The Dinosaurs of the GOP - Page 3

d-ray657 · #1 12-10-2012, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whell

Geez, counselor. Can't take a little joke, eh?

Besides, I wonder how stoned Crosby was when he sang that....

Who can't take a joke?

Besides, if the foo sh*ts . . .

Regards,

D-Ray

whell · #2 12-10-2012, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Who can't take a joke?

Besides, if the foo sh*ts . . .

Regards,

D-Ray

If the foo shits, share it.

piece-itpete · #3 12-10-2012, 10:36 AM

Hey - if I know I know knothing, then I know something. Therefore I cnouldn't know knothing.

Unless I only think I know knothing! In which cnase I really know knothing and am just knidding myself.

Pete

ebacon · #4 05-09-2013, 05:30 PM

The other day I made friends online with a Roman Catholic Priest. He is also an amateur astronomer. What interested me in him was that he made a post about the Vatican Astronomer. I thought the Vatican whu?

Anyhow he summed up the difference between faith and science rather succinctly. In an even smaller nutshell it goes like this -- faith is what you have to trust when you don't know all the facts. The Vatican has an astronomer to help collect more facts.

This stuff isn't that hard when there is a good teacher to explain it. Anyhow here is an article on the Vatican Astronomer.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/interna...omer-1-1116595

Bigerik · #5 05-09-2013, 05:31 PM

Funny thing is, the bible doesn't say the world is 10,000 years old.

barbara · #6 05-09-2013, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HatchetJack

So in other words there are two camps, one in which we study the Bible,
have faith in mankind and trust in the oldest history book or just
SHIT HAPPENS?

Having faith in mankind has very little to do with reading the bible.

ebacon · #7 05-09-2013, 06:22 PM

Interpreting does not require being there when the document was written. What it does require is reading supporting documents that were written at the same time. Most people don't have the patience for that so they take what they can get. I was like that before law school.

There isn't anything mystical about the process. Just a lot of coffee.

mpholland · #8 05-09-2013, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ebacon

Interpreting does not require being there when the document was written. What it does require is reading supporting documents that were written at the same time. Most people don't have the patience for that so they take what they can get. I was like that before law school.

There isn't anything mystical about the process. Just a lot of coffee.

Good thing that theory works with the Bible, because it doesn't seem to work worth a damn for the 2nd amendment.

Marc

Rex E. · #9 05-09-2013, 06:49 PM

All one has to do is look at the canons and you'll know the Bible has little to do with truth. Why would some men be choosing what was allowed in it if it was truly the word of God. Should not all the books be included?

Rather than study anti-Semites maybe you should spend some time looking into the Gnostics. You know...the ones left out at the canon's.....

merrylander · #10 05-10-2013, 07:30 AM

I would imagine that to derive the meaning of any written word one would need at least a command of that specific language. Unfortunately for most Americans the Constitution is written in English, as is the King James Bible. The unfortunate part is that the translators of that book were not all conversant with Greek nor Aramic.