You genuinely believe that the earth is the centre of the universe, as it says in the bible?
That the sun goes around the earth?
That bats are birds?
That hares chew the cud?
That insects have 4 feet, not six?
That snakes eat dust?
That a circle has a circumference 3 times its diameter?
That from the top of a sufficiently high mountain, you can see every kingdom of the earth?
All of these things are in the bible, and therefore presumably you consider them all correct.
And this does not even take into account that the bible *regularly* contradicts itself, and so cannot possibly all be correct in every instance. And not on minor things - major things such as Jesus' family tree, Jesus' last words, the order of creation, where the sermon on the mount took place, the number of Jesus' disciples, the number of animals in the ark...
Offline
I didn't want to join the discussion (which is quite off the original topic), but I must object to Mayhem.
A few of those are Hebrew figures of speech:
--The snake crawls on the ground. A human would be literally "eating dust" if he were crawling like this, therefore this is simply personification.
--Pi wasn't invented until after the birth of Christ; even the ancient Greeks had to estimate before then.
--The "high mountain" refers to heaven, which is immaterial and outside of time, and therefore anyone standing in heaven can see all kingdoms, both past and present.
The law must be worded sufficiently for the people reading it to understand what they are reading. This includes the use of figures-of-speech and phrases unique to each language.
Also, the Bible was not written directly by God. It was written by His followers, who could still be slightly confused at times. It has also been compiled from several different sources and languages, so we would expect at least a few minor translation issues.
Offline
SmartIrishKid wrote:
I didn't want to join the discussion (which is quite off the original topic), but I must object to Mayhem.
A few of those are Hebrew figures of speech:
--The snake crawls on the ground. A human would be literally "eating dust" if he were crawling like this, therefore this is simply personification.
--Pi wasn't invented until after the birth of Christ; even the ancient Greeks had to estimate before then.
--The "high mountain" refers to heaven, which is immaterial and outside of time, and therefore anyone standing in heaven can see all kingdoms, both past and present.
The law must be worded sufficiently for the people reading it to understand what they are reading. This includes the use of figures-of-speech and phrases unique to each language.
Also, the Bible was not written directly by God. It was written by His followers, who could still be slightly confused at times. It has also been compiled from several different sources and languages, so we would expect at least a few minor translation issues.
The problem with the argument of it was written by his followers is because how do you know what was wrong and what was right, who are you to make those choices?
Also the post he was replying to said "The Bible has never and will never be proved wrong." so even minor contradiction disprove that post.
Offline
demosthenes wrote:
SmartIrishKid wrote:
I didn't want to join the discussion (which is quite off the original topic), but I must object to Mayhem.
A few of those are Hebrew figures of speech:
--The snake crawls on the ground. A human would be literally "eating dust" if he were crawling like this, therefore this is simply personification.
--Pi wasn't invented until after the birth of Christ; even the ancient Greeks had to estimate before then.
--The "high mountain" refers to heaven, which is immaterial and outside of time, and therefore anyone standing in heaven can see all kingdoms, both past and present.
The law must be worded sufficiently for the people reading it to understand what they are reading. This includes the use of figures-of-speech and phrases unique to each language.
Also, the Bible was not written directly by God. It was written by His followers, who could still be slightly confused at times. It has also been compiled from several different sources and languages, so we would expect at least a few minor translation issues.The problem with the argument of it was written by his followers is because how do you know what was wrong and what was right, who are you to make those choices?
Also the post he was replying to said "The Bible has never and will never be proved wrong." so even minor contradiction disprove that post.
*Sigh* How did I get myself into this...
I'm not saying I agree with him. I actually said sort of the opposite, but attributed it to the fallibility (did I say that right?) of humans.
Offline
Well, indeed, I never said it was gods fault that the bible wasn't error free, merely pointing out the foolishness of Nate3d's "Inerrant Bible" claim - and, by extension, the foolishness of anyone who claims to follow the bible literally in all things.
Offline
Mayhem wrote:
Well, indeed, I never said it was gods fault that the bible wasn't error free, merely pointing out the foolishness of Nate3d's "Inerrant Bible" claim - and, by extension, the foolishness of anyone who claims to follow the bible literally in all things.
...and also the foolishness of all who argue about this. Seriously, how is it even possible to oppose the Bible to science? But when people want to prove themselves right, it counts, I guess.
But since everybody refuses to return to common sense, I guess it's no use writing this stuff. Please continue. ^_^
Offline
Why don't we just move the "discussion" to Uncanny's website like he said? The link is on page 4, post #92.
Last edited by SmartIrishKid (2009-04-11 11:08:24)
Offline
No proof needed - the entire Old Testament is simp;ly the Jewish Torah.
So when Christians use the prophecies in the Old Testament to prove something about Christianity, they are really just proving it about Judaism.
Offline
Nate3D wrote:
The Bible has never and will never be proved wrong.
Interesting. Theories are proven wrong upon the occurrence of a "bad case". Gravity would be falsified by observing an object falling up instead of down. Which hypothetical "bad case" able to falsify the Bible would you agree to? If the answer is "none" then your relationship to the Bible might be one less founded on truth than on belief (which I suspect shouldn't come as a surprise given it's the Bible we're talking about).
What's more: Religion resists falsification, because every contradiction will in turn be assumed to indicate a devine design superior to our lowly human intellect. Paradoxically this applies to every metaphysical belief, including pastafarianism. So, they must somehow all be right. Right?
I'm not sure, but there might also be a misconception of scientific methodology here: Theories aren't "right until proven wrong" (like criminal suspects are legally presumed innocent until found guilty). Just because you can't falsify something doesn't make it - temporarily - right. Otherwise you'd have to take each and every arbitrary product of imagination for a scientific fact. (Try falsifying the existence of unicorns, earth-rays, magic, extraterrestrials and what-have-you...)
Oh, another thing: What difference does it make wether the Bible is right or wrong about the biological categorization of mammals, Mary's virgin birth or Jesus' divinity? Does truth help a person be good?
Offline
Jens wrote:
Nate3D wrote:
The Bible has never and will never be proved wrong.
Interesting. Theories are proven wrong upon the occurrence of a "bad case". Gravity would be falsified by observing an object falling up instead of down. Which hypothetical "bad case" able to falsify the Bible would you agree to? If the answer is "none" then your relationship to the Bible might be one less founded on truth than on belief (which I suspect shouldn't come as a surprise given it's the Bible we're talking about).
What's more: Religion resists falsification, because every contradiction will in turn be assumed to indicate a devine design superior to our lowly human intellect. Paradoxically this applies to every metaphysical belief, including pastafarianism. So, they must somehow all be right. Right?
I'm not sure, but there might also be a misconception of scientific methodology here: Theories aren't "right until proven wrong" (like criminal suspects are legally presumed innocent until found guilty). Just because you can't falsify something doesn't make it - temporarily - right. Otherwise you'd have to take each and every arbitrary product of imagination for a scientific fact. (Try falsifying the existence of unicorns, earth-rays, magic, extraterrestrials and what-have-you...)
Oh, another thing: What difference does it make wether the Bible is right or wrong about the biological categorization of mammals, Mary's virgin birth or Jesus' divinity? Does truth help a person be good?
That's an interesting question you brought up there.
"Does truth help a person be good?" - kinda vague Imho. First of all, what is being good? The goodness of a person is basically what the crowd thinks about that person. That also applies to religion, because religious people also form a society. In reality, all people, religious and non-religious, have quite similar ideals, so if another person suddenly pops out of the ground and says that greed, aggressiveness and murder are good, he will not be accepted into the community. Because of the similarity of ideals, there is such a thing as defined "good" and "bad" that people accept.
And what we call "truth" in this case is basically the same "good" and is determined by the people. So, knowing and following the truth won't make you happy, although it will make you become good in the eyes of other people - oh, and it'll give you good sleep!
What makes a person happy? Well, first of all we should think about what a "person" is in itself. Our lives are connected with the things in our world, and it is hard for us to imagine just ourselves, without those things. A person is a constant activity. It's like a big flow. We can't live without progress. And we use the different things in our lives to help us in that progress. We use them, but quite often, they take over us and start controlling our minds, and we become dependant of those things we are supposed to have control of. Those things can be anything, e.g. money, fashion, other people's opinions, or our own desires. Of course, some things we cannot live without, but the important part is to be free in our soul. I think a person who independently developed their own ideology and follow it are happier than a person who does great deeds and earns recognition, but doesn't know what they are doing.
A lot of religions do offer a path to perfection, and that's what they exist for. Although, it doesn't mean that every single religious person is happy.
Offline
Wow. These are some very thoughtful and inspiring thoughts, MyRedNeptune! Much to reflect on over the weekend.
MyRedNeptune wrote:
A lot of religions do offer a path to perfection, and that's what they exist for. Although, it doesn't mean that every single religious person is happy.
Hmmm, maybe religions also have been invented to console you over the discouraging prospect that you're still gonna die
(somebody please post a link to that song by the "Old Dogs", Youtube eclipsed Germany because of of a pending royalty dispute, thanks!)
Offline
Jens wrote:
Wow. These are some very thoughtful and inspiring thoughts, MyRedNeptune! Much to reflect on over the weekend.
MyRedNeptune wrote:
A lot of religions do offer a path to perfection, and that's what they exist for. Although, it doesn't mean that every single religious person is happy.
Hmmm, maybe religions also have been invented to console you over the discouraging prospect that you're still gonna die
(somebody please post a link to that song by the "Old Dogs", Youtube eclipsed Germany because of of a pending royalty dispute, thanks!)
Partially yes, but a person is afraid of death when they feel they haven't achieved anything in life. A person who is happy with themself will probably not be afraid to die.
When we want to work hard and achieve something, it is, in way, fear of death, I guess. ^^ Because if we were immortal, would work matter?
I've been to a few (orthodox) monasteries in my life, the people there are great! ^^ They seem very confident and nice. I had a really good time there.
Strange, I searched for that song and I couldn't find it, even on Imeem. But here's another song instead: http://www.4shared.com/file/28650538/1db4be18/Fibich_-_Poema.html
Poeme! ^_^
Offline
MyRedNeptune wrote:
I've been to a few (orthodox) monasteries in my life, the people there are great! ^^ They seem very confident and nice. I had a really good time there.
That's wonderful! Despite my ramblings I'm also a practicing (albeit extremely sceptic) Catholic.
Offline
Jens wrote:
MyRedNeptune wrote:
I've been to a few (orthodox) monasteries in my life, the people there are great! ^^ They seem very confident and nice. I had a really good time there.
That's wonderful! Despite my ramblings I'm also a practicing (albeit extremely sceptic) Catholic.
Yay. ^_^
Lol, I sing 1st soprano in a curch choir. ^o^ I am christian, although I tend to stick more to my own little ideology. ^_^
And I'm an amateur animator. :D I'm going to make an animated series (I've already started!). :D
Oh btw there's one music project of mine you never seemed to look at. :) You're a music person, so I thought you might be interested. :) http://scratch.mit.edu/projects/MyRedNeptune/454691
I lurv singen :O
Offline
Mayhem wrote:
No proof needed - the entire Old Testament is simp;ly the Jewish Torah.
So when Christians use the prophecies in the Old Testament to prove something about Christianity, they are really just proving it about Judaism.
To some extent Christians modified the Torah. As in my last post want proof?
___________________________________________________
"You're Never Gulity Until U're Gulity"-Me
Offline
Uncanny wrote:
The reason that I am a christian is is just how many prophecies are constantly being fulfilled, like Israel invading Gaza ON THE SABBATH DAY! Jews are not supposed to work on that day, and as the Bible says in the last days 'no one will know God.'
Also there is stuff like Russia becoming more powerful with the ecenomic crisis, and revelation 16 also predicts that 'he [gog] will invade from the far north.' Of course, what he is going to invade is Israel. Someone might say 'What!? this is far fetched!' but think about it. Russia has already invaded southwards towards georgia, and if they overtake israel, it is a hotspot for three of the worlds most popular religions, judasim, christiany and islam.
To those people who have read this, I hope that this small part of prophecy will make you more interested, and I will be expecting abuse from most of the community.
I do hope this doesn't offend people either, it does not mean I hate everyone that isn't a christian, nor that i discriminate against russians. The leader is just in prophecy.
I agree alot,but for some strange reason I get afraid when I read stuff lke this. I'm interested,but terrified. Help me get over this horrible phobia, please!
Offline
Jens wrote:
Nate3D wrote:
The Bible has never and will never be proved wrong.
Interesting. Theories are proven wrong upon the occurrence of a "bad case". Gravity would be falsified by observing an object falling up instead of down. Which hypothetical "bad case" able to falsify the Bible would you agree to? If the answer is "none" then your relationship to the Bible might be one less founded on truth than on belief (which I suspect shouldn't come as a surprise given it's the Bible we're talking about).
What's more: Religion resists falsification, because every contradiction will in turn be assumed to indicate a devine design superior to our lowly human intellect. Paradoxically this applies to every metaphysical belief, including pastafarianism. So, they must somehow all be right. Right?
I'm not sure, but there might also be a misconception of scientific methodology here: Theories aren't "right until proven wrong" (like criminal suspects are legally presumed innocent until found guilty). Just because you can't falsify something doesn't make it - temporarily - right. Otherwise you'd have to take each and every arbitrary product of imagination for a scientific fact. (Try falsifying the existence of unicorns, earth-rays, magic, extraterrestrials and what-have-you...)
Oh, another thing: What difference does it make wether the Bible is right or wrong about the biological categorization of mammals, Mary's virgin birth or Jesus' divinity? Does truth help a person be good?
Are you trying to bully Jens because of his/her religoin? I'm sorry but I'm a christian(Ithink she is 2) And that's not only offensive,but cruel and wrong. :C
Offline
Yumi9989_9989 wrote:
Uncanny wrote:
The reason that I am a christian is is just how many prophecies are constantly being fulfilled, like Israel invading Gaza ON THE SABBATH DAY! Jews are not supposed to work on that day, and as the Bible says in the last days 'no one will know God.'
Also there is stuff like Russia becoming more powerful with the ecenomic crisis, and revelation 16 also predicts that 'he [gog] will invade from the far north.' Of course, what he is going to invade is Israel. Someone might say 'What!? this is far fetched!' but think about it. Russia has already invaded southwards towards georgia, and if they overtake israel, it is a hotspot for three of the worlds most popular religions, judasim, christiany and islam.
To those people who have read this, I hope that this small part of prophecy will make you more interested, and I will be expecting abuse from most of the community.
I do hope this doesn't offend people either, it does not mean I hate everyone that isn't a christian, nor that i discriminate against russians. The leader is just in prophecy.I agree alot,but for some strange reason I get afraid when I read stuff lke this. I'm interested,but terrified. Help me get over this horrible phobia, please!
I wouldn't get scared. When prophesies are so vague as to state "one day, some vaguely defined group of people will do something unpleasant to another vaguely defined group of people on the Sabbath day" its is going to come true not once, but hundreds of times.
It's no more proof of the bible being accurate than your daily horoscope in the newspaper that says "Somebody you love will fail to understand you today." coming true makes the astrologer accurate.
Offline
SmartIrishKid wrote:
I didn't want to join the discussion (which is quite off the original topic), but I must object to Mayhem.
A few of those are Hebrew figures of speech:
--The snake crawls on the ground. A human would be literally "eating dust" if he were crawling like this, therefore this is simply personification.
--Pi wasn't invented until after the birth of Christ; even the ancient Greeks had to estimate before then.
--The "high mountain" refers to heaven, which is immaterial and outside of time, and therefore anyone standing in heaven can see all kingdoms, both past and present.
The law must be worded sufficiently for the people reading it to understand what they are reading. This includes the use of figures-of-speech and phrases unique to each language.
.
All well and good, but how can somebody say "Oh, the high mountain thing is just allegorical" and then turn around and say "But the 7 days creation thing? 100% true, that's exactly how it happened."
How can one be explained as allegorical whilst the other is accepted. Who gets to decide? The dead sea scrolls didn't come with cliff notes stating which bits were supposed fact and which were just metaphor, simile and allegory.
It is more reasonable to assume that where physical evidence contradicts the bible, the physical evidence is correct and that that part of the bible was not meant literally.
Of course, reason and faith are, by definition, contrary...
Offline
Yumi9989_9989 wrote:
Are you trying to bully Jens because of his/her religoin? I'm sorry but I'm a christian(Ithink she is 2) And that's not only offensive,but cruel and wrong. :C
Who?
Offline
Mayhem wrote:
SmartIrishKid wrote:
I didn't want to join the discussion (which is quite off the original topic), but I must object to Mayhem.
A few of those are Hebrew figures of speech:
--The snake crawls on the ground. A human would be literally "eating dust" if he were crawling like this, therefore this is simply personification.
--Pi wasn't invented until after the birth of Christ; even the ancient Greeks had to estimate before then.
--The "high mountain" refers to heaven, which is immaterial and outside of time, and therefore anyone standing in heaven can see all kingdoms, both past and present.
The law must be worded sufficiently for the people reading it to understand what they are reading. This includes the use of figures-of-speech and phrases unique to each language.
.All well and good, but how can somebody say "Oh, the high mountain thing is just allegorical" and then turn around and say "But the 7 days creation thing? 100% true, that's exactly how it happened."
How can one be explained as allegorical whilst the other is accepted. Who gets to decide? The dead sea scrolls didn't come with cliff notes stating which bits were supposed fact and which were just metaphor, simile and allegory.
It is more reasonable to assume that where physical evidence contradicts the bible, the physical evidence is correct and that that part of the bible was not meant literally.
Of course, reason and faith are, by definition, contrary...
The Bible isn't to be taken completely seriously. God did not create the Earth exactly how it was said - the story in the Bible represented that.
God did not directly talk to people, but what the bible does represents that.
Offline