Top Ten Creationist Arguments Part 1 and 2

[cindylou]

Crap. That's not a usual retort against such arguments, so I need to think of something else, lol.

Another thing I have against many religions is that their books have been translated through half a dozen major languages over dozens of centuries, yet most cannot read anything but the current Wal-Mart version of their book. Wouldn't a truly religious person devote the necessary time and resources (since we're talking about their eternal soul and stuff) to learn at least the latin translation and interpretations?

If you did you would be living under the assumption that those texts were the infallible inspired word of God. So no one can know the word of God except by piecing together 5,000 or so different pieces of manuscript? Inspiration is only in the originals?

 

[miplank]

I'm bout ready to smite samoth

 

[PICK3]

I'm bout ready to smite samoth

for shilling?

 

[samoth]

If you did you would be living under the assumption that those texts were the infallible inspired word of God. So no one can know the word of God except by piecing together 5,000 or so different pieces of manuscript? Inspiration is only in the originals?

I certainly don't know much about different religions (or the differences between christian religions), but I've always been under the impression that religions treat their respective holy books as the words of their respective gods (whether directly or by proxy), and although interpretations may vary by political opinions (roman catholic church, etc.), they are indeed infallible.

Can you tell me that you trust the catholic monks that King James hired in the late 1500s to dictate to you their personal and political interpretations of the words of god as originally written? Do you not wonder how the original (or older) texts read or how interpretations may have changed over the millenia? I mean, I'm not religious and even I wonder this.

 

[samoth]

I'm bout ready to smite samoth

Quiet child, adults are talking.

*sticks a pacifier in you're mouth*

 

[cindylou]

I certainly don't know much about different religions (or the differences between christian religions), but I've always been under the impression that religions treat their respective holy books as the words of their respective gods (whether directly or by proxy), and although interpretations may vary by political opinions (roman catholic church, etc.), they are indeed infallible.

Can you tell me that you trust the catholic monks that King James hired in the late 1500s to dictate to you their personal and political interpretations of the words of god as originally written? Do you not wonder how the original (or older) texts read or how interpretations may have changed over the millenia? I mean, I'm not religious and even I wonder this.

I have thought about that. I don't think that a translation can't be inspired. The book of Rev ends in 90 AD yet the books of Acts lays out the manuscripts in advance and one is pure. There may be over 5,000 different texts but they all fall into three categories they come through Rome, Alexandria or Antioch. In the Byzantine texts have Paul's preserved writings in the Greek and are part of the Antioch family of manuscripts. The Egyptian manuscript is corrupted in over 6,000 places and no one should trust anything that comes out of Rome. lol The KJV1611 came from Erasmus... texts that people paid for with their lives against the Roman Catholic Church/Inquisition for not denying the Syrian text from Antioch.

 

[Mr. dB]

If you did you would be living under the assumption that those texts were the infallible inspired word of God. So no one can know the word of God except by piecing together 5,000 or so different pieces of manuscript? Inspiration is only in the originals?

I think it's far more likely that they were all written by men, with an agenda.

 

[ledhead]

Crap. That's not a usual retort against such arguments, so I need to think of something else, lol.

Another thing I have against many religions is that their books have been translated through half a dozen major languages over dozens of centuries, yet most cannot read anything but the current Wal-Mart version of their book. Wouldn't a truly religious person devote the necessary time and resources (since we're talking about their eternal soul and stuff) to learn at least the latin translation and interpretations?

Why would people waste their time reading the bible in latin. The old testament was originally written in Hebrew and the New Testament was originally written in Greek, so yes! we do devote time to study the bible in its original language. No, a truly religious person would not devote time, but a truly spiritual person does spend time to learn.

Christians make up 33% of the worlds population, Muslims make up 20%, Hindus about 13%, 14% non religion, 2% atheists, and different religions make up the rest of the percentages. Hindus worship cows, atheists don't believe in anything, the rest of the religions are by-products of Christianity and Islam or from the Satanic church, Satan is classified as a bible character, so you can actually limit the arguement to Christianity vs Islam.


Why in hell can't the Army do it if the Marines can. They are the same kind of men; why can't they be like Marines.
Gen. John J. "Black Jack" Pershing, USA; 12 February 1918

 

[samoth]

Why would people waste their time reading the bible in latin. The old testament was originally written in Hebrew and the New Testament was originally written in Greek, so yes! we do devote time to study the bible in its original language. No, a truly religious person would not devote time, but a truly spiritual person does spend time to learn.

I was going easy on people by saing latin, but if you want to learn hebrew, I'm all for that.

 

[samoth]

The KJV1611 came from Erasmus... texts that people paid for with their lives against the Roman Catholic Church/Inquisition for not denying the Syrian text from Antioch.

Link? I thought it was the wycliff version that got him/others killed.

BRB, there's a treefrog on my computer cord.