Athiests Lie, The Bible Tells the Truth

[ding]

I couldn’t be happier for you to see it that way. It seems important to you.

Lying suits you. Praise God!

Seriously, I am. I believe everyone should be able to experience their predictable surprises.

Yours is coming!

We shall see.

You will!

Most do. The question is more about degree and frequency.

 

[Toro]

My favorite part is when the bible tells us how to kill hooved animals.

 

[ding]

My favorite part is when the bible tells us how to kill hooved animals.

I would have bet it was the part about getting stoned.

 

[Grumblenuts]

I don't need to worry about things because I understand that I control my own destiny and plan accordingly. I understand the importance of an internal locus of control and not normalizing deviance to standards.

So you worry about (concern yourself with) controlling and planning your own destiny, and "an internal locus of control and not normalizing deviance to standards."

Planning is not worrying, neither is controlling, GB.

Having an internal locus of control is how one controls his destiny.

Not normalizing deviance to standards is how one prevents predictable surprises that creates worry.

Yet one can concern themself with any of it and call such concern "worrying about":

worry about

• try
• worry about
• be concerned about
• concern oneself
• exert oneself
• fuss over
• go out of one's way
• make a fuss about
• make an effort
• put oneself out
• take pains

I believe you are projecting.

So you don't know what projecting means. No surprise there.

 

[ding]

I don't need to worry about things because I understand that I control my own destiny and plan accordingly. I understand the importance of an internal locus of control and not normalizing deviance to standards.

So you worry about (concern yourself with) controlling and planning your own destiny, and "an internal locus of control and not normalizing deviance to standards."

Planning is not worrying, neither is controlling, GB.

Having an internal locus of control is how one controls his destiny.

Not normalizing deviance to standards is how one prevents predictable surprises that creates worry.

Yet one can concern themself with any of it and call such concern "worrying about":

worry about

• try
• worry about
• be concerned about
• concern oneself
• exert oneself
• fuss over
• go out of one's way
• make a fuss about
• make an effort
• put oneself out
• take pains

I believe you are projecting.

So you don't know what projecting means. No surprise there.

I understand that you projected on to me your belief that when you are concerned about something that you are worrying about it.

I don't have that problem. Concern and worry mean two different things TO ME. You are literally trying to project your understanding of those words on to me.

Now do you understand?

 

[Grumblenuts]

Wanna play dumb now? Okay, since what Joe just quoted you asserting what appears to be your first post in this topic, let's start there. No doubt - even Joe would at least suspect - the length of a cubit to vary through history. But "widely"? Ostensibly you entered this topic simply to inject ("assert") that adverb. Why? Want to love your fellow man? Scientifically explain how adding "widely" to "varied" helps him or her in this instance? What is your purpose here? Why do you patronizingly presume Joe thinks a cubit is 21 inches in length? What provoked you to claim ("assert") "twenty-one inches" to be "the standard" in the first place? What difference does the actual historical variance in the length of a cubic actually make to the point you thought Joe was trying to make? In other words, why should he pay the slightest bit of attention to your assertions of what he should keep in mind?

First was the claim that Goliath was nine feet nine inches (which is the measurement for the 21" cubit times six.). Where do we get 21 inches? Modern times. If you want to believe the measurement for Goliath is 9'9" so you can claim a man cannot be that tall, isn't that a little silly? Especially when you refuse to believe he probably wasn't that tall? Do you even know the real story of Goliath? After he was King, one of David's foot soldiers killed Goliath. The story was then revised so that David killed Goliath as a boy... And you want to argue about Golaith's true height.

I didn't know that. I learn something new every day.

Try hopelessly gullible, simply taking some internet stranger's word for it, fact checking nothing for yourself, and apparently all simply because they share your "bias."
Whatever floats your dinghy, ding, ding-a-ling..

It seems I have upset you.

Nope, not you in particular. 'Fraid sorry for you is the best I can do.

 

[ding]

Concern and worry are related but not the exact same. If I am concerned about something it means it has my attention and I will make efforts to plan for it. If I am worrying about something that means I am not making plans for it but am instead thinking of all the bad outcomes instead.

It seems Grumblenuts only knows how to worry and assumes everyone else does too.

It would seem that Grumblenuts has an external locus of control.

 

[Grumblenuts]

So you worry about (concern yourself with) controlling and planning your own destiny, and "an internal locus of control and not normalizing deviance to standards."

Planning is not worrying, neither is controlling, GB.

Having an internal locus of control is how one controls his destiny.

Not normalizing deviance to standards is how one prevents predictable surprises that creates worry.

Yet one can concern themself with any of it and call such concern "worrying about":

worry about

• try
• worry about
• be concerned about
• concern oneself
• exert oneself
• fuss over
• go out of one's way
• make a fuss about
• make an effort
• put oneself out
• take pains

I believe you are projecting.

So you don't know what projecting means. No surprise there.

I understand that you projected on to me your belief that when you are concerned about something that you are worrying about it.

I don't have that problem. Concern and worry mean two different things TO ME. You are literally trying to project your understanding of those words on to me.

Now do you understand?

I understand that you are dim and confused, son.

 

[Lysistrata]

Actually, the bible is the work of many authors, not all of whom are known, if any one of them is. We do not know who the writers of the books that became known in the Christian world as "The Old Testament" were; their identities have disappeared in the sands of time. That a committee sat around, beholden to Constantine, and put together a compendium of works pleasing to them and Constantine, and threw the other writings available on the floor, means nothing.

There is absolutely no evidence that many of the writers of the works included in what is called by Christians as the "New Testament" ever, ever had anything to do with Jesus of Nazareth. Never met him, never were in the same room with him.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Concern and worry are related but not the exact same. If I am concerned about something it means it has my attention and I will make efforts to plan for it. If I am worrying about something that means I am not making plans for it but am instead thinking of all the bad outcomes instead.

It seems Grumblenuts only knows how to worry and assumes everyone else does too.

It would seem that Grumblenuts has an external locus of control.

It seems you can't accept that others might just use words differently than you do and without your permission.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Actually, the bible is the work of many authors, not all of whom are known, if any one of them is. We do not know who the writers of the books that became known in the Christian world as "The Old Testament" were; their identities have disappeared in the sands of time. That a committee sat around, beholden to Constantine, and put together a compendium of works pleasing to them and Constantine, and threw the other writings available on the floor, means nothing.

OMG, don't say that you big meanie! It still means EVERYTHING!

..to many die hards
Though I heard recently Jesus saves at Costco now 'cause they treat their employees so much better than at WalMart.

 

[Grumblenuts]

Wanna play dumb now? Okay, since what Joe just quoted you asserting what appears to be your first post in this topic, let's start there. No doubt - even Joe would at least suspect - the length of a cubit to vary through history. But "widely"? Ostensibly you entered this topic simply to inject ("assert") that adverb. Why? Want to love your fellow man? Scientifically explain how adding "widely" to "varied" helps him or her in this instance? What is your purpose here? Why do you patronizingly presume Joe thinks a cubit is 21 inches in length? What provoked you to claim ("assert") "twenty-one inches" to be "the standard" in the first place? What difference does the actual historical variance in the length of a cubic actually make to the point you thought Joe was trying to make? In other words, why should he pay the slightest bit of attention to your assertions of what he should keep in mind?

First was the claim that Goliath was nine feet nine inches (which is the measurement for the 21" cubit times six.). Where do we get 21 inches? Modern times. If you want to believe the measurement for Goliath is 9'9" so you can claim a man cannot be that tall, isn't that a little silly? Especially when you refuse to believe he probably wasn't that tall? Do you even know the real story of Goliath? After he was King, one of David's foot soldiers killed Goliath. The story was then revised so that David killed Goliath as a boy... And you want to argue about Golaith's true height.

Still playing dumb I see. But my, how you dazzle my ding-a- ling with your sourceless BS distractions. "First was the claim that Goliath" - No. First you asked me to supply an example of you "asserting" something here, remember? As though you hadn't the foggiest... So I did. Then I asked you (among other things) why you ostensibly entered this topic simply to inject the adverb "widely"? Don't like that? At least address the last one then - Why should Joe pay the slightest bit of attention to your assertions of what he should keep in mind? Don't like that? Fine. Don't quote people's words you have no intent to address. Also, try supplying your sources for factual information. Sorry, none of us qualify as authoritative alone, no matter how much Trump apes otherwise nor ding-a-ling sticks to Uranus.

 

[ding]

Concern and worry are related but not the exact same. If I am concerned about something it means it has my attention and I will make efforts to plan for it. If I am worrying about something that means I am not making plans for it but am instead thinking of all the bad outcomes instead.

It seems Grumblenuts only knows how to worry and assumes everyone else does too.

It would seem that Grumblenuts has an external locus of control.

It seems you can't accept that others might just use words differently than you do and without your permission.

I fully understand that. That's why it is so odd that you didn't. You are the one who is trying to say that I worry when I use the word concern. You really really want me to be worried when I'm not.

 

[ding]

Planning is not worrying, neither is controlling, GB.

Having an internal locus of control is how one controls his destiny.

Not normalizing deviance to standards is how one prevents predictable surprises that creates worry.

Yet one can concern themself with any of it and call such concern "worrying about":

worry about

• try
• worry about
• be concerned about
• concern oneself
• exert oneself
• fuss over
• go out of one's way
• make a fuss about
• make an effort
• put oneself out
• take pains

I believe you are projecting.

So you don't know what projecting means. No surprise there.

I understand that you projected on to me your belief that when you are concerned about something that you are worrying about it.

I don't have that problem. Concern and worry mean two different things TO ME. You are literally trying to project your understanding of those words on to me.

Now do you understand?

I understand that you are dim and confused, son.

I'm not the one who is worried by things.

 

[Meriweather]

Still playing dumb I see. But my, how you dazzle my ding-a- ling with your sourceless BS distractions. "First was the claim that Goliath" - No. First you asked me to supply an example of you "asserting" something here, remember? As though you hadn't the foggiest... So I did. Then I asked you (among other things) why you ostensibly entered this topic simply to inject the adverb "widely"? Don't like that? At least address the last one then - Why should Joe pay the slightest bit of attention to your assertions of what he should keep in mind? Don't like that? Fine. Don't quote people's words you have no intent to address. Also, try supplying your sources for factual information. Sorry, none of us qualify as authoritative alone, no matter how much Trump apes otherwise nor ding-a-ling sticks to Uranus.

First you are mistaking "playing dumb" for "I don't give a damn." Second, Joe shouldn't pay attention to anything I post if he is only looking for people who have reached the same conclusions he reached and are in agreement with him.

As for me, I've been one of the fortunate few who have had both the time and very good teachers to help with delving deeply in the Bible's languages, cultures, and histories. In past conversations with Joe, he has indicated (as he has in this thread) his interest lies in showing how (at least by contemporary understanding of our language, current social science, and culture) the Bible can be made to look foolish, which is Joe's goal and desire. Everyone should have hobbies, and this is Joe's. Sharing odd bits and pieces I've picked up along the way is mine.

Do keep in mind, this is between Joe and me. You shouldn't let it disturb you that he wants to interpret the Bible by reading in today's language/times and I choose to go back to old languages/times and odd historical facts. If you want to verify these facts, go for it, but currently I don't have the time to dig up old studies. So much is online today, I am confident that if you can't find an old professor's source, another has probably noted it as well.

Since it seems to suit you best, I recommend reading that you Joe's posts and ignore mine.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Still playing dumb I see. But my, how you dazzle my ding-a- ling with your sourceless BS distractions. "First was the claim that Goliath" - No. First you asked me to supply an example of you "asserting" something here, remember? As though you hadn't the foggiest... So I did. Then I asked you (among other things) why you ostensibly entered this topic simply to inject the adverb "widely"? Don't like that? At least address the last one then - Why should Joe pay the slightest bit of attention to your assertions of what he should keep in mind? Don't like that? Fine. Don't quote people's words you have no intent to address. Also, try supplying your sources for factual information. Sorry, none of us qualify as authoritative alone, no matter how much Trump apes otherwise nor ding-a-ling sticks to Uranus.

First you are mistaking "playing dumb" for "I don't give a damn." Second, Joe shouldn't pay attention to anything I post if he is only looking for people who have reached the same conclusions he reached and are in agreement with him.

As for me, I've been one of the fortunate few who have had both the time and very good teachers to help with delving deeply in the Bible's languages, cultures, and histories. In past conversations with Joe, he has indicated (as he has in this thread) his interest lies in showing how (at least by contemporary understanding of our language, current social science, and culture) the Bible can be made to look foolish, which is Joe's goal and desire. Everyone should have hobbies, and this is Joe's. Sharing odd bits and pieces I've picked up along the way is mine.

Do keep in mind, this is between Joe and me. You shouldn't let it disturb you that he wants to interpret the Bible by reading in today's language/times and I choose to go back to old languages/times and odd historical facts. If you want to verify these facts, go for it, but currently I don't have the time to dig up old studies. So much is online today, I am confident that if you can't find an old professor's source, another has probably noted it as well.

Since it seems to suit you best, I recommend reading that you Joe's posts and ignore mine.

Nice invisceration of yet other poser theology master.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
"Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works." 2 John 1:9-11


lies are found throughout the 4th century christian bible, their objective disguised as a religion is among the greatest evil society through the centuries has had to endure. such moments as the 1st century have seldom been replicated due to the awful presence of christianity, the desert religions.

 

[Weatherman2020]

.
"Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works." 2 John 1:9-11


lies are found throughout the 4th century christian bible, their objective disguised as a religion is among the greatest evil society through the centuries has had to endure. such moments as the 1st century have seldom been replicated due to the awful presence of christianity, the desert religions.

Athiests lie, the Bible tells the truth.

 

[BreezeWood]

.
"Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works." 2 John 1:9-11


lies are found throughout the 4th century christian bible, their objective disguised as a religion is among the greatest evil society through the centuries has had to endure. such moments as the 1st century have seldom been replicated due to the awful presence of christianity, the desert religions.

Athiests lie, the Bible tells the truth.

.

Athiests lie, the Bible tells the truth.

the 4th century christian bible refined evil into an agenda disguised as a religion.

 

[Weatherman2020]

.
"Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works." 2 John 1:9-11


lies are found throughout the 4th century christian bible, their objective disguised as a religion is among the greatest evil society through the centuries has had to endure. such moments as the 1st century have seldom been replicated due to the awful presence of christianity, the desert religions.

Athiests lie, the Bible tells the truth.

.

Athiests lie, the Bible tells the truth.

the 4th century christian bible refined evil into an agenda disguised as a religion.

Do tell us the Scripture that says to torture!

What? There isn't any? You mean athiests tortured for power? Oh my!