25 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieSo you are not then saying I am in any way like the the perpetrators of the lynchings after all?
sigh another silly attempt to misrepresent a position, you think you would havevlreaned your lesson from your failure to produce other claims, what i have said is that FMF can substantiate his own claims, I certainly will not be doing so for him. Now your technique has been uncovered you hold little interest for me now, its the same thing again and ...[text shortened]... wered three or four times. Adios dweebster, I got bigger fish to fry on the other side of town.
25 Apr 15
1 edit
James 4:4
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+4%3A4&version=ESV
Memo to Fence Sitters*: if you can read this verse (and understand what it means) without your hair catching on fire, there may still be hope for you.
* Fence sitting is self deception. There are no fence sitters... because no one can have it both ways.
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHe's part of a group on one side of the fence. But unlike most in his group he enjoys climbing up to sit on the fence and pretend he is part of the group on the other side.
So you are part of a group despite the fact that you said and I quote verbatim, 'Being part of a "group" has no appeal to me'. A rather strange and illogical statement, self contradictory too. What is this group of yours called.
He delights the members of his group by acting as though he belongs to the other(1) side or to both(2) sides. I haven't quite worked out whether he believes he fits in with #1 or #2. But it smells like number 2, so I'm inclined to believe he thinks he can have it both ways.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28841
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by lemon limeHave you given away all your worldly possessions old chap; do you live in a cave?
[b]James 4:4
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+4%3A4&version=ESV
Memo to Fence Sitters*: if you can read this verse (and understand what it means) without your hair catching on fire, there may still be hope for you.
* fence sitting is self deception, there are no fence sitters...
Because no one can have it both ways.[/b]
Mark 10:25
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeYou may be surprised to learn that the eye of a needle does not mean the small hole in a sewing needle. It's a hole in the wall providing an entrance to a walled city. The entrance is only large enough for one or two men to walk through at one time. A camel can pass through this entrance (called the eye of a needle) by first having the load removed from its back, and then the camel must drop down to its knees and shuffle through the small entrance. A camels knees are very well padded so this doesn't hurt the camel, it just makes it very difficult for the camel to pass through the small entrance.
Have you given away all your worldly possessions old chap; do you live in a cave?
Mark 10:25
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God."
And why (you might ask) is this entrance to a walled city so small as to make it difficult for a camel to pass through? It's because the city is a "walled" city... the wall is there to protect the city from invaders. If only one or two men can pass through at one time, it's easier to defend the city from a hairy hoard of troublesome invaders... if they can only get through one or two at a time, defenders on the other side can easily pick them off as they come through.
The point being.... it is very difficult for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, but it's not impossible. And it's difficult for a wealthy man to have more regard for God than for his own possessions, but it's certainly not impossible.
An alternate explanation (put forth mostly by detractors of the gospel) is that the original word for "camel" is a mistranslation, and actually means "rope" rather than "camel". It makes sense that it would be difficult to pass a rope through the eye of a needle, but it doesn't make much sense in context with the story of an encounter with a rich man:
~ There were entrances to walled cities called "eye of needle gates".
~ Possessions loaded onto the backs of camels needed to be removed before the camels could pass through these gates.
~ A wealthy man is wealthy by virtue of his possessions.
And last (but not least) many so called mistranslations will often only exist in the eye of the beholder. Any difficulty in translation makes it easier for detractors to insert whatever meaning they wish for a translation to mean. But since this usually involves ignoring various levels of context it's easy enough to spot mistranslations as well as fraudulent claims of mistranslation.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28841
25 Apr 15
1 edit
Originally posted by lemon limeOkay, that's a pretty good answer. Will though go away and try and pick holes in it.
You may be surprised to learn that the eye of a needle does not mean the small hole in a sewing needle. It's a hole in the wall providing an entrance to a walled city. The entrance is only large enough for one or two men to walk through at one time. A camel can pass through this entrance (called the eye of a needle) by first having the load removed from i ...[text shortened]... man to have more regard for God than for his own possessions, but it's certainly not impossible.
*Edit
'The "Eye of the Needle" has been claimed to be a gate in Jerusalem, which opened after the main gate was closed at night. A camel could only pass through this smaller gate if it was stooped and had its baggage removed. This story has been put forth since at least the 15th century, and possibly as far back as the 9th century. However, there is no widely accepted evidence for the existence of such a gate. There is actually a small gate in Jerusalem called "eye of a needle". It can be found in the Russian Church, in the Old City of Jerusalem, but was built in the 16th century.'
Cyril of Alexandria claimed that "camel" is a Greek misprint; that kamêlos (camel) was a misprint of kamilos, meaning "rope" or "cable" . (Which kinda makes sense).
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeCyril of Alexandria claimed that "camel" is a Greek misprint; that kamêlos (camel) was a misprint of kamilos, meaning "rope" or "cable" . (Which kinda makes sense).
Okay, that's a pretty good answer. Will though go away and try and pick holes in it.
*Edit
'The "Eye of the Needle" has been claimed to be a gate in Jerusalem, which opened after the main gate was closed at night. A camel could only pass through this smaller gate if it was stooped and had its baggage removed. This story has been put forth sin ...[text shortened]... amêlos (camel) was a misprint of kamilos, meaning "rope" or "cable" . (Which kinda makes sense).
Sorry for being so slow in editing. After posting I anticipated this particular claim of mistranslation, so I began working on editing my post. Some of you guys are way too fast for me to get changes in before you respond.
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by lemon limeOh yeah, I almost forgot one other point...
You may be surprised to learn that the eye of a needle does not mean the small hole in a sewing needle. It's a hole in the wall providing an entrance to a walled city. The entrance is only large enough for one or two men to walk through at one time. A camel can pass through this entrance (called the eye of a needle) by first having the load removed from i ...[text shortened]... context it's easy enough to spot mistranslations as well as fraudulent claims of mistranslation.
Why would Jesus paint the image of a rope passing through the eye of a needle when no one ever did that? He referred to situations everyone could relate to and understood to be true, so why the apparent departure from his usual approach? This appears totally out of character when viewed within context of his other stories and examples...in other words, it's a piece of a puzzle that doesn't fit in anywhere with any of the other pieces.
Jesus used examples drawn from real life, and wasn't prone to making up and using unrealistic examples for making his points. Flights of unrealistic fancy is more of a modern day convention, and practiced by wanna be gurus to influence people already primed for believing in fantasies. Life was tough back then, and most people were too busy making ends meet to spend any time indulging themselves in a fantasy life.
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28841
25 Apr 15
1 edit
Originally posted by lemon limeNo problem. Are you saying though that atheists are fasting thinking than theists? 😉
Sorry for being so slow in editing. After posting I anticipated this particular claim of mistranslation, so I began working on editing my post. Some of you guys are way too fast for me to get changes in before you respond.
Now,.. you were about to provide evidence for the existence of such a gate. (Other than the one in the Old City of Jerusalem, not built until the 16th century).
Until you do, it rather looks like a Christian trying to dodge the duty (find a back gate if you will) of giving up their wealth.
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeFaster isn't necessarily better. How much depth of thought and play would you think can be applied in a very fast game of chess?
No problem. Are you saying though that atheists are fasting thinking than theists? 😉
Now,.. you were about to provide evidence for the existence of such a gate. (Other than the one in the Old City of Jerusalem, not built until the 16th century).
Until you do, it rather looks like a Christian trying to dodge the duty (find a back gate if you will) of giving up their wealth.
For example, I don't see you responding to any of the reasoning I gave... but I suppose it would be unrealistic for me to expect you to carefully deal with too much information in a fast game of debate.
hint hint
- Joined
- 14 Mar 15
- Moves
- 28841
Originally posted by lemon limeCan you still play chess? It's been nearly a year.
Faster isn't necessarily better. How much depth of thought and play would you think can be applied in a very fast game of chess?
Like i said, provide at least some evidence (rather than reasoning) to back up your interpretation (misinterpretation?) of 'eye of a needle' and i'd be happy to debate the issue at a speed more to your liking (capability?)
25 Apr 15
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeImagine trying to get much trading done with people going in and out of a city if you constantly need to open and shut a large fortified gate in a wall surrounding the city. It only takes a moment of using your own mind and common sense to understand why a needle gate would be a practical alternative to constantly opening and shutting a large gate... any time that gate is open the city would vulnerable to attack, so wouldn't (in your opinion) people living behind a protective wall not want a safe and easy way for most people to gain access to their city?
No problem. Are you saying though that atheists are fasting thinking than theists? 😉
Now,.. you were about to provide evidence for the existence of such a gate. (Other than the one in the Old City of Jerusalem, not built until the 16th century).
Until you do, it rather looks like a Christian trying to dodge the duty (find a back gate if you will) of giving up their wealth.
And by the way, I have gained and lost it all a few times during my life, so why do you automatically assume I have not been willing to do what I've already done?