Evolution Debunked - Life from dead chemicals??? - Page 3

Beetree, it's not stealing but it's called I borrow something I really liked how it fits vk4's description.

Btw what do you think about the video in the first page of this thread, I can't believe atheists can't accept the fact that evolution is a religion or in other words something they believe must be true.

Bee so the OT is not true anymore?

I suppose the way shtal lies and steals you could think the OT is irrelevant.

Shtal you have been told by about everyone here your stupid videos are bullshit made for stupid people who believe bullshit.

Shtal are you going to cut your hand off and poke your own eye out according to gods law as punishment for your sin or do you reject God's law and follow your own.

Shtal do you believe the convicted fraud rev moons is god incarnate like Jonathan Wells does?

Shtal,

"Borrowing" in the context you did, without credit to the original author is stealing, called plagiarism. What you are doing, "called I borrow something I really liked how it fits vk4's description.", is trying to make something unpalatable, not so bad, and at its best, is an euphemism.

The fact you had no intention of crediting Carlin with what you wrote as yours, that was indeed his, only shows direct plagiarism. There is no sugar coating this. You need to atone and redirect, or study better some major fundamentals, if you want to discuss God with natural English speakers.

Do you not remember it was Moses himself who had not the gift of tongue? And instead Aaron was God's gift to him in that matter. You can't demand a following based on a lie, and Carlin did not give you the use of his words. If God or even yourself had that calling for you, these doubts would never arise.

That is perfection in the faith that is the Word of God. No cutting corners to fit your thinking.

@vk4... not sure about OT "being true anymore" and whether it is the basis of OT relevancy.

I just mean that I am not a religious bible study scholar, and the degree in which you and others seem to be enthralled with this area of discussion, gets to be tiring for me. I rely on my basic upbringing and sense of right, wrong, and justice to propel myself through life. I feel no need to be an evangelical, while still professing a belief in God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

I do not let such beliefs cloud my thinking with magical thoughts. However, I do enjoy the idea of mystery. I think there is always more to learn and discover.

I certainly will not support an obvious lie, or blatant plagiarism. Has nothing to do with being able to believe in the one God, because I am imbued with faith, simple as that. Your derision of such— I find abhorrent and unbecoming, but that isn't really something I concern myself overly with, either. And I don't dwell on it, or make it a sticking point to hate you, or others who think like you.

Now it would not be deceipt except that shtal was asked several times about it and shtal chose not to address the issue, even worse he used the same fraud multiple times on multiple threads.

Inabity to think for himself even when it comes to insults.

Shame you deceitful sinner, you can bullshit to us but can you bullshit your god.

Shtal do you believe the Rev Moon is God incarnate like Jonathan Wells does.

Bee, honestly as a believer I am interested in your thoughts on the OT re its relevance to being a good christian.

Many young Christians I know go to the point of only handing out free copies of the new testament. Only when pushed they admit they believe the OT is metaphor and instructive lessons but not the literal word of god, in fact they distance themselves from it.

The OT relevance is to the times in which it was lived in. When mankind progressed and was ready to go beyond its teachings to survive as a people, then the path of Jesus was the next step. What opened my eyes to this thinking was reading James Michener's novel, "The Source". The scholarly insights to every day life that kept one healthy and living in such primitive times, makes some of the more mundane and bizarre instructions, suddenly genius.

I don't get hung up on literalness, because if I was God and offered eternity, then any suffering to get there has to be a blip, so to speak. I do believe there is much metaphor, but that doesn't take away from, what parts may remain as literal truth. There is our certain death and reason to fear God, but that isn't anything worse than what happens when one doesn't believe or fear God's promise of a choice in afterlife.

As always, it remains a choice.
 

How do you decide for yourself the metaphor bits from the truthy bits?

I think there is a clue in differences in prose. I am not a scholar, so I would have to parse certain bits against my own reality, I suppose.

What I would look for instead of faulty transcribing, is the essential lesson that each generation will see as having value.

and ... now g'night! I am done!

OK so the bible means what each individual in each generation thinks it means for them personally.

Like say early Americans that used the bible to justify slavery but the next generation used it to justify anti-slavery kind of thing.