Re: Flat earth vs God=G_uv ?
From: George Hammond (nospam1_at_nospam.net)
Date: 01/18/05
- Next message: Alphonse: "Re: To learn relativity read Quran"
- Previous message: Thomas Wong: "Re: Cahill's recent paper readdressing MMX et al"
- In reply to: TMG: "Re: Flat earth vs God=G_uv ?"
- Next in thread: Randy M. Dumse: "Re: Flat earth vs God=G_uv ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 09:10:58 GMT
"TMG" <TMG@Nowhere.org> wrote in message
news:qKCdnc9T2PrpPnHcRVn-pg@comcast.com...
>
>
> George Hammond wrote:
> > "Pastor Frank" <PF@christfirst.com> wrote in message
> > news:1105882681.2cb4c7aa4b34266f092b1a2e9261272f@teranews...
> >
> >
> >>"Bill Hobba" <bhobba@rubbish.net.au> wrote in message
> >
> >
> >>>[Hobba]
> >>>Anyone with a brain can see the enormity of the conspiracy
> >>>to cover up a flat earth would make such totally unreasonable.
> >>>But nothing prevents religious fanatics each putting forth their
> >>>different views of the world because religious faith is not based
> >>>on evidence. If they could be refuted as simply as the idea of
> >>>a flat earth it would have been done long ago. All that can be
> >>>refuted is simplistic interpretations of religious text - but
> >>>only morons (or fundamentalists who want to escape progress)
> >>>believe the literal interpretations anymore. I seem to recall
> >>>somewhere in the Bible it says man will never know the cause
> >>>of nigh and day. Nowadays such is trivially seen to be false.
> >>>But those of genuine religious sensibility recognize it was not
> >>>meant to be taken literally and was supposed to indicate there
> >>>are some things man will never know - faith is required to
> >>>take you further.
> >>>
> >
> >
> >>[Pastor Frank]
> >> What you are talking about has nothing to do with religion.
> >> Christ spoke only in parables, full of psychological symbolism
> >> and metaphor, and only "fundamentalist" atheist "morons",
> >> who are perceptually and philosophically challenged and are
> >> proud of it, can't understand any of it. See below
> >>
> >>Pastor Frank
> >
> >
> > [Hammond]
> > Well... I am GLAD to see that both of your are in AGREEMENT
> > that the Bible is "parabolic", "metaphorical" and "non literal" in
> > its description of The Divine Phenomenon. Both of you may go
> > to the head of the Seminary class for that one.
>
> What about thousands of your posts claiming that your SPOG proves that
> the exact *LITERAL* interpretation of the bible is an "ABSOLUTELY PROVEN
> SCIENTIFIC FACT"?
[Hammond]
What posts? I never claimed "everything in the Bible is literally true".
My position is:
Some things in the Bible are literally true,
but most things pertaining to the description
of Divine Phenomena are in fact "described
metaphorically".
ALL OF IT IS "SCIENTIFIC FACT" however, whether it
is described "literally" or described "metaphorically".
I dare say there are no "lies" in the Bible.... or scientific
untruths either.
When Ahab's priest commanded the Sun to stop dead in the sky
and then move 15-degrees backwards.... OBVIOUSLY that
is not literally true... for chrissakes everything on the Earth
would slide sideways at 1,000 m.p.h including the Ocean
which would drown everybody.
YOU'RE SUPPOSED to be learned enough to know that
the "san paku" peoples of the Earth (pious, introverted,
upper class religious people... such as the Jews in
particular) are referred to by the code word "the Sun"
and what it meant is that Ahab sensed that the Israelites
were spoiling to go to war and were overconfident and
foolhardy.... and he wanted to thwart their emotional-
psychological propensities and (in code) told the
priest they needed to "stop the Sun in the sky and
make it move back 15-degrees). It was a goddamned JOKE
up at their level... but it was a "scary and mysterious
symbol" to the uneducated Israelites that made them
stop and ponder what the hell they were talking about...
just like you are sitting there glassy eyed with wonder
about what the meaning of the metaphor might be.
Now for you to sit there and claim that God=G_uv
proves that the Sun can go backwards in the sky is
sheer insanity.... the story of the Sun is CLEARLY
not to be taken LITERALLY... in fact... to
LEARNED people it is a VERY POWERFUL
AND MASTERFUL METAPHOR about the social
psychology of the time... a joy of private communication
from some of the world's most influential men to
other learned and experienced men (such as myself)
and is DELIBERATELY DESIGNED to pass right
over the heads of ignorant know it alls such as yourself
and the other Goofballs on this thread.
You would be WELL ADVISED that much if not
all of the important matters of human experience
are discussed and negotiated in such "upper level"
language so that the ignorant goofballs who think they
can merely go by a gun and assinate the government
are kept from knowing what is going on. that kind
of "coded language" is ALL AROUND US 24 hours
a day... and what is being discussed is on a "need
to know basis"... and if you can't understand it,
or more commonly don't notice it..... you simply
DON'T NEED TO KNOW!
A hundred years ago the upper classes spoke in
French so the servants couldn't understand them.
But the art is thousands of years older than that...
and the principle example of it is the BIBLE... where
the average loudmouth aggravated s.o.b. can't
understand what they are talking about even though
it's written in English.
However... the time has come to let the cat out of the bag
and actually LITERALLY TELL the average aggravated
s.o.b. WHAT GOD IS...... Science has finally discovered
the necessity of that.... and that is what God=G_uv is...
a LITERAL, non-metaphorical explanation (and proof)
of what "God" actually is. It EXPLAINS (and proves)
the Bible.
====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
====================================
please ask you news server to add:
alt.sci.relativistic-proof-of-god.moderated
===================================
- Next message: Alphonse: "Re: To learn relativity read Quran"
- Previous message: Thomas Wong: "Re: Cahill's recent paper readdressing MMX et al"
- In reply to: TMG: "Re: Flat earth vs God=G_uv ?"
- Next in thread: Randy M. Dumse: "Re: Flat earth vs God=G_uv ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
