Maybe they should try a Rain Dance instead?

[Nucklesack]

Originally Posted by Toxick

Actually what I said was, the concept being conveyed is what's important, not the ####ing seed, and the concept is conveyed. So, focusing on such semantic terms like "mustard seed" when the obvious point is "SMALL" is useless pedantry.

Emphasis on useless.

Call it a side-step if you like, but picking nits is ultimately pointless.

But if the concept being portrayed is factually incorrect, does that invalidate the concept?

[Nucklesack]

Originally Posted by Nucklesack

But then if the Governor wanted to sacrifice a goat for rain you'd be equally supportive?

Originally Posted by This_person

It is, I agree.On a personal leve, probably not.

Why not? if he was a follower of ..... Voodoo/Hoodoo (i dunno) and it was his faiths belief that to sacrifice a Goat was his beliefs way to apease the Gods, why wouldnt you support him?

In the simplest of terms, if all else has failed - water rations, lawsuits, etc. - then why would you want to deny the one comfort left - Sacrificing the Goat. If you don't Sacrifice Goats then no harm no foul. If you do Sacrifice Goats, then maybe you are comforted by the thought that your neighbors as well as your fellow countrymen/women are Sacrificing Goats with you
(sorry mig)

To anyone that doesnt follow Voodoo/Hoodoo that is unthinkable (which is why you said you wouldnt support it on a personal level). To a non-entity believing Constiuent, the Goat and Praying for Rain are equal, and equally wrong to hold as a State Function.

[Toxick]

Originally Posted by Nucklesack

Still doesnt answer being able to trust the trustworthiness of a book when you admit there are mistranslations in it. Should make you wonder about the infallabity of a document you KNOW is rife with errors.

Ok - my last post might have been a bit dismissive.

Here's the thing, I think you are way to impressed with your "mustard seed" argument - especially when you use it as "Proof Positive" that the Bible is crap. I find this tactic to be pedantic in the extreme, and quite a reach besides.

I've been studying this subject most of my adult life, and although my research isn't as fresh in my mind as it once was (meaning that if you want to quiz me or challenge me on any of the following info, I won't have an immediate answer), I've also written extensively on the subject. I'm going to quote some relevant passages from posts that I've made on this topic several times here.


There are nearly 25,000 complete manuscripts of the New Testament, with more than 15,000 that date to before the 7th Century A.D. (or C.E. if you prefer). These include 5,300 copies in the original Greek, over 10,000 in Latin Vulgate, 4,100 Slavic tranlations, 2,000 Ethiopian thranslations and about 1,000 other early translations.

Yes, there are differences in those manuscripts - however, of all these differences, most are a matter of spelling or word order changes that were made as the styles changed over the ages.

A total of only about 200 words, or 1/10 of 1 percent of the entire New Testament are subject to more than trivial differences. And no single doctrine of Christiantiy in all it's denominations througout history depend on a piece of disputed text.

(I know you're going to harp on the first sentence of that last paragraph, but I will submit to you that it is the last sentence is that is key)

Looking at the Old Testament, the discovey of the Dead Sea Scrolls show that in over 2,000 years those who copied the Old testament were so meticulous that no significant changes were made to the texts. The Dead Sea Scrolls represent a major library of over 800 total documents dating between 250 B.C. to 68 A.D. Every book of the Old Testament is included except for some minor prophets, and Esther.


The bible isn't as much of a mish-mash as you seem to be implying. Someone didn't sit down 100 years ago and pull all that crap out of their butts. Yes the text is OLD, ancient... but I think that today's bible is reliable enough to be considered an accurate representation of the original documents, and I don't think that I'll be discarding the entire Book because you find fault with a couple of passages - especially when those passages accurate convey the original meaning.


I hope that's a thorough enough answer for you to drop this pointless mustard seed vector of yours.

[~mellabella~]

Originally Posted by Nucklesack

Are you sure?

The only thing you'll find is i will post hypocrisy when a believer posts a negative thread about another Belief. When the original posters own beliefs have the VERY SAME examples in his own faith.

And debate whether innacuracies that are in the Bible actually make it an infaliable document.

Posting that some nutjob decided to pray to a sky pixie for more rain, is only offensive to those that follow the same sky pixie as the Governor.

If you dont believe in that same sky pixie, the Governor is no different than Indians dancing for Rain, or a Mayan sacrificing a virgin. Seems to be a concept thats hard for some to follow.

The intolerance is with the sky pixie followers not me (i'm just a target for pointing it out)

I don't post negative things about other beliefs. Which is why I said IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO MAKE IT RAIN, GO AHEAD. I just find your lack respect for those that believe in the 'sky pixie' as you call it a little reprehensible. I don't know what religion any of those people believe in, but I'm willing to bet that the Day of Prayer wasn't spelled out to be The Day of Prayer to God and God only. People are free to pray to whomever they want, whenever they want.

[Toxick]

Originally Posted by Nucklesack

But if the concept being portrayed is factually incorrect, does that invalidate the concept?

Not unless the concept in question relies on scientific accuracy.

[Nucklesack]

Maybe they should try a... 11-14-2007 12:58 PM you should put more stock in the LORD!!!!

But which one ?

Because Karma Giver, you and I arent that different with the plethora of Gods available to us, through the various different religions, the difference between the number of Gods you believe in and I dont believe in, is 1.

[Nucklesack]

Originally Posted by Toxick

Ok - my last post might have been a bit dismissive.

Here's the thing, I think you are way to impressed with your "mustard seed" argument - especially when you use it as "Proof Positive" that the Bible is crap. I find this tactic to be pedantic in the extreme, and quite a reach besides.

I've been studying this subject most of my adult life, and although my research isn't as fresh in my mind as it once was (meaning that if you want to quiz me or challenge me on any of the following info, I won't have an immediate answer), I've also written extensively on the subject. I'm going to quote some relevant passages from posts that I've made on this topic several times here.


There are nearly 25,000 complete manuscripts of the New Testament, with more than 15,000 that date to before the 7th Century A.D. (or C.E. if you prefer). These include 5,300 copies in the original Greek, over 10,000 in Latin Vulgate, 4,100 Slavic tranlations, 2,000 Ethiopian thranslations and about 1,000 other early translations.

Yes, there are differences in those manuscripts - however, of all these differences, most are a matter of spelling or word order changes that were made as the styles changed over the ages.

A total of only about 200 words, or 1/10 of 1 percent of the entire New Testament are subject to more than trivial differences. And no single doctrine of Christiantiy in all it's denominations througout history depend on a piece of disputed text.

(I know you're going to harp on the first sentence of that last paragraph, but I will submit to you that it is the last sentence is that is key)

Looking at the Old Testament, the discovey of the Dead Sea Scrolls show that in over 2,000 years those who copied the Old testament were so meticulous that no significant changes were made to the texts. The Dead Sea Scrolls represent a major library of over 800 total documents dating between 250 B.C. to 68 A.D. Every book of the Old Testament is included except for some minor prophets, and Esther.


The bible isn't as much of a mish-mash as you seem to be implying. Someone didn't sit down 100 years ago and pull all that crap out of their butts. Yes the text is OLD, ancient... but I think that today's bible is reliable enough to be considered an accurate representation of the original documents, and I don't think that I'll be discarding the entire Book because you find fault with a couple of passages - especially when those passages accurate convey the original meaning.


I hope that's a thorough enough answer for you to drop this pointless mustard seed vector of yours.

What about Rabbits chewing their Cud?



Your harping on me, and targetting me for pointing out that the Bible has these inacuraccies (is that one c or 2?). But i am not the one telling other believers of other faiths :

• Your beliefs are wrong
• The Bible is Gods word, your bible is wrong
• You dont believe correctly, your not "Christian" (enough) and then pointing to a verse in the Bible.

All i've done is point out that the Bible has inacuraccies, which then calls into question the definitiveness of the above.

[~mellabella~]

Originally Posted by Nucklesack

Maybe they should try a... 11-14-2007 12:58 PM you should put more stock in the LORD!!!!

But which one ?

Because Karma Giver, you and I arent that different with the plethora of Gods available to us, through the various different religions, the difference between the number of Gods you believe in and I dont believe in, is 1.

Kinda sounds like a lurker. Someone who's been reading, but didn't want to argue with you on the thread. If you ever get bad karma from me, you'll know it. I leave my name.

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Nucklesack

The issue here is that this was done as a government function. That shouldn’t happen

When he was praying to his God, did he equally represent the other Gods of the Citizens of Georgia?

Because Ed Buckner doesnt feel he is representing his religious views.

You and Ed are right. Sonny Purdue might fling Christian-Jesus cooties on some one and they will suffer horribly because of it.

[Nucklesack]

Originally Posted by ~mellabella~

I don't post negative things about other beliefs. Which is why I said IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT TO MAKE IT RAIN, GO AHEAD. I just find your lack respect for those that believe in the 'sky pixie' as you call it a little reprehensible. I don't know what religion any of those people believe in, but I'm willing to bet that the Day of Prayer wasn't spelled out to be The Day of Prayer to God and God only. People are free to pray to whomever they want, whenever they want.

Ahh ok i understand, the Governor, State Representitives and Ministers were calling for a day of Prayer, asking you to Pray to Him, but they didnt mean God