I'm conflicted about the Bible. Will you discuss it with me?
- Thread starter Conflicted
- Start date
Apparently you are, you're still taking it literally and demanding answers to stupid questions based on that assumption. They're getting stupider too, now you're demanding I prove one of *your* claims, that the writers understood all the cross references you've found. And you freely make stuff up to maintain consistency in the elaborate scenarios you've constructed from your exegesis, like the numerology you worked out on the lengths of the days of creation to bring them into line with the known age of the earth, and the freezing rain bit related to the global flood that never happened. There's no scriptural authority for that claim, and in that part of the world freezing rain would have been a dramatically noteworthy event, it's not credible that such a detail would have been omitted from the accounts.
Not only is it foolish to take the Bible literally, it's foolish to waste as much time and energy as you do trying to puzzle out what it all means, and way down in the low 2-digit IQ level to think you can justify making stuff up when you can't make consistent sense of things any other way. By your own hypothesis that the Bible is literally true and correct in every detail and stands alone as the complete message from god, that's disallowed. But that point seems to escape your understanding too. The old Christian apologists who worried about questions like how many angels can dance on the head of a pin would have been delighted by a mind like yours, but reality has passed them, and you, by.
What I find interesting is that both of you have very different views of what the truth and reality are. That is why I say that reality and truth are in the eye of the beholder. In the long run, you are both right, just not right to each other, only unto yourselves. You both live outside my own reality. The only things we seem to have in common are the technologies we use to communicate. Although I may debate another on what these things mean, I do so not to prove the other wrong so much as I find it fascinating how other people's minds work and what they believe. In some strange way it helps me understand my own processes.
As far as the Bible goes I've got just as many answers as there are questions. Not one thing I've promoted has even been considered by you so you would appear to be on the losing end of Bible conversations. Your giant sized ego is another matter, not that you even know you have one. You even had to adopt some version of Revelation that nobody even considers as being even close to being right, did that make you look for other possibilities, no. At that point you should have given up on religion entirely.
You are the one promoting all the books were written by men without any input from God. That many writers today using all our tech and education can not produce anything similar.
Why didn't you or somebody else think of it, ever. I haven't found references that use that and it is certainly closer to matching what science is promoting as fact.
Know any other way to get water reamain on a hill for months on end, how come you never thought of ice. You found what you 'needed' to be able to stay in rejection mode.
How many places in the world experience rain in the low-lands and snow in the high-lands. It can be raining in RD but snowing some 1200 miles to the west, just about where the high hills and mountains start. If I said it was a rain-storm that went all the way to the Pacific would I be wrong, no. In case you missed it the Bible is about two bruises (deaths), if you want to focus on the **** you do go ahead, it means you sure as **** wont ever be trying to understand what 'day of the Lord' fully means.
As long as I've been here you have been spending just as much time on the religious threads, unlike me you posts are almost a mirror of themselves.
The book says the water went upwards, so much for making things up. For your addled mind to make sense of it seems to have meant to cross it off. All that means is it must suck to be you.
There is only one book about the Christian God.
Not in the Bible, why even ponder on it. You and cliffy like to bring up things the Bible doesn't cover and you can't find the energy to read very much (like all the passages that have 'day of the Lord ' in it, yet you can spend lots of time on Christian threads, if one of us has a sad existence it's you and not me. Go ask a shrink rather than try and solve it on your own, your own prejudices would be doing the judging.
That can't possibly be correct. There is not a shred of good evidence for what he's claiming, and mountains of good evidence against it. You're suggesting that in his reality there was a global flood, for instance, and in mine there wasn't? Either there was or there wasn't, you can't have that both ways, and the fact is that there wasn't, there's no evidence it ever happened, no means for it but the miraculous is on offer, and the signs it would have left are completely absent. He is not right, and neither are you, what's true and real remains true and real regardless of anyone's perceptions. If things were otherwise the science and technology we have could not exist, there'd be no point in even trying to do science if what's true and real were subject to the vagaries of human perception.
Actually in 'science world' there were many floods, you are complaining about 22ft of rain while3 accepting the oceans have risen more than 400ft yet you have no idea how long ity took, what form it took or how mant species lost members to the rising water.
Want some bread with that whine?
Want some bread with that whine?
Before the last Ice Age the oceans were about the same depth they are now. During the last Ice age 1 - 1 1/2 mile thick glaciers covered much of the northern hemisphere which caused the oceans to fall 400 feet. When those glaciers melted the oceans returned to normal. Water on this planet is a closed system. How long was that ice sitting on land? Several thousand years. There are quite a few massive stone structures found under water off the coast of several countries. They existed during this period of glaciation. It took hundreds of years for those galciers to melt and the oceans to rise. Very few animals or people would have died from this. None of this has anything to do with the biblical stories.
I'm not sure the flood that created the scab lands was an isolated incident although it may have been the biggest, Floods that did occur would travel down a valley where anything in it would be swept away. Even for the Bible's flood everything would be washed to the lowest place, the oceans, good luck in finding anything down there.
Actually I think you're and asshole. I'll keep it short so you don't get confused. Congradulations
There are many different scientific disciplines. Some are very useful; physics, mathematics, engineering, etc. Some are silly; dissecting organisms to figure out how life works, for example.
The religious see mystics as inspired, science sees them as mentally ill. My point is that there are no absolute truths. The human mind is an incredible mechanism that can make any concept become a reality, translating thoughts into material objects, like light bulbs. Your reality is exactly what you think it is. I find science just a little to dry for my liking. I like to spice it up with a little spirituality, even fantasy. I find religion dangerous just like you do but even though I think believers have to suspend logic and rational thought, doesn't mean I'm right and they are wrong.
We all create our own mythology, our world view that fits our purpose, our genius and character flaws. I think that is beautiful how individually we are all unique and all human at the same time. I think the pendulum of religion swung way to far in one direction and science came along as a reaction to that and has swung too far in the other direction. I think we are coming to a middle ground that one day will see a marriage of science and spirituality. I see quantum physics as the vehicle to let that happen.
Last edited:
[youtube]XdkyLrDpaUg[/youtube]
[youtube]fmTE9Q_SkW8[/youtube]
[youtube]JcI1hEItUYU[/youtube]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn9Czxd3Yxo&feature=related
[youtube]fmTE9Q_SkW8[/youtube]
[youtube]JcI1hEItUYU[/youtube]
The biblical flood was described in the Sumerian texts long before the Hebrews came out of the desert with their goats. The Sumerian world view was limited to that part of the world they had explored. Pretty small area by our standards. It would have seemed world wide to them, but from our vantage point, it would have only happened in the Middle East.
Is that similar or exact? Floods coming 'overland' compared to 'rain from above' is not the same, it is similar.
Every time a culture decides to make a religion their own, they have borrowed from previous mythologies and embellished them to make them their own. There was no world wide flood, only their world was flooded. Just like all the titles and honours bestowed upon Jesus when he was deified centuries after his death were exactly the same titles and honours that were given to the Sun god Horus and even some from the Pharaohs. A little historical fact most modern people like to ignore.