Job sat and talked with God. well God did most of the talking. Neb was a servant of God by the time he died. You don't see that as knowing God any better than anybody alive today?I don't think they knew god any better than anyone else. That is a very old story that could have originated anywhere. As we have seen with the flood story in the bible the religious are quite adept at adopting and changing pagan myths into their own. So who knows? It's a cute story that obviously has no bearing on reality whatsoever.
Like building up pressure? When you write something down (really it was more than that because it is sometimes addressed to people other than the writer, the ones who would encounter the beginning of the reality) it is a deliberate action when it is made manifest. If the lava takes only select people then it is under control is it not?Like a volcano?
Not when you consider Christ telling parables about a master who goes away and leaves somebody in charge and then the master comes back to reward/punish His servants (Christ cleans His own house/people before dealing with others). Even His absence was predicted.That's a pretty good indicator that he isn't real. One person would make up a story and then spread that story around.
An even more sure sign is referencing yourself as 'we'(you are singular) yet you reference to yourself in the plural. You see that as perfectly normal behavior?Maybe he didn't make it up at all; perhaps he was insane? We know insanity was considered a sign of someone being holy.
You have no idea of the mental state of anybody mentioned in Scripture or the state of mind of the writers.In point of fact if you were insane (visions, voices in your head, seeing things like angels) you were more likely to be listened to. Of coarse if that person were too debilitated to spread their story others were more than happy to.
It's more a matter of the breath of life that was in each living soul returns with Christ, that is how the resurrection begins, There is even a passage that describes how dead bones become alive again.People don't return from the dead except after a few minutes, not years, not decades, not centuries and not eons.
The myth includes everybody doing that, Jesus was the first to do it.He is dead and he is not coming back. That is a seriously childish myth.
So when you are on a 'Christian type thread' is that like being in Church or can you use that info you cover in arguments over , well religion?That isn't true. There are many new religions movements started everyday. they don't have much longevity (typically under a year) but they start. Look at Scientology, Eckankar, People's Temple, The Roberts Group, Heavens Gate, Bahia, Babi, Aum Shin Rikyo, Falun Gong, Infinity Forms Of Yellow, Mother Of God, Solar Temple, The Unification Church.... etc... on and on it goes....
If their message is different than the one in the NT then you really should 'not get too involved'. Doesn't the Bible classify anyplace where two or more are gathered and the topic of Jesus (in any context) as being where Jesus is? That might even put you in Church when you spend time on this type of thread.
Do any atheists anywhere have a relationship with God like anything written in the fist few chapters of Revelation. Isn't leaving your first love the same as leaving God. An oath to God is the 1st Law. That would cover one type of atheist, one that may have believed at one time but has since gone down a different path. Is there one that would fit the ones that are atheists for other reasons?
Does that interfer with the way the 'stories should be understood? How far does 'material for your consideration' get a person into what the Bible is telling about a certain time that is not yet. It would be like the 4th book from TLOTR trilogy. All the people in the past are not remembered in song, they are there in person telling their own stories. Such is the Kingdom of Heaven.There is absolutely nothing to suggest the bible and its story is any different from the stories told by the above lunatics. Just like they have no proof so too the bible has no proof. Without proof it cannot be reasonably upheld as true!
Wait till you read the ones about time Yet To Be if you are held by things in the OT.People can read the stories and derive meaning certainly, you can do that with any story, but to say it actually happened requires proof the burden of which falls on those making the claim.
Okay, prove evolution by giving me an example that I can actually watch the process taking place.
Your question assumes there is a god. Perhaps, like today, there will be more evidence there isn't a god? I'm sure some people will be saying god could come back in another 6000 years. At some point we, as a species, need to face the facts.
That being God, as described in the Bible is not here. The one who says this is the current 'ruler' and his reign is about death and pain and suffering, etc. The place man is rescued from and only this one and his followers are the ones there for the start of eternity.
M't:4:8:
Again,
the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain,
and sheweth him all the kingdoms of the world,
and the glory of them;
M't:4:9:
And saith unto him,
All these things will I give thee,
if thou wilt fall down and worship me.
Big hint here about who actually calls the 'kingdoms of the world' as being his but you want God to prove Himself? It would be easier to prove Satan exists because you can see his handi-work all around you every day of the week. A lot of the things his followers do even make the nightly news in most countries.
Yet most people are reluctant to allow the Bible to be quoted, something about it being used to prove itself.Well yes, of coarse, there is no evidence, that's what "not being around" means. There never was any evidence. God has never "been around" actually and the people who say he is and have visions of him and hear him in their heads are bat $hit crazy. They are today and they were back then.
In Ezekiel there are some chapters about a temple, very detailed info even down to dimensions and wall decorations, etc.
Somebody tried adjusting those figures by the same ratio that New Jerusalem is (1500 miles on each side) and used that number on the dimensions in the early Books and it comes out that the size of Israel works out to a few % of the circumference of the earth. I have a link to a site that explored this in some detail.
Would that be proof of God? Giving them info that did not mean anything when the info was first given but when later works were published the 'key number' was given. Would men be able to write something like that over 1,000's of years? According to our history book knowledge about the earth being round is only about 600 years old.