Once upon a time I was friends with a preacher's kid. We hung out and I was invited to attend some getaways here and there. On one I happened to comment how they were doing something was very much the way another religion had once gathered their own followers together. Of course the one I mentioned predated the christian mythos. He immediately turned to me and told me that I had to be quiet because saying such things around them would be a very bad thing.

Quote from: Lisbeth on December 28, 2007, 03:35:38 PM

Quote from: tekla on December 28, 2007, 03:18:09 PM
"Since I don't read the King James Version, that's kind of immaterial."

So you have some sort of access to the original documents (that don't exist) and can translate them from the original Aramaic or Hebrew?  Or perhaps you are using the old version of the Latin Vulgate?

Well, uh, yes, I can.  I prefer the Nestle-Alland edition of the Greek and Stuttgard edition of the Hebrew.  I do also have Jerome's Vulgate.  And I am enough of a textual critic that I am satisfied with the semantics of the versions I read. 

And if you are going to put words like "the inerrant word of god" in my mouth, please check with me for proper quotation, first.  I get enough of that when Phil is writing press releases that have my name in them.

A lady after my own heart.  Those are my tools of choice as well.  I do also have a copy of the Textus Receptus that I pull out just for fun.  It sometimes helps explain things that people believe.

I find it so interesting that those who are the most ardent Bible bashers are so freely given to believe in myths, such as some of those expressed here.   That is also a very bad thing.

And BTW, since Katia is proudly displaying her phd, I will simply say that in most other circles I am known as Doc.  I dare say that we may disagree and that is fine, but it is most certainly not because I am either naive or uninformed. 

Oh, and the back to the subject at hand, the eunuch passage were the ones that finally changed my mind and allowed me to accept myself. 

Peace all,
Kristi

2 Corinthians 4 (King James Version)

13We having the same spirit of faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe, and therefore speak;

14Knowing that he which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by Jesus, and shall present us with you.

15For all things are for your sakes, that the abundant grace might through the thanksgiving of many redound to the glory of God.

16For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day.

17For our light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory;

18While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

2 Corinthians 5

1For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.

2For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven:

3If so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked.

4For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life.

5Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit.

6Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:

7(For we walk by faith, not by sight:)

8We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

9Wherefore we labour, that, whether present or absent, we may be accepted of him.


this is the very definition of being transgendered and christian

love, beth

Quote from: Kristi on December 29, 2007, 06:39:51 AM
I find it so interesting that those who are the most ardent Bible bashers are so freely given to believe in myths, such as some of those expressed here.   That is also a very bad thing.

And BTW, since Katia is proudly displaying her phd, I will simply say that in most other circles I am known as Doc.  I dare say that we may disagree and that is fine, but it is most certainly not because I am either naive or uninformed. 

Oh, and the back to the subject at hand, the eunuch passage were the ones that finally changed my mind and allowed me to accept myself. 

Kristi

but, my dear, apparently we cannot disagree with you on these subjects without you resorting to name-calling and passing moral judgments.

and jfyi, eunuchs were primarily castrated (and sometimes docked) against their will. hardly what one would call a Transgender.

-ell

Quote from: ell on December 29, 2007, 07:47:44 PM

Quote from: Kristi on December 29, 2007, 06:39:51 AM
I find it so interesting that those who are the most ardent Bible bashers are so freely given to believe in myths, such as some of those expressed here.   That is also a very bad thing.

And BTW, since Katia is proudly displaying her phd, I will simply say that in most other circles I am known as Doc.  I dare say that we may disagree and that is fine, but it is most certainly not because I am either naive or uninformed. 

Oh, and the back to the subject at hand, the eunuch passage were the ones that finally changed my mind and allowed me to accept myself. 

Kristi

but, my dear, apparently we cannot disagree with you on these subjects without you resorting to name-calling and passing moral judgments.
-ell

That's totally unfair and inaccurate.  I generally keep my mouth shut, even in the face of grave inaccuracies, such as some of those presented in this post.  I respect your right to believe whatever you want.  I've said that more times than I can count.  But apparently, that respect is not something you wish to return.  So be it.  I can live with it. 

Kristi

I would always give the old WHOSOEVER quote.

I grew up in a theological college in Cambridge, my first job was rubbing cow fat into books (including one pretty old king james).
I adore the Bible on the whole, I think religion is principally a force for good. I just don't believe in God. Small problem.

Quote from: Kristi on December 29, 2007, 08:06:52 PM
That's totally unfair and inaccurate.  I generally keep my mouth shut, even in the face of grave inaccuracies, such as some of those presented in this post.  I respect your right to believe whatever you want.  I've said that more times than I can count.  But apparently, that respect is not something you wish to return.  So be it.  I can live with it. 

Kristi

i do not wish to be unfair. i do not think i have been inaccurate.

by name-calling, may i refer to 'Bible-bashers' ?
by passing moral judgment i refer to "so freely given to believe in myths"
because of your 'unfair' and 'inaccurate' jabs, i refer to these as unfounded accusations

please calm yourself and remember what Gene Wolfe said: "If He is the most powerful force in the universe, then He doesn't need to be defended by [ladies] at Sunday school."

i haven't used any words against you personally, whereas you have, and on a previous post you included the word 'ignorant.' that's a fairly personal bash, which i then let slide. let's discuss this as adults, and not have to have someone start referring to site rules.

"my first job was rubbing cow fat into books (including one pretty old king james).
I adore the Bible on the whole, I think religion is principally a force for good. I just don't believe in God. Small problem."

Not even a small problem.  Good books are good books.  Now, later, and forever.  Truth is relative anyway.  The only problem is the kind of vast difference between what that book says, and what its fan club seem to think it advocates.

This is the news forum and not the spirituality one right?

Discussions, thoughts, and ideas go where they will.  Thinking you can control how ideas work, is not thinking at all.

Quote from: ell on December 29, 2007, 08:43:32 PM
i do not wish to be unfair. i do not think i have been inaccurate.
i haven't used any words against you personally, whereas you have, and on a previous post you included the word 'ignorant.' that's a fairly personal bash, which i then let slide. let's discuss this as adults, and not have to have someone start referring to site rules.

Definition:
Ignorance is a lack of knowledge. Ignorance is sometimes misinterpreted as a synonym of stupidity, and is as thus often taken as an insult.  (emphasis added)

To say that one is ignorant does not constitute an insult.  It simply means a lack of knowledge.  It is not intended to insult anyone.  Apparently you were "ignorant" of what I was saying and took it the wrong way.  If you wish I'll be more than happy to point out the inaccuracies, but this is not the place to get in a point-by-point peeing contest. 

Now I'm out of this discussion.

Kristi

LOCKED.

No more replies to be added, time to let this one slip away.

Mods: do not unlock this post please.