A Question for S.T.Ranger
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 4 Votes - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-05-2012, 11:23 AM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Good morning ST. How are you?

I'm good, thanks. Except I have spent more than half a day responding to posts when I should be working.


(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Guess what...I learnt something from you. When I went back to relook at what the terms 'old covenant' and "new covenant" meant, I was rather surprised at how many different opinions there were. These terms are obviously not well defined , and I didn't realise that. That is the beauty of forums...we learn from others.

But you will not admit that though you claim an extensive knowledge of scripture, this core doctrinal issue was unfamiliar to you?

Mark, until you learn to be honest, not only with others, but with yourself...you will not advance in understanding and ability to make conclusions based upon truth, showing true humility which derives from putting away an inflated self view.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I have also learnt a lot from Bucky's posts (in particular).

My challenge to you is this. Put your ego in your back pocket for a while and listen to what people are telling you.

This is the same nonsense that is always appealed to: "If you don't read our literature...you will not find truth."

Now, I am sure, because you doubt my ability to actually look at an issue and discern the intent, that you believe that your comments here should be accepted as a nice gesture. However, if you cannot read this and see this for what it is, which is false, I am truly very sorry for you.

This reply is very fascinating, and reveals something to me that is surely missed by you and others here. I will address this as I go.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  You just don't know how much you don't know.

This is where you are wrong: I am content to admit my ignorance in many areas, and that I have barely scratched the surface of Biblical knowledge.

As well as the fact that in my own spiritual growth, I am barely more than a child.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Bucky, Lucradis, Jedah, me and Kings Chosen have all hinted that you need to educate yourself a bit more.

And some of the links that are given I have found fascinating.

But, this again is something that conversation always brings us to, and you still don't give thought that you are doing it: you basically say that majority opinion equals truth.

And actually, lucradis is the only one that paid enough attention to what was said to actually "interpret" the posts. Not even your pet theologian could respond very simple statements concerning scripture.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  When 5 people all tell you more or less the same thing, don't you think there's a serious possibility they have a point?

I don't know, Mark, does this mean that the Roman-Catholic Church had a point? There were many more than five in that bunch.

lol

You need to rethink your statements before putting them in public domain.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  That does not mean that what you have to say is not important, but no one is going to listen to you when it is so blatantly obvious you are ignorant of the facts.

Now you are omniscient? You know who is listening, and who isn't?

Well, Mark, thanks for this post and the links, because whether they listen or not, at the very least I an give your friends something to think about. Let's start with the assertion that a majority vote determines truth, then reconcile that with the atrocities committed by many majorities in history. There are a number of examples we can look at.

Has it occurred to you that you may have some sort of Messiah complex? Is your site going to save people from religion?

Sorry, it merely offers...a different religion, complete with scriptures, a spokesman, and theology. The fact that your theology teaches there is no God makes little difference.

What was that thread where it was suggested that Christians be rounded up and forced to live in the bible belt?

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  You believe your god gave you a brain.

I do. Perhaps not a particularly good one, lol, but I do credit God Himself with my creation.

But, you know this...lol.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Why don't you show your gratitude by using it a little?

Let me do a little math:

Quote:The purpose of this correspondence is not to belittle you or to make me feel superior,

...the conclusion being that Taco Bell is made of bricks.

lol

Is that passive aggression there, fella? lol

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  The purpose of this correspondence is not to belittle you or to make me feel superior,

I think maybe "inferior" may be more fitting. You stil assume that I am here to glorify myself.

Let's think about this a bit: I direct men to the Gospel of Mark, you direct men to...Mark.

I give links to scripture, you give links to...Mark.

I give God and His word as authoritative, you give...Mark.

My, but except for the actuall message, there really is not a lot of difference between you and the guy with the coat of righteousness.

But that is just my opinion.

You see, the difference between us, Mark, is that I actually hate religion, and try to steer men away from it.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  or to shove my opinions down your throat.

You are free to bring anything you like to the table. I do not impose the terms of a discussion.

Why...that is just unAmerican!

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I am here to practice my self expression, and to learn how to connect with others, particularly theists.

Yes, I have read some of your expressions. Funny, but I did not see any "expressions" on your site like the ones you use here. Perhaps I did not read enough.

Come on, Mark...be yourself! Let your followers know the real you!



(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I am also here to learn how and when to pull my head in, when to give up being "right" all the time, and to learn. My point? How about you do a little of that too?

Okay, if you insist (and this is really hard for me, my ego being what it is and all):

In my haste, I mistakenly identified NJB as the Philips translation.

*sniff*

There, now you see that I too can be humble. But while we are on the subject, can you tell what texts are used for that translation? And then tell me why you use this particular translation, seeing that there are many, many experts here about manuscripts?

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  How? Have another read of Bucky's last post.

Well, as I have told you before, when responding to posts they are at the very least, read, then reread, then responded to, making a total of no less than three reads of a particular statement.

Plus (look out, my ego again), I think that a line for line examination should be at least an indication that I do not generalize a post. What do you think?

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Q document?
What the hell is that?

They have such a document?

lol


(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  No resurrection in Mark's gospel? Huh? Really?

So you are, in saying this...saying that the Gospel of Mark is a credible document?

I would also ask, if none of scripture is credible, why would this be an issue for you?

I would also ask, despite whether it is credible or not, can you not finish the discussion which you yourself...challenged me to? You don't have to believe it, just as you don't have to believe Star Wars...to discuss what is actually in there.

Of course, if it betrays the fact that claims of expert knowledge are as bogus as the "friendly nature" of this response, I guess it can get a little embarassing for someone seeking to draw people unto himself.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Paul invented the idea of the sacrificial death of Jesus?

It's a shame you did not want to discuss the New Covenant.

Yet you urge me to do something you are unwilling to do.

This also is a normal aspect of all religion: their leaders will not in one wit lift a hand to do that which they command their followers to do.

Only Christianity is different.
(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  You're kidding me! I gotta learn more about this!

Yes, you really do.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  ST, here are some brief, succinct introductions to these topics. This can be your launching pad from which you can do some more research for yourself. They are from a really credible source (LOL) http://www.markfulton.org/paul-a-complex-character

Self-glory, my friend...and you are blind to it.

It is really interesting how you reject the notion that even atheists have their own authoritative sources.

All who seek for power through information will usually end up believing the ineffable twaddle they try to sell.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  http://www.markfulton.org/the-resurrection-of-jesus

http://www.markfulton.org/%e2%80%9cjesus...e-creation

This is quite possibly one of the most disturbing things I have seen in my time here.

Can you really see no correlation between this and...religion?


(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I GENUINELY look forward to your input (so I can learn from you),

Well, let me know how I did...lol. I mean, I isn't that bright, ya know. I need people to tell me stuff like that.

(30-05-2012 08:58 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  but only AFTER you have done some reading.

And again, you will force another to some sort of activity before deigning to bother with them. That probably stems from your Catholic upbringing.

When you learn to have concern for others and learn how to help them without first demanding things, then you will begin to understand the Christ of scripture, rather than the christ you think you know so well.

Sorry for the facetious nature of this post, you should know that I have an odd sense of humor by now, and I know your a big boy and can handle it. Good luck with the proselytizing, there are many people out there starving for things of this nature.

Gotta get going. Have a great day.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2012, 11:32 AM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
Wow.

Impressive behavior.

Very stereotypical.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2012, 11:48 AM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(31-05-2012 11:32 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Wow.

Impressive behavior.

Very stereotypical.
lol
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2012, 11:56 AM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(31-05-2012 11:48 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  
(31-05-2012 11:32 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  Wow.

Impressive behavior.

Very stereotypical.
lol

I thought you had to get going.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-05-2012, 12:02 PM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(31-05-2012 11:56 AM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(31-05-2012 11:48 AM)S.T. Ranger Wrote:  lol

I thought you had to get going.
I do, I just had to get a shower and get ready.
And now, I am going to try to answer a few short ones from another thread...so I will be gere a few more minutes, and then it's time to make up for the time I have lost today (hope I have not upset my Boss...lol)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2012, 01:09 AM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
A genuine question to anyone reading this post.

Does anyone else have trouble making the slightest sense out of anything St is saying? I am getting an occasional sense that there is a loose transient connection between what he writes and the topic at hand, but that is about it. Im trying to follow his trail of thought, but without any success.

It is very hard to judge the mental state of someone without seeing and hearing them. For those who don't know, i am a doctor of medicine with considerable experience dealing with psychological and psychiatric issues. Our friend ST is probably a little unwell. This has nothing to do with his religious beliefs. He just seems incapable of sticking to a topic, and is forever jumping to spurious conclusions and assumptions. He is repeating himself without realizing it. These traits can be features of mental illness. I am not being derogatory or making fun of him. I'm just pointing out that he may be unwell in the sense that someone is unwell if they have an ingrown toenail or appendicitis.

I may be wrong. I have never met him. He will probably be offended by what I have said. I just ask everyone to bear the possibility in mind.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2012, 01:50 AM (This post was last modified: 01-06-2012 02:07 AM by Jedah.)
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(01-06-2012 01:09 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  A genuine question to anyone reading this post.

Does anyone else have trouble making the slightest sense out of anything St is saying? I am getting an occasional sense that there is a loose transient connection between what he writes and the topic at hand, but that is about it. Im trying to follow his trail of thought, but without any success.

It is very hard to judge the mental state of someone without seeing and hearing them. For those who don't know, i am a doctor of medicine with considerable experience dealing with psychological and psychiatric issues. Our friend ST is probably a little unwell. This has nothing to do with his religious beliefs. He just seems incapable of sticking to a topic, and is forever jumping to spurious conclusions and assumptions. He is repeating himself without realizing it. These traits can be features of mental illness. I am not being derogatory or making fun of him. I'm just pointing out that he may be unwell in the sense that someone is unwell if they have an ingrown toenail or appendicitis.

I may be wrong. I have never met him. He will probably be offended by what I have said. I just ask everyone to bear the possibility in mind.

Dear bro:

Why ~~~~~~~~~ so ~~~~~~~~~~ serious ~~~~?? Trolling has nothing to do with psychopath, eh?

Our friend probably has no one in reality appreciates his ill humor so he came here to seek some approve. As a doctor, you know better than I do what to do Evil_monster

Life is too important to be taken seriously.
- Oscar Wilde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2012, 06:03 AM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(01-06-2012 01:09 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  A genuine question to anyone reading this post.

Does anyone else have trouble making the slightest sense out of anything St is saying? I am getting an occasional sense that there is a loose transient connection between what he writes and the topic at hand, but that is about it. Im trying to follow his trail of thought, but without any success.

It is very hard to judge the mental state of someone without seeing and hearing them. For those who don't know, i am a doctor of medicine with considerable experience dealing with psychological and psychiatric issues. Our friend ST is probably a little unwell. This has nothing to do with his religious beliefs. He just seems incapable of sticking to a topic, and is forever jumping to spurious conclusions and assumptions. He is repeating himself without realizing it. These traits can be features of mental illness. I am not being derogatory or making fun of him. I'm just pointing out that he may be unwell in the sense that someone is unwell if they have an ingrown toenail or appendicitis.

I may be wrong. I have never met him. He will probably be offended by what I have said. I just ask everyone to bear the possibility in mind.
Really, Mark?
Okay, I will just focus on the comment that I cannot stay on topic. lol...have you noticed that it is very common for you to accuse your antagonists of your own actions?
The public record shows that I have done my best to further the discussion you began, to no avail. But if it makes you feel better...
Seeya
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2012, 06:07 AM
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
(01-06-2012 01:50 AM)Jedah Wrote:  
(01-06-2012 01:09 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  A genuine question to anyone reading this post.

Does anyone else have trouble making the slightest sense out of anything St is saying? I am getting an occasional sense that there is a loose transient connection between what he writes and the topic at hand, but that is about it. Im trying to follow his trail of thought, but without any success.

It is very hard to judge the mental state of someone without seeing and hearing them. For those who don't know, i am a doctor of medicine with considerable experience dealing with psychological and psychiatric issues. Our friend ST is probably a little unwell. This has nothing to do with his religious beliefs. He just seems incapable of sticking to a topic, and is forever jumping to spurious conclusions and assumptions. He is repeating himself without realizing it. These traits can be features of mental illness. I am not being derogatory or making fun of him. I'm just pointing out that he may be unwell in the sense that someone is unwell if they have an ingrown toenail or appendicitis.

I may be wrong. I have never met him. He will probably be offended by what I have said. I just ask everyone to bear the possibility in mind.

Dear bro:

Why ~~~~~~~~~ so ~~~~~~~~~~ serious ~~~~?? Trolling has nothing to do with psychopath, eh?

Our friend probably has no one in reality appreciates his ill humor so he came here to seek some approve. As a doctor, you know better than I do what to do Evil_monster

Hmmm, you may have something there...lol. Why, are you saying there is something wrong with my humor? Are people talking about...my humor? I knew it, your all out to get me! (<---paranoia)
By the way master jedah (get it? you know...star wars), I actually do have a life, so, regrettably, I will not be able to enjoy the astute assessments and quick wit today. Try to straighten up the coffee table for when I get back...lol.
God bless.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-06-2012, 08:58 AM (This post was last modified: 02-06-2012 04:53 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: A Question for S.T.Ranger
Tennis for Beginners, Keeping the Needle away from E , and replacing one addiction with another.
(or how to waste an hour in the Denver airport, waiting for a plane)


defacto7:

"if your comments are line by line quotes, not concise, ... I won't read any further. Sorry, I need some completeness in the order....There are conditions. It's really no biggie. I am curious if you can answer it as the person."

S.T. Ranger :
"My hopes in coming here was that there was someone that actually had a little bit of knowledge of scripture outside of the refutations given by this website".

"I see the quote system disjointed when it's line by line"
"If it is a simple question, as you have implied in both posts so far, is whether I break it up even an issue?"

"Though never really having any instruction about God, we were taught about the dangers of drugs and alcohol, and at thirteen, the thought of using would have been absurd. However, the Rock Culture goes hand in hand with these addictions, and my heroes at that time used. By fourteen, so did I. At fifteen, I dropped out of high school, and went to work, and primarily so I could support my habits.


Mark Fulton : "in my opinion your wonderfully real correspondence with him is way over his head." .... "By his own admission he is a simple man. By his own admission he has absolutely no interest in discussing history or what any of the great philosophers, past or present, have to say. His whole world revolves around his interpretation of his silly book...and that's fine....for him. Yet he is wasting everyone else's time. You will be lucky to get a direct answer about anything from him. You will read pages and pages and get almost jack shit out of it."


defacto7 : "The conditions:

1. "Do not use a scripture verse or biblical reference of any kind or that anyone else offers that is based on biblical or scriptural authority, and no references within a work, book or a scripture."

2. "Speak for yourself, not me or anyone else."

3. "No quotes other than your own, is the third."

4. "The last thing I ask is that you not get picky about specific wording of the question or qualification to discard the question. It just is what it is. You decide what it means to you. There are no tricks here."

*************** My assumptions:

"I assume you believe in God. I assume you believe in the Christian faith".

S.T. Ranger : "in fact have believed in God since I was very young. Mostly because of my grandfather"; "Nevertheless, you cannot go through this life without hearing about God. And still, I had a belief in my heart...that He existed"; (non-sequitur noted, bells start to ring).

"for the next ten years, I played Metal, used and drank, and worked. And in all of that time, I still believed in God."

"resulting in a situation or condition I wish to avoid, my belief, coupled with the desire to avoid such a condition, will cause me to act accordingly, and keep the needle away from "E."


"who I was in my heart was that same little boy who always associated himself with the good guys in the books I read" / "that after years of having an internal hatred for who I was, due to who my heart saw myself" (bell rings again)

"Anyway, the fourth or fifth service, something happened: my heart was broken. You might say that it was guilt. But it centered around, not necessarily the messages preached by the preacher, but it was as though my life was laid before me to examine, my heart was exposed, and I saw for the first time the person I was. And I was horrified. On this night, I was overcome by a desire to not be that person anymore, to be rid of him. I went forward when they gave an "altar call," sweating, scared to death, because I did not know Who God was, but I believed that if I went forward...God would meet me there.

And to this day, I believe He did. "

"but it is something by which every thought, every action, revolves around. Just as my life before revolved around drugs and alcohol, such as, I worked to supply my habit, even so now, I believe because of the knowledge of God"

"The truth is, I have always believed intellectually in God. But that belief was not a belief that was enough to affect who I was. Since my conversion, one of the greatest evidences that God has become part of my life is that the belief itself has not dimmed. While it is true that the New Testament holds instruction for the believer, there is also God Himself that speaks to my heart, and it was His voice that spoke to me not just at my conversion, but even before that, when I began to think that perhaps the person I considered myself to be was not the person I was."

"why do I believe in the "Christian faith."
"If one reads the bible, it cannot be missed that God has revealed Himself to man in a progressive manner"

" The condition of my heart was, and still is, the primary focus in my life." (bell rings, not god ??, definition of Narcissism )

"Long story short, it has been a continual search for understanding concerning the Christian faith," and I try to embrace the faith that is found in scripture"

"bottom line, I embrace the Christian faith, not the faith of other believers (and I am being honest when I say I am a source of irritation for other believers as well), but I seek to understand the faith that is found in the source of that faith. So you could say I believe in the Christian faith because I have a belief that God gave the Bible to man, that he might know God."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Every Israeli Archaeologist, without exception, (the people with the most to lose with the admission), as well as virtually every other archaeologist with an interest in the Ancient Near East now agrees that the (supposedly) "historical" events recounted in the texts of Genesis and Exodus did not, and could not have occurred according to the chronology claimed by Biblical literalist/fundamentalists. We know for certain, and there is NO dispute, in academic circles that the texts of the Pentateuch were actually written in the post-exilic years, (586-539 BCE), and we know in general the motivations for each of the texts. http://biologos.org/uploads/resources/en...essay3.pdf

2. If they are not historical texts, (as has been proven, countless times, by every commonly accepted historical method), and if we know for certain, by every generally accepted dating method, that the dating claims of fundamentalists/literists are not credible, then what sort of texts are they ?

3. We know, from historical/form critical analysis that the present version of the texts which are claimed to have ultimate, (''God given") authority, as having been "given" by a deity, (in it's present form), actually is not the original version, (form), and have, in fact, been edited, re-assembled, and re-written many times by humans, to suit the cultural needs of the day in which the re-writing /re-editing was done. If we know with absolute certainty that the present version is not the original version, it begs the questions, "when in the long complex writing, re-writing, and editing process did the deity actually stamp the final "revelation" on the texts ?", and which of the many, often disagreeing, writers and editors were actually the recipient of what is called 'inspiration' ?".

Some of the major milestones in the fascinating field of Biblical Archaeology are listed in : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_archaeology . Biblical Archaeology developed into an accepted field of academic inquiry in the mid to late 1800's, as a part of human's search for knowledge, and understanding, according to the emerging "scientific" paradigm.

Along with Archaeology, in the mid Nineteenth Century, there also arose, in academic circles, both in the United States, and in Europe, generally in Ivy League schools, and in the German Universities, (Tubingen..Germany being the center, and remains so today), a field of academic inquiry, generally housed within the Religion and Theology Departments, which is known today as "Form Criticism". The two, (well known to those with educations in the field), giants in the field were Hermann Gunkel, and Rudolph Bultmann. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_criticism . Bultmann possessed a towering intellect, (he wrote "Jesus Christ and Mythology") and believed that with the use of a method which he called "deconstruction", he could approach the original meaning of an ancient text. He anticipated a field, which is now called "Linguistics", and is related to another field of study called "semiotic analysis". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deconstruction , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics .

We know for certain, that threads of oral traditions, which we know for certain, were assembled, written, and edited in a specific span of a known historical time period. In general, (even though it is a complex and on-going source of debate what those threads were), .. in general they are labeled by scholars by a letter name ; Y(J), P, and D. (There are others, but those are 3 of the main ones). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priestly_source Each of the source texts had their own known motivation, and known expected audience.

During the years of the Babylonian Exile, and after, the national identity and confidence, (the self applied "chosen" thingy) of the Hebrew people was shattered by the experience of having been attacked, and defeated by the Babylonian army, and dragged into exile, along with the religious artifacts they had thought represented their god's "presence" among them. The loss of this confidence, and the need to re-form a cohesive society, with some common foundational "myth" systems, and "non-verbal" working assumptions led to the writing and editing of a "national story". Thus a written form of the Pentateuch arose, in a know historical context, written entirely and ONLY by human beings.

After hundreds of years and great human controvesy, which continues to this day, humans, settled on which texts they would accept as "authentic" and as a result of a complex historical process, known to historians as "canon formation" some of the texts were, (non-unanimously) voted in, and some were voted out, of the canon, (the present day "bible").


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .

Someone who "dropped out of high school" could not possibly be aware of what is going on, or has gone on, in the serious academic field of Biblical exegesis/study, during the last 175 years. The "bull in the china shop" analogy is inevitable. Here we are presented with a second example of Dunning-Kruger. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%...ger_effect .

Additionally, we are presented with a total absence of any knowledge of Philosophy, it's many fields of inquiry, and ALL their arguments and the nuances of ANY of them.

We are also presented here, with a complete lack of any familiarity with even ONE of the scientific arguments, and fields of inquiry.

We are asked to accept, coming from one totally unfamiliar with Logic, the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, as he speaks/implies that there is a "true christian", (even though he would not know what that means).

He has not one shred of historical knowledge in which to place his totally, 21st Century limited, understanding, in context.

His fundamentalist/literalist understanding is completely closed off by the fact that he has never, (apparently, obviously), looked at even one of the other competing views of the texts, and apparently is not even familiar with the competing arguments.

He assumes as true, without any examination, the worldview that gods still require the anachronistic ancient requirement for sacrifice.

He has no knowledge, apart from what he "thinks" he knows about the Covenants, ONLY from one source, of what the actual historical facts are about the formation, and meanings of those Covenants.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The human choice to approach any text with a fundamentalist-literalist approach, even while falsely assuming that, that very choice is not a human choice, and a specific decision to approach a text (with it's underlying, unspoken assumtions), is delusional, and denial of the actual choice and decision process.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tennis For Beginners: "Tennis is a game that really has no restrictions on who can play. It doesn't matter what your age, size or gender, if you have the desire you can play. Even kids can learn to play this game. Although it's a great way to get some exercise, you should be in relatively good shape because of all of the running it will require you to do."

"Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest thou also be like unto him". Proverbs 26:4

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: