Re: The Second Coming Of Christ

rogue wrote:
> On May 18, 8:56 am, "Mike Painter" <mddotpain...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> rogue wrote:
>>
>>      <snip>
>>
>>> Here is my position:  The bible is not the word of any Deity.  If the
>>> bible is God's word, it should reflect his perfection, his
>>> omniscience, his omnipotence.  It should be error free - at least all
>>> errors of any consequence, would you agree?  After all, if the bible
>>> contains errors the only people that it would attract among God's
>>> creation are those too lazy or too stupid to read it critically.
>> It must be error free period. A god might be willing to allow
deliberate
>> errors to be introduced in modified copies but those errors would be
>> obvious.
>>
>> Any serious attempt at translating would also have to be error free as
to
>> content and meaning.  It would be unambiguous.
>> Anything less and there is no way to know where an error was introduced
and
>> if there is one there can be two and if there are two...
>>  This god would have to control all of it.
>> If it existed.
>> If it was it's book.
>> If it cared.
> 
> JERRY
> Well, you know, Christians want to claim "copyist errors" but those
> would be mispelled words or a very minor rephrasing of a verse.  I
> don't even have a problem with that, but when you get Christians
> saying that the four resurrection morning accounts were
> "complementary," then they either don't know what that word means, or
> they haven't read the accounts.

Few of these bible quoters have ever truly read the bible - regardless 
of which version - they are all based on a catholic bible somewhere.
Remember - there are NO archic parts of the bible - it was ALL compiled 
about 300 years after christ. After one has read the first three books 
of the bible - you will want to hide it from your kids.