[geocentrism] Re: Bible anomalies

  • From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 15:06:33 -0800

Allen,

My replies in green, below:

Neville
www.GeocentricUniverse.com


-----Original Message-----
From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 13:33:37 -0700 (PDT)

Nevil: Your comments are founded upon your assumption that the Bible does indeed contain truth.

I have a totally realistic explanation to all this division, which is based upon my assumption/deduction that the Bible is not 100% truth.

You state the same thing yourself in this posting, so we are in agreement.

 

Allen: Think the sublties of what i said may have been missed....... Do you mean subtleties or subtitles?

I think if you will look carefully at my comments i do not make the assumption that the bible was "the truth"....I only used it as an example since it is and was the focus of the issues under consideration......("what is truth" & interpretations and such).......if i were Muslim my example would have still been valid... the principle would be the same ..

 

1.I was addressing the logic used to deduce any "truth" (my example bible) as true are not and can not be ascertained on the fact that there is so many divisions....that was the primary point

further, was making that point to show that simply not understanding the bible in whole or in part is not a logically valid reason for discounting some and accepting some of it......i was pointing out that very approach is the reason for the 28000 different interpretations..... In fact if you and everyone else accepted all ignored none logically the divergence between all our various opinions should fade to insignificance, if truth is intrinsic to the word itself and not based in our various understandings and interpretations.......I was only drawing attention to the fact that even with all the various division and interpretations that is not a valid reason for engaging in selective verse picking while ignoring others... I don't use it as such. All I'm doing here is offering a reason why large chunks of the Bible are fraudulent. I can not just proclaim that the Bible is corrupt without a reason. If you want a reason for my being selective, then I will give you that. It is because I am loyal to God. ...it is a case instead for taking the scripture in whole not in part.....why? ...cause the fact that there are 28000 different divisions is only made possible by that very approach..as you said "taking selective verses while ignoring others ...and that is exactly what you do in your assumption.... It is you who do not follow the subtlety here. All the 28,000+ groups are using the entire Bible and stating that it is "God breathed" (2 Tim 3:16). The division is with the entire book. Their "flocks" are taught that this is the actual word of God and that if they don't understand any bit of it, then that is their fault, through stupidity, ignorance, sin, or whatever. It is exactly the Emperor's New Clothes scam. I am saying that several emperors are naked, and one of them is the black book.

 

2. So if the fact that there are 28000 different versions bothers you in so far as it relates to what is and is not truth ..then your own approach to "scripture" would contribute to the very chaos you describe as the reason for taking your own approach to it... The whole point is that these 28,000+ are divisions that are based upon the same thing. My schism, if you like, would be based upon something different. I could label this a philosophy, but I could not claim that it was "God-breathed," because 2 Tim 3:16 comes out in my view. It is therefore not a "Christian" sect, but a philosophy. ...which in turn adds to the 28000 different interpretations....your methodology contributes in creating the very environment you are protesting. Nope.

 

The point you make about so many different variations is independent of truth itself...The logical appraoch is to take all or none... No, this is in no way "logical." It is a knee-jerk reaction. Not logical. ...thus literal interpritaions as mentioned........so many different variations cannot be logically invoked to justify division in any religion to include orthodox Christianity   Pointless statement.

 
 
----- Original Message ----
From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Allen,

Your comments are founded upon your assumption that the Bible does indeed contain truth.

I have a totally realistic explanation to all this division, which is based upon my assumption/deduction that the Bible is not 100% truth.

You state the same thing yourself in this posting, so we are in agreement.

Neville

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. geocentrism
  3. Archive
  4. 10-2007