FreeThinkerNZ Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Wow. There is some real cray-cray going on in here. *Backs away slowly* 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pratt Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 am backing away from this,,,, way above my pay grade,,,,, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Wow. There is some real cray-cray going on in here. *Backs away slowly* lol, heck run forest run, omg the zombie going after Hitchens... For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him will believeth in anything. - Hitchens 3:16” ― Christopher Hitchens Woe,what happened where have I been, who this....well, nothing more admirable than a man when he hears the truth will hold it as his own. What nobody believes Hitchens was the son of God? John 1:12 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. Which brings me back to the OP assertion that Jesus wasn't God's only begotten son There isn't nobody like Him, do you know the Holy Ghost? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Wow. There is some real cray-cray going on in here. *Backs away slowly* lol, heck run forest run, omg the zombie going after Hitchens... [snip] Thanks for confirming my opinion of you. Are you high? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 The humble Photon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon A massless fundamental particle that your eyes are using to read this, Justus. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 No private interpretation needed Justus- Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation. Unfounded assertions (like the emboldened one above) can be summarily dismissed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 No private interpretation needed Justus- Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation. Unfounded assertions (like the emboldened one above) can be summarily dismissed. Indeed, and was also said by my main man Hitchens: "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence". *Raises glass* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Wow. There is some real cray-cray going on in here. *Backs away slowly* lol, heck run forest run, omg the zombie going after Hitchens... [snip] Thanks for confirming my opinion of you. Are you high? Is a though a solid liquid or gas? If it doesn't have mass, it doesn't exist so they say. Seens this one didn't till wrote it down? It but man ya'll change the facts faster than it took Darwin to ship those specimens down to the gotlosers Island. O sorry about the typo something poked me in the ribs, Since personally all I have to do hold on til 7 'm off then, ok, something he me in the rib that time right then STHG, so what up the ribs. Oh that right I got to set to out the frozen pork ribs to thaw out. Later. Guess not possibility of man's origin huH? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 The humble Photon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon A massless fundamental particle that your eyes are using to read this, Justus. why do you think I said the following: there is obviously no reason to talk about the evidence of massless particles Got to go have a great rest of the weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstar Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 WTF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 26, 2014 Author Super Moderator Share Posted October 26, 2014 When they figure the what keeps the planets afloat, well let's just say that some would say the light within resists the light without. But how does one draw a vacuum on a expanding system? Are you really that unfamiliar with the Theory of Gravity?!? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Congrats Justus! It takes a special talent to be so wrong about so much. It take an extra-special talent to not know when you've just had your butt kicked. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 The humble Photon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon A massless fundamental particle that your eyes are using to read this, Justus. why do you think I said the following: there is obviously no reason to talk about the evidence of massless particles Got to go have a great rest of the weekend. Nobody can tell what you think you are saying. Nonsense is a poor substitute for an argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 No private interpretation needed Justus- Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation. Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter. . . . 2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. New International Version. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. American Standard Version 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation. Young' Literal translation 20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition, Orthodox Jewish Bible 20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation. . . . Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...? http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdelsolray Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 A nutcase has infected this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mydisplayname Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Wow. There is some real cray-cray going on in here. *Backs away slowly* lol, heck run forest run, omg the zombie going after Hitchens... [snip] Thanks for confirming my opinion of you. Are you high? Is a though a solid liquid or gas? If it doesn't have mass, it doesn't exist so they say. Seens this one didn't till wrote it down? It but man ya'll change the facts faster than it took Darwin to ship those specimens down to the gotlosers Island. O sorry about the typo something poked me in the ribs, Since personally all I have to do hold on til 7 'm off then, ok, something he me in the rib that time right then STHG, so what up the ribs. Oh that right I got to set to out the frozen pork ribs to thaw out. Later. Guess not possibility of man's origin huH? Ok People. Looking at the grammar and spelling we definitely have a great prophet here. I'm going to try and translate this into english. I was fluent in fundie back in the day. Blue is the translation. Underlined is the original texts. Plain text is a comment on that section of text. Here goes: "Is a though a solid liquid or gas?" The devil caused the misspelling in an attempt confuse us unbelievers. What he meant to say: Is a thought a solid, a liquid or a gas? "If it doesn't have mass, it doesn't exist so they say. Seens this one didn't till wrote it down?" They say if it doesn't have mass, it doesn't exist. - Unfortunately, as I have committed the unforgivable sin, the holy ghost have removed my ability to understand the second sentence. ("Seens this one didn't till wrote it down?") "It but man ya'll change the facts faster than it took Darwin to ship those specimens down to the gotlosers Island. O sorry about the typo something poked me in the ribs, " All of you change the facts faster than it took Darwin to ship those specimens to the gotlosers island. Note the intentional spelling of "got losers" island. This is critical to understand before continuing with the next sentence. My apologies for mistyping "got losers". Something poked me in my ribs and that caused the misspelling. "Since personally all I have to do hold on til 7 'm off then, ok, something he me in the rib that time right then STHG, so what up the ribs." Again this text seems garbled. I fear the author might have been speaking in tongues at this point and we might never fully translate this sentence. It's between the author and his deity of choice. "Oh that right I got to set to out the frozen pork ribs to thaw out. Oh, I just remembered. I need to get the frozen pork out of the refrigerator so that it can defrost. "Later." I will speak to all of you later. Guess not possibility of man's origin huH?" I guess humanities origin couldn't have been from being taken out of a refrigerator and defrosted? That's my translation, but I beg of all you to study up on your fundie so that you're able to read the text from the original source in order to better understand the intention of the author. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstar Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 (a thousand thumbs up!) But I'd like to point out that 'thought' does have substance: electrochemical. It can be observed and measured - at least in it's simplest form. They use MRI's… http://newscenter.berkeley.edu/2011/09/22/brain-movies/ http://pinktentacle.com/2008/12/scientists-extract-images-directly-from-brain/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/brain-researchers-can-detect-who-we-are-thinking-about/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Unfortunately, as I have committed the unforgivable sin, the holy ghost have removed my ability to understand the second sentence. ("Seens this one didn't till wrote it down?")I think Justus means that the thought he just wrote down didn't exist until he wrote it. So it can't be material. Justus' habit of writing unintelligible stuff casts doubt on the sincerity of his desire to engage in dialogue. I think he's more interested in trolling. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mydisplayname Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Unfortunately, as I have committed the unforgivable sin, the holy ghost have removed my ability to understand the second sentence. ("Seens this one didn't till wrote it down?")I think Justus means that the thought he just wrote down didn't exist until he wrote it. So it can't be material. Justus' habit of writing unintelligible stuff casts doubt on the sincerity of his desire to engage in dialogue. I think he's more interested in trolling. I'm not sure that a thought actually existed when he wrote it down at all. After reading his post I'm actually slightly dumber than I was before. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 No private interpretation needed Justus- Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation. Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter. . . . 2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. New International Version. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. American Standard Version 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation. Young' Literal translation 20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition, Orthodox Jewish Bible 20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation. . . . Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...? http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm Try reading the next verse [2 Peter 1:21] The Holy Ghost has the final, or rather private interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 No private interpretation needed Justus- Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation. Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter. . . . 2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. New International Version. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. American Standard Version 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation. Young' Literal translation 20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition, Orthodox Jewish Bible 20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation. . . . Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...? http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm Try reading the next verse [2 Peter 1:21] The Holy Ghost has the final, or rather private interpretation. Well that solves everything. Let's have the invisible, silent guy who never shows up have the final say. It's perfect! . . . and 40,000 denominations later . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 No private interpretation needed Justus- Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation. Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter. . . . 2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. New International Version. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. American Standard Version 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation. Young' Literal translation 20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition, Orthodox Jewish Bible 20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation. . . . Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...? http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm Try reading the next verse [2 Peter 1:21] The Holy Ghost has the final, or rather private interpretation. Why would the Holy Ghost want any kind of private interpretation of things he/she/it already knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 No private interpretation needed Justus- Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation. Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter. . . . 2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. New International Version. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. American Standard Version 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation. Young' Literal translation 20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition, Orthodox Jewish Bible 20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation. . . . Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...? http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm Try reading the next verse [2 Peter 1:21] The Holy Ghost has the final, or rather private interpretation. Oh good, we haven't heard from the Ex-C member TheHolyGhost for a while now. I would be interested to hear his take on the topic. Calling THG, where are you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator TheRedneckProfessor Posted October 28, 2014 Author Super Moderator Share Posted October 28, 2014 No private interpretation needed Justus- Unforunately, you know very little about handling the holies, but yes there is a private interpretation. Don't take my word about private interpretation of scripture Justus... JUST USe some more massless photons to read the words of the Apostle Peter. . . . 2 Peter 1 : 20, King James Version 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. New International Version. 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation of things. American Standard Version 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation. Young' Literal translation 20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition, Orthodox Jewish Bible 20 Knowing this first: that every nevu’ah (prophecy) of the Kitvei Hakodesh is not of one’s own interpretation. . . . Or maybe you'd like that in the original Koine (New Testament Greek)...? http://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_peter/1-20.htm Try reading the next verse [2 Peter 1:21] The Holy Ghost has the final, or rather private interpretation. And since the holy ghost dwells within the heart of each and every believer, they all have the exact same private interpretation. Oh... Wait... How many different denominations are there? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted November 2, 2014 Share Posted November 2, 2014 The humble Photon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon A massless fundamental particle that your eyes are using to read this, Justus. why do you think I said the following: there is obviously no reason to talk about the evidence of massless particles Got to go have a great rest of the weekend. Nobody can tell what you think you are saying. Nonsense is a poor substitute for an argument. Try reading then, 'there is obviously no reason to talk about the evidence of massles particles" Talk about ignorance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts