Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Religion and science Religion and science

06-28-2020 , 02:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvr
You read the whole bible? and still believe?



first time meeting a Christian who has read the whole bible
I have read the whole Bible.

Even the books with genealogies of names I can't begin to pronounce.
06-28-2020 , 02:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d2_e4
I'm not weighing in, I'm mocking. Thought that was pretty transparent!
Mocking has a bit more credibility when one shows at least some comprehension of what one is mocking.
06-28-2020 , 02:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kelhus100
Also,

Lagtight,

The sky daddy Goofy is referring to goes by many names, depending who you ask. But some common ones include Allah, Yahweh, and God.
Quite so.

Can probably throw in the Flying Spaghetti Monster as well
06-28-2020 , 02:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman
When it comes to believing crazy stuff, you definitely outclass every other person.



Perhaps Well Named can create a Make Believe and Fairy Tale thread for lagtight and Luckbox to pontificate in.
I already post in the "Poker is Rigged" thread in the Internet Poker Forum. LB can join me there.

Last edited by lagtight; 06-28-2020 at 02:25 AM.
06-28-2020 , 02:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuepee
Religious books are allegory and fairy tale, and I don't mean that in a bad way.
Some are and some aren't. Nobody who actually is familiar with the genre of religious books would say what you said.

Quote:
That should be the honest appraisal.
No, it shouldn't.

Quote:

Do not conflate them with science which is method, systematic, and foundational.

One can correct and learn and build upon and the other cannot.
Apparently you've never even HEARD of a book on Systematic Theology, let alone read one.
06-28-2020 , 02:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuepee
The bible is a collection of the wisdom of people who came prior, without citation.



Some might call it plagiarism but I will be nice.



----



Thomas Tusser - 1573 - Book, Five Hundreth Pointes of Good Husbandrie.



"A foole and his money be soone at debate: which after with sorrow repents him too late.”



--------



The Defence of the Government of the Church of England, 1587 by Dr. John Bridge. “A foole and his money is soone parted.”



------



cite
So, you DO know that your citations were written about 2500 years AFTER the Old Testament book of Proverbs was, right?
06-28-2020 , 02:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverbeclever
Thought this one would be appropriate in here:

Proverbs 21:20
“A fool and his money are soon parted”
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cuepee
The bible is a collection of the wisdom of people who came prior, without citation.

Some might call it plagiarism but I will be nice.

----

Thomas Tusser - 1573 - Book, Five Hundreth Pointes of Good Husbandrie.

"A foole and his money be soone at debate: which after with sorrow repents him too late.”

--------

The Defence of the Government of the Church of England, 1587 by Dr. John Bridge. “A foole and his money is soone parted.”

------

cite
The correct response was to look up Proverbs 21:20 and see that his alleged verse was a complete fabrication. It is definitely hilarious that our resident street preacher who claims to have read the whole Bible didn't notice this.

Last edited by MrWookie; 06-28-2020 at 02:45 AM.
06-28-2020 , 02:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
The correct response was to look up Proverbs 21:20 and see that his alleged verse was a complete fabrication. It is definitely hilarious that our resident street preacher who claims to have read the whole Bible didn't notice this.
The Living Bible comes closest to the famous quote:

The wise man saves for the future but the foolish man spends whatever he gets. Proverbs 21:20
06-28-2020 , 03:05 AM
Contemporary English Version (CEV) concludes Proverbs 21:20 as follows:

...stupid people spend their money as fast as they get it.

Only paraphrases get close to the actual verse.
06-28-2020 , 03:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrWookie
The correct response was to look up Proverbs 21:20 and see that his alleged verse was a complete fabrication. It is definitely hilarious that our resident street preacher who claims to have read the whole Bible didn't notice this.
I agree, it is hilarious that I didn't notice.

(More pathetic than hilarious , actually)
06-28-2020 , 03:53 AM
Excise the last ~150 posts to a "lagtight vs. the world" thread, IMO.
06-28-2020 , 04:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
I have read the whole Bible.

Even the books with genealogies of names I can't begin to pronounce.
lol i still stand by my statement

never met a Christian who has read the whole bible
06-28-2020 , 07:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
Mocking has a bit more credibility when one shows at least some comprehension of what one is mocking.
Ok, I call.

Lord's prayer, Authorized or King James Version (1611)

Our Father which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.

<snip>

"Our" indicates that the prayer is that of a group of people who consider themselves children of God and who call God their "Father". "In heaven" indicates that the Father who is addressed is distinct from human fathers on earth.

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord%27s_Prayer ("Analysis" section")

Heaven

The modern English word heaven is derived from the earlier (Middle English) heven (attested 1159); this in turn was developed from the previous Old English form heofon. By about 1000, heofon was being used in reference to the Christianized "place where God dwells", but originally, it had signified "sky, firmament".

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven#Etymology

---------------------------------------------------------
So, he is our "father" who is in "heaven" which derived from an older word meaning "sky".

Sounds very much like a sky daddy to me. QED.
06-28-2020 , 08:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d2_e4
Ok, I call.

Lord's prayer, Authorized or King James Version (1611)

Our Father which art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name.

<snip>

"Our" indicates that the prayer is that of a group of people who consider themselves children of God and who call God their "Father". "In heaven" indicates that the Father who is addressed is distinct from human fathers on earth.

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord%27s_Prayer ("Analysis" section")

Heaven

The modern English word heaven is derived from the earlier (Middle English) heven (attested 1159); this in turn was developed from the previous Old English form heofon. By about 1000, heofon was being used in reference to the Christianized "place where God dwells", but originally, it had signified "sky, firmament".

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaven#Etymology

---------------------------------------------------------
So, he is our "father" who is in "heaven" which derived from an older word meaning "sky".

Sounds very much like a sky daddy to me. QED.
Thank you for offering a serious argument for your use of "sky daddy."

"Heaven" has multiple meanings in Scripture.

For example, Genesis 1:1 says:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the Earth.

In this context, "heaven" does indeed refer to the "sky or firmament."

Since the context of Genesis 1:1 is the creation of Planet Earth, "heaven" can't be referring here to God's dwelling place, since he was already dwelling in Heaven before He created Planet Earth.

Good try, though. An admirable effort.
06-28-2020 , 08:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
Thank you for offering a serious argument for your use of "sky daddy."

"Heaven" has multiple meanings in Scripture.

For example, Genesis 1:1 says:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the Earth.

In this context, "heaven" does indeed refer to the "sky or firmament."

Since the context of Genesis 1:1 is the creation of Planet Earth, "heaven" can't be referring here to God's dwelling place, since he was already dwelling in Heaven before He created Planet Earth.

Good try, though. An admirable effort.
Lol dude. You got called and now you're trying to argue with the dealer that your 3rd pair no kicker beats my flush. Time to let this one go.

Even if such an esoteric distinction is known to theological scholars such as yourself, it's pretty safe to say that the average religious Joe construes "our father in heaven" exactly as "daddy in the sky", which is what was to be demonstrated.

Anyway, it's Sunday, so lot's of pokering to do today. Can't really be spending lots of time deconstructing the chronological paradox of whether the imaginary man was already living in the imaginary place before he created the imaginary place, fascinating though it is.

Last edited by d2_e4; 06-28-2020 at 08:58 AM.
06-28-2020 , 08:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d2_e4
Lol dude. You got called and now you're trying to argue with the dealer that your 3rd pair no kicker beats my flush. Time to let this one go.



Even if such an esoteric distinction is known to theological scholars such as yourself, it's pretty safe to say that the average religious Joe construes "our father in heaven" exactly as "daddy in the sky", which is what was to be demonstrated.
Well, if you are correct that it should be super easy to find an average religious Joe who believes that the God they believe in is a "sky daddy" it should be super easy to find one quote from one of those "Joe's" saying just that.

You are the one who started us down the esoteric word-study path.
06-28-2020 , 09:01 AM
See my edit. Also, should probably wait till WN moves this whole thing to your hotly awaited vanity thread.
06-28-2020 , 09:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d2_e4
See my edit. Also, should probably wait till WN moves this whole thing to your hotly awaited vanity thread.
Having my own Containment Thread would be the crowning achievement of my whole life up to this point.
06-28-2020 , 09:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by d2_e4
Lol dude. You got called and now you're trying to argue with the dealer that your 3rd pair no kicker beats my flush. Time to let this one go.

Even if such an esoteric distinction is known to theological scholars such as yourself, it's pretty safe to say that the average religious Joe construes "our father in heaven" exactly as "daddy in the sky", which is what was to be demonstrated.

Anyway, it's Sunday, so lot's of pokering to do today. Can't really be spending lots of time deconstructing the chronological paradox of whether the imaginary man was already living in the imaginary place before he created the imaginary place, fascinating though it is.
Have a great day winning on the Digital Felt!
06-28-2020 , 10:23 AM
I believe Sky Daddy is first referenced in Joe 1:6pack
06-28-2020 , 10:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverbeclever
Well...u r looking at from a wrong angle.
The way i see it: wisdom from thousands of years ago, which still is valid today, is true wisdom.

Forget the fairy tales...just read the life lessons.
3k years ago they stole your sheep and cut it into pieces, now they steal your car and strip it for parts.

Ecclesiastes 1:9
What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun.
I agree that wisdom that survives the ages is true wisdom.

Just don't make the mistake of thinking the bible, or those quoted with any specific words of wisdom are the originators of such. They are mostly repeating past wisdom passed on to them which was documented.

Imagine a thousand years from now, someone could quote me stating these things in this forum as if my original thought.

What has made the bible successful is that as a large book of collected wisdoms they never cited the sources thus leading many people to think these were original authorships when they were not. Today that would be ridiculed as plagiarism if any other such publication did that.
06-28-2020 , 10:34 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by neverbeclever
Not sure what your angle is, but u asked for an example of a life lesson and i produced one.
Pretty good one as well imo as well...since this is poker/gambling forum.
No angle.

Just trying to get you to consider your words with the proper context.


Do you doubt that today, and very easily, I could write (copy and paste) a book of collected wisdoms very easily and quickly?


IF I do that and provide no citations to the original authors of those wisdoms should I then get credit or should my book get credit?

I guess you could give me credit for what i 'choose' to include but that is about it. I would also get lots of discredit for representing those wisdoms as my own by not citing they were not original thoughts or works.
06-28-2020 , 10:36 AM
Luke 21:17-19 - "Don't tap the glass."
06-28-2020 , 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
Some are and some aren't. Nobody who actually is familiar with the genre of religious books would say what you said.
Many have and do say that. ...
[QUOTE]
No, it shouldn't.



Quote:
Originally Posted by lagtight
So, you DO know that your citations were written about 2500 years AFTER the Old Testament book of Proverbs was, right?
The point being that few is any are original wisdoms that can only be cited in the Bible. You can go back and forth across various text from various ages from various religions or philosophers or other and find the same wisdoms stated in different forms.

It is not unique for the bible to 'borrow' them and present them as unique (meaning without footnote to state it is not original wisdom) but I am sure you will concede any exercise of chasing down originations would see the statements made in similar forms both prior to the bible (and 'borrowed' by the bible) and also post by others ('borrowed' from the bible or other).
06-28-2020 , 10:42 AM
Or if you'd prefer one with a more "Christian" feel to it:

Proverbs 9:8 - "**** your feelings."

      
m