Philosophy Now Forum

Terrapin Station wrote:

Bill Wiltrack wrote:What does that scripture mean to you?

That I should pick a better book to read.

Try the book of Revelation.

bobevenson wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:

Bill Wiltrack wrote:What does that scripture mean to you?

That I should pick a better book to read.

Try the book of Revelation.

Nah, that sucks, too. The Bible is horribly written in my opinion.

Terrapin Station wrote:

bobevenson wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:That I should pick a better book to read.

Try the book of Revelation.

Nah, that sucks, too. The Bible is horribly written in my opinion.

Well, first of all, I'm sure you have never read the book of Revelation, and so I have automatically caught you in an obvious lie. Secondly, the first 65 books of the Bible are merely wrapping paper for Revelation, the 66th (mankind adds up to 66 in English gematria simplex, A=1 to Z=26). Thirdly, the KJV edition of the Bible (all other translations are bogus) was written by 47 scholars and edited by 12, corresponding to the beast line of the Ouzo Cross that starts at reference point 47 and extends 12 units (see "The Ouzo Prophecy" at http://church-of-ouzo.com/pdf/ouzo-prophecy.pdf for further details.

bobevenson wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:

bobevenson wrote: Try the book of Revelation.

Nah, that sucks, too. The Bible is horribly written in my opinion.

Well, first of all, I'm sure you have never read the book of Revelation, and so I have automatically caught you in an obvious lie. Secondly, the first 65 books of the Bible are merely wrapping paper for Revelation, the 66th (mankind adds up to 66 in English gematria simplex, A=1 to Z=26). Thirdly, the KJV edition of the Bible (all other translations are bogus) was written by 47 scholars and edited by 12, corresponding to the beast line of the Ouzo Cross, that starts at reference point 47 and extends 12 units (see "The Ouzo Prophecy" at http://church-of-ouzo.com/pdf/ouzo-prophecy.pdf for further details.

I didn't read all of it, because I read enough of it to know that I thought it was horribly written. Same reason I didn't read all of James Joyce's Ulysses, for example. I'm not someone who is going to waste a lot of time with something I think sucks. (Well, not unless there's some other motivating factor. For example, I slogged through all of Heidegger's Being and Time, even though I think that sucks and think it's horribly written, too, because as someone who wanted to be generally educated re philosophy, I felt it was important to be familiar with it, since it's such a popular work. Of course, it was also a requirement to read it when I was a student, but I could have gotten by not reading the whole thing.)

Also, re the Bible, I haven't read a bit of every "book," but I've read enough of different books to know I think it sucks as literature overall. And I definitely read bits of Revelation, partially because it's been referenced in so much horror fiction, metal lyrics, etc.

bobevenson wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:

bobevenson wrote: Try the book of Revelation.

Nah, that sucks, too. The Bible is horribly written in my opinion.

Well, first of all, I'm sure you have never read the book of Revelation, and so I have automatically caught you in an obvious lie. Secondly, the first 65 books of the Bible are merely wrapping paper for Revelation, the 66th (mankind adds up to 66 in English gematria simplex, A=1 to Z=26). Thirdly, the KJV edition of the Bible (all other translations are bogus) was written by 47 scholars and edited by 12, corresponding to the beast line of the Ouzo Cross, that starts at reference point 47 and extends 12 units (see "The Ouzo Prophecy" at http://church-of-ouzo.com/pdf/ouzo-prophecy.pdf for further details.

Fourth, the Ouzo Prophecy is toilet paper you can safely flush down the toilet.

PhilX

Terrapin Station wrote:The Bible is horribly written in my opinion. I haven't read a bit of every "book," but I've read enough of different books to know I think it sucks as literature overall.

Well, I don't know if you are referring specifically to the KJV, but if you are, I believe most linguistic experts would take serious issue with your assessment.

bobevenson wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:The Bible is horribly written in my opinion. I haven't read a bit of every "book," but I've read enough of different books to know I think it sucks as literature overall.

Well, I don't know if you are referring specifically to the KJV, but if you are, I believe most linguistic experts would take serious issue with your assessment.

A lot of people feel it's excellent as literature, of course. Those sorts of assessments are subjective. I think it sucks. Other people think it doesn't. I'm just voicing my opinion.

Terrapin Station wrote:

bobevenson wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:The Bible is horribly written in my opinion. I haven't read a bit of every "book," but I've read enough of different books to know I think it sucks as literature overall.

Well, I don't know if you are referring specifically to the KJV, but if you are, I believe most linguistic experts would take serious issue with your assessment.

A lot of people feel it's excellent as literature, of course. Those sorts of assessments are subjective. I think it sucks. Other people think it doesn't. I'm just voicing my opinion.

Well, I'm referring specifically to the KJV book of Revelation, which was divinely inspired, written and translated.

bobevenson wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:

bobevenson wrote: Well, I don't know if you are referring specifically to the KJV, but if you are, I believe most linguistic experts would take serious issue with your assessment.

A lot of people feel it's excellent as literature, of course. Those sorts of assessments are subjective. I think it sucks. Other people think it doesn't. I'm just voicing my opinion.

Well, I'm referring specifically to the KJV book of Revelation, which was divinely inspired, written and translated.

God doesn't exist, just in case you didn't realize that.

What makes someone an expert in your view?

Terrapin Station wrote:What makes someone an expert in your view?

No, I was just commenting that you apparently consider yourself to be an expert as opposed to somebody who disagrees with you.

bobevenson wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:What makes someone an expert in your view?

No, I was just commenting that you apparently consider yourself to be an expert as opposed to somebody who disagrees with you.

What makes someone an expert in your view is "No"???

Again, I'm curious what makes someone an expert in your view.

An answer would go something like this: "I consider someone an 'expert' when _______" and then you fill in the blank.

Terrapin Station wrote:

bobevenson wrote:

Terrapin Station wrote:What makes someone an expert in your view?

No, I was just commenting that you apparently consider yourself to be an expert as opposed to somebody who disagrees with you.

What makes someone an expert in your view is "No"???

Again, I'm curious what makes someone an expert in your view.

An answer would go something like this: "I consider someone an 'expert' when _______" and then you fill in the blank.

CAN I OH PLEASE - I DO KNOW ANSWER TO DA ORIGINAL QUEST_ION.

attofishpi wrote:

Bill Wiltrack wrote:"If anyone comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters--yes, even their own life--such a person cannot be my disciple."


What does that scripture mean to you?

It means if you have the love of your father mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, and dont even hate your own life - you do not require being a disciple of Christ.

No, what it means is if you love your family higher than the hippie, then you are not worthy of being the hippy's diciple.