XPost: alt.atheism, alt.checkmate, alt.christianity   
   XPost: alt.philosophy.checkmate   
   From: me@nothere.invalid   
      
   On 17-September-2016 8:11 AM, duke wrote:   
   > On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 23:23:47 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1"    
   > wrote:   
   >   
   >> In article ,   
   >> greghall@yacht_master.fake says...   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>> On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 18:23:34 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1"  wrote:   
   >>>> In article ,   
   >>>> greghall@yacht_master.fake says...   
   >>>>> On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 17:24:19 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1"  wrote:   
   >>>>>> In article <8k5htbd0uqfl13u4ru2gmc8udgojtf5ulq@4ax.com>,   
   >>>>>> greghall@yacht_master.fake says...   
   >>>>>>> On Tue, 13 Sep 2016 17:02:07 -0700, "Checkmate, DoW #1"    
   ricksabian1@gmail.com> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> In article ,   
   >>>>>>>> greghall@yacht_master.fake says...   
   >>>>>>>>> On Mon, 12 Sep 2016 12:06:35 -0500, "Ms Kitty Royal Order of the DoW   
   #6"  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>> "Checkmate, DoW #1"  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>> has fallen, and she can't get up!  LOL, etc...   
   >>>>>>>>>> God has perfect timing. . .   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> How could you *not* believe?   
   >>>>>>>>> Both Checkmate and Pandora are blinded by their   
   >>>>>>>>> arrogance. God warned about the dangers of arrogance   
   >>>>>>>>> for the very reason we see demonstrated in the   
   >>>>>>>>> attitudes of Checkmate and Pandora towards the   
   >>>>>>>>> Lord.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> They reject the Lord for no other reason than their   
   >>>>>>>>> arrogance which renders them too proud and haughty   
   >>>>>>>>> to even READ the Bible and consider the evidence   
   >>>>>>>>> before they reject it. Nay, they reject it while   
   >>>>>>>>> being totally ignorant of it.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> This is really an abuse of the intelligence God   
   >>>>>>>>> created them to have and to use. It is inspired   
   >>>>>>>>> by their false belief that THEY are superior to   
   >>>>>>>>> any and all.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Sad, so sad. A brain is a terrible thing to waste.   
   >>>>>>>> The bible is one big clusterfuck of aimless, unorganized, and   
   >>>>>>>> contradictory ramblings, used by everyone to allegedly support   
   whatever   
   >>>>>>>> agenda they wish to force on people.  The supposed writings of the Big   
   >>>>>>>> Four were written long after their deaths.  Nobody even knows anything   
   >>>>>>>> about most of Jesus' life.  There's about twenty years that aren't   
   even   
   >>>>>>>> accounted for.  This is undoubtedly one of the biggest and longest   
   >>>>>>>> running scams in all of recorded history.   
   >>>>>>> So why do you judge a book vicariously? Why not read it   
   >>>>>>> instead of taking the word of other ignorant assayers?   
   >>>>>> I've read plenty of it, but not all, for the above-stated reasons.   
   >>>>>> Before someone decides to read the bible, they should read the history   
   >>>>>> of the bible to put things in the proper context.   
   >>>>> So you are admitting that reading a biased secular   
   >>>>> debunking of it first is conducive to appreciating it   
   >>>>> for what it is - the word of God?   
   >>>> "God" didn't write the bible, Sodomite.   
   >>> Where did I say God wrote the Bible. I said   
   >>> the Bible is God's word.   
   >>>   
   >>> There's a difference, ya know.   
   >> The bible is hearsay, mostly written by unknown ghost writers who   
   >> claimed that the words they wrote were actually penned by others.   
   > You'll never make a case for that.   
      
   you'll never never make a case that Jesus ever said anything attributed   
   to him, because nothing in the bible is written by him. all you have is   
   testimony of dubious origin   
      
   >   
   >> Here's what the Huffington Post says on that subject, and it's only one   
   >> of many sources that have come to the same conclusion:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Apart from the most rabid fundamentalists among us, nearly everyone   
   >> admits that the Bible might contain errors ? a faulty creation story   
   >> here, a historical mistake there, a contradiction or two in some other   
   >> place. But is it possible that the problem is worse than that ? that the   
   >> Bible actually contains lies?   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Most people wouldn't put it that way, since the Bible is, after all,   
   >> sacred Scripture for millions on our planet. But good Christian scholars   
   >> of the Bible, including the top Protestant and Catholic scholars of   
   >> America, will tell you that the Bible is full of lies, even if they   
   >> refuse to use the term. And here is the truth: Many of the books of the   
   >> New Testament were written by people who lied about their identity,   
   >> claiming to be a famous apostle ? Peter, Paul or James ? knowing full   
   >> well they were someone else. In modern parlance, that is a lie, and a   
   >> book written by someone who lies about his identity is a forgery.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Most modern scholars of the Bible shy away from these terms, and for   
   >> understandable reasons, some having to do with their clientèle. Teaching   
   >> in Christian seminaries, or to largely Christian undergraduate   
   >> populations, who wants to denigrate the cherished texts of Scripture by   
   >> calling them forgeries built on lies? And so scholars use a different   
   >> term for this phenomenon and call such books "pseudepigrapha."   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> You will find this antiseptic term throughout the writings of modern   
   >> scholars of the Bible. It's the term used in university classes on the   
   >> New Testament, and in seminary courses, and in PhD. seminars. What the   
   >> people who use the term do not tell you is that it literally means   
   >> "writing that is inscribed with a lie."   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> And that's what such writings are. Whoever wrote the New Testament book   
   >> of 2 Peter claimed to be Peter. But scholars everywhere ? except for our   
   >> friends among the fundamentalists ? will tell you that there is no way   
   >> on God's green earth that Peter wrote the book. Someone else wrote it   
   >> claiming to be Peter. Scholars may also tell you that it was an   
   >> acceptable practice in the ancient world for someone to write a book in   
   >> the name of someone else. But that is where they are wrong. If you look   
   >> at what ancient people actually said about the practice, you'll see that   
   >> they invariably called it lying and condemned it as a deceitful   
   >> practice, even in Christian circles. 2 Peter was finally accepted into   
   >> the New Testament because the church fathers, centuries later, were   
   >> convinced that Peter wrote it. But he didn't. Someone else did. And that   
   >> someone else lied about his identity.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> The same is true of many of the letters allegedly written by Paul. Most   
   >> scholars will tell you that whereas seven of the 13 letters that go   
   >> under Paul's name are his, the other six are not. Their authors merely   
   >> claimed to be Paul. In the ancient world, books like that were labeled   
   >> as pseudo ? lies.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> This may all seem like a bit of antiquarian curiosity, especially for   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)