Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
September 30, 2014, 09:19:27 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The bible and the trinity (or lack of it)  (Read 7362 times)
Onetimehard
Competitors II
Getbig V
******
Gender: Male
Posts: 13965


Jasher


« Reply #275 on: October 09, 2012, 01:30:08 PM »

I donated a Christian magic book today to a children's organization.....you know, in hopes that I can brainwash them now while they're young.

They need to understand the reality of the flying spaghetti monster and the almighty gnome.
Did you tell them about 127 billion 438 million 300 thousand 543 animals that where in the Noah's ark?  Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15072


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #276 on: October 09, 2012, 02:10:52 PM »

Did you tell them about 127 billion 438 million 300 thousand 543 animals that where in the Noah's ark?  Grin
Yep, matter of fact, one of the more outspoken kids asked me where Cain's wife came from so I smacked him with the very bible I was gonna give him and threw holy water on him.  
Report to moderator   Logged

avxo
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 4002


You've given me multiple traumatic brain injuries!


« Reply #277 on: October 09, 2012, 06:49:43 PM »

avxo, now you have to make up stuff in order to win an argument.

Hey, us heathens can't help it... Grin


Please tell me when Ahmed, bigbobs, MOS or myself told you that science requires faith? That's right non of us ever said such a stupid statement so why pretend that we did.

I was contrasting "belief" in science with "belief" in religion. I never said that any of you said that, although


Evolution requires faith bro,

You keep repeating that. But repetition doesn't make the statement being repeated right.


the theory is wrong,

Oh... well if you say so! That changes everything! Roll Eyes


to much assumption,

Assumptions aren't bad. Scientific theories make assumptions all the time. Einstein, in formulating his theory of gravity, assumed that mass warps space-time, much like an object warps a sheet that it lays on. Frankly, Einstein's general and special relativity theories made a lot more assumptions that the theory of evolution does, and for many years could not be experimentally tested.


false assumptions,

Oh well... that's different. False assumptions are bad. But can you, perhaps, provide us with some of those assumptions? Remember, just because you think an assumption is false doesn't mean it actually is. You will have to prove that.


very stupid ones,

Such as? Again, remember, just because you think something is stupid doesn't mean it actually is. You will have to prove that.


the theory is no more science then religion.

Because you say so?


Any part of the theory that incorporates science I have no problem with, as with any theory out there, there are some truth to them, but the bulk of it is simply wrong and require faith in order to believe in it.

What leap of faith does "believing" that the theory of evolution is almost certainly true require? Please be specific.


Did you tell them about 127 billion 438 million 300 thousand 543 animals that where in the Noah's ark?  Grin

THERE WERE 127,439,307,543 ANIMALS! Yes, that's an odd number, because the Purple Hippo reproduces asexually by budding! Grin


Yep, matter of fact, one of the more outspoken kids asked me where Cain's wife came from so I smacked him with the very bible I was gonna give him and threw holy water on him.

Did he sizzle? I always like it when holy water sizzles and smokes upon contact with then heathens. Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
Onetimehard
Competitors II
Getbig V
******
Gender: Male
Posts: 13965


Jasher


« Reply #278 on: October 09, 2012, 07:26:24 PM »

Good to see you have a sense of humor unlike Ahmed, sorry Ahmed had to throw in my cheap shot  Cheesy

OK avxo fair question, `what assumption``

how about the geologic column representing different periods in time. There are many parts of the world that have a younger layer over an older layer and how do you explain polystrate fossils going through 2 different layers, actually in many cases 3 different layers.

How about one species becoming another and don`t give me some lame example of one of 2 variations of one species but classified as 2 different species based on your biased classifications. That`s cheating and it`s fraud, I am talking about an ape becoming a human.

Lots and lots of micro evolution equals a macro evolution, that`s the biggest horseshit I have ever heard, plain stupid to think this. There are boundaries and limitations between species.
Report to moderator   Logged
avxo
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 4002


You've given me multiple traumatic brain injuries!


« Reply #279 on: October 09, 2012, 08:26:10 PM »

how about the geologic column representing different periods in time. There are many parts of the world that have a younger layer over an older layer and how do you explain polystrate fossils going through 2 different layers, actually in many cases 3 different layers.

Let's take a tree, for example. A tree is, more or less, vertical, and extends upwards for at least a few feet. I think it's fairly clear how such a structure could extend through more than one layer. You'll have to do better than that.


How about one species becoming another and don`t give me some lame example of one of 2 variations of one species but classified as 2 different species based on your biased classifications. That`s cheating and it`s fraud, I am talking about an ape becoming a human.

It's unlikely that you will personally observe this, as the time scales over which such a process would occur, from start to finish, far exceed your lifespan. I'll explain by analogy: much like how the earth appears to be flat from any one point, examining two creatures at any one point in time won't show you the process of divergence.

Beyond fossils which provide credible evidence, it's hard not be convinced by the easily demonstrable fact that we share upwards of 90% of our genetic material with a large number of other animals. We share a whopping 97% with certain apes.

Lots and lots of micro evolution equals a macro evolution, that`s the biggest horseshit I have ever heard, plain stupid to think this.

Let's not forget that Galileo's proclamations sounded stupid to people of his time, from the uneducated peons, all the way up to Popes Paul V, and Gregory XV.

Why am I bringning this up? To remind you that a lot of scientific theories sounded stupid at first, even to fellow scientists educated on the topic, so you can imagine how they appeared to those with no rigorous scientific background, and to point out that while it may sound stupid to you, you should remember that what things sound like to you isn't the metric by which scientific theories are judged.


There are boundaries and limitations between species.

Can you tell us more about these boundaries?
Report to moderator   Logged
Man of Steel
Moderator
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 15072


Isaiah40:28-31 ✝ Romans10:9 ✝ 1Peter3:15


WWW
« Reply #280 on: October 10, 2012, 07:42:07 AM »

Did he sizzle? I always like it when holy water sizzles and smokes upon contact with then heathens. Grin

It was hard to hear with me beating him over the head with the bible.  And I wasn't using some pansy, pocketsized, NIV translation either....this was a real bible.....a rugged, hetero, Christian man's bible....an old, dusty, heavy King James version with thick raised lettering on the front so "Bible" was left clearly visible on his forehead.

I believe I changed a life that day.
Report to moderator   Logged

avxo
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 4002


You've given me multiple traumatic brain injuries!


« Reply #281 on: October 10, 2012, 09:46:16 AM »

It was hard to hear with me beating him over the head with the bible.  And I wasn't using some pansy, pocketsized, NIV translation either....this was a real bible.....a rugged, hetero, Christian man's bible....an old, dusty, heavy King James version with thick raised lettering on the front so "Bible" was left clearly visible on his forehead.

I believe I changed a life that day.

Now, that's something I can believe in! Grin
Report to moderator   Logged
bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #282 on: October 11, 2012, 10:45:26 AM »

Please demonstrate the Hebrew roots in those words. "Pais" means child, "Huios" means son.

The Greek word pais derives from the Hebrew ebed, which bears the primary meaning of servant or slave (reconfirmed in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament"

Ironically the phrase pais theou is selectively translated as servant of God regarding David (Acts 4:25, regardless of which version), but in many versions (King James, Webster's, etc.) translates pais theou in Acts 3:13 as "son of God" just because it refers to Jesus.  Can't have it both ways.

Many other examples of selective translation too, but you get the point - there's an agenda to emphasize that Jesus is the son of God even through mistranslation, since the Bible alone does not make a case for this interpretation, or I should say misinterpretation Smiley
Report to moderator   Logged
bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #283 on: October 11, 2012, 10:51:15 AM »

Yes ,sorry I was typing to fast and erased a paragraph and forgot to re-type it, anyway we don't go by the English standard version, we go by the king James and the king James says...

And why is that?  Because one version mistranslated itself to hide an obvious contradiction while other versions don't?  I wonder if certain versions were also "updated" to hide other contradictions like the few I posted earlier.  Smiley
Report to moderator   Logged
avxo
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 4002


You've given me multiple traumatic brain injuries!


« Reply #284 on: October 11, 2012, 12:23:09 PM »

The Greek word pais derives from the Hebrew ebed, which bears the primary meaning of servant or slave (reconfirmed in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament"

Let's take a step back...

Are you claiming that the origin of the Greek word παῖς is Hebrew? If so, there's absolutely no justification for this claim.

Or are you only claiming that some translations, incorrectly in your opinion, use the Greek word "παῖς" when translating the Hebrew word "ebed"?
Report to moderator   Logged
bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #285 on: October 11, 2012, 03:04:33 PM »

Let's take a step back...

Are you claiming that the origin of the Greek word παῖς is Hebrew? If so, there's absolutely no justification for this claim.

Or are you only claiming that some translations, incorrectly in your opinion, use the Greek word "παῖς" when translating the Hebrew word "ebed"?

Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, New Testament in Greek.  Old Testament was later translated to Greek, in which ebed was translated to pais.

Since Acts is in the New Testament the example I chose to quote above does not require anything to be translated from Hebrew anyway.  So we're still left with the question as to why Greek pais is translated as servant of God for David but son of God for Jesus.
Report to moderator   Logged
a_ahmed
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5781


Team Nasser


« Reply #286 on: October 11, 2012, 03:13:27 PM »

BAMMM!

BigBobs owns all Smiley mashAllah

I just might throw this in.

In arabic it is Abd. Servant/slave.

The reasoning behind it is to emphasize that we are all slaves/servants/belonging to God.

In the declaration of faith in Islam we say:

ASH-HADU ANLAA ILAHA ILLA ALLAH WA ASH HADU ANNA MUHAMMADAN ABDUHU WA RASUULUH.

"I bear witness that there is no deity worthy to be worshipped but Allah, and I bear witness the Muhammad is His servant and messenger.''

Also worthy of note, Jesus spoke Aramaic. Not Latin.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTSG0YzlGB8" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTSG0YzlGB8</a>

It's amazing listening to it how many words are the same in Arabic. SubhanAllah...
Report to moderator   Logged
a_ahmed
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5781


Team Nasser


« Reply #287 on: October 11, 2012, 03:23:21 PM »

And why is that?  Because one version mistranslated itself to hide an obvious contradiction while other versions don't?  I wonder if certain versions were also "updated" to hide other contradictions like the few I posted earlier.  Smiley

He believes the king james version is the 'most authentic bible' and all others are 'from satan'. Literally. I was showing him the differences in bible translations. King james version has like 40000 errors or something like that as per the preface of the new standardized revised version.

Alot of the forgeries are taken out, alot of the mistranslations are taken out. Some of the forged stories and additions remain but they are commented upon saying they were later additions and not in the oldest and most original parchments.
Report to moderator   Logged
bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #288 on: October 11, 2012, 03:24:31 PM »

BAMMM!

BigBobs owns all Smiley mashAllah

I just might throw this in.

In arabic it is Abd. Servant/slave.

The reasoning behind it is to emphasize that we are all slaves/servants/belonging to God.

In the declaration of faith in Islam we say:

ASH-HADU ANLAA ILAHA ILLA ALLAH WA ASH HADU ANNA MUHAMMADAN ABDUHU WA RASUULUH.

"I bear witness that there is no deity worthy to be worshipped but Allah, and I bear witness the Muhammad is His servant and messenger.''

Also worthy of note, Jesus spoke Aramaic. Not Latin.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTSG0YzlGB8" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTSG0YzlGB8</a>

It's amazing listening to it how many words are the same in Arabic. SubhanAllah...

Thanks bro, I learn from you Smiley  Servant, slave, ebed, abd - just shows how the description of prophets from the original teachings of the Old Testament are the same as in the Qur'an despite the difference in languages, and why wouldnt they be, since they are from the same God.  But most Christians don't see that.
Report to moderator   Logged
avxo
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 4002


You've given me multiple traumatic brain injuries!


« Reply #289 on: October 11, 2012, 03:32:28 PM »

Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew, New Testament in Greek.  Old Testament was later translated to Greek, in which ebed was translated to pais.

Since Acts is in the New Testament the example I chose to quote above does not require anything to be translated from Hebrew anyway.  So we're still left with the question as to why Greek pais is translated as servant of God for David but son of God for Jesus.

You could have simply said "no, I am not claiming that the the Greek word παῖς is derived from Hebrew."

Report to moderator   Logged
Skeletor
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 4226


You boob!


« Reply #290 on: October 11, 2012, 09:45:38 PM »

You could have simply said "no, I am not claiming that the the Greek word παῖς is derived from Hebrew."



That was my point, the Hebrew word is different that the Greek. "Pais" means "child" in Greek though, no "slave" or "servant" meaning.
Report to moderator   Logged
bigbobs
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 9620


Islam, Nasser and Corvettes.


« Reply #291 on: October 11, 2012, 10:39:37 PM »

That was my point, the Hebrew word is different that the Greek. "Pais" means "child" in Greek though, no "slave" or "servant" meaning.

Not according to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.

Also, why isn't anyone responding to the main issue here:


Ironically the phrase pais theou is selectively translated as servant of God regarding David (Acts 4:25, regardless of which version), but in many versions (King James, Webster's, etc.) translates pais theou in Acts 3:13 as "son of God" just because it refers to Jesus.  Can't have it both ways.

Many other examples of selective translation too, but you get the point - there's an agenda to emphasize that Jesus is the son of God even through mistranslation, since the Bible alone does not make a case for this interpretation, or I should say misinterpretation Smiley
Report to moderator   Logged
Skeletor
Getbig V
*****
Gender: Male
Posts: 4226


You boob!


« Reply #292 on: October 11, 2012, 10:51:26 PM »

Not according to the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.

Also, why isn't anyone responding to the main issue here:


The Theological Dictionary might try to add or twist meanings to suit whatever purpose or context. Example, the "servant" translation.

I see your argument though. There are many such Bible inconsistencies and selective interpretations or translations. I think it is unavoidable when it comes to religious or "divine" texts (not just Christian) that people will twist the meaning if it is somehow contradicting.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 10 11 [12]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!