contradictions' and sarcastic 'flames' and some of the worst biblical interpretation and scholarship I have ever seen.. worse than Dawkins even.
So yeah.. I do believe that is 'sweet' tasting to you and you want more and more of it.
I have no doubt about it.

'flat earth' :hugesmile:

[Stu]

Yes, you love false analysis, contrived 'contradictions' and sarcastic 'flames' and some of the worst biblical interpretation and scholarship I have ever seen.. worse than Dawkins even.
So yeah.. I do believe that is 'sweet' tasting to you and you want more and more of it.
I have no doubt about it.

'flat earth' :hugesmile:
Isaiah 11:12
12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH.

Revelation 7:1
1 And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor on any tree.

Job 38:13
13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?

Jeremiah 16:19
19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ENDS OF THE EARTH, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit.

Daniel 4:11
11 The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto heaven, and the sight thereof to the ENDS OF ALL THE EARTH

Matthew 4:8
8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them





And consdering The Bible was written by man, without any divine influence, and considering all but the most radical of men believed the earth to be flat at the time, it's safe to assume The Bible has been written from the viewpoint of the earth being flat.

[ElProximo]

...And after these things I saw four angels standing on FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, nor on the sea, nor ...

Thanks for proving my point about 'worst interpretation ever' because if you ACTUALLY believe you are to be comprehending that as an 'actual map' and really believe the writer is trying to communicate to you real physical dimensions...
...then you are in SERIOUS need of some help with reading comprehension.
I mean Im not even joking when I say that our 11 year olds don't even get confused about that.

Also, if you actually knew anything about these Jews you would know that guys like Moses were raised in Egypt and Jews came out of Sumeria (and had their own things of course),
and,
ABSOLUTELY KNEW THE EARTH WAS A SPHERE.
Didn't just 'know it' but they had EXCELLENT astronomy.
Its actually sad we lost so much of that and only recently are catching up to them.

Wow.. just sad you cannot even comprehend the most basic hermeneutics even children can grasp.

But no.. Im not interested in you just copying and pasting huge chunks of text from 'infidels' or whatever 'online atheist' websites.
Especially not stupid ones like that.
Especially not from someone who ACTUALLY thought they were reading some physical directions from those verses.
Wow.
Just wow.

[Stu]

Oh so those were the poetic bits. Right, right. I get it now.

I love how you religionsists pick and choose which bits of The Bible are litteral and which parts are just poetic language based on whatever online discussion you are in.

Those bits are poetic yet the story of creation is absoloutely how it happened?

lolz

Have you come up with a good explanation as to how I am a racist yet?

[letmein]

Oh so those were the poetic bits. Right, right. I get it now.

I love how you religionsists pick and choose which bits of The Bible are litteral and which parts are just poetic language based on whatever online discussion you are in.

Those bits are poetic yet the story of creation is absoloutely how it happened?

lolz

Have you come up with a good explanation as to how I am a racist yet?

I'm still waiting to hear how I'm a homophobe.:xyxwave:

[Stu]

Get in line. We could be waiting awhile :tongue:.

[letmein]

Get in line. We could be waiting awhile :tongue:.

Well, let's go do something racist and homophobic while we wait! :dance:

[Stu]

Well, let's go do something racist and homophobic while we wait! :dance:
Let's find some black gay's and kill two birds with one stone.

[Clockers]

Baldwin is a Bible Freak
he needs to shut his Gob.

I dont come on this forum for a 1 day and my thread gets side tracked.

Baldwin is a Bible Freak, i cring hearing listening to his conversations but he makes good tv.

[BlackOrWhite]

Stephen doesn't "preach". Earlier on for example, he was just going to go read his Bible but Alex asked him about it. What do you want him to do? Say "No, f-ck of, I'm reading my Bible"? Some people in the house are obviously genuinely interested about what he's got to say.
If you can't accept other peoples religions or beliefs then I recommend never stepping outside your front door.

[Clockers]

Stephen doesn't "preach". Earlier on for example, he was just going to go read his Bible but Alex asked him about it. What do you want him to do? Say "No, f-ck of, I'm reading my Bible"? Some people in the house are obviously genuinely interested about what he's got to say.
If you can't accept other peoples religions or beliefs then I recommend never stepping outside your front door.

I want Baldwin to continue doing what he is doing, his style not gonna float everyone boat and the sh!t will hit the fan. That is what I wanna see.:devil:

Who I wanna win is big brother, the celebs are there for my entertainment.

[ElProximo]

Oh so those were the poetic bits. Right, right. I get it now.

I love how you religionsists pick and choose which bits of The Bible are litteral and which parts are just poetic language based on whatever online discussion you are in.


Yes, those are metaphor bits and this is where a vision of metaphors is shown to someone.. who then writes down what they are and even what they look 'like'.
So congrats.. you needed me to explain that to you. Children get this 'intuitively' and they don't 'pick and choose' but rather you need only have something called 'basic reading comprehension'.
You 'pick and choose' just like you do when you read something like this article:

CBB Ratings Smash all Records.
This years opening drew in more viewers than any before it. 7 million viewers viewed and...

1.It doesn't even matter if this report is factually correct or not because what you do is interpret and comprehend the text itself as it is presenting itself.

2.You picked the title as intending to communicate a 'true claim' using metaphorical language. You did not suppose it mean some ratings can actually become physical objects used to physically damage some paper or CD containing previously recorded ratings.

3. Again, you understood 'drew in' to be speaking about the viewers desires and wishes and not resisting their attractions to the entertainment.

4. You did suppose it meant 7 million viewers. You did not understand that to be an 'allegory' but supposed they intended to communicate a factual statement and claim.

But for some reason you are baffled and even suspicious when it came to a passage in which a metaphorical 'vision' is given and communicated.
Somehow you don't know which way to go on that one?
Children do.
Intuitively they know this as a first read.

Now, I would say IF you did get to something where you could go 'either way' then how would you 'pick and choose'?
Well,
In this example, on this specific question about the spherical earth and how the 'receivers' understood it, although not required, I was showing you that - EVEN IF - you became confused here and did not know which way to go,
then,
you could make a 'tie-breaker' with other texts (in which they seem to understand a spherical Earth and so 'if anything' you fall to the majority of clear texts),
and,
with some historical context. In this case, Israelities along with their related counter-parts (Egyptians, Sumerians etc),
and,
you realize they knew perfectly well the Earth was a sphere and were well aware of rotation, stars, other planets and actually had some amazingly sophisticated understandings of astronomy.
So,
EVEN IF you were confused whether Moses was being 'literal' or a text was communicating a 'metaphorical' or 'poetic' passage.. ..your 'easy tie-breaker' would be knowing that historical context,
and,
it helps more if you know a bit about their 'catch phrases' and 'expressions' and how they used them back then in their language.
(not necessary here but helpful sometimes).

But none of this is complicated.
"I saw a vision of angels holding the four corners of the earth" is EASILY understood by even a child who certainly does not think "God must think the Earth is like a floating bread board d'uhhhhhhh".
Honestly.

[Skeptic-i]

It's a helluva lot more rational, logical and scientific than your '0+0 = something' and your 'Nuttindidit' explanation for complex working information systems.

Where did god come from? nothing? Where did god get his materials from? nothing? Oh! let me guess: God has always existed and he pulled his materials out of his magic hat - from nothing.

If your going to assume your elusive god has always existed, then I might as well assume god[s] don't exist - and that the universe has always existed in some shape or form. No god required. At least the universe is evident - unlike your god.

As for your complexity nonsense, well, is your god complex? - if so, who created him? - oh no! it's not a compendium of increasingly complex gods creating gods, is it?...sigh!

FYI, I suggest you read: Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?
http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Briefs/Something.pdf


Main reason for posting: The Bible Guy

Although I think he comes across as a decent guy, it's a shame he's using BB as an opportunity to invade our homes with his religious woo-woo. That said, I find him quite entertaining: especially when he takes advantage of the others by thrusting his religious woo-woo on them at the dinner table - where the only escape (walking off) would cause offense.

[DigitalSid]

Was Stephen Reincarnated?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Born_again_(Christianity)

[BB_Eye]

Yes, those are metaphor bits and this is where a vision of metaphors is shown to someone.. who then writes down what they are and even what they look 'like'.
So congrats.. you needed me to explain that to you. Children get this 'intuitively' and they don't 'pick and choose' but rather you need only have something called 'basic reading comprehension'.
You 'pick and choose' just like you do when you read something like this article:

CBB Ratings Smash all Records.
This years opening drew in more viewers than any before it. 7 million viewers viewed and...

1.It doesn't even matter if this report is factually correct or not because what you do is interpret and comprehend the text itself as it is presenting itself.

2.You picked the title as intending to communicate a 'true claim' using metaphorical language. You did not suppose it mean some ratings can actually become physical objects used to physically damage some paper or CD containing previously recorded ratings.

3. Again, you understood 'drew in' to be speaking about the viewers desires and wishes and not resisting their attractions to the entertainment.

4. You did suppose it meant 7 million viewers. You did not understand that to be an 'allegory' but supposed they intended to communicate a factual statement and claim.

But for some reason you are baffled and even suspicious when it came to a passage in which a metaphorical 'vision' is given and communicated.
Somehow you don't know which way to go on that one?
Children do.
Intuitively they know this as a first read.

Now, I would say IF you did get to something where you could go 'either way' then how would you 'pick and choose'?
Well,
In this example, on this specific question about the spherical earth and how the 'receivers' understood it, although not required, I was showing you that - EVEN IF - you became confused here and did not know which way to go,
then,
you could make a 'tie-breaker' with other texts (in which they seem to understand a spherical Earth and so 'if anything' you fall to the majority of clear texts),
and,
with some historical context. In this case, Israelities along with their related counter-parts (Egyptians, Sumerians etc),
and,
you realize they knew perfectly well the Earth was a sphere and were well aware of rotation, stars, other planets and actually had some amazingly sophisticated understandings of astronomy.
So,
EVEN IF you were confused whether Moses was being 'literal' or a text was communicating a 'metaphorical' or 'poetic' passage.. ..your 'easy tie-breaker' would be knowing that historical context,
and,
it helps more if you know a bit about their 'catch phrases' and 'expressions' and how they used them back then in their language.
(not necessary here but helpful sometimes).

But none of this is complicated.
"I saw a vision of angels holding the four corners of the earth" is EASILY understood by even a child who certainly does not think "God must think the Earth is like a floating bread board d'uhhhhhhh".
Honestly.

Are you a six year old who swallowed a dictionary? Your posts are so awkward and make no sense.

[Skeptic-i]

...you realize they knew perfectly well the Earth was a sphere...

Nonsense. They thought the earth was flat, with four corners, that the sky, the firmament, was solid, the floor of Jehovah's house. They imagined that the sun journeyed about the earth, and that by stopping the sun the day could be lengthened.

That said, the Bible also mentions that the earth was a circle (with four corners apparently). A circle is not an OBLATE SPHERE.

[aoq2008]

George bush was a born again and he was my favourite person. I don't like step-hen tho

[Clockers]

Stop Hijacking my Mother *****ing Thread.

http://www.buffettworld.com/forum/forumimages/HIJACK_onplane.gif

[letmein]

Stop Hijacking my Mother *****ing Thread.

http://www.buffettworld.com/forum/forumimages/HIJACK_onplane.gif

That's not funny. :nono:

[Clockers]

That's not funny. :nono:

Neither is a censored pic of Basshunter bolloxs.

[ElProximo]

Nonsense. They thought the earth was flat, with four corners, that the sky, the firmament, was solid, the floor of Jehovah's house. They imagined that the sun journeyed about the earth, and that by stopping the sun the day could be lengthened.

That said, the Bible also mentions that the earth was a circle (with four corners apparently). A circle is not an OBLATE SPHERE.


Dummy. Please read my previous posts explaining why metaphorical language (poetic, hyperbole etc etc), is EASY for children to understand,
and,
to demonstrate this is 4000+ years of Judaism in which we simply don't find Jews 'interpreting' as badly as YOU and other 20somthing 'online atheists' who apparently have HORRIFICALLY BAD reading comprehension skills,
and,
you have actually 'out-fundamentalisted' the most wooden 'literal' born-again type fundamentalist Christians - and EVEN THEY can somehow comprehend how language works.
But you can't.
Only you and other 'online atheists' apparently have total confusion and difficulty.

Once again - IF you want to figure this out then spend 20 minutes googling ancient astronomy of Jews, Egyptians, Sumerians.
They were WELL AWARE the Earth was a Sphere.
KNEW IT.
Absolutely KNEW it and further more created some very impressive astronomy, maps, calendars, charts and graphs of the Solar System... actually amazing stuff!

Oh.. and while you are at it. Find out how this 'flat earth society' was actually an Anti-theist 'satire' or 'mockery' society which was really created by atheistic types.
It worked on you that is for sure. You actually believe that 'people thought the earth was flat.
No.
btw.. by Jesus time the Romans (like everyone else) not only knew the Earth was a Sphere but had ALMOST measured its circumference (they even supposed there was another continent on the other side),
and,
had all but pin-pointed the distance to the Sun.. actually VERY close.
In Jesus time.
When the NT was being written they were onto this.

So no.. LEARN TO READ.
Children get this and you can't?

[Stu]

Yes, those are metaphor bits and this is where a vision of metaphors is shown to someone.. who then writes down what they are and even what they look 'like'.
So congrats.. you needed me to explain that to you. Children get this 'intuitively' and they don't 'pick and choose' but rather you need only have something called 'basic reading comprehension'.
You 'pick and choose' just like you do when you read something like this article:

CBB Ratings Smash all Records.
This years opening drew in more viewers than any before it. 7 million viewers viewed and...

1.It doesn't even matter if this report is factually correct or not because what you do is interpret and comprehend the text itself as it is presenting itself.

2.You picked the title as intending to communicate a 'true claim' using metaphorical language. You did not suppose it mean some ratings can actually become physical objects used to physically damage some paper or CD containing previously recorded ratings.

3. Again, you understood 'drew in' to be speaking about the viewers desires and wishes and not resisting their attractions to the entertainment.

4. You did suppose it meant 7 million viewers. You did not understand that to be an 'allegory' but supposed they intended to communicate a factual statement and claim.

But for some reason you are baffled and even suspicious when it came to a passage in which a metaphorical 'vision' is given and communicated.
Somehow you don't know which way to go on that one?
Children do.
Intuitively they know this as a first read.

Now, I would say IF you did get to something where you could go 'either way' then how would you 'pick and choose'?
Well,
In this example, on this specific question about the spherical earth and how the 'receivers' understood it, although not required, I was showing you that - EVEN IF - you became confused here and did not know which way to go,
then,
you could make a 'tie-breaker' with other texts (in which they seem to understand a spherical Earth and so 'if anything' you fall to the majority of clear texts),
and,
with some historical context. In this case, Israelities along with their related counter-parts (Egyptians, Sumerians etc),
and,
you realize they knew perfectly well the Earth was a sphere and were well aware of rotation, stars, other planets and actually had some amazingly sophisticated understandings of astronomy.
So,
EVEN IF you were confused whether Moses was being 'literal' or a text was communicating a 'metaphorical' or 'poetic' passage.. ..your 'easy tie-breaker' would be knowing that historical context,
and,
it helps more if you know a bit about their 'catch phrases' and 'expressions' and how they used them back then in their language.
(not necessary here but helpful sometimes).

But none of this is complicated.
"I saw a vision of angels holding the four corners of the earth" is EASILY understood by even a child who certainly does not think "God must think the Earth is like a floating bread board d'uhhhhhhh".
Honestly.
In that case the entire Genesis sounds like metaphorical fairy tail language to me. I would properly argue your post, but I honestly can't be arsed trawling through your obscene paragraph and sentence structures, whilst at the same time being lambasted for my own intelligence.

[Stacey.]

no arguments please, CBB live is on :D

[ElProximo]

In that case the entire Genesis sounds like metaphorical fairy tail language to me.

That doesn't surprise me. Not that you know and certainly never read the 'entire' Genesis,
but,
I strongly agree you should not be arsed.

We agree on something at last.

[MojoNixon]

http://www.metal-archives.com/images/5/1/7/517.jpg

[Stu]

That doesn't surprise me. Not that you know and certainly never read the 'entire' Genesis,
but,
I strongly agree you should not be arsed.

We agree on something at last.
I read Genesis, actually. It's not as good as they say. Leviticus is where all the action is. God is like Bruce Willis on coke in that mother****er.