lawcat Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 I'd rather read your preaching than argue with you that you are fraudulently representing science, and my humble advice is that you should not peddle this as science because only then you are walking a fine line. Just continue expounding on your thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dduckwessel Posted September 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 I'd rather read your preaching than argue with you that you are fraudulently representing science, and my humble advice is that you should not peddle this as science because only then you are walking a fine line. Just continue expounding on your thoughts. will do :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 I was being evasive, wasn't I? B) The writings themselves say they were inspired by an otherworldy and superior, being. ... that's why what you are doing here does not meet the standard of this board. we do have appropriate threads here that approach the who's, where's, when's and why-for's of who wrote the bible (and other apocrapha). it is not as you say, against our rules to discuss the bible per se. the ops's and authoritive links given in these threads set the tone for the kind of discourse we intended in setting up the theology section. surely if you are as clever & adept at puzzles as you contend, then you can understand our very simple straight-forward admonitions to you that your topic as presented is not appropriate to our board. Who [Re-]Wrote the Bible? Hermeneutics - Who [Re-]Wrote the Old Testament? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dduckwessel Posted September 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 that's why what you are doing here does not meet the standard of this board. we do have appropriate threads here that approach the who's, where's, when's and why-for's of who wrote the bible (and other apocrapha). it is not as you say, against our rules to discuss the bible per se. the ops's and authoritive links given in these threads set the tone for the kind of discourse we intended in setting up the theology section. surely if you are as clever & adept at puzzles as you contend, then you can understand our very simple straight-forward admonitions to you that your topic as presented is not appropriate to our board. duly noted: http://www.mtio.com/articles/bissar35.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dduckwessel Posted September 14, 2011 Author Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Did my offering please you oh great B'wana and atone for my sheep-ish-ness? :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Did my offering please you oh great B'wana and atone for my sheep-ish-ness? :unsure: in a word, no. you traded one sheep-gut reader for another. :xmas_sheep: what's more, you simply threw up a link with no discussion relating it's content to the op. your "authority" does not even know how to write and/or edit a complete sentence in modern english. (boldenation mine)How We Got the Bible; Chapter 13from Reading The Bible With Understandingby Dr. Lane Burgland dr[/i]. lane burgland']...The debate over who wrote the books of the Old Testament and when they were written has raged for over two centuries. While tradition plays a role in answering these questions. Scripture itself makes certain claims about authorship and date. ... then there is this bit....The writing of the Old Testament took place over about one thousand years. We cannot determine how many authors were involved. ... if you took the time to read those threads and contained links on bible authorship that i gave you would know that we can determine a number of authors, and more to the point more than 1 author, through the bona fide scientific methods of technical analysis. your method(s) and your reference's methods are not technical analysis by any stretch of the doubt. i am ashamed to be an old man when such as you come here and carry on about how you have spent 40 years on some vice and expect that others should think your waste of time is worthy of some accreditation simply for its length. just how is it you can be so bright and not understand "no"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qfwfq Posted September 14, 2011 Report Share Posted September 14, 2011 Duck, you are definitely not conducting this discussion in an appropriate manner. In the past I have already dropped you little hints about how to avoid annoying people. You tend to dodge criticism and you are in the habit of invoking your supposedly superior competence in the topic to justify your statements. Your style of discussion is just not suitable. To avoid further annoyance, thread closed. Mind not to get yourself banned someday. Turtle 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts