Why do so many Christians and Jews ignore the words of Jesus and Moses?

Quote from OPTIONAL777:


Below is a certain someone leaving the "ET town" to find refuge from the opinions of strangers on a message board for a few weeks to try to salvage some busted self esteem after the "ET town" voted by a majority percentage in a poll that indeed, "RM is full of shit. Another useles (sic) junkie trying to justify his habit." Let's see, who was right about that one? The fella who said he had found a bupish cure, or those who said the fella was just a junkie...I guess this post answers that question: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showt...0&highlight=rearden metal junkie&pagenumber=1
[/url]
More...

If you want to take credit for occasionally getting it right like the twice-daily broken clock that you are, you're gonna have to balance that out by also admitting when you're wrong.

I do it all the time, how about you?... and yet you continually insist that <i>I'm</i> the one who needs a lesson in humility?
 
Joe Granville made a career out of being right once a decade...

So did Jean Dixon...she made her career on the prediction of the Kennedy assassination. Ooooooohh, psychic astrologer...LOL!

So who is counting who is right and wrong? You apparently...of course the "right and wrong" is in the absence of fact.

In any case, there is reality, then there are anonymous message boards like ET and the P&R forum, then there are the poor souls who confuse the two.

It is pretty obvious what great pride you take in your pattern recognitions skills...so when it comes to applying those skills to me, why should I try to damage that pride of yours? It is much more interesting allowing you to stay in the darkness and make the wild guess.

You will continue to believe whatever you like in the absence of fact, your "ET Towny" dodo birds of a feather flock will continue to together, and you think you are winning the game, because you think there is some game to win.

Why should I introduce personal fact to alter the fun you must be having, right?

A lesson in humility?

You do it all the time?

You must be joking mate...

Humility is in the inner intention, not in the self gratification that comes from the approval from the audience. Humility is between you and your higher power, not between you and the "ET Townies."

It is an inside job dude, 100%. A guy can go to a meeting and confess all of his sins to a group of strangers giving only his first name and his addiction in the process, and that will have no benefit in his recovery if he continues to lie to himself and those he genuinely cares about. Shit...anyone see the Oprah Hollywood style confessionals on the telly and in the gossip rags, complete with drama, crying, self absorption, and the full complement of the narcissist falsely humbling themselves to the camera and the audience.

That's all just show business.

Get real...this ET Town ain't real...and you darn well know it.

I know the lies you tell yourself. It has been said "you are only as sick as your secrets" but secrets kept from whom? To whom does it matter that a person is rigorously honest with? "The ET townies?" LOL!

Now ask your pattern recognition skills: Am I telling the truth?

...and are you really keeping it real?

No need to answer those questions to me, for though I might or might not be in your head from time to time...in either case, I am not the one that is really in need of the answer, or the one to practice rigorous honesty with.


Quote from Rearden Metal:

If you want to take credit for occasionally getting it right like the twice-daily broken clock that you are, you're gonna have to balance that out by also admitting when you're wrong.

I do it all the time, how about you?... and yet you continually insist that <i>I'm</i> the one who needs a lesson in humility?
More...
 
Quote from kandlekid:

Load of crap. From Wikipedia ...

"... The vast majority of the hundreds of thousands of differences are due to the mistakes of scribes;[8] these have little or no effect on the meaning of the passages or core tenets of Christian dogma. Ehrman argues however that some changes could not have been mistakes, but were purposeful alterations by early church writers to support their interpretation of Christianity.

Two key examples illustrate the critical nature of the variations. Two of the most striking additions occur in the last 12 verses of the Gospel of Mark, and in 1 John.

Ehrman points out that the last 12 verses of the Gospel of Mark are not found in the earliest manuscripts,[8] an omission which is noted in the New International Version (a translation used by many Evangelicals),[9] and argues that these verses were added on to the original text many years later.[8]

In the King James Version of the First Epistle of John there is a passage often taken as an explicit reference to the doctrine of the Trinity. Ehrman points out that this section does not appear in any Greek manuscript before the 9th century.[8]"


Ok, so 12 verses of Mark and a passage in 1 Jn. A really lame attempt at changing the Bible.

The NT is the most accurate Greek text in existence, by virtue of the sheer number of manuscripts extant. This doesn't address the accuracy of the quotes, since they were written down some time after the events (about 30 years or more).

I read once about the earliest (earliest being how long after the events or author does the manuscript occur) classic Greek text vs the earliest Greek NT manuscript. I think the earliest classic Greek manuscript occurred about 300 years after authorship (Illiad ?). The earliest NT manuscript about 30 years after the events.

The very fact of some differences in the versions attests to their veracity, just as the testimony of different eye witnesses don't normally agree on all points.

Texts that agree on all points would allude to a conspiracy. Texts that differ in some (or even many) aspects would allude to eye witness accounts (i.e so and so remembers such and such, etc ...)
More...

THE Jesus seminar, a group of 150 bible scholars, determined that only about 20% of the sayings attributed to jesus in the bible actually happened:

The Seminar concluded that of the various statements in the "five gospels" attributed to Jesus, only about 18% of them were likely uttered by Jesus himself (red or pink). The Gospel of John fared worse than the synoptic gospels, with nearly all its passages attributed to Jesus being judged inauthentic
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Seminar
http://www.westarinstitute.org/Seminars/seminars.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top