A Mormon bishop in Colorado has been running a Ponzi scheme

[_Calculus Crusader]

What indication is given in the text that the Tower of Babel story is ahistorical, and that the sparkle Jesus magic you believe in actually happened? The Bible is as matter-of-fact about the former as it is about the latter. You're engaging in special pleading.

Find something like this for the Tower of Babel:

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Emperor Tiberius, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was ruler of Galilee, and his brother Philip ruler of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias ruler of Abilene, during the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.

(I will not hold my breath.)

I apologize that I can't pray to my sky-daddy to start the 2009-10 academic year any sooner.

You have an exceedingly naïve view of God.

[_JohnStuartMill]

Find something like this for the Tower of Babel:

In the fifteenth year of the reign of Emperor Tiberius, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, and Herod was ruler of Galilee, and his brother Philip ruler of the region of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias ruler of Abilene, during the high-priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.

What do you think is special about this passage? That it references figures mentioned by secular history? Big damn deal -- the Egyptian pharaoh was a historical figure, but that doesn't make the parting of the Red Sea less ridiculous. It's not as if there's an asterisk to the footnote, "Just kidding -- it's all allegorical, kids!" in Genesis anywhere. Apparently, your standard is: "believe in the Bible, except where it's just too ridiculous for even dolts like me to take seriously".

I apologize that I can't pray to my sky-daddy to start the 2009-10 academic year any sooner.

You have an exceedingly naïve view of God.

I wonder how that came to pass...

If God can bring people back from the dead, and can telepathically read your thoughts and grant wishes, why can't he make the academic year start sooner?

Maybe you think those university administrators really are as important as they think they are.

[_Some Schmo]

When the only rejoinder you can cough up is I know you are but what am I?! then it is best to remain silent.

LOL... and yet that's never stopped you.

What should I say to someone who has little to contribute but calling people 'pos', 'hayseed', 'low rent', 'dimbulb', 'moron' etc etc.

I figured I should speak at the level at which you seem to live.

I get the strong feeling your mommy didn't like holding you much.




_____

[_Calculus Crusader]

What do you think is special about this passage? That it references figures mentioned by secular history? Big damn deal -- the Egyptian pharaoh was a historical figure, but that doesn't make the parting of the Red Sea less ridiculous. It's not as if there's an asterisk to the footnote, "Just kidding -- it's all allegorical, kids!" in Genesis anywhere. Apparently, your standard is: "believe in the Bible, except where it's just too ridiculous for even dolts like me to take seriously".

Pick an argument and stick to it, instead of flopping around like a fish. You asked me how I can take the Gospels as historical but not the Tower of Babel, and I answered you. (The former is rooted in history and the latter is not.) Besides which, the Tower of Babel narrative is ancillary to Christianity.

[_JohnStuartMill]

Where in the Bible does it say that stories rooted in secular history are historical, and everything else is up for grabs? You gave a crappy rationale for your distinction. What was I supposed to do, roll over?

Your treatment of the Tower of Babel story as ahistorical has been rejected by probably 95% of believers in the Old Testament. NOBODY thought that the story was ahistorical until modern history and science showed it to be implausible at best, and it thus became a dead weight dragging down the rest of the faith tradition. It's very clear that you're only throwing the Tower of Babel story under the bus because it has no relation to reality whatsoever, and not because there's actually any kind of Biblical warrant to do so.

The Mopologists would be proud.

[_rcrocket]

Where in the Bible does it say that stories rooted in secular history are historical, and everything else is up for grabs? You gave a crappy rationale for your distinction. What was I supposed to do, roll over?

Your treatment of the Tower of Babel story as ahistorical has been rejected by probably 95% of believers in the Old Testament. NOBODY thought that the story was ahistorical until modern history and science showed it to be implausible at best, and it thus became a dead weight dragging down the rest of the faith tradition. It's very clear that you're only throwing the Tower of Babel story under the bus because it has no relation to reality whatsoever, and not because there's actually any kind of Biblical warrant to do so.

The Mopologists would be proud.

You throw the English language under the bus.

[_JohnStuartMill]

You've confirmed my suspicions about you.

Which are?

"Ahistorical" means "not historical."

Yes, it does. What do you want, a cookie?

You throw the English language under the bus.

Don't blame me for your poor reading comprehension.

[_harmony]

An interesting thread that started about a bishop in CO, and slid immediately into a 3 page discussion about grammer, with a little Old Testament thrown on the heap.

Fun on MDB!