Topic awaiting preservation: owwwwwww.....it hurts bad (Page 3 of 3)

quote:

---

I was going to put in scriptures and facts that prove it, but all I would really be doing is moving facts from AIG to here, so I will just give you the web site to look at it yourself. It has all the answers you have been looking for about Creation. http://www.answersingenesis.org. I hope it has the answers you are looking for.

---

It is no wonder you are so confused.

*wanders off down the halls, laughing his ass off, and shaking his head*

The only problem with drawing the line [between micro- and macro-evolution] at " the changing of animal 'kinds'" is that "animal 'kinds'" is totally arbitrary.

Go to this list of classifications within the animal kingdom and pick a handful of animals -- say, domesticated dogs, quail and spiders (or some other representative sample). Now click through that animal kingdom hierarchy and decide what other animals are of the same "animal kinds" as the ones you choose and what are not.

Example, for domesticated cattle:
Species: Bos taurus (aurochs or domesticated cattle)
Genus: Bos (above plus yaks, gaur, banteng, kouprey)
SubFamily: Bovinae (above plus bison, buffalo, water buffalo, others)
Family: Bovidae (above plus antelopes, gazelles, sheep, goats, oxen, others)
Order: Artiodactyla (above plus camels, llamas, deer, giraffe, hippos, hogs, pigs)
SubClass: Eutheria (above plus all mammals that give birth to live young)
Class: Mammals (above plus kangaroos, possums, etc)

I can not, with any sort of reason, say "cows could be related to bison and buffalo, but definately not oxen." Genetically speaking, even possums and cattle have more in common than they have different.

I simply can't look at that hierarchy and point to a place I would call a seperator of different "animal kinds". Can you?

You don't even have to come back here and give an answer. That's not what I'm looking for. I'm not trying to put you on the spot, or anything like that. This is simply an exersize in understanding what are "animal kinds".

If you can honestly look through that website and point to *specific* divisions of animals and say "these could be related through micro-evolution, but this group over here is definately a different kind of animal" more power to you.

I can not do that in any sort of logical manner.

Well, me either. I can't really do that since I haven't really researched that too much, but that looks to me like classification and not family lines. I could be wrong, but isn't that like saying that all cows are mammals, but not all mammals are cows? Since they aren't really interchangeable, I wonder about the distinct lineage of them.

WS, please don't do this to me. I want to have an intelligent conversation with you, not be tossed aside like a lunatic.

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

Gideon. I take it you are young, and searching for your path through Life.

When you first started posting here, I thought you were some kind of religous nut.

After that, I thought you were just confused and trying to sort things out the best you could.

I see that you are still searching.

An intelligent conversation? By all means. I see that you are questioning...but you are mostly questioning only Science. Not that that is a worry, keep questioning, you will find that Science is built on a firm foundation of facts. After you have exhausted yourself in the futile attempt to re-assess Science (if you are a reasonable person, and are interessted in the truth and in facts), you will eventually turn your attention to the questioning of your belief. You will find, that literal interpretation of the Bible just doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

You will be forced to make a decision. Subjective view of the Bible and your faith, or no faith. Or you will reject all notions of Science fact, and become a religious nut.

Either way, you will not be changing Science. You can deny its existence, but it will not go away.

In the end, it is your choice.

The problem with "science" as it is in the real world, however, is that it is only as good as the scientist's discipline. Unfortunately, there are a lot of "bad" scientists out there who don't love facts and the scientific method nearly as much as they should.

I am only pointing this out to make sure that we all recognize that there are a lot of problems in the scientific community that require improvement as well as in the religious community.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

^Agreed Bugs, no human system is perfect. I have never, ever suggested blind acceptance. But Physics are physics, after all, and so is Chemistry, etc, etc, etc. And the Peer review system has time and again exposed such "problems" - remember Cold Fusion ?

I don't see Theologians examining the Bible, and changing it.

Yep - important point, WS. While there are certainly 'bad scientists', the scientific process accounts for the possibility of error...and when exisiting knowledge is found to be erroneous, science changes to fit reality.

When something religious is found to erroneous, it's far more likely that some complex 'work-around' will be formulated to fit the reality to existing dogma, and above all else, scripture and dogma will be 'proven' to still be accurate no matter the cost.

And yes, this *does* also happen in the scientific community, but the scientific community is such that it won't allow for this kind of 'bury your head in the sand' attitude to prevail.



(Edited by DL-44 on 11-02-2004 17:46)

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

Gideon. I take it you are young, and searching for your path through Life.

---

Relativley, I suppose so.

I'm a baby Christian at least...

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

When you first started posting here, I thought you were some kind of religous
nut.

---

Not religious nut, I prefer "Jesus Freak."

quote:

---

WebShaman said:

I see that you are still searching.

---

Yes siree. I am still looking for answers. That is a never ending process that will stop shortly after death.

And WS, I do like facts. I love them. I love seeing facts that disprove theories or prove them without a doubt (those are really fun). But I do not blindly follow the interpretations of those facts presented form either side. I dispute interpretations, not facts.

Amen to that Bugimus. Humans are very confusing creatures.

And DL, I thank God that the Bible is not a science text book, because those change every year! There are always new finds and incredible discoveries that are happening in the scientific field. The Bible doesn't change because it doesn't have to.

quote:

---

Malachi 3:6
For I, 0 the LORD, do not change; therefore you, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.

---

And I do agree that there are many discrepencees in the "religious world," but I haven't found any in the Bible yet.

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

How about these, then Gideon

quote:

---

Here are but a few:

* Insects with four feet?

"Yet these may ye eat of every flying creeping thing that goeth upon all four, which have legs above their feet, to leap withal upon the earth; Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind. But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you."
Leviticus 11:21-23

Just for the record, insects have six feet and arachnids have eight. You'd think the ancient Israelites might have picked up on this little detail, what with eating locusts and beetles and all.

* Bats identified as "birds"?

"And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, and the vulture, and the kite after his kind; Every raven after his kind; and the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind, and the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl, and the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle, and the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat."
Leviticus 11:13-19

An almost identical passage occurs in Deuteronomy 14:11-18. The bat is of course a flying mammal, not a bird.
* Rabbits claimed to chew their cud?

"And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you."
Leviticus 11:6

To chew the cud means to eat grasses, swallow, then regurgitate later for further chewing. Rabbits simply do not do this.

---

There are a lot more...but these will suffice.

Good response, I will have to look into these a little bit. Thanks for the questions, I will try my hardest to find answers for them.

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

I don't see Theologians examining the Bible, and changing it.

---

not quite true - there are quite a few versions out there
. . . many interpretations of what they mean

as far as bats, fowls, insects, etc.
you're using modern classification and definition (IOW : technobabel)

i think you know better

Outcydr, first of all, show me the evidence of your first "rebuttal", if that is what you call it. "Many interpretations" is hardly what I would call anywhere near to a rebuttal.

As for your second...don't know what to call it really...but you said

quote:

---

bats, fowls, insects, etc.
you're using modern classification and definition

---

. Uh, yeah, that is right, I am. I assume your god is all-knowing, right? Second, the bat is "grouped in" with birds. To anyone with any brains, a bat is not a bird, irregardless of what language one uses. The bat has leathery wings, and fur - birds have feathered wings, and feathers. The bat has a mouth, with pointed teeth in a gum bed. Birds have a beak.

Is that the best you can offer? What about the other points? C'mon, I haven't even started yet! This is just the warm up! The other points I have yet to make are really nasty...for anyone taking the Bible literally.

I think you should know better.

And since you seem to be having fun answering my questions, here are some more!

quote:

---

1. How long can a person survive without oxygen?

Correct Answer: D (Three days.) ?Now the Lord had prepared a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights? (Jonah 1:17).

2. What causes some goats to be striped or spotted?

Correct Answer: C (Placing striped or spotted tree limbs in goats? watering troughs causes their babies to be born striped or spotted.) ?And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chesnut [sic] tree; and pilled white stakes in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods. And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink. And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted? (Genesis 30:37-39).

3. How many legs do insects have?

Correct Answer: C (Four.) ?Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind. But all other flying creeping things, which have four feet, shall be an abomination unto you? (Leviticus 11:22-23).

4. What type of animal is a bat?

Correct Answer: B (A bat is a bird.) ?And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray, . . . and the bat? (Leviticus 11:13-19).

5. Who named all the animal species?

Corect Answer: B (Adam.) ?And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof? (Genesis 2:19).

6. How big did God make the stars in Heaven?

Correct Answer: D (Stars are tiny little objects of light, so small that every star in the universe could easily fall onto the ground of Earth.) ?And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind? (Revelation 6:13). ?And [the red dragon?s] tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and did cast them to the earth? (Revelation 12:4).

7. Into what shape did God make the Earth?

Correct Answer: B (Flat, with four corners.) ?And after these things I saw four angels standing on the four corners of the earth? (Revelation 7:1). ?And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth? (Isaiah 11:12). ?And the devil taking [Jesus] up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time? (Luke 4:5; see also Matthew 4:8). ?The tree grew, and was strong, and the height thereof reached unto the heaven, and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth? (Daniel 4:11).

8. How long did it take Noah to place at least two of each of the more than 50 million animals species on his boat?

Correct Answer: C (A single day, meaning an average of 1,157 animals boarded the boat every second [100,000,000/24hours x 60minutes x 60seconds.) ?In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, and the sons of Noah, and Noah?s wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark; They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort? (Genesis 7:13-14).

9. How big did God make the sun?

Correct Answer: D (Our eyes don?t deceive us. The sun is no bigger than it appears when we look up. In fact, it is so small that a single cloud could prevent it from bringing any light to the earth.) ?And when I shall put thee out, I will cover the heaven, and make the stars thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light? (Ezekiel 32:7).

10. How high above the ground is Heaven?

Answer: B (Heaven is, at most, a few hundred feet above the ground, because people building towers before the discovery of electricity almost reached it.) ?And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded [sic]. And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do? (Genesis 11:4-6).

---

All nice out of the Bible.

Now I am very interested, to see how anyone explains these in a literal view of the Bible.


And when you get doen with these, go to Some Reasons Why Humanists Reject The Bible, the section entitled "Teachings Inconsistent with the Laws of Nature".

(Edited by WebShaman on 11-04-2004 12:33)

I just don't see any evidence in the Bible that God communicated EXACTLY and COMPLETELY everything that is to be known about our physical world to the writers and readers of the OT. Everything points to God communicating His desires for how we should live according to His purpose regardless of our level of scientific knowledge. That is why the Bible is just as relevent to us today as it was to them. It contains eternal principles that humanity for all time yearns for.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

(Edited by Bugimus on 11-04-2004 16:46)

quote:

---

I just don't see any evidence in the Bible that God communicated EXACTLY and COMPLETELY everything that is to be known about our physical world to the writers and readers of the OT.

---

I don't either. In fact, I see no evidence, whatsoever, that god communicated anything to the writers of the OT (or the NT, for that matter).

Actually, God really didn't make the Koran (first five books of the Bible) as a science text book. He did, in fact, put many different scientific ideas in the Bible which I trust. They aren't specific, but reliable.

As for those questions, I had seen something like them before and was wondering where they came from. Thanks.

As for your questions WS, I will look into them, and I am sure that there is a good answer for each of them. With my limited knowledge I can already see some discrepencies from context and links to other passages that completely explain some things.

I don't wnat this to turn into a full fledged debate on discrepancies in the Bible. Of course there are discrepencies (it was written/translated by men wasn't it?), but that isn't the main issue of the Bible. If God wanted you to know the inner workings of your DNA He could easily open up Heaven, come down here with trumpets blaring, earth shaking, volcanos erupting, and answer your questions about what makes you go. BUT, He doesn't like to do that. Remember, He likes faith, and I guess if you have no faith in Him, then it will be hard to get answers.

Plus, He likes breezes better than Earth quakes.

I am trying to stop bashing people around and being so blunt, and as one of those things I like to talk to only believers about the "intricacies" of the Bible. But, if you really need them I can give you some answers. I don't know about all of them, but I will try.

One thing about that. The main focus of Christianity is love. I have had to be reminded of that lately. It is not proving points or defending myself. You see, Jesus Christ died for us all: smart and stupid alike. I love Him for that.

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

Bugimus said:

His desires for how we should live according to His purpose regardless of our level of scientific knowledge. That is why the Bible is just as relevent to us today as it was to them. It contains eternal principles that humanity for all time yearns for.

---

what about Buddhist teachings? Native American wisdom? Mesapotanian? Greek? Pagan? all bulshit? only jews figured it out?

Gideon, you have a good approach to things, keep it up. You are willing to think about your positions and even more importantly, *rethink* your positions. We are all growing and we are all at different stages of understanding. As long as we are moving forward in the search for greater wisdom, that is the best we can do.

And just a correction, the Koran is the holy writings of the Muslims. The first 5 books of the bible are called the Pentateuch or the Torah.

Ruski, I never said that other sacred writings didn't contain truths. Did you see me type that?

Also, you really must not look at it like "only jews figured it out". God chose them to get to us, they did not choose Him. They are not better than everyone else, they were blessed and special because God decided to start with them in hopes of reaching all nations and peoples. Please don't blame them for what God chose to entrust to them.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Gideon, you still haven't offered any proof.

Without proof, your arguments are as valid as someone proposing that there is a place called Valhalla, where the Gods are. The Bible alone is not proof. Otherwise, other great books of Faith are, as well. The Hindus would be right, the Moslems, etc, etc, etc.

In light of that, irregardless of the praise that Bugs gives you, your assumptions boil down to that - assumptions and belief. Nothing more.

If you can accept that, then we will have progressed forwards here.

EEK!

http://www.americanhumanist.org/humanism/thebible.html

quote:

---

In the New Testament, God has gotten far worse regarding his trait of imposing excessively severe punishments. It would be hard to imagine anything more cruel and disproportionate than punishing people with eternal torture for mere disbelief that Jesus was the son of God. The inability to believe that proposition harms no one, and it has been disbelieved by some of the greatest benefactors of humanity. Nonetheless, God promises to punish them and all other nonbelievers with the most horrible pain that can be conceived.

God?s Violence Incites Human Violence

A major problem with the violence and injustice in the Bible is that, all too often, the teachings and example set by the biblical God have incited and been used to justify cruel acts by his followers. Many of them reasoned that since God, who is considered just and loving, committed or approved of the most brutal acts of violence, good Christians need not have qualms about behaving similarly. It is likely that this logic was, at least in part, what the American patriot Thomas Paine was referring to when he said, "The belief in a cruel god makes a cruel man.&quo1]Nephk]

---

These Humanists are evil blasphemers!

______________
Is This Thing On?

Webbing; the stuff that sticks to your face.

Bugs, please stop using metaphoric interpretations for whatever happened in order to explain something to me....it's just not history.(Least of all not to me) It is simply your way of expressing your religious beliefs while at the same time ignoring or pushing aside other culture's believes where it states their deities created the earth, humans, animals. Chose particular individual (who was born from virgin/goddess/magical sperm etc. to lead people to enlightenment etc etc etc, in order to save them from demons/devils/monsters/bad/sex/evil/*insert evil activity/being here* etc.... and I am quite aware of development of Judaism and Christianity historically, and I have been an insider in numerous Christian sects. And to assume that Christianity/Judaism is universally righteous is silly.

It is just that I don't understand why do you seem to avoid historical development and influences of Jewish culture. How much Egypt/Mesopotamia/Akkadian/Babylon/Antolia/Sumerian cultures have influence their writings and literatures.
The number of stories which you would call myths/not true/made up stories today, were great influence and many of them were adopted by Jewish themselves (such as story of Flood, Talion Law "eye for an eye" - from Law of Hammurabi, the ideas on afterlife, values etc etc)..

giving me a statement such as "God chose them, God decided something, because he wants to/someone is more special/he changed his mind/whatever" is just irrational and inane.
How can anyone have a discussion when you immediately assume and interpret that the ?story/myth? you believe in is accurate/true/?world of god?.

I thought it was agreed that no one can *prove* the bible is the word of God or that God indeed exists.

What I thought we were discussing was whether one should read all of the OT literally. WS, I think you have pointed out some very valid points for those who insist on reading it that way. If God laid out the whole story to Moses to write down in Genesis, why didn't God also be more accurate in other areas? To me the answer is clear. God spoke to the people of the time in the terms that they understood. I believe God was unconcerned about our level of scientific knowledge but obsessed with bringing His creation back into reconciliation with Him.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

quote:

---

Ruski said:

giving me a statement such as "God chose them, God decided something, because he
wants to/someone is more special/he changed his mind/whatever" is just
irrational and inane. How can anyone have a discussion when you immediately
assume and interpret that the ?story/myth? you believe in is
accurate/true/?world of god?.

---

Because we have an understanding around here. The understanding is that when I make statements like "God did this or that...", it comes from what I believe to be true. What else would you have me do? Would you impose your views on me? Isn't that what you and I both detest? People imposing or forcing their views on others?

You must allow me to speak freely from my point of view. I let you do the same to me all the time. I am afraid you are advocating a double standard. Let me explain. Every time you say that my beliefs are nonesense or fairy tales, etc. you state that as a fact in the exact same way I say "God did this or that..."

You should be allowed to hold that view and state those "facts" as you see them from your world view just as I should be allowed to do the same. I understand your core belief system because I know you from our discussions. I only ask that you afford me the same courtesy.

When I say "God did this or that..." I am trusting those who know me to understand that I am speaking from a deeply held belief and I am trying to advocate and present my point of view in this arena of competing ideas.

Does that seem reasonable to you? I very much value clarity and honesty and trust in our discussions here all the time recognizing we are separated greatly by our most basic assumptions about life and reality.

: . . DHTML Slice Puzzle : . . .

Bugs, see...it's not about beliefs...it's more about history. I do not try to hold any religious dogma in order to explain my views. I am more looking foward to have a discussion based on up to date discovered hostorical facts which you very much as the rest of society we live in has access to. But the use of jewish anciet interpretation on the world, which was very much researshed and studied for long time on how it came to be, is just won't lead us to any realistic conclusion.

Ruski - you will have to note that Bugimus also does not rely on religious domga. If you really think he does, then you must examine what 'dogma' actually is.

Bugimus is a very religious person, no doubt. And while I disagree very strongly with many of his conclusions, the path that lead him there is very thoroughly researched, questioned, and reasoned.

As he says, you can no more prove that the bible is *not* the word of god, than he can that it *is*.

I agree, of course, that to look at the bible as the word of god is preposterous. But that's still an opinion.

You will also note that Bugimus is also rather well versed in historical matters, as the history of his religion is very important to him.

I think everyone involved would be better of f if this discussion continued with such things in mind, and with the goal of discussing the evidence availabe, the interpretations possible, rather than demanding "proof" of something that can neither be proved or disproved.

my 2 cents...

alright then, that's understandable

http://www.remnantbride.com/indexlist.html#BIBLE%20CONTRADICTIONS

you might find this site interesting or preposterous - the choice is yours

quote:

---

Holding to the two divergent opinions that the Bible is both God's written word, as well as the unplanned fallacies of the accounts of men, is to espouse two ideas that are in clear and highly vulnerable conflict, which the critics justifiably relish. Either the Bible is entirely intentional as God's infallible written word, or it is not.

For one to truly hold to the trust and belief that the Bible is God's word, then one must conclude that the contradictions hold very special meaning. If the Holy Spirit wrote the Bible, then the contradictions within the Bible are His plan as well, and are thus intentional and meaningful - a meaning that (1) must include repeatable consistency in its representation and interpretation, and (2) must be of tremendously great significance since Yahweh, once again, has hidden His truth from the multitudes, and by its unique construction shames the wise.

---

Hehe...man, that is funny. Well, outcydr, that would go for ANY belief system then.

As DL has mentioned (and I am very aware of, having sparred with Bugs on a number of issues during the years here), it is in the realm of belief. Which is where I wanted to move it - Gideon being the one who has resisted this (among others).

I believe, if we can agree on this common ground, that we will then have a foundation to debate on.

(Edited by WebShaman on 11-04-2004 22:37)

outcydr,

I don't buy that argument. It's a similar argument to one used by many Christians: "Either Jesus is exactly who he said he is -- the son of God and savior of the believers, or he was a raving lunatic."

It's an argument designed to make those "undecideds" choose the first, for fear/uneasiness/whatever of calling Jesus a lunatic.

The truth is, the Bible can be both the Word of God and not 100% literal.
As Bugs pointed out earlier, his belief is that the Bible is the Word of God, written through/by man, and without error *ON THOSE SUBJECTS ABOUT WHICH GOD WAS CONCERNED*.
Namely, the relationship between God the creator, his son the savior, and humans.

I don't necessarily hold to that belief, but it is a perfectly rational, legitimate belief system. It is coherent. It is relatively encompassing. It is not internally contradictory. It doesn't require huge leaps of imagination and twisting of words and interpretations. All in all it is a relatively simple theory.

And, it doesn't fall into one of your two categories.

And it also doesn't rely on a literal view of the Bible.

That's right. Torah, sorry about that. I am really bad with names.

quote:

---

Ruski said:

magical sperm

---

I'm sorry, I just had to laugh.

quote:

---

Ruski said:

it's not about beliefs...it's more about history

---

Well actually Ruski, the Bible is an excellent History book. Especially since the Jews were paraniod about keeping their lineage. You can get pretty accurate dates, civilizations, and events from the OT. There were many kings of nations mentioned in the OT that weren't even discovered to be true until the past decade or so (someone help out if you know names because again I am bad at that).

Yeah Bugs, I am learning to control my urge to become a raving lunatic. It is hard though. I think you know about this.

Ok WS, I will concede about beliefs. This is true that we each have a different belief system that we are all very accustomed to. I am positive that each of our positions has been entirely thought through, and there is no amount of argumentation that will sway me from my veiw of the Bible. Suggestions maybe, but no arguments. I should learn to only expect the same from the rest of you. I am sorry. You have a right to your opinion and I was infringing upon that. Again I am sorry. I will try to refrain from that in the future and if I start again please feel free to yell at me a while. Thanks.

About that Mobrul, I hate to use that argument for the precise reason you posted. It doesn't cause a change of heart, simply a change in mind set.

I think that it requires a massive leap of faith to trust even part of the Bible, let alone it being all truth. Am I right? Not faith in Jesus. You don't have to trust in a literal Bible to be saved. That isn't what I believe. I do think, though, that if God spoke generalizations, why would He want to lead us astry on things such as Creation, Adam and Eve, even little things like bats being birds. Where do you place the line between fact and story in the Bible?

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

the bible is a great source of historical reference. It does indeed carry many references to many people and things that would likely have been lost to us had they not been preserved in the biblical texts.

But then, of course, we are again talking about certain parts of the bible, which is - again - a collection of texts that are seperated by many things, including great spans of time, variations in culture, language, intent, etc.

That does not by *any* stretch make the bible as a whole an accurate historical record.

Sorry, but you know I will have to disagree =)

see...there is something called..."civilizations before jewish tribes" which is very much unmentioned in Torah.... that also includes cavemen, netherlanders, austrailans etc etc etc...Torah is good for traking down jewish culture, but there was so much more than that....you seem to forget al the cultures before the development of writting records, the cultures in asia...ohh my.

Well, that didn't take all that long, did it? Pages of discussion and debate, to finally arrive at the point where we started.

At least we now agree on that starting point. And Gideon, I humbly respect one who can admit that they were wrong.

Peacepipe, anyone? *puff, puff*

*puff puff*
Is that a bubble peace pipe WS?

Yeah, sorry it took so long. I have had alot in my way recently, and I guess I have been a little close minded.

Ofcourse there were civilizations before the Israelites. There were many of them, and Abraham even came from one. The point is that there IS history in the Bible, and even if you leave out the parts that take leaps of faith to believe, then it is even more relieable by the world's standards.

Well, DL, I guess this is where you and I will make a parting of beliefs. I believe that the entire Bible as a whole is historically accurate (only thing is that it won't be able to be verified in many scientific terms until some of the tribulations prophesies come true). You believe (correct me if I am wrong) that the Bible is a good history book with stories stretched in the middle of facts (parting of Red Sea, Flood, Elijah, etc.). Am I correct?

My beliefs in this are not going to change. I am a Baptist and if any knows what a Baptist is they take the Bible literally. (I do not take the Bible literally since I am a Baptist, I am a Baptist because I take the Bible literally. Does that make sense?)

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

quote:

---

(correct me if I am wrong) that the Bible is a good history book with stories stretched in the middle of facts (parting of Red Sea, Flood, Elijah, etc.). Am I correct?

---

Not really.

I beleive there are parts of the bible that give us insight into aspects of history that we might not otehrwise have, by having preserved some historical tidbits (such as various kings of various kingdoms, and the like), and many mythological stories that we have been able to trace to earlier civilizations, and it provides some small amounts of corroboration of other texts that we have available.

I believe that certain stories, such as the issues of the flood, and the parting of the red (or reed, depending on the source you care to use...) are based in actual events. There is enough evidence to suggest that such things may have happened. But the extras that go along with them are - in my view - pure nonsense.

And of course, most stories of the great flood (which, as we have discussed, are prevelant in many cultures) predate the bible, and contain a wide variety of obviously mythological additions....I find it completely absurd to say that, although those are mythology, the version that just happened to make it into the bible (after some significant but not plot-altering changes from the earlier sumerian version) is 100% true.

In other words, it gives us a glimpse into history in the way that things like the legends of King Arthur give us some historical insight. And the stories developed in largely the same way, and for the same reasons. people need something to beleive in, and enjoy a good story.

^what he said

So, basically you agree that some parts are true, most stories are false, but some have believable basis for them? I just want to try and get this straight.

As for people wanting something to believe in, and wanting a good story, the latter is very true. I love good stories, and even acknowledging that I am not really normal, I can pretty assuredly say that most people like stories, too.

But, why do people want or rather need something to believe in? Why are there all these people who chase after supernatural feelings?

(How's that for a philosophical question?)

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.

Good question - perhaps you are in a better position to answer it. Why are you chasing after this 'supernatural' feeling you call 'god'?

^ Now THAT is a good question - and one I would like to hear answered, as well.

Well, DL, it goes like this: I am "chasing" after Jesus, because Jesus first chased after me. Does that work for an answer?

I was in total misery and defeat. I was lonely in a crowded room. Do you ever have that feeling? I had friends, family, and many mentors, yet I was somehow alone. I felt that no one really loved me. I know that my family and friends loved me, but I just kinda felt alone in some of the bad things I was doing (I later found out that it wasn't just me that did these things). I didn't talk to anyone, and caught myself up in some nasty habits. I was an outcast. I didn't speak to anyone, and if someone would try to speak to me I would shut them out. I was a wreak.

I suffered from depression, mainly stresses in my life, some with my lack of real love. Back then I didn't know what love really was about. I tried to relieve the stress with various methods: video games, school work, card games, and something I am really ashamed about. I started entering into a spiral downward, I thought of girls in a very bad way. I used their images to give me a little from the stress. It was wrong. It felt good for a few moments, then I hated myself afterwards. I knew it was wrong, but soon found out that I could not stop. I started going down and down into more depression.

I was ashamed of what I did. I tried to reationalize it. I said that other guys must do it too, so that made it alright. I even tried to stop. I would go for a couple of days, the stress would be immense and I would make up for all of the time I had restrained myself in one day. I finally gave up and surrendered that that was how I would be.

This was the state I was in DL, this is what I felt. I was in total disaray. I played with suicide and rape, just to think about what it would be like. I was wrong. I never followed through with my plans, I was too afraid. I was just spent beyond my limits.

Back a few years ago in my Freshman year, my teacher suggested that the class read a book. It was entitled A Voice in the Wind. It was about a Jewish Christian girl enslaved by the Romans after the sack of Jerusalem. It was an incredible story about a girl who trusted in God for her saftey.

As I read I began to realize that maybe what I was missing I couldn't get by my own hands. Up until that point I had the attitude that I could do everything I needed to do by myself. I didn't need any help from anyone. At that moment, I realized that I did need help. I needed God's love again.

I used to have it as a child, but I then had went astray. I had shoved Him in the backseat and I was in control of my own life. Look at what good that did me.

He had prepared me, though. I would never have came back to Him if it hadn't have been the people He had put in my life, the oppertunities He had given me. He opened my heart and I went back once more to Him on my knees. I gave up on the world and trusted that He knew what was better.

I started reading my old King James Bible, and I came across a verse that really struck my heart. Jesus said,

quote:

---

Mattew 11:28-30
28 "Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. 29 "Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and YOU WILL FIND REST FOR YOUR SOULS. 30 "For My yoke is easy and My burden is light."

---

I decided that He knew what was better for me and I trusted in Him. He has not once let me down yet. I may have slammed the door in His face sometimes, but He is still standing there when I open it again with tears in my eyes.

As soon as I trusted Him my depression lifted. I had a joy in my heart that I still have today. I don't want to run from my problems, but face them head on, because I know that Jesus is here with me, and He will never let me down.

There was one thing that did not lift immediately, though. It was my addiction. I didn't want to give it up, but He slowing and surely was able to help me back up to my feet. I soon found out that I was not alone. Many men suffer with that same addiction, and Jesus helped me through. He is my fortress for times of trouble, and my best friend for times of joy.

He helped my by paying the ultimate sacrifice so that I could be clean, but He didn't stop there. He continued to stay in my life. He worked on me, and gave me the Holy Spirit to help me, too. From that moment on I have become a new person. I'm not depressed all the time anymore, I walk around with a smile on my face most of the time now. The joy in my life is just overflowing. I am so glad that I did trust in Jesus.

It wasn't from some fear of death, or Hell. It wasn't some message condemning me by a preacher. It was purley God speaking through a simple little book about the promise of miracles in my life. Even though the book was only based on true facts, He used that book, and verses in that book to open my heart to His Word again.

I am so glad that I trusted in Jesus as my Lord and Savior, and I am never looking back.

Do not rebuke a mocker or he will hate you, rebuke a wise man and he will love you.