Some people

Some people just read the Bible so they can twist the words around, these people are not Christian's and should stick to reading "Dirty magazines"

The words in the Bible are Christian and the words in dirty mags are not, so the Christians should stick with the Bible and the non Christians should stick with their dirty mags.

Love from

Jim

Look Batman is a good man in 1969, but some one who dont like Batman could read the comic's 1000 years later and say batty was hurting people as it states in the comic that he WHHHHAMED and BIFFED a penquin

How do you spell Penquin

Originally posted by Vivaldi
Some people just read the Bible so they can twist the words around...

That's exactly what many christians do.

Originally posted by rwingett
That's exactly what many christians do.

Certainly most on this site. Several even have admitted that they have never read the book cover-to-cover, preferring rather to look at individual verses (a structure that was never part of the original texts). Thus, they never read in context, only out of context--the very definition of twisting texts.

Of course, their practice is all the more horrifying when one realizes that evangelicals, in their recruiting competition against those they deem cults, have spoken out against this form of twisting. See the book Scripture Twisting, published by Intervarsity Press for an instance of an evangelical identifying this out-of-context reading practice as twisting.

Originally posted by rwingett
That's exactly what many christians do.

Haha your so funny, but at the same time you are negitive

But I love you for ever

We are all going to die, and time goes so fast

Earth is man

man is but a comic

Originally posted by Vivaldi
Some people just read the Bible so they can twist the words around, these people are not Christian's and should stick to reading "Dirty magazines"

The words in the Bible are Christian and the words in dirty mags are not, so the Christians should stick with the Bible and the non Christians should stick with their dirty mags.

Love from

Jim

Why bother with reading a dirty mag when you can read about Lot's own daughters having sex with their daddy? The bible's so kinky!

Originally posted by Wulebgr
Certainly most on this site. Several even have admitted that they have never read the book cover-to-cover, preferring rather to look at individual verses (a structure that was never part of the original texts). Thus, they never read in context, only out of context--the very definition of twisting texts.

Of course, their practice is all the more horrifying ...[text shortened]... for an instance of an evangelical identifying this out-of-context reading practice as twisting.

Each book in the Bible was written by a different author. The Bible itself was written over hundreds of years.

I’m curious, do you believe that it is possible to read and understand a book in the Bible without having read the complete Bible?

Originally posted by Vivaldi
Some people just read the Bible so they can twist the words around, these people are not Christian's and should stick to reading "Dirty magazines"

The words in the Bible are Christian

Love from

Jim

The words and even the choices of which books of your bible to include were done in the last 1000 years.
Neither the Water into Wine or the Feeding of the Multitudes fables can be found in the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Are you proposing that all the words in your bible have always belonged to christians? That is a lot of words.
Your obvious fixation on Dirty Magazines suggests that Sodomy might just be your favorite christian word.

In Love there is Life

Angela

Originally posted by rwingett
That's exactly what many christians do.

I dont agree with you rwingett

I would agree if you said:

"That's exactly what many people do."

Originally posted by Vivaldi
The words in the Bible are Christian.

The old testament was written before Christ was born and so can not really be called Christian. It would be more accurate to call them Jewish.

The assumption that the bible is a single book and that any statements about it must apply to the whole book is unfounded. Many people read the whole Bible but to not bother to find out about its history and where it came from.
If I handed you a Bible tapped back to back with the Quoran would you declare the whole to be Christain. What if the Catholic Church had a council meeting and declared that the Quoran was a book to be included in the Bible ? What about the books in the Apocrapha ? What about other religious writtings that were written before and around the time of Christ? Have you read them all ? Most of the Bible is written in the context of the time and location that the particular book was written. To really understand what is being said one should really study the history and culture of the writer. And if possible learn the language and read it in its origional language as much can be lost and changed in translation.
For example the statement that Mary the mother of Jesus was a virgin is clear in most English versions of the Bible but is not so definate if you look at the origional and could also be interpreted as "Young Woman"
Many splits between Churches are due to different interpretations of particular phrases in the Bible.
Many Christans are not Roman Catholic but do not realise that the Bible they are using could be said to have been put together by the Early Catholic Church and not by the 12 diciples of Jesus.

Originally posted by Vivaldi
so the Christians should stick with the Bible and the non Christians should stick with their dirty mags.

How did you become a Christain if you had not read the Bible? To only read it after you become a Christain will give you a bias view anyway and to ignore any comments from non-Christains will lead to a very narrow view of the world. And have you read the whole of the Quoran and other religious texts before declaring them invalid ?
Have you read all the dirty magazines are are you basing your opinion on the cover page ?

Originally posted by The Chess Express
Each book in the Bible was written by a different author. The Bible itself was written over hundreds of years.

I’m curious, do you believe that it is possible to read and understand a book in the Bible without having read the complete Bible?

No

Originally posted by Vivaldi
Haha your so funny, but at the same time you are negitive

But I love you for ever

Why am I negative? Because I don't agree with you?

Originally posted by Wulebgr
No

Take the book of Mathew for example. What is there in Mathew that cannot be understood without having read the entire Bible?