The Bible?, historical acocunt or a political agenda |
Here are the general forum rules that you must follow before you start any debate topics. Please make sure you've read and followed all directions.
The Bible?, historical acocunt or a political agenda |
![]()
Post
#1
|
|
![]() dripping destruction ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 7,282 Joined: Jun 2004 Member No: 21,929 ![]() |
we all know this book. we've at least seen it in hotel rooms. this is the book with tissue-thin pages, the book that was first printed. this is a book that people rally to.
and it is a political agenda. in the early years of christianity, there were many, many sects that called themselves chistian. one sect decided they were the real christians, and condemned the rest as false sects. this sect evolved into the church. In order to make all other sects wrong, they edited the bible. they threw out the parts they didn't like, added parts they liked. The bible is a manual for how to live your life- so, why not add in a bit about who you should give money to? over the years, the bible evolved as it's editors saw fit. It was changed, in the case of the king james bible, to help conquer ireland. It was rewritten to support values the political leaders wanted supported. want a reason to allow slavery? put in a bit about cain and able. want to be able to get precious farmlands in the middle east? put in a bit about that being the holy land. the bible, it seems, is nothing more than a written propoganda tool; too far edited from it's original text to be considered anything more than a pamplet that's designed, not to ensure truth of history, and that all sides are protrayed, but to get the godless heathens to convert to christianity. now; you can either flame me and tell me how i couldn't understand, and cite bible quotes and give me something to laugh at, or you can prove me wrong with a bit of rational debate. i'd enjoy it emmensly more if you'd pick the first one, although the second is nice. have a nice day! |
|
|
![]() |
![]()
Post
#2
|
|
![]() dripping destruction ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Group: Staff Alumni Posts: 7,282 Joined: Jun 2004 Member No: 21,929 ![]() |
the 10 people! becuase they weren't christians! the sociopath christian goes to heaven for killing the infedel.
that's in the bible. and if it's not in your version, it's because it's been edited out. |
|
|
*suddenly she* |
![]()
Post
#3
|
Guest ![]() |
QUOTE(sadolakced acid @ Jun 12 2005, 1:04 AM) the 10 people! becuase they weren't christians! the sociopath christian goes to heaven for killing the infedel. that's in the bible. and if it's not in your version, it's because it's been edited out. eh, what version is that? it sounds interesting. we should probably compare different versions. considering that the ten people killed were christians, of course they went to heaven. if the sociopath truly repented and was sorry that he did it, he also went to heaven. ^if you want a (niv version) verse for that, ask. because otherwise i won't post it unless i need to prove it. if the ten people killed were not christian, but did not have a chance to receive the gospel before, then it is my own belief that they would have a chance to become christian before entering either heaven or hell, or that they would go to heaven. of course, i'm not trying to force anyone to agree with me on that, because i'm human and can't tell you how God works. if they did have a chance before and did not become christian, then they went to hell. that's what i believe, anyway. |
|
|
![]() ![]() |