A word to those who invoke The Deity constantly.
06 Aug 2010, 3:04 am
I wish you God Fearing Folk would stop confusing your beliefs and wishful thinking with empirically well established fact. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs. No one is entitled to their own facts. Facts are What Is and are public and part of the world. Beliefs are peculiar to various people and reflect, at most, the inner mental and emotional states of people.
Also stop invoking the Bible as though it were a Book of Fact. It is NOT! The Bible is a collection of myths and stories created by and compiled by pre-scientific folks, the kind of people who believed the Sun went around the earth, the kind of folk who did not now that stuff consists of atoms and that invisible microscopic living things are alive in us and on us. Disease is mostly caused by pathogens, not by demons sent by Satan.
The Bible contains mostly non-facts and in some cases nonsense.
ruveyn
06 Aug 2010, 4:40 am
ruveyn wrote:
I wish you God Fearing Folk would stop confusing your beliefs and wishful thinking with empirically well established fact. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs. No one is entitled to their own facts. Facts are What Is and are public and part of the world. Beliefs are peculiar to various people and reflect, at most, the inner mental and emotional states of people.
Also stop invoking the Bible as though it were a Book of Fact. It is NOT! The Bible is a collection of myths and stories created by and compiled by pre-scientific folks, the kind of people who believed the Sun went around the earth, the kind of folk who did not now that stuff consists of atoms and that invisible microscopic living things are alive in us and on us. Disease is mostly caused by pathogens, not by demons sent by Satan.
The Bible contains mostly non-facts and in some cases nonsense.
ruveyn
Also stop invoking the Bible as though it were a Book of Fact. It is NOT! The Bible is a collection of myths and stories created by and compiled by pre-scientific folks, the kind of people who believed the Sun went around the earth, the kind of folk who did not now that stuff consists of atoms and that invisible microscopic living things are alive in us and on us. Disease is mostly caused by pathogens, not by demons sent by Satan.
The Bible contains mostly non-facts and in some cases nonsense.
ruveyn
Great speech, ruveyn. Now that the Bible has been put into its proper place we can all settle down to rationality.
06 Aug 2010, 6:14 am
ruveyn wrote:
I wish you God Fearing Folk would stop confusing your beliefs and wishful thinking with empirically well established fact. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs. No one is entitled to their own facts. Facts are What Is and are public and part of the world. Beliefs are peculiar to various people and reflect, at most, the inner mental and emotional states of people.
Also stop invoking the Bible as though it were a Book of Fact. It is NOT! The Bible is a collection of myths and stories created by and compiled by pre-scientific folks, the kind of people who believed the Sun went around the earth, the kind of folk who did not now that stuff consists of atoms and that invisible microscopic living things are alive in us and on us. Disease is mostly caused by pathogens, not by demons sent by Satan.
The Bible contains mostly non-facts and in some cases nonsense.
ruveyn
Also stop invoking the Bible as though it were a Book of Fact. It is NOT! The Bible is a collection of myths and stories created by and compiled by pre-scientific folks, the kind of people who believed the Sun went around the earth, the kind of folk who did not now that stuff consists of atoms and that invisible microscopic living things are alive in us and on us. Disease is mostly caused by pathogens, not by demons sent by Satan.
The Bible contains mostly non-facts and in some cases nonsense.
ruveyn
^^ Greetings ruveyn, thankee for your post, as I believe this is very interesting. However I believe there is a problem. How do I know that a fact is a fact. I personally believe that knowing is very similar, if not the same as believing, however that knowing believing with the added condition that what you believe in is correct. Yet, again, how do I know what I believe in is correct?
For instance, I possess a happy book named "The Book of General Ignorance" and contains many "facts" that contradict common beliefs. For instance, the book states that the "thumbs up" sign is misunderstood from the Gladiatorial myth. In fact, the book states that "thumbs up" signalled death, and a sheathed thumb signalled the gladiator to spare the victim's life. Yet, which fact do I choose? This book presents no proof of this fact. Yet, neither have I seen proof for the converse statement.
In addition, you have mentioned those who believed that the Sun revolved around the Earth. I suspect that these individuals "knew" these facts also. This was the Science of the time.
Furthermore, I suspect that no individual could ever experience and witness every piece evidence for every Scientific fact ever established by humans, let alone understand them. Even then, the interpretations between each individual may differ. In addition, there could be mistakes in the evidence, a piece of evidence missing (as there has in the past). I do believe in certain matters, many Scientific, and some more strongly than others. I do not personally follow a particular religion I suspect that they believe what they believe in, as strongly as you believe what you believe in. At least, that is what I believe is best to assume.
You state "Facts are what and are public and are part of the world". In many ways, I agree that there is solid truth. Yet, I also believe that it is impossible to know completely that you what you believe in is completely true. This does not mean that you should disbelieve everything, but if an individual can not see your way, then leave them be.
^^ I am very sorry if I was horrible.
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
06 Aug 2010, 7:10 am
That makes me laugh. What "empirical evidence" do you have that the Bible isn't factual? Archeological evidence has increasingly shown that the people and places of the Bible were real. When Jesus taught, His followers transmitted His teachings orally until the Gospel writers saw fit to actually write down accounts of His life and work. His followers recognized Him as the Messiah, a fact that they, as "witnesses," testified to the rest of the world. And those of us who believe through their "testimony" become witnesses ourselves through faith. And by being witnesses of and for the Anointed, we are able to continue in testimony of those things we DO know as fact.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
leejosepho
Veteran
Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock
06 Aug 2010, 7:52 am
AngelRho wrote:
What "empirical evidence" do you have that the Bible isn't factual?
Yes. You (Ruveyn) and others here quite regularly say things I know to be ridiculous:
Quote:
The Bible is [but] a collection of myths ...
The Bible contains mostly non-facts and in some cases nonsense.
The Bible contains mostly non-facts and in some cases nonsense.
Rubbish!
_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================
06 Aug 2010, 7:55 am
AngelRho wrote:
That makes me laugh. What "empirical evidence" do you have that the Bible isn't factual? Archeological evidence has increasingly shown that the people and places of the Bible were real. When Jesus taught, His followers transmitted His teachings orally until the Gospel writers saw fit to actually write down accounts of His life and work. His followers recognized Him as the Messiah, a fact that they, as "witnesses," testified to the rest of the world. And those of us who believe through their "testimony" become witnesses ourselves through faith. And by being witnesses of and for the Anointed, we are able to continue in testimony of those things we DO know as fact.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
Lets see. The bible says or implies the entire cosmos is six thousand years old. (See Bishop Usher's careful literal examination of scripture). The earth is over four billion years old. The earth is flat. The sun revolves around the earth. Jacob could breed striped and spotted sheep by showing striped and spotted sticks of wood to the ewes while they are rutting. The sun and the moon stood still over Gibeon. That means the earth stop rotating with no detectable physical effects. Work out the physics of that and you will have something that makes 2012 look like a picnic. The bible tells us there is a physical plague that knows the difference between the first born and subsequent born not only of humans but every mammalian species in Egypt!
That a human being - Jesus- really died, lay in the earth three days and came back to life without even smelling a little bit. The bible proclaims its absurdity prima facia.
We have peered nearly thirteen billion light years into space with not a sign of God. Not even a hint.
To believe in the veracity of the bible one would have to deny virtual all of the science discovered in the last four hundred years.
The bible taken as a historical chronicle of events in the past is pure unadulterated nonsense.
ruveyn
06 Aug 2010, 8:24 am
ruveyn wrote:
We have peered nearly thirteen billion light years into space with not a sign of God. Not even a hint.
^^ Greetings again everyone. In this quote ruveyn, I believe by "we" you do not mean us, but other scientists. Although with that I am being very pedantic, I believe the main problem with the above quote is that you are implying that you should be able to see God floating in space, and know that that floating entity is God. The bible is a sign of God. As AngelRho has said, in many ways, the accounts in the bible are written experiences of witnesses.
ruveyn wrote:
To believe in the veracity of the bible one would have to deny virtual all of the science discovered in the last four hundred years.
In many ways, I agree that to accept all of the bible, then one must do so. But, if that is what an individual believes, then that is that. However, I believe most followers do not believe in all that the bible states. (I believe that my Atheist friend within the past very much enjoyed quoting some rather eccentric parts from the bible). Although with this a problem arises "If they deny one part of the bible, then how can they reliably selectively accept other parts of the bible?". This is not for me to decide. Let us take the sheep example you used. I do not believe that this method was allegedly told by God, yet in many ways you could consider that very early Science. Indeed, it is possible that Jacob tried this experiment and it worked in the way mentioned.
ruveyn wrote:
The bible taken as a historical chronicle of events in the past is pure unadulterated nonsense.
I believe that is the case for all texts written at a particular time. I believe that the bible is a source to be studied, not a ready guide to the history at that time.
I am very sorry if I have been silly here.
leejosepho
Veteran
Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock
06 Aug 2010, 8:32 am
ruveyn wrote:
The bible says or implies the entire cosmos is six thousand years old.
No, it does not. "Formless and void" seems to me to represent/indicate some period of time prior to "creation" (formation and filling) of the earth as we now know it.
ruveyn wrote:
The sun and the moon stood still over Gibeon.
I once read something about NASA's adding that into its computations making things come out right while plotting a course of some kind.
ruveyn wrote:
The bible tells us there is a physical plague that knows the difference between the first born and subsequent born not only of humans but every mammalian species in Egypt!
No, it says the destroyer made that distinction.
ruveyn wrote:
That a human being - Jesus- really died, lay in the earth three days and came back to life without even smelling a little bit.
How could/would something like that be impossible for The One who first made man from dust?
ruveyn wrote:
We have peered nearly thirteen billion light years into space with not a sign of God.
That is silly. But either way, my own experience right here on earth and in life as we know it is *much* different!
ruveyn wrote:
To believe in the veracity of the bible one would have to deny virtual all of the science discovered in the last four hundred years.
For example?
_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================
06 Aug 2010, 9:10 am
ruveyn wrote:
I wish you God Fearing Folk would stop confusing your beliefs and wishful thinking with empirically well established fact. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions and beliefs. No one is entitled to their own facts. Facts are What Is and are public and part of the world. Beliefs are peculiar to various people and reflect, at most, the inner mental and emotional states of people.
Also stop invoking the Bible as though it were a Book of Fact. It is NOT! The Bible is a collection of myths and stories created by and compiled by pre-scientific folks, the kind of people who believed the Sun went around the earth, the kind of folk who did not now that stuff consists of atoms and that invisible microscopic living things are alive in us and on us. Disease is mostly caused by pathogens, not by demons sent by Satan.
The Bible contains mostly non-facts and in some cases nonsense.
ruveyn
Also stop invoking the Bible as though it were a Book of Fact. It is NOT! The Bible is a collection of myths and stories created by and compiled by pre-scientific folks, the kind of people who believed the Sun went around the earth, the kind of folk who did not now that stuff consists of atoms and that invisible microscopic living things are alive in us and on us. Disease is mostly caused by pathogens, not by demons sent by Satan.
The Bible contains mostly non-facts and in some cases nonsense.
ruveyn
---
ruveyn - That's why John Bunyan told a story called The Pilgrim's Progress (about the Geneva Bible/preceded the KJV) and told the story in the form of a dream (my view) to avoid the conflict between a literal interpretation of the Bible and a symbolic one. - http://www.pilgrimsprogressthemovie.com/ - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pilgrim's_Progress - At the same time, there are a number of non-profit religions in the world today - year 2010 - which view the Bible as literal and will excommunicate/publicly punish members who do not accept a literal interpretation of the Bible. Some of those extremist non-profit religions are headquartered in Europe today, some in the USA, and other areas of the world. That's my understanding. - pgd
...
Do non-profit religions which claim they love God and love their neighbor burn members at the stake who do not subscribe to what these non-profit, tax-exempt extremist religions believe?
Yes.
List of people burned as heretics (aka History)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pe ... s_heretics
Last edited by pgd on 06 Aug 2010, 9:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
06 Aug 2010, 9:13 am
ruveyn wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
That makes me laugh. What "empirical evidence" do you have that the Bible isn't factual? Archeological evidence has increasingly shown that the people and places of the Bible were real. When Jesus taught, His followers transmitted His teachings orally until the Gospel writers saw fit to actually write down accounts of His life and work. His followers recognized Him as the Messiah, a fact that they, as "witnesses," testified to the rest of the world. And those of us who believe through their "testimony" become witnesses ourselves through faith. And by being witnesses of and for the Anointed, we are able to continue in testimony of those things we DO know as fact.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
Lets see. The bible says or implies the entire cosmos is six thousand years old. (See Bishop Usher's careful literal examination of scripture). The earth is over four billion years old. The earth is flat. The sun revolves around the earth. Jacob could breed striped and spotted sheep by showing striped and spotted sticks of wood to the ewes while they are rutting. The sun and the moon stood still over Gibeon. That means the earth stop rotating with no detectable physical effects. Work out the physics of that and you will have something that makes 2012 look like a picnic. The bible tells us there is a physical plague that knows the difference between the first born and subsequent born not only of humans but every mammalian species in Egypt!
That a human being - Jesus- really died, lay in the earth three days and came back to life without even smelling a little bit. The bible proclaims its absurdity prima facia.
We have peered nearly thirteen billion light years into space with not a sign of God. Not even a hint.
To believe in the veracity of the bible one would have to deny virtual all of the science discovered in the last four hundred years.
The bible taken as a historical chronicle of events in the past is pure unadulterated nonsense.
ruveyn
Give up, ruveyn. You can't teach a starfish to play baseball.
06 Aug 2010, 9:23 am
Sand wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
That makes me laugh. What "empirical evidence" do you have that the Bible isn't factual? Archeological evidence has increasingly shown that the people and places of the Bible were real. When Jesus taught, His followers transmitted His teachings orally until the Gospel writers saw fit to actually write down accounts of His life and work. His followers recognized Him as the Messiah, a fact that they, as "witnesses," testified to the rest of the world. And those of us who believe through their "testimony" become witnesses ourselves through faith. And by being witnesses of and for the Anointed, we are able to continue in testimony of those things we DO know as fact.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
Lets see. The bible says or implies the entire cosmos is six thousand years old. (See Bishop Usher's careful literal examination of scripture). The earth is over four billion years old. The earth is flat. The sun revolves around the earth. Jacob could breed striped and spotted sheep by showing striped and spotted sticks of wood to the ewes while they are rutting. The sun and the moon stood still over Gibeon. That means the earth stop rotating with no detectable physical effects. Work out the physics of that and you will have something that makes 2012 look like a picnic. The bible tells us there is a physical plague that knows the difference between the first born and subsequent born not only of humans but every mammalian species in Egypt!
That a human being - Jesus- really died, lay in the earth three days and came back to life without even smelling a little bit. The bible proclaims its absurdity prima facia.
We have peered nearly thirteen billion light years into space with not a sign of God. Not even a hint.
To believe in the veracity of the bible one would have to deny virtual all of the science discovered in the last four hundred years.
The bible taken as a historical chronicle of events in the past is pure unadulterated nonsense.
ruveyn
Give up, ruveyn. You can't teach a starfish to play baseball.
^^I am sorry Sand, may I please suggest the following analogy instead?
"You cannot persuade a pacifist to kill."
I write this as the issue here is not physical abilities, but beliefs.
06 Aug 2010, 9:28 am
ruveyn wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
That makes me laugh. What "empirical evidence" do you have that the Bible isn't factual? Archeological evidence has increasingly shown that the people and places of the Bible were real. When Jesus taught, His followers transmitted His teachings orally until the Gospel writers saw fit to actually write down accounts of His life and work. His followers recognized Him as the Messiah, a fact that they, as "witnesses," testified to the rest of the world. And those of us who believe through their "testimony" become witnesses ourselves through faith. And by being witnesses of and for the Anointed, we are able to continue in testimony of those things we DO know as fact.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
Lets see. The bible says or implies the entire cosmos is six thousand years old. (See Bishop Usher's careful literal examination of scripture). The earth is over four billion years old. The earth is flat. The sun revolves around the earth. Jacob could breed striped and spotted sheep by showing striped and spotted sticks of wood to the ewes while they are rutting. The sun and the moon stood still over Gibeon. That means the earth stop rotating with no detectable physical effects. Work out the physics of that and you will have something that makes 2012 look like a picnic. The bible tells us there is a physical plague that knows the difference between the first born and subsequent born not only of humans but every mammalian species in Egypt!
That a human being - Jesus- really died, lay in the earth three days and came back to life without even smelling a little bit. The bible proclaims its absurdity prima facia.
We have peered nearly thirteen billion light years into space with not a sign of God. Not even a hint.
To believe in the veracity of the bible one would have to deny virtual all of the science discovered in the last four hundred years.
The bible taken as a historical chronicle of events in the past is pure unadulterated nonsense.
ruveyn
---
ruveyn - Agree with you 100%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wallch ... ld_History
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pe ... s_heretics
Some of these non-profit religious people believe that God invented the light bulb (not Thomas Edison) and that God founded the USA in 1776, not George Washington (and others). Some non-profit religions such as European Catholicism will not even acknowledge the existence of democracies on planet earth but argue for a harsh religious dictatorship run from Europe by the child crime hiding, marriage-hating, women-hating Pope of Italy.
- pgd
AngelRho
Veteran
Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 48
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,366
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile
06 Aug 2010, 9:35 am
ruveyn wrote:
Lets see. The bible says or implies the entire cosmos is six thousand years old. (See Bishop Usher's careful literal examination of scripture). The earth is over four billion years old. The earth is flat. The sun revolves around the earth. Jacob could breed striped and spotted sheep by showing striped and spotted sticks of wood to the ewes while they are rutting. The sun and the moon stood still over Gibeon. That means the earth stop rotating with no detectable physical effects. Work out the physics of that and you will have something that makes 2012 look like a picnic. The bible tells us there is a physical plague that knows the difference between the first born and subsequent born not only of humans but every mammalian species in Egypt!
That a human being - Jesus- really died, lay in the earth three days and came back to life without even smelling a little bit. The bible proclaims its absurdity prima facia.
We have peered nearly thirteen billion light years into space with not a sign of God. Not even a hint.
To believe in the veracity of the bible one would have to deny virtual all of the science discovered in the last four hundred years.
The bible taken as a historical chronicle of events in the past is pure unadulterated nonsense.
ruveyn
That a human being - Jesus- really died, lay in the earth three days and came back to life without even smelling a little bit. The bible proclaims its absurdity prima facia.
We have peered nearly thirteen billion light years into space with not a sign of God. Not even a hint.
To believe in the veracity of the bible one would have to deny virtual all of the science discovered in the last four hundred years.
The bible taken as a historical chronicle of events in the past is pure unadulterated nonsense.
ruveyn
I'd give my usual kind of response to this, but I see that leejosepho has beaten me to it and has been MUCH more succinct than I'm capable of being.
I'll simply add this: I do consider myself a literalist, but certain things have to be taken into account when taking the Bible literally--for example, if interpreting the Bible literally, are you aware that certain parts of the Bible were CLEARLY intended as poetry/songs, writings of general wisdom (certain psalms along with proverbs), metaphorical language (such as the parables), and prophetic visions in which symbolism is used to communicate to the seer who it is that gives the prophecy (like Ezekiel's description of the cherubim)? Those are just the more obvious examples. Using the age of the earth is very poor evidence in that the book of Genesis is not overly concerned with the passage of time. When I read Genesis, I often get the feeling that just a few days passed from the birth of Isaac to the arrival of Israel in Egypt. Turn the page, and it seems like all of Israel just woke up one day and, on a whim, said, "Hey, let's go home." The Bible isn't concerned with all of the "story" within the story, else it would be a much larger book. You CAN'T use a book that consistently neglects keeping an accurate account of time to judge the age of the Earth.
Now, it is true that if you rely ONLY on what's there, sure you come up with about 6,000 years. But I think evidence that the Earth is older demands re-reading the opening text of the Bible. Genesis 1 need not be read to mean that all the days of creation are fixed units of time (such as a 24-hour day as we know it). Even if they are, the Bible doesn't indicate that the days of creation are necessarily CONSECUTIVE days. Scientific examination of the fossil record does not appear to dispute the order of creation in the Bible as to how larger plant and animal life appeared. Even if you favor evolution over creationism, it seems that science affirms THIS part of the Biblical account. I will concede that it is foolish to give the Earth a hard and fast age of 6,000 years. But at the same time I cannot say I really believe the cosmos is as old as some speculate it to be. The scientist and the believer are in the same boat on this issue, that neither science nor the Bible provides any certainty of the age of the earth or the universe.
I'm not familiar enough with physics to say what would happen if the earth stopped rotating. As I recall, gravity is theorized to be a product of the masses of objects--the greater the mass, the stronger the force. I would think that the centrifugal force of rotation would simply sling everything on and in the earth into the endlessness of space, and we know this simply doesn't happen. The rotation of objects in space don't seem to give them any more or less stability or integrity, so I don't really see how this is a problem.
As I said, leejosepho has already stated anything else I could have said and has done a much better job.
leejosepho
Veteran
Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,011
Location: 200 miles south of Little Rock
06 Aug 2010, 9:57 am
AngelRho wrote:
As I said, leejosepho has already stated anything else I could have said and has done a much better job.
Please never leave anything to me! Speak right on up in whatever way.
One of the things I find interesting in situations like this is the noticeable, word-born evidence present. For example:
"A word to those who invoke The Deity constantly" seems to indicate "once in a while" might not seem so objectionable ...
... and why would/might that be so?
As mentioned somewhere in Scripture, all of creation declares an inescapable awareness of "God" some people spend even entire lifetimes attempting to not notice!
_________________
I began looking for someone like me when I was five ...
My search ended at 59 ... right here on WrongPlanet.
==================================
06 Aug 2010, 10:44 am
Tomasu wrote:
Sand wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
That makes me laugh. What "empirical evidence" do you have that the Bible isn't factual? Archeological evidence has increasingly shown that the people and places of the Bible were real. When Jesus taught, His followers transmitted His teachings orally until the Gospel writers saw fit to actually write down accounts of His life and work. His followers recognized Him as the Messiah, a fact that they, as "witnesses," testified to the rest of the world. And those of us who believe through their "testimony" become witnesses ourselves through faith. And by being witnesses of and for the Anointed, we are able to continue in testimony of those things we DO know as fact.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
Thus we CAN accept and teach the Bible as fact. And you are right, people are and rightfully should be entitled to their opinions. I think the problem here is we disagree on what the facts are, and given your particular background that fact saddens me.
Lets see. The bible says or implies the entire cosmos is six thousand years old. (See Bishop Usher's careful literal examination of scripture). The earth is over four billion years old. The earth is flat. The sun revolves around the earth. Jacob could breed striped and spotted sheep by showing striped and spotted sticks of wood to the ewes while they are rutting. The sun and the moon stood still over Gibeon. That means the earth stop rotating with no detectable physical effects. Work out the physics of that and you will have something that makes 2012 look like a picnic. The bible tells us there is a physical plague that knows the difference between the first born and subsequent born not only of humans but every mammalian species in Egypt!
That a human being - Jesus- really died, lay in the earth three days and came back to life without even smelling a little bit. The bible proclaims its absurdity prima facia.
We have peered nearly thirteen billion light years into space with not a sign of God. Not even a hint.
To believe in the veracity of the bible one would have to deny virtual all of the science discovered in the last four hundred years.
The bible taken as a historical chronicle of events in the past is pure unadulterated nonsense.
ruveyn
Give up, ruveyn. You can't teach a starfish to play baseball.
^^I am sorry Sand, may I please suggest the following analogy instead?
"You cannot persuade a pacifist to kill."
I write this as the issue here is not physical abilities, but beliefs.
My comment was not about emotional conviction but intellectual competence. People who interpret the Bible literally simply do not have the mental stuff to think.
