[geocentrism] Re: Bible anomolies

  • From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: 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.......
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.....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....

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......which in turn adds to the 28000 different 
interpretations....your methodology contributes in creating the very 
environment you are protesting. 

The point you make about so many different variations is independent of truth 
itself...The logical appraoch is to take all or none......thus literal 
interpritaions as mentioned........so many different variations cannot be 
logically invoked to justify division in any religion to include orthodox 

----- Original Message ----
From: Neville Jones <njones@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2007 11:53:30 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Bible anomolies


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.



-----Original Message-----
From: allendaves@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sun, 30 Sep 2007 17:57:35 -0700 (PDT)

These points you raise actually reinforces Jacks case for literal 
interpretations & accountability for such……..why/ how?……
Nevile: There are something of the order of 28,000+ 
sects/schisms/divisions/..., call them what you will, under the Christian 
banner. Are not all of these interpreting the Bible in their own way? 
Emphasizing certain verses and ignoring others? To suit the ends of the 
"church" to which they "belong"?

What about non-Christians? They reject the Bible either in whole, or at least 
in large parts. Are they all off to "hell," in your opinion?
.......Emphasizing certain verses and ignoring others? .Yes, but that is not a 
problem who’s point of origin stems intrisicaly from "Christianity" or "the 
Church" "nor does it stem from some intrinsic problem with "THE TRUTH" itself. 
The problem is intrinsic to men and the flaws of men not God’s Word or Even 
God’s Church...willfully or in ignorance……….. but the problem is not in the 
literal meanings nor does the fact there are so may schisms have anything to do 
with affecting what is and what is not the literal truth …to argue that those 
facts imply or has some significance to the meaning of the truth itself only 
has meaning in terms of men's perceptions of the truth or men’s' 
interpretations.............The point you raise only has meaning if men's 
perceptions are what determines truth.... if men’s perceptions do not determine 
truth then the fact there are so many interpretations does not nor would it 
affect what is truth whether it be
 bible, Koran, or rig veda, modern cosmology/ evolution…the fact that there are 
so many "bibles" in the world does not nor would it affect which one is "the 
word" of God/truth nor would that fact affect what God Chooses to do with those 
who don’t accept :"the truth" or if you will just go out of existence all 
together…the issue is why you believe what you believe not that 1 there is such 
a thing as absolute truth knowable or unknowable 2. How you arrive at what ever 
you consider the truth to be ..however the fact that many people believe many 
different things only makes a a statement about the condition of men not "the 
…........for the sake of simplicity assume there is such a thing as "the word 
of God" in written form...the fact that there are 28000 different 
interpretations and schisms reflects on men not God not the Truth .....I think 
the fundamental issue is if you accept bible as "the word of God" then there is 
no other way to take scripture except to 
1. take all of it not emphasizing certain verses and ignoring others, but 
taking all....if it is possible to take some and ignore others, other then 
men's personal flaws, then why is it not possible to take all and ignore none? 
2. if the meaning is not literal then how does one know what the author's truth 
is unless one first knows what the truth is..but that is the logical conundrum, 
for if the truth of the meaning is only known external of the "word of God" 
then the word of God has no intrinsic truth.......In fact this whole issue 
highlights the fact that it is this very philosophy (truth understood external 
of God's word to interpret God's word) that enables men to develop 28000 
different interpretations in the first place..... Demorgan makes this point as 
well in his  book Bugget of Parodoxes......
Without regard for how people feel about "God" or "truth if we are to assume 
such a thing and call it the bible and if Jesus is the word in the flesh, then 
feelings are irrelevant, men’s interpretations are irrelevant for if the truth 
is intrinsic in Gods word then the truth is not dependent or determined by my 
or anyone’s interpretations.... interpretations may make us feel good but they 
would not affect or determine what God's truth is....Thus, the fact there would 
be or are so many different interpretations of the truth says nothing about 
truth itself............ rather it makes a undeniable statement about the 
condition of men. If Christ was the word in flesh, i believe he was, He claimed 
that he was the only way the only door and the only path to salvation. If he is 
the only path or door and there is no other name under heaven whereby men can 
be saved then salvation is nowhere else and that would be a fact external of 
our feelings on that
 matter....and if our feelings on the matter tell us or persuade us to other 
interpretations then the word of God is not absolute out feelings about the 
word of God would be absolute.....
This philosophical problem that keeps getting raised from time to time only 
exist in a world view where the literal meanings of the word of God are not 
taken literally, where the truth or God is arbitrated by men or men’s feelings/ 
understanding/knowledge/ abilities ect and even the justifications for such an 
approach are based on that same 
philosophical circular conundrum. 

Prevent accessing dangerous websites - Protect your computer with Free Web 
Security Guard!
More information at www.inbox.com/wsg

Other related posts: