According to the Bible..

???

The common peasantry of the Middle Ages could not afford the luxury of learning Latin, however the Church continued to hold its services in this language because of its tradition. I'd also like to point out that none of the Bible was originally penned in Latin; the Old Testament was written primarily in Hebrew, with bits of Aramaic and Greek, and the New Testament was written primarily in Greek with a bit of Aramaic.

 

The bible says many many things.

However like always, people disregard what they don't want to hear.


I'm surprised that theory made news on Australia.

 

The Quran was written in Arabic and Islam asks you to read it in the language it was revealed in, to prevent misinterpretations. When they translated the Bible, they obviously put in the wrong words, changing the meaning of the verse as a whole. That is why it's best to learn something the way it came to be.

My point precisely. Show your devotion, if you really care.

 

I heard from someone that the guy used to think the world was flat too.

 

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them" (Leviticus 20:13, AV).

 

This:

http://atrueott.wordpress.com/2011/05/09/may-21-2011-rupture-or-rapture-may-22-2011-day-of-disaster/

 

THe doomsday group made over 74m last few years, so nice to see the business of predicting doom is thriving.

 

Then why is it still in the bible?

Who's to say who should or should not take something out of a holy book literally?

Everyone says it's taken out of context, it's taken out of context, how can you take the act of a man having intercourse with another man out of context? The fact is the bible has it in it, and that is undeniable.

 

It's 8:05pm here in New Zealand, May the 21st LOL Fail Harold Camping, gf logic.

 

7:13 AM here, still waitin' :s

 

Because it was describing the conditions and laws of the society back then.

You can take it literally if you'd like if you want to follow laws of early Israel. Most Jews follows the laws of Leviticus though, and not Christians. An example of this would be pork, in Leviticus it states not to eat pork, Christians do not follow this, but Jews do.

It is because it is generally used to attack those of the Christian faith by calling every Christian one who kills gays. This is not the case, it is just one of the laws in the time period in Israel. I cannot deny and I even agree with you that it is in the bible, but when used as something like the 10 Commandments where Christians are required to kill homosexuals "as this is what it says in the bible", I strongly disagree.

 

harold camping is a false prophet who is in the illuminati he claims hes christian and everything but hes not really... hes using this method to turn many people who beleive in god into non beleivers after when his logic fails once again. he claimd the world is ending at 6PM today i wanna laugh when it fails.

 

So it's a description of the observable behavior 'back then'?

Fundamentalists, but those who do not take it literally would take 'the word of god' in a metaphorical, figurative sense correct?

So the Christians should do what the bible says as they see fit?
Follow laws as they see fit?

Why worship an ancient book as your holy book if your only prepared to take anecdotal bits of information literally?


If the bible is simply a book that describes the past, why is it any different from a popular history book?

 

Whaaaat? Now its 6PM? -.- We gotta wait more to prove the point.

 

Jokes on you if you associate with people who believed this

 

Im sure lots of people did die on saturday though.

 

Lol i was just playing runescape while "end"

 

How so?

 

Most religious people need something to grab onto, to give their life some meaning, they're followers.

A PERFECT example of this, is what the missionaries did in Africa. Those people were in dire straits, and religion gave them some salvation of hope in their life, something to follow.

Without religion, the world would crumble. With it, the world is crumbling.
It's a no win situation, because the masses are followers.

 

First sentence: But by saying that they're being "herded like sheep" isn't it implying that there is no choice on the part of the [as you described them] 'followers'? I couldn't accept that people don't make choices which contribute, if not wholly, to a result, state of affairs or consequence. Also just out of curiosity would you say that 'meaning' and 'understanding' [in the context of what you said] are synonymous with each other?

Second sentence: I have two questions. How is the world crumbling as a direct result of religion? How would it crumble without religion?

(Xhesi I'd still like to see your answer as the question was directed at you)