oh and remember Jesus loves you

miss you timeless

I like a broad range of mythologies. :)

I didn't mean to be rude or insulting. If I was being rude, then I'd be outrightly rude or insult you in an obvious way. So I apologise if you were insulted by my flippant ways.

The only person one should worship is themselves. All the holy books are stories about people who filled their lives with love for others. Instead of worshipping one deity, people should be trying to emulate their lives, not just say "I'm a christian, so therefore I can treat people like shit, because I'll go to church on a sunday and cleanse myself of treating people like shit."

Love. Compassion. Tolerance.

But your answer does raise another question for me. What is the difference between faith and belief?

too bad it's not a mythology it's true and the only thing that is true

this is the day that the Lord hath made

Come now, rabbits do not chew cud. Asserting that they do is untrue therefore any source that states that rabbits chews cud, cannot be wholly true as it contains false hood.

If you check Leviticus 11:3-6 and/or Deuteronomy 14:7, you'll find that rabbits are considered unclean as they chew cud and don't have hooves.

But if you know anything about rabbits, you'll know that they don't chew cud, they don't have the organs to generate a cud with. Due to the ineffectiveness of their digestive system, they do, however eat their own poop (but only the first time).

The bible has proven, to be an unreliable source of truth.

do you know what cud is ? rabbits sometimes will regergitate their forr from their stomach to their mouth and rew chew it, that's what it means to chew cud

To be fair, "chew the cud" isn't what is said in Hebrew, what the Hebrew says is raising up food from the stomach, which rabbits technically do.

I'm growing more and more of the opinion that the English translation is the worst way to understand what the hell the Hebrews meant.

that's what I was trying to say

Rabbits do not chew a cud, they chew their poo when it comes out the first time (Cecotropes are the technical name for this special first poo). Ruminants, have specialized stomach compartments that allow for food to be regurgitated and re-chewed before being sent to a different digestive chamber for further processing.

I wouldn't knit-pick, but when something is held up as the ultimate truth that we should all accept as the true word of god, then it should be accurate, as god (if he exists) should know how his damned world works.

The church once declared the beaver to be a fish. Just putting it out there...

... and the bible refers to bats as birds... *eyeroll*

11 You may eat any clean bird. 12 But these you may not eat: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture, 13 the red kite, the black kite, any kind of falcon, 14 any kind of raven, 15 the horned owl, the screech owl, the gull, any kind of hawk, 16 the little owl, the great owl, the white owl, 17 the desert owl, the osprey, the cormorant, 18 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.
Deuteronomy 14:11-18
New International Version (NIV)

Yet another translation error.

Was the original language listing types of birds, or types of flying things?

Of course this does pretty much shoot the "infallibility of scripture" idea in the face.

Astronomy textbooks from before 2006 refer to our solar system as having 9 planets *eyeroll*

;-)

Who gives a shit? Its fallible, translation errors or not, it shouldn't be an issue with a book that is supposed to be the end-all be-all of Truth.

They also said that daughters can get their father drunk and **** him without him noticing - this is obviously a fabrication as no man can maintain an erection and orgasm without somehow noticing something!

Having gone to a religious school and somehow managing to get less than 100% score on every Bible verse memorization test or quiz, I can personally attest that there is nothing magically preventing the intentional or unintended corruption of the source material.

Its all well and good, until some one professes the book to be the only source of truth, even when its proven otherwise.

If it there is an ineffable, omniscient, omnibenevolent creature who is overseeing the process, this should not be an issue.

The bible has insights that are worth exploring, just as any book on mythology does. Its just not the best book to go to, when one is hoping to understand reality as it truly is.

Right on. There's definitely problems in there, particularly over how awesome it is to smash babies against rocks. Whether bats count as the kind of bird you can eat or not is a lesser concern for me.

I hear ya there. I'm not a big fan of killing live babies. :'( I don't care who their parents are.

What if they were angry about being horrifically oppressed by Babylonians and it was subversive kawaii?

Obvs I don't think the book is infalliable, but its a sort of religious pseudo-history of an often oppressed, sometimes well off people that stuck together for thousands of years, their evolving ideas and cultures and arguments that was put together to put their differences together, and even the laws they didn't even follow anymore, even if it confuses the hell out of people born thousands of years later, even if the document becomes contradictory, because it should all be there together.

Okey, that's cool, I've just been rebuffing "too bad it's not a mythology it's true and the only thing that is true", which is what I got when I mentioned that I like the bible along with other mythologies.

The thing is, it isn't wholly true, it is full of fallacy and contradiction. If I wanted truth about the world the bible is far from the first place I'd look.

Right, but I'm more of the opinion that this thread would be better, if we must keep it going, if we ignored trolls XD I'm just a little uncomfortable comparing living religious texts and traditions to "myths", because its typically used to dismiss; we say Hindu "mythology" as we would dead Greek "mythology", but when we say Christian mythology or Jewish mythology, we're trying to demean it and bring it down to the level of, horror of horrors, religions we think are "silly" and typically are followed by non-Europeans. Not as bad as when people dismiss all religion as "voodoo nonsense" or something of the like, poor Voodoo. I'm not saying that's you're intention here, but its something that skeeves me out a bit, intended or not.

And one thing I like about the Old Testament is that it doesn't really offer truth or salvation or anything, no heaven and hell, no original sin, no after life, and a whole lot of moral grey area, it doesn't pretend its all universal and it should be applied to everyone (after all most of it is addressed very very specifically to a kingdom that no longer exists).

Everything the light touches will one day belong to you, Saya.