God's word perverted????

It's called remarketing. Just trying to repackage the same male cow feces. It is still crap.

It's like this to me:

Alan Moore writes Watchmen, and is hailed as one of, if not the, greatest graphic novel writer of all time.

Zack Snyder directs Watchmen movie, in which instead of *spoiler warning* making a giant psychic exploding squid, Adrian harnesses Doctor Manhattan's energy to blow up New York and a few other places. While they still hail Alan Moore as the true genius, for being original, many prefer Zack Snyder's plot to Alan's.

A website gives a summary of the 2009 movie's plot that many disagree with, because it shows Veidt as a much darker more evil character then he actually was, and dislike it.

Overall: Who cares, it's a fiction story, read it however you want.

no its not perverted

what do you expect and really what did this god expect , really......

inotherwords thats the thing , daredevil , many people , interpert and translate the bible differently

what surprises me is that god did not forsee this

The Bible is only a tool to provide access to the Divine in a culturally biased way. I suppose even perverted versions of the Bible have some value in that they can cause a person to become aware of their spiritual blindness. But in asking such a question I'd personally not value the opinions of anyone who was spiritually dead when seeking as to whether a version of the Bible is perverted or not, because as the Bible itself says "The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned." (http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=spirit+discern&searchtype=all&version1=31&spanbegin=1&spanend=73)

A true scientist and a true seeker of the Divine have this in common they don't presume to know everything and are humble enough to admit their senses and understanding are limited.

The funny thing here is you cant even see the contradiction you are making. First you state that a god cannot understand why a person would not accept the things that come from the "spirit of god". Only and idiot can not determine why this would be. The fact is that a god is expecting some being to believe in it's existence without it even presenting anything tangible to do so. Only an idiot would expect that all beings would just assume without any reasoning. If he had even the slightest of intellect he would know that many would not accept it without some kind of basis to establish the belief on. So which is it? Is god a moron or how about the more realistic explanation? God does not exist, humans invented the god idea and that is why there are hundreds of contradictions. The later sounds far more plausible to me.

@Krumble,
Actually you're proven my point, because like so many others I've read, or talked to, you’re writing an overly emotional response containing the dogma handed to you by your religion: atheism. But in any case your response deserves a reply, just understand that I do not think I can change your mind nor can I convince you of something you believe in wholeheartedly. That said if you never believe in a god, I do hope you realize you’re being as dogmatically close minded as any Christian I’ve ever met. This is something I find it highly ironic, and humorous, because so many atheists are in themselves religious fundamentals (i.e. living by dogma and not by understanding through experience).

<shrug> Well… I guess this just goes to prove that humans tend to be self deluded into believing they are superior to the truth evident by their actions.

Anyway in response to your comment, "First you state that a god cannot understand why a person would not accept the things that come from the 'spirit of god'." I would like you to consider that you're making a humanistic assumption by stating "a god cannot understand". It seems obvious to me that you can't know this to be fact since you don't have any empirical evidence that a god exist and so then you don't have any empirical evidence that a god doesn't understand.

This leads me back to my initial response to Daredevil. When asking a question about a book that claims to be divinely inspired it is best to give more weight to the opinions of those who’ve had an empirical experience with the Divine as opposed to those who have no empirical experience (i.e. spiritually dead).

(Hopefully this response doesn’t sound too condescending, but it probably does. This is an unfortunately consequence of trying to distill a great amount of years of study and experience into a synoptic forum format.)

Doesn't having spiritual experiences just make you more of an expert on spiritual experiences?

Does having delusions make you more of an expert on delusions? I suppose in some way.

To some degree, yes, Zetherin.

Yes, but what good is that? In Christian terms this is known as discernment, and the closer to the Truth a person is the more discerning they are. This may all be really enlightening to one who sees things from a spiritual view, but the question is how worthwhile is that if you're unable to bless others with the "known" truth. The Bible refers to people who are full of spiritual knowledge, but of no earthly good as "rain laden clouds who pass over a dry and thirsty land".

forum is going to hell.