2 of 8
2
Misquoting Jesus : The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible
Posted: 05 April 2006 08:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2005-01-03

[quote author=“frankr”] Here is what the Church says. This is taken right from the document Dei Verbum:

“Therefore, since everything asserted by the inspired authors or sacred writers must be held to be asserted by the Holy Spirit, it follows that the books of Scripture must be acknowledged as teaching solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings (5) for the sake of salvation. Therefore “all Scripture is divinely inspired and has its use for teaching the truth and refuting error, for reformation of manners and discipline in right living, so that the man who belongs to God may be efficient and equipped for good work of every kind” (2 Tim. 3:16-17, Greek text).

12. However, since God speaks in Sacred Scripture through men in human fashion, (6) the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, in order to see clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words.

To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to “literary forms.” For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. (7) For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another. “

frankr, it is beyond ridiculous how can you or any other rational human being read that crap without shouting “BULLSHIT!” and then barfing their guts out…........scuse me, I need to urgently go “talk to Ralph”.

You’re joking, right?  Does anyone actually believe that drivel?

No wonder that there are over 10.000 different Christian denominations!  Obviously, anyone can read and interpret the intention of the “sacred author” any way they want….....making it totally subjective, arbitrary……………..and (QED) worthless!

Nevertheless, people like you waste your entire lives parsing and analyzing the bronze-age contradictory biblical scribbling as though it somehow contains hidden messages from some mythical invisible supernatural force………simply AMAZING!

 Signature 

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful…..Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Roman (3 BC - 65 AD)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 April 2006 09:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2168
Joined  2005-11-15

You saved me a lot of typing - thanks, C.A.

 Signature 


Welcome to Planet Earth, where Belief masquerades as Knowledge!

This way to the Unasked Questions—->
<—- This way to the Unquestioned Answers

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 01:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2338
Joined  2006-02-19

Mia and CA
I will continue to attempt to answer your questions. You may continue to retort with cowardly ad hominems. Calling something drivel is hardly an articulate argument. Maybe C.A. You are too emotional to attack the argument. The question was do I or does the Church hold any part of the Bible as being metaphor. I answered with the Church’s teaching on the senses of Scripture. You rebut this argument by saying it is bullshit and point to the fact that anybody can use scripture to say what they want. Mia you, who asked the original question chimed in with a heroic “yeah what he said”  I wasn’t asked about the interpretation and authority which by the way is all in the above link I gave. I will quote the Church on that now.

10. Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the word of God, committed to the Church. Holding fast to this deposit the entire holy people united with their shepherds remain always steadfast in the teaching of the Apostles, in the common life, in the breaking of the bread and in prayers (see Acts 2, 42, Greek text), so that holding to, practicing and professing the heritage of the faith, it becomes on the part of the bishops and faithful a single common effort. (7)

But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on,  has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, (9) whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.

It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.

The Church is well aware of the division Scripture can cause if there is no teaching authority. Now rebut this one by calling it crap and bringing up some point I did not answer because it is unrelated to the original topic.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 03:23 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  134
Joined  2006-02-13

Thanks for posting all that info showing exactly where you’re coming from Frank. Given that the church is the one that says how scripture should be interpreted and that the church is made up of fallible people is it not possible that such people could make mistakes or deliberately interpret things according to a particular agenda? Or do you believe that this is covered by papal infallibility?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 05:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2005-01-03

[quote author=“frankr”]

10. Sacred tradition and Sacred Scripture form one sacred deposit of the word of God, committed to the Church. Holding fast to this deposit the entire holy people united with their shepherds remain always steadfast in the teaching of the Apostles, in the common life, in the breaking of the bread and in prayers (see Acts 2, 42, Greek text), so that holding to, practicing and professing the heritage of the faith, it becomes on the part of the bishops and faithful a single common effort. (7)

But the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on,  has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church, (9) whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.

It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God’s most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls.

The Church is well aware of the division Scripture can cause if there is no teaching authority. Now rebut this one by calling it crap and bringing up some point I did not answer because it is unrelated to the original topic.

Ummmm…..........I think I got it…........ordinary people cannot possibly fathom the true sacred meaning and intent of the contradictory biblical scribbles without the Catholic Church’s self proclaimed exclusive and infallible interpretation!

What a bunch of hypocritical self-serving CRAP! 

……………..scuse me, I need to go clean a “sacred deposit of the word of god” off my windshield……damn seagulls!

 Signature 

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful…..Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Roman (3 BC - 65 AD)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 06:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2338
Joined  2006-02-19

C.A.
Instead of defending my position I will attack yours. You seem enamored with that Bertrand Russell quote. It displays ignorance of an order that can only be described as ironic. Jesus Christ in the Gospel of John is referred to as the Word. “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God..” It should sound familiar. Well the word is a translation of the Greek word logos which translates into the Latin as Ratio. You will notice that these words mean more than word but can be translated as wisdom or reason. So Christ is the wisdom or reason of God made Flesh. So to say that there is no praise of intelligence in the Bible is to deny the existence of the word. It is silliness.

Mia while on the subject of signature quotes yours is suspect as well. Some of the most beautiful lines of Scripture are attributed to women. The most beautiful being Mary’s fiat “I am the handmaid of the Lord, Let it be done to me according to thy Word” It should be the proud boast of women the heroic virtue displayed by the women of the Bible. Most of the men abandoned Christ it was the women who remained faithful

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 06:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2005-01-03

[quote author=“frankr”]C.A.
Instead of defending my position I will attack yours.

Thank you frankr………. I graciously accept your surrender and tacit agreement that Catholic Church dogma is hypocritical self-serving CRAP!

 Signature 

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful…..Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Roman (3 BC - 65 AD)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 07:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2338
Joined  2006-02-19

C.A.
I try to meet people at their level so no point arguing reason with you. I am sure you think your pathetic bully, I scream louder so I am right tactics are successful tools of influence for your ilk. Here’s an idea why not head to the beach, find a skinny guy and kick some sand on him. It seems to fit your level of discourse.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 09:16 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2005-01-03

[quote author=“frankr”]C.A.
I try to meet people at their level so no point arguing reason with you.

frankr, if there was even a shred of “arguing reason” in anything that you have posted on this site, I would be more than willing to engage you in a respectful debate. 

Sadly, that is not the case……..rather than being willing to engage in rational critical analysis, you simply endlessly quote Catholic dogma (a.k.a. Catholic Rationalization and APologetics (CRAP)).

snakechic absolutely nailed you in the article quoted in her post above…….. which you have consistently exemplified in your subsequent mindless babbling.

[quote author=“snakechic”]read this - its right to the nitty gritty
If You Can’t Beat ‘Em, Join ‘Em

Many theists are so afraid (if only subconsciously) of being wrong about their beliefs that they purposefully try not to critically analyze them for fear of where self-interrogation may lead.  (Remember that the next time someone tells you that were not supposed to question god’s reasons for doing something or for allowing something to happen.)  It was out of this fear of looking foolish or intellectually challenged that “apologetics” was borne.  While it flies in the face of true faith, sometimes believing isn’t good enough.  Some people need to prove what they want so desperately to be true.

Apologetics is that field of religious study that seeks to answer the challenges of cults, evolution, philosophy, false doctrines, and whatever else threatens what is perceived to be biblical truth.  Note that apologetics is not specific to any particular religion, but I will focus on the Christian aspect for this discussion.

Apologists are clever, persuasive, and well-educated “rationalizers” who pretend to embrace science and skepticism, but force the results of their research to arrive at the only conclusion that allows them to maintain their faith and their intellect.

frankr, you have been repeatedly asked by other posters on this site why you have come here and have consistently dodged the question with the safe and self-serving answer that you simply like arguing.  For example;

[quote author=“frankr”]
I am a believer I buy it hook line and sinker. Sacraments, Virgin Birth, the Incarnation, The Creed, The Immaculate Conception. I don’t want to prosletyze here I came here looking for an argument. I enjoy the debate.

[quote author=“frankr”]
I am here for the argument. I love the argument. Its the Irish in me

[quote author=“frankr”]
I like the arguing. I enjoy the mission. I feel like St. Paul among the Corinthians.

The contradictions and inconsistencies in the Bible and Catholic doctrine have been repeatedly identified and documented for you on this site and by reference.  The inconsistencies and total irrationality of your faith have been carefully, clearly and logically exposed. 

Yet, you persist in “argument” and steadfastly refuse to engage in serious critical analysis of your blind faith in the Catholic Church and its hypocritical self-serving dogma.  However, whenever an argument gets too close to challenging your core beliefs, you become sarcastic and/or play the “victim” of religious persecution.

frankr, is your faith so tenuous and fragile that you live in abject fear that if any aspect of it is brought into serious question, the whole construct will shatter and collapse like a wobbly house of cards?  Why are you so afraid of critical thinking?

I believe that you come here in a desperate attempt to practice and harden your rationalizations by endlessly repeating Catholic dogma in response to serious critical questions.  It is as though by repetition, they might somehow become more convincing to you……..they are certainly not convincing to anybody else.

So, I ask you again frankr, why do you come here?  Even if you do not owe us “heathens” an honest answer……….you owe it to yourself!

 Signature 

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful…..Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Roman (3 BC - 65 AD)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 10:51 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2338
Joined  2006-02-19

The contradictions and inconsistencies in the Bible and Catholic doctrine have been repeatedly identified and documented for you on this site and by reference. The inconsistencies and total irrationality of your faith have been carefully, clearly and logically exposed

What are they. Please tell me so I can become enlightened. Any argument put forth by a believer is dismissed as the “rationalizing” believer. There are few on this site who even entertain the truth that the largest contributor to the culture, the science and the world of the west is the Catholic Church and your ignorant enough to believe it as well. Your world was shaped by the Church.

You quote snakechic as someone who is reasoned. I believe that I did read something reasonable she wrote between the hundreds of bizarre and offensive things she has posted on the forum, but I assumed she did so by mistake. As for her above quote. Take out Christians and insert atheists. It is the same. This website is atheist apologetics and the rationalizing is just as great if not greater because you ignore the elephant in the room. Why something? What caused the something? Why me? I know, not important questions or even better random chance.

As to why I am here. My wife asks me the same question? She thinks I am a time wasting idiot. She also believes with Red Sox season beginning my interest will fade. She may be right. However I happened on this site accidently. I was looking to write an angry letter to a silly man I saw on tv. I found this forum and saw that were many who thought like him, and it just seems so foolish. So I argue repetively at times but there is no one else here that gives a catholic point of view. Treb does at times but he has other agendas and all his posts are dismissed because of them. Champ is dismissed by his antievolution views. So I think someone should put forth the traditional catholic argument because someone will hear it. I also enjoy discussing these issues with a couple of you.

As to my unreasonable posts. I linked a NYTimes piece on Dennett that could easily have been about Harris. It points out the fallacies that are repeated at this website daily and yet no one stands up and answers these criticisms (homunculus and Hampstead Pete were exceptions). I do not think there is an answer to the critique.

In the future, if you would like I could use your method of reasoned debate:

Atheism is a load of crap. I can’t believe anybody uses that crap. What a load of bullshit. Your an idiot for believing that crap. Did I mention that atheism is crap.  You are so unreasonable. Look out while I wipe the atheistic crap off my shoe. Oh yeah and snakechic nailed it when she said that I am right. Please, terrors for children

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 12:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2819
Joined  2005-04-29

Frankr:

Your world was shaped by the Church.

Frank, I really don’t think anyone would disagree with this statement, which is exactly why we are here (at least speaking for myself). I’ve written many thousands of words here and elsewhere that seek to examine what in our cognitive habits is healthy and what is sick. Sorry if this offends you, but I personally feel very strongly that much of our religious heritage—and thereby much of our cognitive well-being and makeup—is sick. The world is filled with mentally sick people, and your answers have not made things better, odd as that may seem to you.

Just being honest.

 Signature 

Philosophy may in no way interfere with the actual use of language; it can in the end only describe it. For it cannot give it any foundations either. It leaves everything as it is.
Ludwig Wittgenstein

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 12:46 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2338
Joined  2006-02-19

Homunculus
We disagree. I do not mind. I make my case you make yours. I have no problem with that. Maybe we will make our arguments better in the process maybe we will see their weaknesses. I like the dialogue. If reasoned the argument will get better and the distinctions clearer. I would be very surprised if either of us switch sides.

However there are many here that deny the Christian heritage of the west accept for the Crusades, the inquisition and the arrest of Galileo. they may not like the influence but it is widespread and deep.

We disagree on the sickness plaguing our culture

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 03:00 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  754
Joined  2005-01-03

[quote author=“frankr”]
Atheism is a load of crap. I can’t believe anybody uses that crap. What a load of bullshit. Your an idiot for believing that crap. Did I mention that atheism is crap.  You are so unreasonable. Look out while I wipe the atheistic crap off my shoe. Oh yeah and snakechic nailed it when she said that I am right. Please, terrors for children

AWRIGHT!!!  Now, maybe we’re getting somewhere!  At least now, we may be beginning to glimpse what the real frankr actually THINKS rather than a rote and sterile parrot-like recitation of Catholic dogma……..this is great progress!

[quote author=“frankr”]So I argue repetively at times but there is no one else here that gives a catholic point of view. Treb does at times but he has other agendas and all his posts are dismissed because of them. Champ is dismissed by his antievolution views. So I think someone should put forth the traditional catholic argument because someone will hear it.

frankr, I think that you may have inadvertently put your finger on the primary reason that we are having such a significant “failure of communication”.  The truth is, that if anybody here actually cares about what the “traditional catholic argument” is, they already understand it and have rejected it completely……….the rest simply don’t care what it is…….and won’t hear it no matter how many times it is repeated.

Most of the atheists on this site have come to their rejection of organized religion, supernatural forces, mythical deities and ignorant superstition not by studying “atheist dogma” (which, BTW does not exist), but rather by individual critical reasoning, careful and objective analysis of evidence, independent thought and the rational application of logic…….on their own.

Whether they are right or wrong, at least they have come to their conclusions through a process of critically thinking through the issues and seriously questioning and challenging orthodoxy.  They enjoy and respect discussions with those who can thoughtfully engage in such critical thinking and analysis even if they ultimately disagree with the conclusions reached.

They don’t “dismiss” the Chump, treblinka, yourself and the others because of your beliefs but rather because you insist on spouting church and biblical dogma rather than actually engaging in critical independent thinking and discussion about the evidence and its implications.

We don’t really care to hear endless recitation of the church and biblical dogma,…………we want to understand what you REALLY THINK and how you wrestle with and resolve the same issues and doubts that led us to our individual conclusions.

[quote author=“frankr”]As to why I am here. My wife asks me the same question? She thinks I am a time wasting idiot.

frankr, unless you are willing to engage in truly open and honest dogma-free discussion,……….your wife is probably right.

 Signature 

Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful…..Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Roman (3 BC - 65 AD)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 03:15 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3166
Joined  2005-04-25

[quote author=“Conservative Atheist”]Atheists….They don’t “dismiss” the Chump, treblinka, yourself and the others because of your beliefs but rather because you insist on spouting church and biblical dogma rather than actually engaging in critical independent thinking and discussion about the evidence and its implications.

Well, Conservative Atheist at least you are smart enough to recognize that conservative principles of government and civics far outweigh the financially risky and weak foreign policy liberal principles. But how can a person smart like yourself, one who can recognize folly in civics, dismiss matters of the spirit so readily. Why?

God has written his law upon your heart Conservative Atheist. That is a given. If you do not turn from your sins, you’ll stand convicted before God one day. I tell ya, you are robbing the church. The church could use brilliant minds such as yours. Doesn’t need them, God doesn’t need anybody. But he could sure use you and the talents you were born with.

I think of famous “atheists turned Christian” such as Lee Stroebel or Josh McDowell. Look at what they have done for the kingdom of God.

One college I attended, I met a guy who was a New York intellectual/atheist who had become a Christian and had changed his major to Ministry/Theology. I asked him how in the world did he go from A to Z. He said the am on his car radio got stuck and he never thought about replacing it. However, it got stuck on a Christian radio station. Everyday he would listen so he could refute the nebulous and ridiculous theology that he would hear.

Guess what happened. Jesus changed his heart. And there he was entering the ministry. Last I heard he was a honcho at Youth With a Mission, or one of those “getting youth off drugs” ministries outside of Houston, Texas. Surreal.

But what would God have Conservative Atheist do?

 Signature 

Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light. Matt 11:28-29

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 April 2006 03:55 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  4
Joined  2006-03-06

Not wanting to jump into the middle of what has become an argument.

I bought the book after seeing the author interviewed on “The Daily Show” - I’m about 80% through it.

I’ve found it informative, and written in a scholarly way. I don’t sense the author is selling an anti-religion message, just proving (as a good scientist) that the contents of the New Testament had many contributors, and were changed thousands of times over the years, often mistakenly, and often by people who did want to alter the message.

As a “fundamentalist atheist” reading this is an interesting, intellectual activity. I imagine the facts presented in the book would likely piss of the brain-dead christian wackos.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 8
2
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed