Pericles, I never typed this

>>Is the Bible true? If it is not true Christianity self destructs.<<

That was pasted from a Daviy post that others had missed on the thread "Is Christianity for real"?

Furthermore you contradicted yourself by actually stating a criticism you made of me.

>>To imagine that inconsistencies, contradictions, misunderstandings, mistranslations and politically convenient additions would not find their way into such a document, is to be wilfully ignorant of the conduct of real life.<<

You admonished me falsely for "calling christians dumb" which I never did, and yet you refer to some as "wilfully ignorant"?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2530&page=0#57496

Pericles you have perfected the "foot in mouth" diet!

I put the "error you inadvertently picked up Pericles" in my last post I used "truth" rather than "honesty".

Daviy an interesting documentary explained a lot about the astonomical events. I checked it all out with an astronomer and it's conclusions were wrong.

It alleged "A major astronomical event was alleged to have occured in 6BC. The planet Saturn ("Protector of Israel")aligned with Jupiter (the Kingstar) in Pisces "the constellation of the Messiah" and this conjunction would have been seen in Israel as a very bright star which rose in the East".

The astronomical calculations to test this theory are very complex and take quite a deal of computer time, but if anyone is astronomically gifted I would love their input.

My astronomer disagreed that this conjunction was seen in Israel on the morning of the 12th April 6BC as a bright star over Bethlehem. She also refuted the 4th October 7BC others calculated to have been the birthdate of Jesus.

I have quite a lot of detail on this as I actually wrote a short paper on it.

But it does beg the question - Why don't the churches tell their people that the calendar is out? The dates allegedly have a lot to do with alleged prophecy.

Davidf - worse than that people who tell you God thinks and answers their prayers are actually the ones who believe in the "most unintelligent model of God" Amazing!

Your protestations become increasingly confusing, OP2.

>>Pericles, I never typed this. 'Is the Bible true? If it is not true Christianity self destructs.'<<

Funny, I'm sure I read it in one of your posts. Ah yes, here it is.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2572#58426

Please explain exactly how to distinguish between your own words and excerpts from others'?

On second thoughts, it is bound to add another layer of confusion. Don't bother.

But it gets weirder, if that were possible.

>>You admonished me falsely for "calling christians dumb" which I never did, and yet you refer to some as "wilfully ignorant"?<<

A quick "find" of the word dumb will not discover it in any of my posts, OP2. Plenty of yours. None of mine.

And it is crystal clear from the context that this was aimed at you:

"To imagine that inconsistencies, contradictions, misunderstandings, mistranslations and politically convenient additions would not find their way into such a document, is to be wilfully ignorant of the conduct of real life"

>>I put the "error you inadvertently picked up Pericles" in my last post I used "truth" rather than "honesty".<<

I didn't pick it up inadvertently, OP2, it was quite deliberate.

Sadly, if you substitute "honesty" for "TRUTH!", it kinda loses all its impact. Because people can, and often are "honestly" wrong. They honestly do the best they can, but are prone to error. Possibly through not knowing the whole story, or perhaps from a zeal to "do the right thing"

If you look at it that way, it's difficult to find anything that you could possibly prove to be wilfully dishonest in the Bible.

Pericles ... You are right, I can't expect you to decipher my comments from others in the same post. The fact that it actually stated it wasn't clear enough for you... I apologise!

But hang on... You are allowed to misinterpret but I'm not. If you think I am "wilfully ignorant" then you are back to your childish "name calling" ways again. Please grow up!

<<A quick "find" of the word dumb will not discover it in any of my posts, OP2. Plenty of yours. None of mine.>>

I would have thought wilfully ignorant could be synonymous with dumb but in the Pericles mind anything is possible.

<<If I understand you, you are hoping to persuade Christians that they are dumb to believe what they believe.>> That statement was below even you Pericles!

Another of your false statements Pericles - http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2530&page=0

You have failed to understand the simplest concepts... but you bat at 100% on that...lol

So to refresh -

Did you make up statistics? http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2530&page=0

Can you read English? - Scroll up

Can you type English so that it makes sense? - Scroll up

Are you prone to name calling - Scroll up & http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2530&page=1

Are you prone to asking dumb questions!

Yep you have a gift...lol

Perhaps you should change your name to Periwinkles...lol ENOUGH!

Daviy - One school of thought is that Dionysius Exiguus chose December 25 for Jesus' birthday by combining the Jewish ritual of circumcision which occurs on the eighth day after a birth of a male child and the 1st day of the Roman year which is the 1st of January.

Another theory is that Jesus was born during the reign of Saturnius as legate from 8BC to 6BC and that a census may have taken place at that time. The Romans were great tax collectors and so it is logical (although not in anyway proven) that regular census' would have taken place. The bible however lists Quirinius as the census taker and yet all other records don't have Quirinius as legate until 6AD.

It all makes for a most interesting journey of discovery.

And this is the point. Mental sickness through the horrors of primitive beginnings, would of had our worst institutionalized modern day humans just looking tame as a biscuit!. Talking too a burning bush! come on! Does that sound well to you?
Its mans word, coming from the three parts of the human mind or sole as in the 33 and a third.

We all are on a merry go round, just like it has been written, so the time line we are on, will seal our fate, just like where they got their information from and so on. ( A burning city will insight the imagination) and a lot more.

It has been luck up till now on how we have exist at all.

And after the year 2000! our governments are now to blame!

Dam them to hell! ( The planet of the apes )

EVO

For all your scroll-ups and lols, OP2, you still don't get it, do you?

>>It all makes for a most interesting journey of discovery<<

The question you have never attempted to answer is why you are taking this particular journey?

If you are genuinely interested in getting answers, you should learn to phrase your questions in an open and curious manner. So far, your approach has been to pour scorn and ridicule on Christians, on the grounds that (you assume) they believe every word of the Bible.

It is so distasteful, the only assumption that can be made is that you have some form of grudge against their religion, and get your jollies from demonstrating that the book is not entirely internally consistent.

Throwing your petty verbal stones at me won't convince anyone that your quest is sincere, so you may as well give up.

>>I would have thought wilfully ignorant could be synonymous with dumb but in the Pericles mind anything is possible<<

Not in my language. You can be dumb without knowing it. But to be wilfully ignorant, you have to make an effort.

Whichever, if the cap fits, wear it. My statement was clear

"To imagine that inconsistencies, contradictions, misunderstandings, mistranslations and politically convenient additions would not find their way into such a document, is to be wilfully ignorant of the conduct of real life"

Do you fit this profile? I think you do. And you probably would admit to it as well, if you gave it a moment's thought.

>>Christians - Please invite all friends to join this thread. Bible study for John 3:16ers. It is an open invitation! Who knows an atheist might be reading this and convert!<<

Do you really believe that you are going about this in the right way? Your approach is one of aggressive non-belief, which gives atheism a bad name.

But perhaps that was your intention all along?

Hi Opinionated2

This was the source I used as my refernece to the birth date of Jesus.

“We have seen his star in the East” (Matt.22), said the Wise Men, according to the A.V. The translation is however incorrect, for the words “in the east” are in the original “En te anatole” - the Greek singular - but that elsewhere “the east” is represented by “anatolai” - the Greek plural. The singular form “anatole” has, it is maintained, quite a special astronomical significance, in that it implies the observation of the early rising of the star, the so called heliacal rising. The translators of the Authorised Version could not have known this.
When “en te anatole” is translated properly Matth.22 reads as follows:
“We have seen his star appear in the first rays of dawn.” That would have corresponded exactly with the astronomical facts.
Keller, Werner. The Bible as History. Hodder & Stroughton, 1975.

The idea that the conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter in the year 7 BC was the “star” referred to in Matthew’s account of the birth of Jesus is supported by the nature of the conjunctions. The conjunctions of Saturn and Jupiter were “heliacal” risings in Pisces; that is, the first visible sightings were at daybreak.

But this is not of any great importance. 6BC or 7BC? 1AD still came about by working backwards over 533 years.

How can we ever get anywhere with a religion that acknowledges that it book that is supposed to the word of God but contains errors? Then Christians go on to decide what is true and what is false in the Bible to support whatever argument they are supporting at that time.

To all you Christians out there. Make your choice. Is the Bible true or false? If it is true you must accept the negative arguments based on the Bible. If it is false then all your arguments must be rejected. It is a totally fallacious form of argument to pick and choose what you want to be true and what you want to be false