It shows...
Doesn't show...
I rather doubt our definitions of real would match.
Harold, I have to agree with Aussie on this one.
No offense, but even in the short time I've frequented this site, I have known many a "Bible Scholars", and you tend to have the same agenda. The problem is there isn't enough evidence in any view to condemn any specific viewpoint of revelation. Your view is one I share about the Bible, but I give a bit more credit to the authors that they at least attempted to write it as accurately as possible. Yes evidence exists that edits and revisions took place over time, but you cannot say for certain that the one that prevailed isn't the correct one. You might argue that your viewpoint contradicts the inerrant nature believed amongst many biblical studiers. You can even say that your studies lead you to believe these views are false, but quickly referencing your credentials usually is a prominant internet sign of the credentials not actually existing, of which I am not accusing you of making this lie, just that it does happen. Your views about the Bible, and religion in general are quite combative, and from someone who also converted away from a Bible centric view, tends to stray way away from the beliefs of said religions in an attempt to prove the accuracy to be off. I see this as a weakness to many of your posts. Your point seems less informative than it does persuasive, and if your point is persuasive, I doubt many will be following your path as you fail to grasp even the most basic of beliefs of those religions, or their texts.
I think there are too many factors going on to make this conclusion. 1) Aussie didn't initially refer to Shunya, yet Shunya went on the defensive and started spouting his credentials and making claims that are very difficult to prove (while not offering actual evidences of such) and making fairly grandeur claims of his knowledge over that of others. 2) it is likely that Aussie has read several of the other posts where this same technique from the same poster has been employed. In this he has spotted many holes in the informative side of forum etiquette, and focussed highly on the persuasive, while missing the more basic fundamentals of the target religions.
HAHAHAHA! Aussie spotted etiquette holes in anothers posts? Yup, he's all about that etiquette!
Looks to me like Aussie's initial post was #3. So Big Joe's right. The shunster started spouting his credentials over a comment not even directed at him.
That's me alright. Even had my left pinky extended when I posted!
no, just stating the fact that this is the internet and as far as you are concerned I could be either the head of Islamic studies at al-azhar or the writer for islamicawareness or even lower, a kid who read some stuff one time. Coming out and demanding my respect for your vast knowledge only shows that you fail to humble yourself, that you refuse to let another be seen as an equal. Even a jester has knowledge the professor doesn't.
not all, and even when you do, that doesn't mean the references you give aren't equally able to prove the opposite given a different perspective.
it happens a lot, don't let it get ya down.
ok so that means that you (nor I or anyone else) can prove our view right. It doesn't prove that someone cannot be, nor that someone other than you that contradicts you can't. All your studies are from certain perspectives, believe it or not there are probably common men who know as much or more.
just make sure your shoulders are square too... all or nothingThat's me alright. Even had my left pinky extended when I posted!
