The Dinosaurs of the GOP

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by HatchetJack

So in other words there are two camps, one in which we study the Bible,
have faith in mankind and trust in the oldest history book or just
SHIT HAPPENS?

Do you honestly believe that the Bible is a history book? If so, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

[ebacon]

The other day I made friends online with a Roman Catholic Priest. He is also an amateur astronomer. What interested me in him was that he made a post about the Vatican Astronomer. I thought the Vatican whu?

Anyhow he summed up the difference between faith and science rather succinctly. In an even smaller nutshell it goes like this -- faith is what you have to trust when you don't know all the facts. The Vatican has an astronomer to help collect more facts.

This stuff isn't that hard when there is a good teacher to explain it. Anyhow here is an article on the Vatican Astronomer.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/interna...omer-1-1116595

[Bigerik]

Funny thing is, the bible doesn't say the world is 10,000 years old.

[barbara]

Originally Posted by HatchetJack

So in other words there are two camps, one in which we study the Bible,
have faith in mankind and trust in the oldest history book or just
SHIT HAPPENS?

Having faith in mankind has very little to do with reading the bible.

[ebacon]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Do you honestly believe that the Bible is a history book? If so, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

While I am not an authority on the subject, my understanding is that it is not a history book. Instead it is a very old book that tries to explain how the world works as best the authors understood. As such the book is rich in period stories and needs someone that's in the know to interpret it properly.

Similar situations exist even in day-to-day translations of foreign languages. I think the Japanese language refers to man's spirit as steam from hot rice. Obviously translated stories about hot rice would not be about food.

Wasn't the bru-haha over Martin Luther about him getting the Bible out to the masses and there being concern that they would misinterpret and abuse it?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by ebacon

Wasn't the bru-haha over Martin Luther about him getting the Bible out to the masses and there being concern that they would misinterpret and abuse it?

Pretty prescient fellow. I'll admit a degree of distrust and disdain for anyone who wears their religion on their sleeve.

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by whell

I really believe that this is the case. Over 10000 years ago, men used to have balls. The rise of liberalism changed that.

Yes, we all know the human condition was far more conservative and therefore more civilized in the Mesolithic period.........................

The first Republican;

Neanderthal_2D.jpg
Zod.

Who died a gruesome death at 23 because he killed a Mastodon and refused to share the meat with the rest of the tribe. His last words were; "Ig chumbaba ud gick-gick GARRRRRRR!" Which, roughly translated, means; "I'll let it rot before I'll let you 47%ers get a free meal!"

They ate the Mastodon. Then they ate Zod.

Dave

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by HatchetJack

So in other words there are two camps, one in which we study the Bible,
have faith in mankind and trust in the oldest history book or just
SHIT HAPPENS?

I don't recall "SHIT HAPPENS" being a Bible passage. But, I have heard many a Christain claim, for lack of an explanation to a given situation, "The Lord works in mysterious ways." Which I've always taken as the nicey-nice Bible-thumper way of saying; "I dunno. Shit Happens."

P.S.

I have faith in mankind too. I have faith that greedy, avaricious people will try to screw me anytime I give them the chance.

So, tell me. Are all those guns you keep handy solid evidence of this great faith you have in humanity?

Dave

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by ebacon

While I am not an authority on the subject, my understanding is that it is not a history book. Instead it is a very old book that tries to explain how the world works as best the authors understood. As such the book is rich in period stories and needs someone that's in the know to interpret it properly.

Which, to my mind, would require someone that was there. Someone that was there would also be long dead.

Similar situations exist even in day-to-day translations of foreign languages. I think the Japanese language refers to man's spirit as steam from hot rice. Obviously translated stories about hot rice would not be about food.

Would a Mexican translation describe a mans spirit as farts from digesting beans?

Wasn't the bru-haha over Martin Luther about him getting the Bible out to the masses and there being concern that they would misinterpret and abuse it?

Sort of like TeaBaggers reading the U.S. Constitution?

Dave

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by BlueStreak

Sort of like TeaBaggers reading the U.S. Constitution?

Dave

Well put! They parse everything else, why not the second amendment?