Re: Vista beta vs. OSX

In article <1133406993.044567.37290@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"ed" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> George Graves wrote:
> > In article <BFB34A6D.4B44%orthocross@xxxxxxx>,
> > Donald <orthocross@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> <snip>
> > > Anyway, I was finally able to download that page. And I simply disagree
> > > with his definition, as do many, many others. So, "more authoritative"
> > > in
> > > this case means absolutely nothing. I consider only ONE written work to
> > > be
> > > "more authoritative" than another, or "PERFECT", as you claim your
> > > definition is: The Holy Bible of Historical Christianity.
> >
> > Yeah, the Bible is "Perfect" all right.
> >
> > "And Cain knew his wife". Where the *** did SHE come from? I mean, if
> > you accept the nonsense that the first man and the first woman were Adam
> > and Eve, and Eve had two sons, Cain and Able, unless Cain was screwing a
> > sheep (the cute one, though, with the pretty pink ribbon) there were no
> > women in the world.
>
> um, sure there were- adam and eve had daughters as well.

Would you like to show me the chapter and verse where the Old Testament
says that Adam and Eve had more than the two sons? I'd love to see it.
In Genesis 4, verses 1 and 2 it says: And Adam knew Eve, his wife, and
she conceived and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the
Lord. And she again bare his brother Able. And Able was a keeper of
sheep but Cain was a tiller of the Land.

That's it. That's the full extent of the Bible's treatment of the
subject of Adam and Eve's offspring.


> and more than
> two sons. you'd make a much more effective bible basher if you'd
> actually read the thing george...

I have read it. Probably more than you have.

I know that some worthy in the 4th century wrote a book called the
"Story of Adam of Eve" and some early Bibles included it, and supposedly
it fleshes out the family with daughters and more sons (9 in all I
believe) but it has no provenance in Hebrew scripture.

> <snip>

having no answers for the Noah's Ark story's discrepancies, He simply
skips them...


> > Jumping ahead to the New Testament, we have the Gospels of Matthew and
> > Luke disagreeing on many points of the life of the Christ Figure. They
> > totally disagree about the series of events leading up to the
> > crucifixion.
>
> why's that a big deal? you take 10 eye witnesses to a bank robbery
> that happened an hour ago and you'll get 10 different stories. i don't
> believe the bible is rooted in fact, but the gospels are basically
> supposed to be different individuals perspectives on events. it'd be
> dumb to expect them not to differ.

Yet you say that it is "Perfect." Odd hypocrisy that allows for such
glaring errors in a "perfect" text.

> > Shall I go on?
> >
> > And this is what you Christians call a "Perfect" written work? The thing
> > is full of more holes than a piece of swiss cheese. Just like your
> > idiotic religion.
>
> perfect means different things to different people

No. "Perfect" means "without flaw." It's that simple.
.