Oldest Known Fragment of the New Testament Found

Because God Says: The Sequel follows from the first novel, God Says. In order to understand the sequel, it helps if you have some familiarity with Book I.

And because you refuse to answer Posts #64 and #67.

Because you asked for proof when John Castle claimed the Bible was fiction. I picked Exodus because it was an easy target. Or have you forgotten already?

Yes I have.

At any rate inaccuracy doesn't make something fiction.

For decades in history classes we taught that Laika the first animal to orbit the Earth in Sputnik 2 died in orbit after several days.

Not true.

For decades in history classes it was taught that Yuri Gagarin landed back on Earth in his Vostok spacecraft.

Not true.

God Says II: Whoops, nevermind that last one.

You're forgetting what it says in Psalms 136:14-15:

Sounds like Yul Brynner went "Glub! Glub!" to me.

Hatshepsut was erased to help cement the rule of her successor. She was probably the first queen to rule Egypt in her own right, but wore a fake beard to look more like a king. Absolutely nothing during her reign had anything to do with Israel or Israelis.

Everybody knows that Rameses survived his army's destruction at the Red Sea.

Really? So she survived? Proof?

A minor technicality, because the only thing that he didn't do, was remain in the craft all the way down. To match the level of error found in the Bible, Gagarin would have to have never been born.

So again you're saying that the Bible is not true.

Holy shit! That's gorgeous! My hat's off to ol' Cecil B., and the guys who cleaned the film up for blu-ray! I might have to pick up a copy.

Or maybe that he conquered Mars for Peter the Great.

Laika died after just a few hours due to stress and overheating.

And the Soviets considered it a major issue as to whether Gagarin landed with his craft. Because under internationally recognized rules for setting aviation records in effect at that time, a new accomplishment could only be official if you landed with your craft. To prevent pilots from pushing their aircraft to destruction and then bailing out.

The fear was that Gagarin's accomplishment would not be recognized if it was known he bailed out of his Vostok.

Again, both of those are minor when compared to the errors in the Bible.

I didn't forget, I just never read.

It's a great transfer/restoration. Looks really nice.

Yeah. That's like finding out the plague of frogs was actually toads.

And really, some idiot wrote that. Back then that would be about like having a plague of tasty lobster.

Hey, speaking of old testament, have any of you sat down and read the minor prophets??
Holy fucking shit!!
Fox News has nothing on that bug-fuckery.
It's just a bunch of butthurt "that tribe over there sucks!!! They fucking suck!! Kill them for me, God!! Kill them!! KILL!! KILL!!! KIIILL!!! ".

Whenever someone says that the Bible is beautiful literature, or "the good book", or "the greatest story ever told", fold it in half at Micah or Obadiah, and fucking whack them with it.

Depends on how you see it.

I don't see the bible as a true history book, nor do I see it as a complete work of fiction. I see it as a retelling of events that some may be true, some not and some exagerated. Some places, people and events may be true, some not, but the bible does give us an example of the way peoe lived and how they related natural events to God.i don't believe in no god, but I don't necessarily believe in the God of the bible either.

I've said it before and I'll repeat it.

Everyone seems to acknowledge that the end of the New Testament in Revelation is writing I think the word is "symbolically" or with "symbolism".

I have no problem believing that the first part of Genesis like the creation story is written in a similar manner.

That said, I believe all the stuff in the Bible about personal moral conduct in the New Testament is binding and on point.

So you're saying the Russians made it up?

The Russians lied about it.

So it was fictional?

No the

No. The underlying events regarding Laika and Gagarin were in fact factual.

But the details were not.

Events can be inaccurately described yet still be true.

Oh, I get it. Showing where parts of The Bible aren't factual doesn't make the whole Bible fiction.

There's really no comparison between the two, at all. We have ample evidence that the Soviet Union launched both Laika and Yuri Gagarin into space. We have no evidence that Jews were ever slaves in Egypt, or that they left after looting their Egyptian masters.

Parts of of it being symbolic in no way means it all (or most) is nor does it diminish the remainder.

All of which hinges upon what's described in the Old Testament. If there is no "Fall of Man," there's no need for Jesus. If mankind "fell," but not in the way described in the Old Testament, then why have an Old Testament with wrong information in it at all? Surely, a God who can raise the dead can figure out a way to explain the past in an accurate manner? But then again, this is a God who apparently can't heal amputees, so perhaps its beyond him. (Which makes me wonder why you'd worship such a being to begin with.)

But how do you know which parts are symbolic, and which parts are literal? If they're symbolic, how can you be certain that you're interpreting them the right way? And why screw around with symbolism when you know people are going to seize upon that to claim that the document is a falsehood?

Oh, that's just low! They are differently-abled!!! God still finds them perfect, as should you, in no need of heeling.

You racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, limb-centric twenty-digited blasphemous ambulatory quad!



But yeah, you'd think God loved amphibians more than people.