Please Sign In

Please enter a valid username and password
  • Log in with Facebook
» Not a member? Take a moment to register
» Forgot Username or Password

Why Register?
Signing up could earn you gear (click here to learn how)! It also keeps offensive content off our site.

Campfire

The Bible- Proven wrong? or Proven True?

Uploaded on February 09, 2011

These days there are a lot of conflicts going around about whether the Bible has been proven true or if it has been proven false. I want to hear from yall, what do you think? What is your opinion? What are some findings that you have researched. Anything.

Top Rated
All Replies
from trapper4life wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

This could go without any discussion. Of course the Bible is true.

If you read the Bible, you will find that human life is based upon solid, Biblical principles. You will also find that the Bible has sensible, reliable answers to questions about moral and spiritual views, and other areas in life.

Read the Bible, and you will see...

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Fluger wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

1st of all Trapper 4life, I do believe that the bible is 100% true, perfect, and God inspired. I posted this simply to see what peoples views are and I am completely blessed to have you believe what you do with such a passion. Keep the good work up man.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sarge01 wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

From the quality of people that are on this site it would really surprise me if anyone , other thansomeone wanting to start trouble, would post that they truely believe that the Bible has been proven false. I believe 100% of what the Bible teaches and will go to my grave believing everything that the Bible has to say. I strive to live my life according to the Good Book but I fear alot of times that I come up short.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

The Bible is proven true, no question about it. That is why my family and I are doing what we do. We are striving to reach the lost world with Its truth.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

It's proven true every day if you read it and pay attention. Just look at Egypt right now, prophesies are coming to pass every day. Hope we're all ready.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from FirstBubba wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

Bingo on that 007!!!
Another thing that lot's of people miss is this.
In recorded history, no democratic society has EVER survived more that 200 years.
Guess what?
Every day the sun rises over Maine, the U.S. sets a new record.
History repeats itself. Over and over and over.
How much longer will/can the U.S. stand?
Good question.

Bubba

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from trapper4life wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

Good point 007...

One more thing here --- If you take a look at the U.S. Constitution and compare it to what the Bible says, you will find that our Constituion is based upon solid Biblical principles. (Which is what I was getting at when I said what I did above, but I realized I never actually mentioned the Constitution, so I figured I should probably clarify what I was saying.)

So basically what I am saying is, if you claim that the Bible is false, then for one thing, you need help, but for another thing, then you are not truly an American. Because the U.S. Constitution is what this country revolves around (or it should be, anyway) and the U.S. Constitution revolves around the Bible.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

The bible is a nice piece of historical fiction.
The US Constitution? Yeah, the bible is a big proponent of democracy...

Live your life how you want. Personally, I think that there are a lot of good messages in the bible. But you will find just as many is Aesops fables.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

The bible is a nice piece of historical fiction.
The US Constitution? Yeah, the bible is a big proponent of democracy...

Live your life how you want. Personally, I think that there are a lot of good messages in the bible. But you will find just as many in Aesops fables.

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sarge01 wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

Shazam,
I hate to disagree with you but to me the Bible is the absolute truth and every word is to be taken that way. If we live our lives by the Bible we will have eternal life. The Bible is more than just a bunch of good sayings. I wouldn't even think about saying the Bible was a piece of historical fiction. As staunch of supporter of the US Constitution that I am I couldn't even bring myself to compare it to the Bible. Of course every person to their own thinking. I wouldn't even think about comparing it to Aesops fables they are just good sayings by some guy.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

The Bible is the Word of God, if what it contains makes you uncomfortable, then there's probably a reason.
It makes me uncomfortable more times then not, that's almost it's purpose. As far as historical fiction, NO WAY! There is nothing fictional about the Bible, or God.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

Allow me to soften my last post a bit. I know people who believe strongly in the truth in the book. Good people. (some bad people too, but lets ignore them for a minute)
For me, I suppose I would have to qualify myself as agnostic. Religion generally and Christianity specifically seems to mean a lot to some people, and they draw strength from it. For someone who doesn't believe by faith, the arguments for and against have to be balanced... while some of it is probably true, the evidence is hard against enough of the other parts for me to find the whole thing to be literally true. As for faith... who should I believe? The Hindus? The Jews? The Scientologists? The Wiccans? Or one of the many interpretations and translations of what started out as an oral tradition thousands of years ago?
Maybe I will find myself at the pearly gates feeling pretty foolish in a few years, but it seems to me that there is an equal chance I'll have to explain to Odin how I happened to die in my bed.
If the bible works for you, more power to you. I don't mean to be rude, but if you are honestly asking for an opinion (and really want an answer) I would have to vote for fiction.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from longliner13 wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

shazam,

If you want to believe that the Bible is fiction, then all I can say is: 1.) You need some serious help. What you are saying is absolutely ridiculous. (Read what you wrote and think about what you are saying...ridiculous.)

2.) Have you even ever READ the Bible? I have a hunch that you haven't. And if you have, then not nearly enough.

As previously stated, the Bible is proven true every single day. This Country proves it true. Every day.

Maybe you should go to a Bible study and actually read the Bible, and learn what's in the Bible before you go spouting of to everyone whether or not the Bible is true.

Have a marvelous day.

---longliner---

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

1) Ok, so you didn't want me to answer the question.
2) I stand by what I said. I have read the bible, and I just don't buy it as a factual account. Nice thoughts, sure, but completely and literally true? Not a chance.
3) Sorry you feel this way, but you have to realize that less than a third of the world even descibe themselves as Christian, and less than that believe in the bible as a literal truth.

Good luck, good health, and maybe one day we will be able to discuss this over a friendly beer.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

shazam,
You are right, Fluger did ask for peoples opinions, and you gave yours, and it's out of place for people to reprimand you for you opinion.

I would like to encourage you to give the Bible a chance. If you do, what's the worst that could happen, you confirm your opinion that you already have.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

Thanks QS.
It has been a while since I read it, so perhaps it does deserve a review. As I said, there must be something to it, since it evokes such strong passions from so many people.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from lawman328 wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

God gave us many gifts, the Bible is a blessing of a guide book for life.
He also gave us freewill, and we can accept or reject his word.
He isn't asking you to jump through hoops, or practice your faith on a schedule, or any of the crazy stuff required and demanded under the penalty of law, which could be death, and enforced by a man, as in some religions.
Do you realize that out of all the religions, the only requirment to be a Chistian is that you believe that Jesus loved you so much that he died for your sins, and your gift for accepting that fact is Heaven. Thats it! you don't have to do good deeds, or kill anyone, or whip or stone somebody to get in to Heaven. John 3:16 will tell you all about it.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

Shazam

You are certainly enttled to your beliefs, or perhaps more appropriately non-beliefs. Unfortunately, you will have an eternity to mull over your choices. John 3:16

Peace...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jamesti wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

what i find interesting is the people who go through their whole life never givivg God or the bible another thought and when they are on their death bed they want a priest and to pray. unfortunate.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

WAM - unfortunately, every other religion on the planet says the same thing: join us, or spent eternity in limbo (at best).
I see no way to tell which one is "true". Even the various flavors of christianity say "our way is the only true way"

I think I will stick with my way, and simply treat others as I wish to be treated in kind, without needing a book or fear of eternal damnation as a threat to keep me in line.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from HunterDue wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

If you disagree with the bible you disagree with our founding fathers, therefore you disagree with the constitution, therefore you are anti-american. So you would be better off to go and live with the Taliban.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

US Constitution:
Article 6: "but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

Sorry, I just don't see it. No references to God at all (or anything specifying which god),

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

Archeologists have been finding cities, places and events in archeological diggings proven the information in the Bible is correct and vise verse!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

Quinton Schmelz...

Nice to have a Biblical Scholar on board <><

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

shazam

If' The bible is a nice piece of historical fiction?

Then explain why is the Bible the biggest and most archeologicaly proven by Archeologists!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

Well Shazam,

At least you have heard the Truth and have chosen another path.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

shazam,
again I say, give it a chance, and if you reread it, (and it goes without saying, I think anyone should) go into it as objective as passable, and try not to let the opinions of the world taint you ultimate outcome.

HunterDue,
In my mind, that comment was unnecessary and rude.

Clay Cooper,
thanks, not exactly a bible scholar, rather a fervent follower of the Lord Jesus Christ and want everyday to learn to follow Him better, reading the Bible is one way which I can do that.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

HunterDue, are you seriously of the opinion that non-christians are un-American? Comparing agnostics and atheists to the Taliban is quite a stretch. The Taliban is a terrorist entity that I would think is predominantly muslim, correct?
Please tell me you understand the difference.

Not believing in a god and believing you have a God-given right to murder innocents are not the same thing. I would say your post is more un-American.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from HunterDue wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

sorry about the taliban and athiest comment. but if athiest could just find jesus life would be so much better. we see the world though the same eyes, but different glasses. and no athiest arent un american,i just said that because i was having a bad day yesterday.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

My advise would be to really think through anything you post, especially on bad days.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from davycrockettfv wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

Unfortunately, every religion has its share of people who don't represent the principles of their faith, and Christianity is no exception. I believe the Bible to be 100% true and applicable to this very day. HunterDue, I'm glad you retracted your first comment because there are too many people who call themselves "Christians" and are completely devoted to that point of view and worse. Shazam is right in that the vast majority of the world does not recognize Jesus as Lord, or believe in the veracity of the Bible. Many Christians take on the attitude of "I'm right, I know I'm right, and if you don't agree with me, you're going to hell". True as that may be, it's our ATTITUDES that turn people off the most. The best approach in today's "Your truth is not my truth" society is to follow the Apostle Paul's example in Greece, and meet people on their own terms with respect. Then we can EARN the right to be heard. Not compromising our own beliefs or skirting around the stuff that makes us uncomfortable, but not shoving it in someone else's face either - that can ruin any shot someone else may have down the road. I don't want to be that guy when I stand in front of my Savior!

Lawman, couldn't have said it better myself!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

well stated davycrockettfv, I was trying to think of a way to say exactly that, and you kit it right on the head.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

To me, the bottom line is what our pastor is fond of saying. "I'd much rather live my life like there was a Heaven and hell and find out later that there was none, than to live my life like there wasn't and find out later that there was."

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jamesti wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

another thing i find interesting is that people rarely question the newspaper but won't believe half of what the bible says. scarey!

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

Remember "journalists", and I use the term loosely, have resources and credentials to check and cross-reference. Not that they report factual info 100% of the time, but that's the general idea. Now the bible, where does this info come from? What are the major sources? Shall we put all of our faith in King James' interpretation? Also, when you say "Bible" does that include the Mormon bible? The Gnostic texts? "Bible" means different things to different folks.

In no way am I trying to uphold our pitiful examples of journalism these days (no such thing as unbiased news source anymore), but at least we can usually come to an agreement as to whether the event took place or not based on sources and cross-reference. Comparing newspapers and the bible, and consequently comparing the validity of claims by both is asinine.
Sounds like intentional stubbornness to believe what you want at all costs despite any evidence to the contrary.

I understand those who choose to follow the teachings of Jesus, as they seem to be solid principles that would be in accordance with any decent functioning society (love your neighbor, do unto others....etc..). The problem mainly is with those who wish to use the bible as a history or science book. Surely even the most pious would admit this was never meant to be so! It's meant as a religious tome! There's dozens and dozens of authors!
Could you imagine if we tried to push through the school system a textbook with dozens of unknown authors, and only scant historical sources to back up the text? Oh wait, Texas is doing that. It's the bible. (Again, Mormon? Baptist? Catholic?)
The bible is a religious document, not a history book and certainly not a science book. Can believers and non-believers at least agree on that?
I know we can agree on the beauty of a sunrise and the rise of a trout to a fly in cold clear water, let's start there.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from davycrockettfv wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

Some great points gumby! One thing to keep in mind is that "journalism" in the way it is recognized today, hasn't been around for more than a few hundred years. Before that, eyewitnesses who chose to record the things they had seen (even hearsay from a third party) were considered valid. The authors of the Bible simply did the same - they wrote down what they had seen and heard. This form of historical record is accepted as valid for other authors throughout history, but seems to be a stumbling block when it comes to Biblical accuracy. Doesn't seem to be a consistent way of looking at things. Even today, if twenty journalists were to independently report on the same event, each would write in a different style, report different details, yet agree with each other on the basics of what happened (this is for reporters, not columnists). And 100% of people would accept the account as fact. If you take even just a shallow look at the Bible (I refer to the Bible proper, which is ascribed to by those of the official Christian faith) you can see the same thing happened thousands of years ago. So why can't we, in similar fashion, accept that as fact?
That being said, I don't believe there is any way to "prove" the Bible is true in its entirety. I believe it is, but it's impossible to "prove", just as it is impossible to prove nearly ANYTHING scientifically. This is a well-known fact of the scientific method. We can only find evidence to support or refute what it is we are studying. The Bible is full of scientifically and historically accurate principles and events supported by modern-day professionals in the fields of chemistry, physics, astronomy, archeology, history, mathematics, geology, and so on. It was because of the Bible that mankind eventually discovered the concept of our solar system, the value of our blood staying INSIDE our bodies, the ruins of the Hittite civilization, etc. These cannot "prove" the Bible to be true, but they do give extensive and convincing support for its validity and reliability. No, the Bible was not intended to be a textbook, and should not be taken as such.
The men who wrote the Bible were completely aware of the importance of what they recorded, as well as the danger to themselves in doing so. This can also add to the veracity of the text. Many journalists of today risk their own safety to get a good story, but how many of them, years down the road, willingly suffered horrible deaths instead of denying the truth of their writings? People don't die for a lie. Some may die for a lie they believe to be true because of misleading information from others, but not for a lie they themselves made up.
We all have to make our choice. I've made mine, and it sounds like you've made yours. I respect your opinion, and the way you have stated and defended it.
I will, however, wholeheartedly agree with you on the beauty of nature. If you're ever in Arizona, let me know and we'll tickle a lake or scare up some quail, and just enjoy our freedom - without attempted "conversions" :-)

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from pbshooter1217 wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

The Bible is not proven. If it was proven, there would be no need for faith. I'm not saying I don't believe in the Bible, but no one can be 100% certain.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

I agree with you pb,
I believe that we who believe in the Bible believe in It entirely by faith, not by sight. As the the Lord Jesus Christ said to Thomas "You believe because you see, but how much more blessed is he who believe without seeing?"
On the topic of faith, I believe that any religion requires faith. I also believe that it takes more faith to believe in a god that condemns his believers to hell, or a God who loves and saves His believers from an eternity of damnation.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Zacpro wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

The Bible is 100% accurate when it speaks in scientific and historical terms(although, if you believe in evolution it's not)I believe every word in the bible is true. "For all scripture is GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD,and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in rightousness" (I cant remember the reference right now)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 5 weeks ago

The Bible is not fully proven because of man's limitations at proving it.

As someone who fully relies on science and mathematics in the workplace, I've had to undergo a lot of learning regarding these subjects. The more I learn, the more gets revealed to me. For Example, I can better understand the Biblical accounts on how the earth went from a 360-day year to a 365.25 day year through the miracles of God. Ancient texts commonly refer to the year having exactly 360 days, 30 days per month.

http://www.amazon.com/Ancient-360-Day-Year-Changed/dp/1599320134/ref=sr_...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jrok6661 wrote 3 years 5 weeks ago

I just want to say I love the passion people have for the bible, but many do not live the life that is preached by Jesus. We all have different beliefs and ideas of who God is. For me God is loving and caring, not scornful and mean. I try to live the gospel preached by Jesus. That means that any book written by man is flawed just as men are. That does not mean I hate the book, but I do think it would be best to remember that it was not written by God or Jesus. It was put together at the Counsel of Nicaea in 327 A.D, by the Roman Emperor Constantine in an attempt to unite his empire. That does not make it bad. There are many things that I love about the bible. For one it does a great job of giving us a guideline on how we should live, but many things that people say are in the bible are not. We need to live the message and not what someone else tells us the message is. For me that message is to love everyone no matter who they are or what they do.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from abmcp13 wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

IMO, the old testament is true, Jesus is a wonderful teacher and no matter your religious affiliation you should take his teachings to heart about loving others, and putting the less fortunate ahead of yourself. That being said, the old testament is more of a historical fiction book than reality. I believe, according to the old testament, that the oldest person reached an age of 900+ years old. That to me is stretching it. But, Zacpro, nowhere in the bible does it say that evolution never happened. It just said that god created man, in a likeness of himself. He could have started with a single cell being had let it progress from there, after all, God is all knowing. God could very well have created the "Big Bang", but we'll never know. There is no way to prove or disprove the Bible. I am a christian, I believe in Christ, and I believe that if I live my life the way Jesus taught me I will go to heaven. I don't believe that I need a priest, minister, pastor, etc. to tell me how to live my life just because they had a shady life and discovered God. I can interpret the Bible on my own, that was the whole point of Martin Luther's 95 theses.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

I agree with you abm, however I would like to add that it takes more then just saying that Christ was a good teacher and trying to live a good life. What really matters is the realization that Jesus is your personal savior and the only way to heaven and the glory of God is through that statement of faith.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

So, the agreement here is the bible requires only faith to believe in. That means the final answer to the topic question can only be "The bible can neither be proven false or proven true."
Nothing wrong with that.
I don't see any reason why we can't come to that conclusion.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from abmcp13 wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Quinton S.- Thank you, that's what I meant for me being Christian, what I said was a little confusing. As far as the teaching goes I meant that for devout atheists, agnostics, or people of other faiths, they should still listen to what Jesus had to say because his teaching are something everyone could live by. It won't take them to heaven, but it will help make the world a much better place.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from abmcp13 wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

In my first post, the first line should read the NEW Testament, not old

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from fishfool wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Read it every day. Sometimes it's hard to relate but most of the time it hits home. Believe it. Jesus is the truth.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from GiantWhitetails wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Common sense. we all know what is right and what is wrong. no matter the religion, you should always be respectfull, honest, ethical, moral, and kind. be a heartless human being and youll eventually get whats comin. You shouldnt force your beliefs and demonize people who are different. didnt the the crusades end years ago? why do people hate others because of beliefs anyways? makes absolutly no sense to me.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Impressing ones beliefs on another has never been something that I agree with, that said, I don't think that witnessing is impressing, or I wouldn't be doing what I am out here doing, being a missionary to the lost of this world.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Witnesses tell the story as they experienced it. Lawyers are the ones impressing an opinion!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

The bible has been proven wrong about a great number of things, not the least of which is its central idea: that a man rose from the dead. We know this is impossible. The bible makes a magnificent glory about such an event’s impossibility: otherwise, why would god be required? The problem is that there’s no evidence that it occurred. The same can be said for walking on water, living in the belly of a fish, staffs turning into snakes, people turning into pillars of salt, etc. This is not even mentioning ‘prophecies‘ like the city of Tyre never being rebuilt (Ezekiel 26:14…Tyre is still around to this day) or a global flood (which was completely missed in the historical records of civilizations like Egypt’s Sixth Dynasty, or the 7 cities that are still inhabited to this day that predate Noah's flood (2350 BC)like Beirut, Tyre, Athens, Jerusalem, Argo which should have been destroyed. What a hearty bunch they must have been…).

This is the problem with faith: it destroys our reason by removing all our standard checks for proof and accountability. This unmakes our ability to converse fairly and, in doing so, destroys our connection to one another. This is the faith they tell us is necessary to redeem humankind.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

They won't listen maco.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Macomacus, I suppose it is true that faith doesn't always line up with reason, but name one religion, or walk of life that doesn't take faith. I don't think it exists. I personally have seen to many things that had not explanation at all to really believe that God isn't alive and at work in my life. The truth is, after all is said and done, there are to many things that you can't explain for God not to exist.
By the way, I really would like to hear more of your view on this, I do not want to argue, but rather have a good, healthy conversation.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

I do want to point out that when you say that the world wide flood was never accounted for, I would like know of your informants,
because, from my understanding, there are a great many ancient civilizations that have a history, oral or written, giving some kind of documentary of a great flood, but, again, that is only my understanding, I have not done a whole lot of research on this.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Evangelical Christianity which insists on literal interpretations of scripture teaches...

God created the universe in 6 days

All life was created perfect and in its present form including man

Man turned from God and God cast man out of the Garden of Eden and condemned him to death and eternal damnation...

Eventually God grew so displeased with Man that he wiped out all but Noah and his family (and however many animals could fit on a really big boat)

All life since then has descended from the inhabitants on that boat a few thousand years ago.

Man is still not perfect thus God sent his son as a sacrifice as God may only forgive if blood is spilled in penance (good thing I dont make the same requirements before forgiving someone)

God will come again in judgment

Those who accept Jesus will receive salvation while those who do not will be cast out from God to spend all eternity in torment for their life (average 70 years or less) of "bad behavior".

Now if God is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient, then he is not bound by the laws of the universe which he created including the concepts of time and space. Thus these are not separate events...all are occurring and have already occurred as far as God is concerned...He exists according to Christian theology in all times and places.....God created.... as he judged.... as he sacrificed... as he saved... as he condemned. There is no difference in these events...at least for God....

And he did it all...knowing he was creating and condemning to hell for eternity at the same time?

Yet he is a loving God who wants us to be with him? and yet wants us to have free will to choose to do so? He created knowing that the VAST majority of humanity would NEVER know Christ existed..

from the stone age Neanderthal hunting to support his family 130,000 years ago....

to the farmer in China 2000 years ago who tilled the land for his warlord...

to the Amazonian native indian 500 years ago who never saw any humans but his own tribe...

to the Afghan farmer today...who lives in his remote mountain village all his life...tries to be a good Muslim...for it is all he knows, all he has ever been exposed to.......tries to provide for his family...care for his sons and daughters...

to the Somali child who dies of malnutrition tomorrow at age six, after a lifetime of suffering, starvation, and disease ...

None of these "knew Jesus"...none could accept him...none could receive "salvation"..all will burn in the fires of hell for all eternity and were condemned to do so from the instant of "creation"…And this is what is taught as a loving and limitless God?

The theological contortions boggle the mind.....

And none of those contortions even begin to address the FACTS that have been proven by scientific observation of the natural world....

Now through my observations of the world we live in and using the guidelines laid down in the scientific method I see overwhelming proof that…

1. The universe is old, it is in fact almost 14.5 billion years old, and that it, and that its contents may be traced back to a single point of origin.

2. that the earth itself is almost 4.5 billion years old

3. That life on earth has not always been the same, that is began with simple, single celled life forms and changes gradually over time, becoming more complex , undergoing occasional extinctions and also occasional rapid expansions in diversity ,

4.That this “evolution” of life also clearly shows a progression beginning in equatorial Africa that leads towards the development of modern man. That through simple mechanisms proposed by Charles Darwin we can understand the driving mechanisms that caused this change to occur.

5. That no "world wide" flood occurred within the last 10,000 years. There would be a world wide sedimentary layer!!!! There is not!!!!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

"Macomacus, I suppose it is true that faith doesn't always line up with reason, but name one religion, or walk of life that doesn't take faith. I don't think it exists. I personally have seen to many things that had not explanation at all to really believe that God isn't alive and at work in my life. The truth is, after all is said and done, there are to many things that you can't explain for God not to exist.
By the way, I really would like to hear more of your view on this, I do not want to argue, but rather have a good, healthy conversation."

You can't name one religion or "walk of life" that doesn't take faith - "faith" is the problem.

Another problem is this ... if a person can not explain something, why must it be divine interaction. The more we learn about the complexities of life the less divine it becomes.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

"The truth is, after all is said and done, there are to many things that you can't explain for God not to exist."

Really? ... let me give a relational example.

This line represents what humans knew and what they attributed to God thousands of years ago.

I--I----------------------------------------------------I

Here is that line today

I----------------------------------------------------I--I

Given enough time and research I think as a species we will overcome the concept of God.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Side note:

I do believe in the bible is accurate in a lot of ways. For example all the cities and towns that still exist. I believe there was a jesus, moses, apostles and mary etc. Archaeologists are getting closer and closer all the time. I just don't believe in god, jesus as the son of god, divinity, heaven or hell. I do believe early christians used the bible as a means of suppressing and controlling entire races, countries and continents. I should restate this ... "all religions used their
special books (bible, koran, torah etc)to dominate and subvert other peoples in the name of their god."

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

That's beautiful maco....brings a tear to my eye..

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Ok, it took me awhile to get through all of what you wrote, very interesting.
First of all, in your opening statement, "Evangelical Christianity which insists on literal interpretations of scripture teaches..."
I think of my self as Christian, I don't really care what labels other people put on me. What I have come to refer to my belief as is a theistic macro-evolution, that is, I believe that the earth is at least 4.5 billion years old, and that when God created the world, it wasn't in it's present form. (It would take me a lot of time to write down my entire beliefs, which I can if you so wish)
Secondly you say, "Man turned from God and God cast man out of the Garden of Eden and condemned him to death and eternal damnation..."
I would say that, yes, man did turn form his creator, and God cast man out of the Garden of Eden, but, I think, that rather then condemning man to hell,
The punishment for disobeying the laws that He clearly set out, was merely the absence of Himself, a.k.a hell.
Regarding your example on my statement '"The truth is, after all is said and done, there are to many things that you can't explain for God not to exist."' , I don't see how I would come to that conclusion, God is more complex in nature than man could ever figure out, and there is no way of knowing to what extent God is, so we can move what we know, but that only makes what we don't know all the more bigger.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Your belief as a theistic macro-evolution proves that as man learns more of the world around him and its complexities "faith believers" or "nondenominational christians" etc. tend also to make the bible fit the new discoveries. What was once taken as literal is now metaphorical.

The bible clearly states that there is a hell and what awaits you. Why create your own version of hell?

Matt 25:41: "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels."

Just an example passage, as you know there are many more.

Give your self some credit! Why would you limit your or mankind's capacity to understand. You just gave up with the last statement. You gave up just by saying "god is more complex than man could ever figure out." Thank God ;-) Edison, Bell, Ford, Newton, Einstein etc. didn't give up on a problem that easily! I say to you lets let mankind figure it out! What was once thought impossible, we barely give a second thought today! Space travel, flight, medical discoveries, and so on and so on. Just think of the exciting things that mankind will figure out next century - it'll boggle our minds and we thought it was too complex.

Also, just my thoughts. The creation of the earth and the universe and all the galaxies and everything in them would take a finite amount of intelligence (a whole crap ton of intelligence) - not an infinite amount.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

maconacus -2
Quinton - 0

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from jplevine wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

I am catholic and I believe in god and jesus and all that but I think that some parts of it are a bit flawed like the part about the end of the world. that is just phsycopathic rantings. i also believe that adam and eve is a METEPHOR about human sin and temptation not the story of how man was created. also, if god hates gays so much how come all the bible says about that is "a man shalt not lay down with another man" but there are ten pages about how we should not eat pork but we do that anyway

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

macomacus: I think that rather then creating a different version of hell, my idea simply goes along with what the Bible already says, as you stated, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels." Therefor hell is, in essence, the absence of God. "Depart from me" would, in my mind, mean the departure from the prescience of God.

Also I am not saying that man has reached anywhere near what his capacity of learning is, however, I, myself, have learned that the more I learn of the world, the more I learn of its
Creator, and the more I learn of its Creator, the more I realize that I know so little of Him. I really believe that man can never reach the stagnation point in understanding, and, yes the understanding of the creation of the world and galaxies would take a measurable amount of intelligence, and I think that man's brain can have that capacity for intelligence, but, I believe that it is so large that no man can reach that point.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 60256 wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Belief in God essentially boils down to this debate:
Do you believe that the universe has always and will always exist?
OR
Do you believe that God has always and will always exist?

Me? I believe God always was and is. Even in the Bible it is asked "who are you?", and he responds "I am". I basically agree with all of Quinton's points.

Nate

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Interesting conversation, I wish i had found it sooner. If I said everything I am thinking of right now, It would take too long, I am tired so I will come back and add some stuff later, but for now.
1 The Bible was not written by man. Rather, God directed men to right what he wanted them too. The Theological term is inspiration. Someone mentioned the verse earlier, 2 Timothy 3: 16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." Also, "For the prophecy came not by will of man, but holly men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holly Spirit." I am tired right now, so I can't remember the reference of the second verse. I'll put that up later. The Bible was written over thousands of years, by over twenty different authors of every possible social position, on three continents in three languages. However, there is not a single contradiction in it. If that many people were to give a perfectly cohesive testimony like this in a trial, it would be called a conspiracy. Even if that many people all saw the same thing, they would have all remembered it slightly differently or would have seen it from a different perspective, thus there accounts would have differed some. However, the Bible does not. Every writer tells the same story proving that there is a single author behind them. aka, God. Thus treat Scripture as the perfect complete word of God. Not some wise sayings about a God who probably exists.
2I agree that the Bible is neither a Science text or a history book. However, there are parts where it mentions such things. For example the Hittites were used as evidence against Scripture, because the Bible mentions them several times, yet "History" said there had never been such a people. That is until archeologists discovered them. Also anyone who truly understands Scripture cannot believe in evolution of any sort. This would take a while, so if you want go look at the Rare Triple Tragedy Page to see some arguments against evolution that I brought up there. I'll expand upon this point later.
3 Just want to caution against getting all bent out of shape about the Constitution when we we are discussing the Bible. I am a History nut, and know that the Founding Fathers based the Constitution on Biblical principles and that a number of them were Christians. However, what a few of you seemed close to was something C.S. Lewis talked about in the Screwtape letters. He talks about how some people are Christians not because they truly believe the Bible and God, but because it is convenient in promoting what they do believe in. For example, one is a die hard conservative, and finds that Christianity is very compatible with his political beliefs and therefore becomes a Christian because of the political benefit. He has just shrouded his earthly ambitions in a pseodo-religios cloak. I am a supporter of our Constitution, don't get me wrong, and believe that Biblical principles should be the foundation of law, but we need to be careful about what ties we make between religious and non-religious things. Though I am not one of these keep the religion in the church on Sunday morning types, but just saying when you start being a Christian because it fits your politics, not choosing your politics because it fits your faith you have issues. Not saying that any of you necessarily did this but, a few posts could be taken that way.
Any way, I feel like I am rambling now so I am going to bed. I'll probably write more later.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

sounds like you have many thoughts, interested to see what you continue to post,

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

macomacus said, "all religions used their
special books (bible, koran, torah etc)to dominate and subvert other peoples in the name of their god."

Iron Giant said, "For example, one is a die hard conservative, and finds that Christianity is very compatible with his political beliefs and therefore becomes a Christian because of the political benefit. "

What we see is that yes, there are people within Christianity who step in and use it for their own ends, but they are not necessarily true to the faith. I would like to call attention to Jesus and the disciples. Jesus made the claim to be the Son of God, heresy in the Jewish culture of the day. He also claimed to have the power to forgive sins. This was considered heresy because only God could do that. Through the jealousy of the religious rulers of the day, Jesus was condemned to death though he did not do anything wrong. Being the Son of God, he did not lie in His claims. If he did not rise from the dead, and his remaining disciples (after Judas hanged himself) wanted to use the following to their own means, what would any person do? Normal people would try to gain some sort of power and rise to some rulership. Instead, these men carried out the command to love to their deaths. Stephen was stoned to death, Peter was crucified upside down, John was boiled alive (and lived through it) to name a few of the persecutions. Christians were literally covered in pitch, and were engulfed in flames to light the Roman Coliseum at night. If it were all a hoax, wouldn't the leaders have quit in the face of torture?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

There are books worth of info on the stuff discussed on this page. Something I want to expand upon from my last post is that you can't be both a Christian and an Evolutionist. Evolution stands in direct opposition to Christianity. Scripture tells us that God spoke everything into existence. Evolution tells us that it all just happened. Can't really tell us how or why, but that it happened. Scripture tells us that man started off perfect and fell into sin by disobeying God. Evolution says that man started as goo and will continue to improve for forever. According to Scripture there is a just God to whom we are responsible for our deeds. Evolution says we are nothing more than animals and that right and wrong do not exist and that our concept of it comes from some trait that has helped us to succeed as a species. Something like a monkey figured out that for his species to win the evolutionary competition he couldn't kill members of his own species. And it got ingrained into genetic memory and we now think of it as a moral, not to kill. I will not go into how to prove that Creation fits the facts better than evolution because I spent a lot of time on that herehttp://www.fieldandstream.com/photos/gallery/hunting/deer-hunting/2010/12/triple-tragedy-three-bucks-drown-antlers-locked
The bottom line is that you can not believe in evolution and the Bible. Now I know you are going to say, "But what if God is the one who directs evolution." First realize that Theistic Evolution was thought up by men who questioned the authority of Scripture and wanted to conform to "Science." If you relegate the Old Testament to story or even mere metaphor you might as well not believe the New Testament either. The Theological problems encountered by picking what parts of the Bible you want to believe are enormous. For example.

* You make unnecessary Christ's death. If we relegate the account of man's creation and original sin to a mere metaphorical story, we take away the sin nature of man. If man is not sinful and in no need of rescue why did Christ die for us?

*You make Christ a liar. Some of you have said that true or not and regardless of the truth of the Old Testament we can follow the teachings of Christ. How? Christ quoted from the Old Testament. All the time. Read through the Gospels. Why would you hold as a wise teacher someone who is a blatant liar? Look at other books in the New Testament such as Romans. In Romans the Law is referenced repeatedly. Jacob and Esau are treated as real historical people. Hebrews has an immense amount of context material in the Old Testament. It also talks of may individuals from the old Testament. Even Enoch who was pre-flood. The amount of times the New Testament confirms the O.T. is staggering. If you won't believe the O.T. don't bother believing the N.T.

*Also you set yourself up as the authority. If we can pick what parts of the Bile we want to believe and what parts we don't want to believe, where does it end? If we allow even a single verse to be reinterpreted by man we open ourselves up to redefining the whole of Scripture. A buffet of a Bible that we can take the parts we like and leave the parts we don't.

*To believe in Theistic Evolution you have to make assertions that the Bible leaves no room for. The Creation account is very literal and to call it a metaphor is ignoring the text.

So Evolution of any sort is completely incompatible with Scripture. If you categorize yourself as both a Christian and an Evolutionist, I challenge you to seriously consider the ramifications of each world view. Read the Bible. All of it not just a few passages you like. If you are honest with yourself, you will realize that you can not be both. I pray that anyone in this situation will then turn completely to Christ, but even if you don't it would be better to at least not be sitting on the fence. I recommend that anyone interested in this look up the sermon "Evolution" by R.G. Lee. Lee explains in more depth and with better skill how completely incompatible Christianity and Evolution are.

2 Peter 1: 21 is the reference for the other verse I mentioned in my last post.

Depending on interest and time I might right a bit more about this later.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from davycrockettfv wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

There are some very well educated contributors to this thread. Everyone seems to have his or her own opinions and interpretations of the Bible, Christianity, and religion. However, I don't think anyone is going to be swayed to another's point of view. Obviously that shouldn't stop us from interactions like this where we get to really analyze what we believe and why (who knows, maybe we can find a weak spot in our own faith - yes, everyone has faith in something - and shore it up, or broaden our understanding. I think it's important to remember though, that as we discuss the validity of the Bible, creation and evolution, pros and cons of religion and Christianity, it is impossible to say that anything has been "proven". We can find evidence to support our claims, but we cannot prove. As much as I would like to say the Bible has been proved true, it's just not the case as the majority of Biblical material is impossible to prove (based on the scientific method). And as much as any of you would like to say the Bible is proven false, or evolution is a scientific fact, that is a claim you cannot make. I'm anxious to read what everyone has to say, especially those whose beliefs/opinions differ from my own, so let's keep it up, but remember we are largely discussing belief, opinion, theory, and faith, and also that we can all still be friends :-)

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Ok, here is the thing... if we assume that there is an omnipotent god, then god could have snapped the universe into existence 5 minutes ago, with everything in place and looking aged just so. There is no way to "prove" otherwise. Thats the nature of omnipotence. However... we, as men, have a capacity to investigate the world, learn about it and build upon that knowledge. Everything we look at supports evolution as the best theory going. Do we know everything? Of course not. Are there still unanswered questions? Of course, and there probably always will be. However, if we run with the theroy of evolution as a working theory... along with DNA, RNA transcription, genetic drift, etc, etc, then we can make predictions, theorise further and conduct experiments to validate those theories. If we just accept "god made it" and "just because thats the way he did it" as answers, we will never investigate and never progress. That would be the true tragedy of "blind" religion.
Question everything. If there is a god, do you think he wants you to be stupid? At the end of the day, this should not take away from god... its a complex, beautiful world, and god was bright enough to lay it all out in seven days. He just put the mysteries out there to be solved. Use evolution, not because it is "against the bible", but because it is a tool to help us better understand the world we live in.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Science is the tool that man has crafted to study the world around him (aka to study God's creation). I use science every single day in the workplace, yet I believe wholeheartedly that God designed this world exactly. I believe that there is a difference between adaptation and macro evolution. In my pursuit of knowing more in science, I see is as a revelation of the complexity at which this world was designed. The more I learn, the more I can see that this couldn't have happened by chance. To say that science disproves God would be similar to saying that the critique of a painting disproves the existence of the artist. By definition, that cannot work. God doesn't want us to be stupid, He blessed us with inquisitive minds to investigate the world around us. Isaac Newton was a strong Christian, yet he did tremendous work with physics and mathematics among other things.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from GENO wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

My dad has always told me this:

Take an expensive watch completely apart; all the gears, the screws, everything. Put the disassembled watch in a shoebox, and start shaking it. See how long it takes for the watch to reassemble.

The watch will never reassemble itself. Compared to cells, nerves, etc, a watch is very simple. I believe science is the result of God too. Humans are similar to tons of different animals, yet none of them posses the ability to communicate and advance like we do.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from davycrockettfv wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

One thing I have noticed in my studies of evolution is it's ability to explain the big picture, but also a lot of holes when you get down to the little things. It sounds very plausible when it gives a stage by stage account of how our present-day planet came into existence (i.e. this happened, then the next stage was the evolution of this characteristic, etc.). However, I have a lot of difficulty when I look more closely at the process and wonder how pretty much anything could have survived in between those different stages. Can you imagine a woodpecker without it's hardened bill or only half it's tongue? Or a giraffe with only half the "valves" in it's neck's circulatory system? It just seems to me that if changes happened leading to animals evolving into what they are today, those changes, when they ocurred, would have had to have been instant for survival to continue. It's just something I often see glossed over or maybe even avoided...

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Christian Emter wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Or is it? The bibal has really never been proven it was made by god and his followers, its alomost like it is a book of stories past on from generations about the past.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

"Dog Breeding" as a provable example of "Evolution"

The word "evolution" just means - change to the genetics of a population over time. So dog breeding is absolutely an example of evolution in action.

More specifically, it is the act of humans "manipulating" evolution by controlling the reproductive environment.

So if one were to design a "scientific experiment" to test the theory of evolution by natural selection, it would look like this:
1. Pick a species and divide it up into separated populations.
2. Subject each sub-population to different selective pressures. I.e. pick certain traits that determine which individuals get to reproduce more.
3. Allow this to continue for many generations.

If the theory of evolution by natural selection is false ... then there would be no visible changes to the population even over many generations.

If the theory of evolution by natural selection is true ... then the different populations will show noticeable differences in their physical traits ... traits that continue to be passed on through inheritance.

---

People who reply that "a dog is still a dog" are MISSING THE POINT!

Dog breeding demonstrates conclusively that genetics can change dramatically in even a tiny amount of geologic time, if there is a strong enough selective pressure.

That IS evolution, as defined by the people (i.e. scientists) who support it.

It is irrelevant how people who disagree with evolution want to re-define the word "evolution" in order to reject it.

So dog breeding demonstrates EVOLUTION IN ACTION ... as the word "evolution" is defined by those who accept it as a fundamental principle of biology.

Dog breeding is an "EXPERIMENT" that confirms the basic principles of the theory.

It demonstrates conclusively that even a short amount of time can produce a significant amount of evolution if the selective pressure is strong enough.

So this explains why HUGE amounts of time can produce HUGE amounts of evolution ... if there is "selection"!

Dog breeding explains why this can happen. But that is not the only evidence that it has happened. That is where all the other evidence (fossils, DNA, proteins, genes, embyology, morphology, biogeography, etc. etc.) comes into play.

People who oppose evolution can't just separate cause from effect, by an arbitrary order or decree.

Selection is the cause. Evolution is the effect. You can't just declare that X amount of evolution is a reasonable effect, but 2X or 100X amount of evolution is not.

----
Source(s):
Definition of 'evolution' from biologyonline.org:
http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary…

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

It depends on how you want to define it being proven true. Much of it is prophecy and most of that has already come true.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

This is not even mentioning ‘prophecies‘ like the city of Tyre never being rebuilt (Ezekiel 26:14…Tyre is still around to this day)

Prophecies are like horoscopes, just depends on who reads them.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Almost everyone here makes valid points it seems besides GENO, I have no idea what you're saying dude.
If that watch were able to assemble itself it wouldn't be evolution, that would be MAGIC. I don't think evolutionists believe in Mary Poppins and I hope creationists don't either.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

ableskeever sounds like Clinton.
"It depends on how you want to define it being proven true." What?
"Depends on what your definition of 'is' is."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

I misspoke, gumby. It depends on your APPROACH, whether by prophecy or by scientific means.

maco, the original city of Tyre was destroyed... and the new city does not lie over the old one's ruins. What is nearby now? A fishing village where fishermen spread their nets.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

yeah, meant to get the to the Tyre thing. Good point AbleSkeever.

GENO's point is that order doesn't just happen. There must be someone ordering it. It takes a watch maker to put a watch together. Why would it be any different with anything else. It takes a creator to make life just like it takes a watch maker to make a watch.

Macomacus, you described a perfect example of micro-evolution. No informed Creationist will deny that genetic changes occur within species. This was a system given by God to help species survive. But tell me how does a dog turn into something else? You do realize that genetic information is lost in every generation. For macro-evolution to ever work there would have to be a gain of genetic information somewhere, not just a remixing of it.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus1 wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

This is macomacus

I have been blocked using my other log in, they keep telling me I am posting spam. So this will be my final post. If there is one thing I can't abide, it is censorship.

I probably did steer this to an "Evolutionism Vs Creationism" debate. That was not my intent. As Iron Giant stated earlier there is literally hundreds of books on that subject.

You can't just declare that X amount of evolution is a reasonable effect, but 2X or 100X amount of evolution is not.

"But tell me how does a dog turn into something else?"

http://evolutionlist.blogspot.com/2009/02/macroevolution-examples-and-ev...

Tyre may not have been the best example. How about this one then.

In Matthew 12:40, Jesus said, “For as Jonas [Jonah] was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (see also Jonah 1:17). This prophecy is repeated in various forms in Matthew 16:4 and Luke 11:29-30. This is a very precise prophecy from the lips of Jesus himself about his own resurrection, and it is demonstrably false from the Bible itself.
The Gospels make very definite statements that Jesus died on a Friday afternoon and was raised around dawn on the following Sunday morning. This belief is foundational to Christian theology and is the basis for Good Friday and Easter rituals celebrated every year.
From Friday afternoon to Sunday morning is at most 40 hours, not three days and nights. Some argue this did include portions of three days, since Jewish days are counted from sundown to sundown, which stretches the facts but may appear plausible to some people.
However, there is just no way to get “three nights” out of this. The Bible says that Jesus died on Friday shortly before the Sabbath, which began at sundown (Mark 15:37-47, Luke 23:46-56, John 19:31-42). The Bible also says that Jesus was raised around sunrise on Sunday morning (Matthew 28:1-7, Mark 16:1-6, Luke 24:1-6, John 20:1). Friday afternoon to Sunday morning is two nights.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/proph/long.html for 100 more inaccuracies.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Your missing the point, first of all, the exact days could have been lost in the translation from the original Greek and Aramaic texts,
But also, Jesus did raise from the dead, miraculously, who really cares about the time frame that He was dead?

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

That is a horrible argument. The words "raise" and "dead" could have been lost in translation from the original texts, to actually mean "awaken from a coma."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

you don't just go into a coma when crucified, or stabbed with a spear, and your legs don't heal that fast, from being broken by the soldiers

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

John 19:36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

His bones weren't broken. His death came quicker than what was standard for a Roman crucifixion. Probably had something to do with the flogging beforehand (40 lashes are considered enough to kill a man anyways). It says clearly that when the soldiers came to him to break his legs so that he would suffocate, they saw that he was already dead. Then they thrust a spear into his side and the flow of blood and water confirmed that Jesus had indeed died. It is quite easy for a spear to go between ribs, and not break any bone.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

ableskeever that is what I'm saying with the above verse. Jesus' legs were not broken. Quinton was under the assumption that jesus' legs were broken as was the normal practice at the time.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

"But also, Jesus did raise from the dead, miraculously, who really cares about the time frame that He was dead?"

I care about the time frame because it means that the bible is inaccurate. Since the bible is the word of god, it means that the word of god is inaccurate and therefore fallible.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

I've hear d the explanation for the apparent discrepancy in timing. I can't remember how to explain it though. I will look it up and post it soon.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

I am sorry, I forgot about the not breaking of His legs. My fault.

another thing, this is not a bad conversation, but is F&S really the place to have it?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Maco,
In the Jewish system, the Sabbath (aka the next day) began at sundown. We know that Jesus died before that on Friday because the Jews who were to prepare His body before burial were not allowed to do work on the Sabbath. So, Friday is the first calendar day on which he was dead, the Sabbath (Saturday) was the second day he was dead, and he rose on Sunday, the third day. If it were to happen over a 72 hour period, then that would have made the resurrection on a Monday afternoon... four calendar days, which would have been obviously wrong according to prophecy.

Thats what I have off the top of my head. I'll have to go do some research if you want a more in-depth answer.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Jesus died on a wednesday and rose on friday. Actually, you can kind of prove either the wed. or fri. theory of his death, depending on the verse.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

All four Gospel accounts say that the resurrection occured on the first day of the week... the day after the Sabbath. I'm not sure where the Wednesday account came from that you're referencing.

Summarizing the account in Mark,
Mark 15:42-43 - Mentions that its the day before the Sabbath and Joseph of Arimathea comes to ask for the body of Jesus

Mark 15:44 - Pilate gets confirmation from the centurion that Jesus has died. (Death is something that a centurion would know about.) This is the same centurion who was standing right before Jesus when he breathed his last breath in verse 39.

Mark 15:45-47 - Pilate gives the body to Joseph of Arimathea and Joseph places the body in a new tomb hewn out of the rock. A stone is placed over it. The account in Matthew lists that the stone was sealed and a guard (sometimes referred as plural with guards) was placed over the tomb. Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses followed the burial proceedings. (The reason is clear in the next verse.)

Mark 16:1 - Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James purchased spices to correctly prepare his body according to the Jewish law. (Being it the day before the Sabbath, no work could be done to complete the job. Instead, it was a quick burial and then the correct preparation would be finished on the day after.)

Mark 16:2 - States that the day is the first of the week... the day after the Sabbath.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

There is also a Thursday theory. Just google "What day of the week did jesus die" and you'll find all sorts of theories from religious experts. It's another one of those deals where it is just too much info to list here.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

First of all the reason that Jesus died quicker than usual had nothing to do with the lashing before hand, everyone who was crucified got the same amount of lashings, usually 39 not 40. Why he died early had everything to do with His paying for sin, and voluntarily giving His life. Jesus endured far more than the average crucifixion victim. While on the cross He endured the unadulterated wrath of God for sin. Then He cried "Telestai" or "it is finished" and gave up the ghost. Jesus had earlier said(paraphrasing) that no one takes my life. I lay it down and I will pick it back up. His statement of "it is finished" was not the dyeing lament of a defeated idealist, but rather the victorious shout of a conquering King. Sin had been paid for. All that was left to do was die and rise again to prove His conquest over sin and death.

Also, ableskeever is right about the calendar day arguments. The couple of times when it is phrased three days and three nights it was a figure of speech. Jesus uses plenty of them, a camel through the eye of the needle, if thy eye offend thee pluck it out, to name a couple. The emphasis throughout not only the gospels but the rest of the New Testament is that it was three days. When he said three days and three nights he just meant three days.

The theories that Jesus died on a different day of the week than Friday are of relatively little importance. Any of those theories still put his resurrection three days later, they just have a different three days. I personally think the Friday theory works best, but it is not an issue of huge significance which day are in question since they all end up being three days.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

The couple of times when it is phrased three days and three nights it was a figure of speech. Jesus uses plenty of them, a camel through the eye of the needle, if thy eye offend thee pluck it out, to name a couple. The emphasis throughout not only the gospels but the rest of the New Testament is that it was three days. When he said three days and three nights he just meant three days.

My rebuttal.

*Also you set yourself up as the authority. If we can pick what parts of the Bile we want to believe and what parts we don't want to believe, where does it end? If we allow even a single verse to be reinterpreted by man we open ourselves up to redefining the whole of Scripture. A buffet of a Bible that we can take the parts we like and leave the parts we don't.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

It's not that we can pick and choose what we like and what not.
It's that God sets clear boundaries, and as long as you don't go outside of those clear cornerstone for the foundation of you belief, these other things just aren't the cornerstones,
You can have many types of houses built on the same foundation, but without that foundation, the house will not last.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Obviously god does not set clear boundaries. You have literal parts and supposedly metaphorical parts and then you have the "what he meant" parts as interpreted by whomever. The problem is, the foundation IS the "bible", and it is flawed.

Been fun, but I'm done. Turkey season starts in a couple of weeks!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 1 week ago

Maco, I know that you're done, but there are a couple of your statements about what you've heard from Christianity that I would differ on.

"Evangelical Christianity which insists on literal interpretations of scripture teaches..."

"All life was created perfect and in its present form including man."
God saw his creation and saw that it was good. When sin entered the world, it brought with it a curse. That curse is evident in the behavior of animals, the natural world, and man's self-destructive nature.

"Man turned from God and God cast man out of the Garden of Eden and condemned him to death and eternal damnation..."
God did not condemn mankind, but mankind condemned himself. John 3:17 says that God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him. There is a difference between the thought that God condemned man and the thought that man condemned himself by making himself unable to approach God.

"Eventually God grew so displeased with Man that he wiped out all but Noah and his family (and however many animals could fit on a really big boat)."
I don't have a problem with this statement. I will note that animals of the day were different from animals of today. They did not have the "fear" of man in them yet, so they were more domesticated as opposed to wild at the time. There is a specific statement that two of every animal and seven of every clean animal came to the ark. Why seven of every clean animal? So that Noah could offer sacrifices to the Lord after deliverance.

"All life since then has descended from the inhabitants on that boat a few thousand years ago."
I have no issue with this statement.

"Man is still not perfect thus God sent his son as a sacrifice as God may only forgive if blood is spilled in penance (good thing I dont make the same requirements before forgiving someone)."
Sin is an imperfection that goes against the holiness of God. Because of this, nobody who is alive and has sinned can come into the presence of God. Blood must be shed. God introduced the animal sacrifice so that his people could offer up a life in their place to COVER their sin. It hadn't been taken away yet. There were strict rules about the sacrifice and how it must be visibly perfect. When Jesus came, he was sinless. Be being the human sacrifice, he completed the deal to actually take away sin for those who want him to take their place. If you accept the fact that there is a God and that you're a sinner, its pretty much a no-brainer solution for us. If it sounds too easy, God made it that way so that there isn't some intellectual test that people must past to get to this point.

"God will come again in judgment"
Sure He will. There is unfinished business on earth with His enemies, and even though He isn't taking action at the moment, he is giving everyone ample time to turn to Him. His record book is still being kept for those who do not choose to have their sin taken away through Jesus. I do disagree with using the argument of the coming judgement as a scare tactic to make people turn to Jesus though.

"Those who accept Jesus will receive salvation while those who do not will be cast out from God to spend all eternity in torment for their life (average 70 years or less) of "bad behavior"."
This is a reality that is a consequence of mankind's sin. If you want it taken away, the path is there.

"Now if God is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient, then he is not bound by the laws of the universe which he created including the concepts of time and space. Thus these are not separate events...all are occurring and have already occurred as far as God is concerned...He exists according to Christian theology in all times and places.....God created.... as he judged.... as he sacrificed... as he saved... as he condemned. There is no difference in these events...at least for God...."
There is nowhere where is says that man is able to fully conceptualize God. Men are limited in their ability to understand... this is an important realization that we must accept or else, we will drive ourselves insane in our attempt to know everything. If an artist were to create a 2D drawing, would the artist be limited to a 2D world?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from OutdoorsDave wrote 3 years 1 week ago

First the Bible is not flawed. People have been trying for thousands of years to disprove the Bible and can't because they have no evidence on their side. I will make a case. In historical evidence, by looking at prophecies, and looking at eye witness accounts. But in the end I can argue all i want but if you have turned you heart against God nothing i say will matter. So please read this with an open mind.
1st Historical Evidence,
Lets look at a non Christian view, in the writings of Josephus the roman scholar. Josephus' writings cover a number of figures familiar to Bible readers. He discusses John the Baptist, James the brother of Jesus, Pontius Pilate, the Sadducees, the Sanhedrin, the High Priests, and the Pharisees. As for Jesus, there are two references to him in Antiquities. Concerning Jesus he wrote two passages. First, in a section in Book 18 dealing with various actions of Pilate, the extant texts refer to Jesus and his ministry. This passage is known as the Testimonium Flavianum referred to hereafter as the "TF".

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day.

Jewish Antiquities 18.3.3

Second, in Book 20 there is what could be called a passing reference to Jesus in a paragraph describing the murder of Jesus' brother, James, at the hands of Ananus, the High Priest.

But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as lawbreakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.

Jewish Antiquities 20.9.1

Price, Christopher. "Did Josephus Refer to Jesus." Bede's Library - Reasonable Apologetics. Web. 08 Apr. 2011. .

So even non Christians saw this happening in history.

2nd Prophesies

According to "How Many Bible Prophecies Did Jesus Fulfill? by JerryBallard | Eons.com." The Online Community for BOOMers | Eons.com. Web. 08 Apr. 2011. .
"Many of the prophecies concerning the Messiah were totally beyond human control: Birth: Place, time, manner of Death: People's reactions, piercing of side, burial Resurrection: Where did His body go? By using the modern science of probability in reference to just eight of these prophecies, the chance that any man might have lived to fulfill all eight prophecies is one in 100 trillion!
To illustrate this point: If we take 100 trillion silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas, they would be two feet deep. Now we mark one of these silver dollars and thoroughly stir the whole mass--all over the state. Now blindfold a man and let him travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick only one silver dollar.

What chance would he have of picking the marked one? The same chance that the prophets would have of writing just eight of these prophecies and having them all come true for any one man if they had written them without God's inspiration!
The chance of any one man's fulfilling all of 48 prophecies is one in ten to the 157th power. The electron is about as small an object as we can imagine. If we had a cubic inch of these electrons and tried to count them, it would take us (at 250 per minute) 19,000 times 19,000 times 19,000 years to count them.
Now mark one of them and thoroughly stir it into the whole mass. What chance does our blindfolded man have of finding the right electron?"
the likelihood the one man could fulfill all the prophesies gives some amount of credibility to the Bible.

3rd In eye witness accounts.
this is the most important topic to understand. because God knows that men doubt he appeared to over 500 people after he rose. Including Paul, The twelve apostles, 500 brethren, the two on the rode to amass, and others. These men say Jesus and wrote it down in the Bible. This book is not just some bums writing what they want, it is the Holy Spirit inspiring 40 men over 1600 years to write the account of Him and his Nation.

I pray you read this post and look further into what i am saying.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 1 week ago

(cont.)

"Yet he is a loving God who wants us to be with him? and yet wants us to have free will to choose to do so? He created knowing that the VAST majority of humanity would NEVER know Christ existed.."
I can't speak for everyone else because I do not know exactly what God has revealed to them. When I do enter into His presence, I am accountable for myself who had received His Word. Before He ascended into the clouds, Jesus did give out what we call the Great Comission which is to go and preach to all nations the Good News that there is salvation available. Note what God said to Job (Job 38:4-6) on why God lets good people suffer:
Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding,
Who set its measurements? Since you know.
Or who stretched the line on it?
"On what were its bases sunk?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
Mankind lacks the understanding to know all facets of God.

"And none of those contortions even begin to address the FACTS that have been proven by scientific observation of the natural world...."
I believe that science is a tool of mankind to study the natural world. It has been changing, and I believe that we'll see some more changes in our lifetime...

"1. The universe is old, it is in fact almost 14.5 billion years old, and that it, and that its contents may be traced back to a single point of origin."
I'm not claiming to know it all, because thats impossible. I do know that God created the world. Many within the Christian community will argue that God had created something before the current Earth we're on but then destroyed it and started over. What we do have is that it was created. There are also those out there who claim the the Hebrew word "yom" (day) is also interchangeable with the meaning of a day being like an age. For instance, if referring to a different time, you could say "in the day of the Great Depression" and it could take on the meaning of being over a period of time. By leaving the details out, God didn't disprove his creation, but left room for us to investigate. If you believe in an all powerful God, then would it be out of the question that He might have created it with some age built into it? If you don't believe in God, then you've already shut your mind off to the possibility.

"2. that the earth itself is almost 4.5 billion years old"
In addition to the comments above, it is important to note that very little information is given to what was before mankind, and all the rest of the emphasis is back on mankind. That is where the importance is.

"3. That life on earth has not always been the same, that is began with simple, single celled life forms and changes gradually over time, becoming more complex , undergoing occasional extinctions and also occasional rapid expansions in diversity ,"
We're clearly not improving with life on earth. If we take a look at how fast different species are becoming extinct, we won't last much longer, how is it that we're supposed to be improving? Why is is that with our technolical advancements we aren't able to create structures that last a fraction of the time that ancient ones have stood for?

"4.That this “evolution” of life also clearly shows a progression beginning in equatorial Africa that leads towards the development of modern man. That through simple mechanisms proposed by Charles Darwin we can understand the driving mechanisms that caused this change to occur."
If this is true, why are we so different from animals? If it is just a more developed brain, then how come we're the only ones? How many transitional fossils are really out there? If someone took the skeletons of a frog during its development from a tadpole into an adult, how would they be able to distinguish from evolution?

"5. That no "world wide" flood occurred within the last 10,000 years. There would be a world wide sedimentary layer!!!! There is not!!!!"
There is no sedimentary layer? Where we drill in East Texas, there is a sandstone layer at least 2000' thick 8,000 feet down. In addition to this, how would oil get so far underground unless there was a mass burial of organic matter under tremendous pressure (hundreds of feet of water). Most times when something dies, it is eaten by carrion animals and lays out in the sun for a long time until the bones are bleached in the sun. In addition to this, there are the vast oceans and land masses underneath that haven't had hardly any exploration done underneath. Also, there are marine fossils found on mountaintops. People haven't been able to go investigate Mt. Ararat (where the remnants of the ark are at) because the radical Muslims won't let anyone close. Would a recovery of the boat change your opinion of the matter?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 4 days ago

OutdoosDave

Historical evidence:Testimonium Flavianum

Concerns have been raised about the authenticity of the passage, and it is widely held by scholars that at least part of the passage has been altered by a later scribe. The Testimonium's authenticity has attracted much scholarly discussion and controversy of interpolation. Louis H. Feldman counts 87 articles published during the period of 1937–1980, "the overwhelming majority of which question its authenticity in whole or in part." Judging from Alice Whealey's 2003 survey of the historiography, it seems that the majority of modern scholars consider that Josephus really did write something here about Jesus, but that the text that has reached us is corrupt. There has been no consensus on which portions have been altered, or to what degree. However, Geza Vermes points out in an in-depth analysis of the passage that much of the language is typically Josephan, which not only supports the hypothesis that Josephus did write something about Jesus, but also may aid in determining which parts of the passage are genuine. In antiquity, Origen recorded that Josephus did not believe Jesus was the Christ. As I stated earlier, I do believe there was a Jesus, I just do not believe in his divinity.

According to "How Many Bible Prophecies Did Jesus Fulfill? by JerryBallard | Eons.com." The Online Community for BOOMers | Eons.com. Web. 08 Apr. 2011

Jerry Ballard is convinced that the fact that the story told in the Gospels so well matches the prophecies of the Old Testament proves the truth of Christianity.

Jerry fails to consider the alternative explanation: that the story as told in those Gospels was written with prior prophecies in mind. The earliest Gospel according to Mark was written six decades after Jesus’ birth by an author already convinced of his messianic status and no doubt familiar with all “574 Old Testament verses containing messianic prophesies.” We ought not be surprised, then, that Mark tells his tale in such a way as to fulfill those prophesies.

Thus, in order for Jerry’s argument to work, he needs to assume that the story of Jesus as presented by Mark, Matthew, Luke and John is truth instead of legend. In other words, Jerry must assume the very conclusion he is arguing for.

Eyewitness accounts:
Christians often argue that one reason we should believe in Jesus is because we have firsthand eyewitness accounts that testify of his divinity. They are speaking of the Gospels and Acts of course (Paul never claims to have met Jesus except in a dream). Yet the first Gospel in the Bible to be written (there are other Gospels that were not included in the Bible), the Gospel of Mark, wasn’t written until 65 – 80 years after the time that Jesus would have been crucified. Matthew wasn’t written for 80 – 100 years after, Luke & Acts – 80 to 130 years after, and John – 90 to 120 years after. These are hardly eyewitness accounts.

The lack of any eyewitness accounts of Jesus is a bigger problem than it may seem at first. It’s not just that there is one less reason to believe in Jesus. It’s that if the stories in the Gospels were true, there really should be eyewitness accounts – a lot of them.

Take Matthew’s story of Jesus’ birth for example (Mat 2:16)

When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi

Outside of the Gospel of Matthew written 80 to 100 years after Jesus would have been crucified, there are no firsthand accounts of Herod’s order to kill every Jewish firstborn in the city. Wouldn’t such a massacre be noteworthy? Shouldn’t we expect at least a mention of it in some writings from that period? In fact, there is no mention of it anywhere else.

Take Matthew’s story of Jesus’ death for another example (Mat 27:45, 27:51-53):

From the sixth hour until the ninth hour darkness came over all the land … At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split. The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus’ resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

Rocks spontaneously splitting, the temple curtain spontaneously tearing (that would be THE curtain that separates the rest of the temple from the Holy of Holies where the Arc of the Covenant was kept), and the dead coming back to life and walking around Jerusalem – how often to these sorts of things happen? How “normal” are these events? How many people should have seen at least one of these events?

How plausible is it that all of these events really occurred AND that there are no firsthand accounts of any of the events? Certainly the lack of any firsthand account is a good reason to doubt that the events really happened, but isn’t the Gospel of Matthew THE firsthand account? No, the Gospel of Matthew was an embellishment of the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Mark does not mention any of the events except for the tearing of the Temple curtain. Paul’s writings, the earliest writings in the New Testament, says nothing at all about any of these events.
askanatheist.wordpress.com/2010/10/31/334/

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 4 days ago

If the gospels were made up, wouldn't there have been some conspiracy to be sure that all the stories lined up exactly right? I've heard of lawyers taking the four gospels and comparing the testimonies as they would in court and find out that because of some of the variances, this was not a man-made fabrication.

There are differences between the emphasis of the gospels because they were written for different audiences and purposes.
Matthew - Written for the Jews
Mark - Written for the Greeks
Luke - Written for the Romans
John - Written to emphasize the divinity of Christ

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 4 days ago

ableskeever

Proselytizing my every remark does not prove your point in any way. Then on points 3,4 and 5 you just pose more questions for me to answer.

3. We're clearly not improving with life on earth. If we take a look at how fast different species are becoming extinct, we won't last much longer, how is it that we're supposed to be improving? Life is evolving. Some species have adapted and flourished and some have gone extinct. The species that are still around are definitely "improved" as they would have died off.

4.If this is true, why are we so different from animals? If it is just a more developed brain, then how come we're the only ones? How many transitional fossils are really out there? If someone took the skeletons of a frog during its development from a tadpole into an adult, how would they be able to distinguish from evolution? We were not the only ones with a more advanced brain. Homo erectus, hablis, ergaster, neanderthalensis, faber, ludens etc.

5.There is no sedimentary layer? Where we drill in East Texas, there is a sandstone layer at least 2000' thick 8,000 feet down. In addition to this, how would oil get so far underground unless there was a mass burial of organic matter under tremendous pressure (hundreds of feet of water). Most times when something dies, it is eaten by carrion animals and lays out in the sun for a long time until the bones are bleached in the sun. In addition to this, there are the vast oceans and land masses underneath that haven't had hardly any exploration done underneath. Also, there are marine fossils found on mountaintops. People haven't been able to go investigate Mt. Ararat (where the remnants of the ark are at) because the radical Muslims won't let anyone close. Would a recovery of the boat change your opinion of the matter?

There is no worldwide sedimentary layer 4500 year layers deep. Bringing up oil, and the depth it is at, only strengthens my position on how old the earth really is.

Genesis 6:15 clearly states the dimensions of the ark. Recent thought on the Ark's design is that it could have had a slightly tapered top at the front and back, instead of being squared off. But the famous rock formation near Mount Ararat with pointed ends, which some think is Noah's Ark, is definitely not.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 4 days ago

I'm not sure how recent thoughts on the Ark's specific shape have any bearing. If it wasn't specifically listed, then how would anyone know?

On the sedimentary layer, there is proof that a catastrophic event can pile up quickly and have multiple layers as well as create canyons quicker than normal. Look at Mount St. Helens.
http://aristophrenium.com/duane/mount-st-helens-witness-for-a-biblical-w...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Brennen Spann wrote 3 years 3 days ago

The Bible is absolutely been proven true... thousands of prophecy's in the bible have happened exactly how and when it was said they would happen... mathematicians have calculated that even 10 of these coming true is an impossibility but guess what... they did... shows how smart they are.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 3 days ago

LOL at Ableskeever, saying lawyers have proven the gospels divinely inspired. I'll have to remember that one...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 3 days ago

Hey, taking them for what they do well, it does prove the point that it wasn't some made-up story by four guys.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 2 days ago

No, actually that is not proof at all. If that were all that was required for 'proof', then this debate would've been over by now. Also I have some beachfront property in Minnesota you might like...

Just say something to the effect of, "I don't care if my beliefs are actually true are not, I still want to hold those beliefs."
If the bible is allegorical, then all skepticism is valid and you can basically do what you want picking and choosing what you wish to "believe in." If it is literal then stonings are okay, dogs don't go to heaven, Noah's a drunk, Native Americans go to hell and we're all a product of incest. Oh and if you're Mormon you get to rule your own universe some day.
I just prefer to ask, "Why should I believe in any of this supernatural junk anyway?" Then I immediately feel a load lifted off my back and go fishing.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 days ago

I don't think that property on Lake Superior counts as beachfront... but if thats how you call it up there, then thats fine.

I cannot say "I don't care if my beliefs are actually true are not" because I do care. I'm betting my life on these beliefs, so I want to be absolutely sure that those beliefs are in order.

In simplistic terms, the Bible is a combination of history, poetry, and prophecy. Throughout the years, men with self serving intent have created distorted views on interpretation. My suggestion to you is to bypass all the interpretations out there and start with the life of Jesus because He is the focal point of it all. Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John, they all tell the same story, but to different audiences with different emphases. If you were to give a presentation of hydroelectric power to a group of engineers, you would probably be more technical in the presentation. If it were to a group of investors, then it would be geared towards the costs.

There is nothing I can do to make you believe, but that isn't my job. I know that there is a cure to humanity's problem of separation from God and that the way is Jesus. I'm just here to let you know how to overcome that problem. The rest is up to you and God.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 3 years 1 day ago

Anyone that would ask this question is obviously ignorant, or just not thinking clearly. What parts of the bible would you like to prove or disprove? Some are obviously true. Some things are not true, or at least not good ideas (barbaric treatment of women kinda stuff). Some things in there can't possibly be proven one way or the other. That's why it's called faith.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from OutdoorsDave wrote 3 years 1 day ago

I am leaving now. But I will leave this comment to think about. Both sides here have to use an enormous amount of faith to believe that their side is true. So I'd say in the end we shall see who is true and who is false. (That is if we get to see those times or if they happen in years to come.)

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from thegreatsantini wrote 2 years 41 weeks ago

Bible completly true and as a matter of fact I think that amaerica in gerneral has lost those traditional values that got us to be such a super power. Not rascist or hateing on the mordern world and what ever but if there were more ppl like the ppl on this site hahaah we would be much better off as a country

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ga hunter wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Wow this is one long thread! I believe the Bible is 100% true and i agree with Quinton on everything except that the earth is 4.5 million years old. Me personally i believe the universe is between 6 to 10 thousand years old but thats a story for a different day. Other people dont have the same beliefs. or they may not believe in the Bible at allbut we shouldnt bring them down. But what does the Bible say to do for those who dont believe in Gods word? Pray for them! I dont see how you can look at this universe and say there is no God and that the human race is basically just a big accident.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ga hunter wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Wow this is one long thread! I believe the Bible is 100% true and i agree with Quinton on everything except that the earth is 4.5 million years old. Me personally i believe the universe is between 6 to 10 thousand years old but thats a story for a different day. Other people dont have the same beliefs. or they may not believe in the Bible at allbut we shouldnt bring them down. But what does the Bible say to do for those who dont believe in Gods word? Pray for them! I dont see how you can look at this universe and say there is no God and that the human race is basically just a big accident.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ga hunter wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Wow this is one long thread! I believe the Bible is 100% true and i agree with Quinton on everything except that the earth is 4.5 million years old. Me personally i believe the universe is between 6 to 10 thousand years old but thats a story for a different day. Other people dont have the same beliefs. or they may not believe in the Bible at allbut we shouldnt bring them down. But what does the Bible say to do for those who dont believe in Gods word? Pray for them! I dont see how you can look at this universe and say there is no God and that the human race is basically just a big accident.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

In the way the Bible is written, different theories can be raised into the actual age of the earth. One thing that I gain from it is the fact that only one chapter was spent on the issue (which means that the details are not relevant to salvation), and the main point is the Creator which is constantly brought up in the other books. It tells me that the specific details are up to us to figure out if we're so inclined, but it is not the focus of our existence.

From what I understand, the Hebrew word for day (Yom) can be taken to mean either a 12 hour period, a 24 hour period, or a long time (like an age). We see similar uses in our culture where a calendar day is a 24 hour period while a work day can mean 8, 10, or even 12 hours. Also if I were to say "In the day of Rome's decline" it could mean a longer, but a finite amount of time.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Actually the age of the earth is of terrible significance to Salvation. If we believe that the world came into being billions of years ago and that life gradually evolved over those eons of time, that means that things had been dyeing for billions of years before God pronounced hid Creation, "Very Good." It makes the curse that God placed on the Universe when Adam sinned meaningless and redundant. He couldn't have cursed to death a univese in which death already existed. In turn Christ's death on the Cross becomes meaningless because he was not paying for sin. Death is the result of sin, thus death could not have existed before Adam fell.

Also, Yom can mean a long time or period, but never when in the context that it is in Genesis 1 and 2. Whenever it is used in a phrase like the morning and the evening were the 1st day it means a literal 24 hour day, and this is the context of Genesis.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from CHKILCHII wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

The bible has been proven true time and time again, and all those who do not believe that will all too soon find out just how true it was.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

The significance is in the fact that God did it... and He did it just how it says in Genesis.

The way of evaluating the account in Genesis is in dispute as to the number of years. There is the account of the age of the men from Adam to Noah, but then its left off.

Though I lean towards the view of a younger earth, I've seen a very good point being made in the use of the word day to mean an age in Genesis 2:4.

If someone believes that God created the earth over a time that is longer than what I think it is, I don't doubt their salvation over it. Could God have chosen to create the universe in a period longer than 6 days? Sure he could have. Could he have the ability to create it in a split moment? Of course. Does the Genesis account have evidence to support some different timelines? I think that since there are arguments about this, it does. Personally, I think that God presented it in a way so that all it takes is a little bit of faith to believe it from whichever direction you're coming from.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Maxx Smith wrote 21 weeks 1 day ago

Here are three questions to ask yourself and if your answers are no, no and yes you have just disproved the existence of god.
1. Was the world made in 7 days? No, the earth took billions of years to create. If you think otherwise you clearly have never read a book.
2. Is the world less than 10,000 years old? No, the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old. Read a book a non fiction book if you disagree.
3. Is evolution true? Yes, ABSOLUTELY it is a proven fact and as hunters you should be able to put two and two together. There is a reason deer are slowly becoming nocturnal animals, there is a reason certain ducks fly 60+ miles per hour. Whether creationists want to believe it or not you yourself are part of evolution. If you do not believe in evolution do not have kids because you will be proving evolution right. One example of evolution that has been seen over the past 200 years and guys are going to like this is womens breast size. In the past couple generations breast size has gone from an average of B to an average today of D. Men liked women with bigger breasts and so that trait was passed down to their daughters. If you think men have been skipped in the evolution cycle your very wrong the proof is, believe it or not, in your pants. Yes your package has grown exponentially over the past generations and thats because women like bigger things. If your wife or girlfriend says size doesn't matter she is just trying to comfort you and wishing you had evolved like every other average man. Finally look at the athletes that compete today they are bigger, faster, stronger and have better endurance. Darwin proved that evolution is real and showed that there is no god.

FACTUAL HISTORY LESSON
- There was no jesus of Nazareth. Nazareth wasn't in existance during "Jesus's" life.
- The writes of the gospels said they never knew "Jesus" they just took peoples word for it when they wrote the gospels decades later.
- 2 of the 4 gospels admitted that they wrote it for propaganda. The original uncle Sam.
- There was no Adam and Eve
- The earth is not flat
- The earth does not revolve around the sun
- The first human species were found in Africa not in the fertile crescent or the "garden of Eden"
- The bible plagiarized many works around it mainly one religion in Egypt. Hundreds of years before the new testament was written an egyptian religion had created a man who was born from a virgin birth, was the son of god, walked on water, healed the sick, died for his people and rose from the dead. HMMM sounds familiar!!!
- Jews were never slaves in Egypt. The people who worked and created the pyramids were paid with quarts of beer!!!
- No Jewish slaves means no Moses and 10 commandments.
- Christianity was created by taking buddhist, hindu and jewish values and combined them to create a religion that people could to relate to. If people cant relate the religion will die which means no power and money.
- Religion was used as a way of governing people. If they have a perfect place to go to people will be happier to die allowing government officials to gain more land and MONEY!!!!!!!!
- You can NOT rise from the dead.
- You can NOT walk on water unless its frozen!!!
- You can NOT cure the blind unless you have horrible cataracts then get them removed by a doctor.
- You can NOT multiply fish and bread by waving your hands over it.
- You can NOT get pregnant without having sperm cells. Reproductive cells carry half of the chromosomes required to create a child so when both meet a child is created.
- The catholic church has tried to cover up any scientists work that disproves them.

Final thoughts and facts-
1. If you still believe in god you are blatantly ignoring true facts to keep your beliefs alive.
2. The catholic church spends on average $300,000,000 of your donated money a year to keep molesting and abusive church officials out of prison. So thanks for funding that because clearly religious people are above the law and the pedophile down the road.
3. SCIENCE CAN PROVE ANYTHING!!!!!!!! 50% of the worlds great physicists say by the end of OUR lifetime we will be able to know what caused everything to come to be.
4. Who are you really going to believe sheep herders that didn't even know what a molecule or an atom was or scientists in the 21st century who can answer almost any question you have with a factual answer on a molecular level.
5. Im not trying to push Atheism upon you. I am just presenting facts that everyone should consider. If you do not and say history, science and I am full of BS I will judge you on your absolutely amazing and idiotic ignorance. No matter how much you pray or preach you can not stop the Atheist and Agnostic revolution. Like slavery eventually all religion will be abolished and people of the future will look back and think wow what a bunch of religious of idiots.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Maxx Smith wrote 21 weeks 1 day ago

Here are three questions to ask yourself and if your answers are no, no and yes you have just disproved the existence of god.
1. Was the world made in 7 days? No, the earth took billions of years to create. If you think otherwise you clearly have never read a book.
2. Is the world less than 10,000 years old? No, the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old. Read a book a non fiction book if you disagree.
3. Is evolution true? Yes, ABSOLUTELY it is a proven fact and as hunters you should be able to put two and two together. There is a reason deer are slowly becoming nocturnal animals, there is a reason certain ducks fly 60+ miles per hour. Whether creationists want to believe it or not you yourself are part of evolution. If you do not believe in evolution do not have kids because you will be proving evolution right. One example of evolution that has been seen over the past 200 years and guys are going to like this is womens breast size. In the past couple generations breast size has gone from an average of B to an average today of D. Men liked women with bigger breasts and so that trait was passed down to their daughters. If you think men have been skipped in the evolution cycle your very wrong the proof is, believe it or not, in your pants. Yes your package has grown exponentially over the past generations and thats because women like bigger things. If your wife or girlfriend says size doesn't matter she is just trying to comfort you and wishing you had evolved like every other average man. Finally look at the athletes that compete today they are bigger, faster, stronger and have better endurance. Darwin proved that evolution is real and showed that there is no god.

FACTUAL HISTORY LESSON
- There was no jesus of Nazareth. Nazareth wasn't in existance during "Jesus's" life.
- The writes of the gospels said they never knew "Jesus" they just took peoples word for it when they wrote the gospels decades later.
- 2 of the 4 gospels admitted that they wrote it for propaganda. The original uncle Sam.
- There was no Adam and Eve
- The earth is not flat
- The earth does not revolve around the sun
- The first human species were found in Africa not in the fertile crescent or the "garden of Eden"
- The bible plagiarized many works around it mainly one religion in Egypt. Hundreds of years before the new testament was written an egyptian religion had created a man who was born from a virgin birth, was the son of god, walked on water, healed the sick, died for his people and rose from the dead. HMMM sounds familiar!!!
- Jews were never slaves in Egypt. The people who worked and created the pyramids were paid with quarts of beer!!!
- No Jewish slaves means no Moses and 10 commandments.
- Christianity was created by taking buddhist, hindu and jewish values and combined them to create a religion that people could to relate to. If people cant relate the religion will die which means no power and money.
- Religion was used as a way of governing people. If they have a perfect place to go to people will be happier to die allowing government officials to gain more land and MONEY!!!!!!!!
- You can NOT rise from the dead.
- You can NOT walk on water unless its frozen!!!
- You can NOT cure the blind unless you have horrible cataracts then get them removed by a doctor.
- You can NOT multiply fish and bread by waving your hands over it.
- You can NOT get pregnant without having sperm cells. Reproductive cells carry half of the chromosomes required to create a child so when both meet a child is created.
- The catholic church has tried to cover up any scientists work that disproves them.

Final thoughts and facts-
1. If you still believe in god you are blatantly ignoring true facts to keep your beliefs alive.
2. The catholic church spends on average $300,000,000 of your donated money a year to keep molesting and abusive church officials out of prison. So thanks for funding that because clearly religious people are above the law and the pedophile down the road.
3. SCIENCE CAN PROVE ANYTHING!!!!!!!! 50% of the worlds great physicists say by the end of OUR lifetime we will be able to know what caused everything to come to be.
4. Who are you really going to believe sheep herders that didn't even know what a molecule or an atom was or scientists in the 21st century who can answer almost any question you have with a factual answer on a molecular level.
5. Im not trying to push Atheism upon you. I am just presenting facts that everyone should consider. If you do not and say history, science and I am full of BS I will judge you on your absolutely amazing and idiotic ignorance. No matter how much you pray or preach you can not stop the Atheist and Agnostic revolution. Like slavery eventually all religion will be abolished and people of the future will look back and think wow what a bunch of religious of idiots.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Edward J. Palumbo wrote 13 weeks 5 days ago

It is written that the universe was created in six days and on the seventh day He rested, and this is a stumbling block for many, until we consider that the word Hebrew "yom" (which appears in Scripture 1500 times) is the word used to describe the "days"…the word has more than one meaning. We are all aware of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, and other usages wherein "yom" means a day as we usually use it.
The word also means "epoch, age, or period", such as "King Arthur's day" or "in David's day". Thus we accurately translate it as "epochs or ages".
I must remind you, God does not wear a wristwatch. He stands outside of time. His work was accomplished in phases or ages, not in 24-hour days. The reason this is a stumbling block for many is they haven't had the resources to research it. One of my professors, Dr. Ed Curtis, had a doctorate in Hebrew, and was kind enough to clarify this (and much more) for me.
Mr. Smith, you have listed issues that many regard as obstacles to faith. I've heard these and many others. I am not qualified to be an apologist for Christianity, a humbling admission, I assure you, but I have satisfied myself that the Bible - the Old & New Testament - is my reference as a moral compass and a guide for issues requiring judgment and wisdom. On issues of faith, I am increasingly convinced that my limited intellect cannot understand or grasp a fraction of all that the Almighty is capable. I watched my wife deliver my children, and came to a better understanding and acceptance of God.
I was asked by a coworker to "prove there is a God", and I replied that I really didn't think that was my job; I made it my focus to prove or disprove it to myself and, having done that, I suggested he prove or disprove it for himself. With the understanding this is not the appropriate forum for this exchange, may I suggest you broach this topic with respect. When, as all of us must, you meet the Creator, it will give you less for which you must apologize. I ask you to keep an open mind, investigate thoroughly at more than a superficial level, and weigh your decisions carefully.
Respectfully,
Ed Palumbo

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from country road wrote 5 weeks 6 days ago

I'm kind of fond of the sketch "The Creator's Pet" done by Hal Holbrook from the writings of Mark Twain. There it is pointed out that in the name of religion, "Man has made a graveyard of the globe trying his level best to smooth his brother's path to heaven, and cuts his throat if his theology isn't straight."

The Bible has truth and falsehood, fact and fiction, wishful thinking and creative writing. Have any of you Bible scholars studied the history of the Bible? Which version do you adhere to---the King James version where Jesus spoke in red? The original Hebrew (it wasn't originally written in Hebrew)? Are you aware that the books of the bible were chosen by a committee?

I guess I'm a closed agnostic with a belief in a Higher Power, but I'm always astounded by otherwise intelligent people who blindly follow what they've been told to "have faith in".

Faith is believing in something you know ain't so.

There are some excellent directions for living found scattered throughout the bible if you can wade through the obfuscations to find them. I don't care who inspired it, it was written by men and men are creatures who tend to tell lies and get drunk when it suits them.

I don't know if shazam is still around, but I'd like to buy him a cup of coffee.

I've got cabin fever.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Reply

from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

shazam,
You are right, Fluger did ask for peoples opinions, and you gave yours, and it's out of place for people to reprimand you for you opinion.

I would like to encourage you to give the Bible a chance. If you do, what's the worst that could happen, you confirm your opinion that you already have.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

HunterDue, are you seriously of the opinion that non-christians are un-American? Comparing agnostics and atheists to the Taliban is quite a stretch. The Taliban is a terrorist entity that I would think is predominantly muslim, correct?
Please tell me you understand the difference.

Not believing in a god and believing you have a God-given right to murder innocents are not the same thing. I would say your post is more un-American.

+5 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

WAM - unfortunately, every other religion on the planet says the same thing: join us, or spent eternity in limbo (at best).
I see no way to tell which one is "true". Even the various flavors of christianity say "our way is the only true way"

I think I will stick with my way, and simply treat others as I wish to be treated in kind, without needing a book or fear of eternal damnation as a threat to keep me in line.

+4 Good Comment? | | Report
from jamesti wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

another thing i find interesting is that people rarely question the newspaper but won't believe half of what the bible says. scarey!

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from davycrockettfv wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

There are some very well educated contributors to this thread. Everyone seems to have his or her own opinions and interpretations of the Bible, Christianity, and religion. However, I don't think anyone is going to be swayed to another's point of view. Obviously that shouldn't stop us from interactions like this where we get to really analyze what we believe and why (who knows, maybe we can find a weak spot in our own faith - yes, everyone has faith in something - and shore it up, or broaden our understanding. I think it's important to remember though, that as we discuss the validity of the Bible, creation and evolution, pros and cons of religion and Christianity, it is impossible to say that anything has been "proven". We can find evidence to support our claims, but we cannot prove. As much as I would like to say the Bible has been proved true, it's just not the case as the majority of Biblical material is impossible to prove (based on the scientific method). And as much as any of you would like to say the Bible is proven false, or evolution is a scientific fact, that is a claim you cannot make. I'm anxious to read what everyone has to say, especially those whose beliefs/opinions differ from my own, so let's keep it up, but remember we are largely discussing belief, opinion, theory, and faith, and also that we can all still be friends :-)

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Science is the tool that man has crafted to study the world around him (aka to study God's creation). I use science every single day in the workplace, yet I believe wholeheartedly that God designed this world exactly. I believe that there is a difference between adaptation and macro evolution. In my pursuit of knowing more in science, I see is as a revelation of the complexity at which this world was designed. The more I learn, the more I can see that this couldn't have happened by chance. To say that science disproves God would be similar to saying that the critique of a painting disproves the existence of the artist. By definition, that cannot work. God doesn't want us to be stupid, He blessed us with inquisitive minds to investigate the world around us. Isaac Newton was a strong Christian, yet he did tremendous work with physics and mathematics among other things.

+3 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

The Bible is proven true, no question about it. That is why my family and I are doing what we do. We are striving to reach the lost world with Its truth.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from FirstBubba wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

Bingo on that 007!!!
Another thing that lot's of people miss is this.
In recorded history, no democratic society has EVER survived more that 200 years.
Guess what?
Every day the sun rises over Maine, the U.S. sets a new record.
History repeats itself. Over and over and over.
How much longer will/can the U.S. stand?
Good question.

Bubba

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from trapper4life wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

Good point 007...

One more thing here --- If you take a look at the U.S. Constitution and compare it to what the Bible says, you will find that our Constituion is based upon solid Biblical principles. (Which is what I was getting at when I said what I did above, but I realized I never actually mentioned the Constitution, so I figured I should probably clarify what I was saying.)

So basically what I am saying is, if you claim that the Bible is false, then for one thing, you need help, but for another thing, then you are not truly an American. Because the U.S. Constitution is what this country revolves around (or it should be, anyway) and the U.S. Constitution revolves around the Bible.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

1) Ok, so you didn't want me to answer the question.
2) I stand by what I said. I have read the bible, and I just don't buy it as a factual account. Nice thoughts, sure, but completely and literally true? Not a chance.
3) Sorry you feel this way, but you have to realize that less than a third of the world even descibe themselves as Christian, and less than that believe in the bible as a literal truth.

Good luck, good health, and maybe one day we will be able to discuss this over a friendly beer.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from lawman328 wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

God gave us many gifts, the Bible is a blessing of a guide book for life.
He also gave us freewill, and we can accept or reject his word.
He isn't asking you to jump through hoops, or practice your faith on a schedule, or any of the crazy stuff required and demanded under the penalty of law, which could be death, and enforced by a man, as in some religions.
Do you realize that out of all the religions, the only requirment to be a Chistian is that you believe that Jesus loved you so much that he died for your sins, and your gift for accepting that fact is Heaven. Thats it! you don't have to do good deeds, or kill anyone, or whip or stone somebody to get in to Heaven. John 3:16 will tell you all about it.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from jamesti wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

what i find interesting is the people who go through their whole life never givivg God or the bible another thought and when they are on their death bed they want a priest and to pray. unfortunate.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

US Constitution:
Article 6: "but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

Sorry, I just don't see it. No references to God at all (or anything specifying which god),

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from abmcp13 wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

IMO, the old testament is true, Jesus is a wonderful teacher and no matter your religious affiliation you should take his teachings to heart about loving others, and putting the less fortunate ahead of yourself. That being said, the old testament is more of a historical fiction book than reality. I believe, according to the old testament, that the oldest person reached an age of 900+ years old. That to me is stretching it. But, Zacpro, nowhere in the bible does it say that evolution never happened. It just said that god created man, in a likeness of himself. He could have started with a single cell being had let it progress from there, after all, God is all knowing. God could very well have created the "Big Bang", but we'll never know. There is no way to prove or disprove the Bible. I am a christian, I believe in Christ, and I believe that if I live my life the way Jesus taught me I will go to heaven. I don't believe that I need a priest, minister, pastor, etc. to tell me how to live my life just because they had a shady life and discovered God. I can interpret the Bible on my own, that was the whole point of Martin Luther's 95 theses.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

I agree with you abm, however I would like to add that it takes more then just saying that Christ was a good teacher and trying to live a good life. What really matters is the realization that Jesus is your personal savior and the only way to heaven and the glory of God is through that statement of faith.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

So, the agreement here is the bible requires only faith to believe in. That means the final answer to the topic question can only be "The bible can neither be proven false or proven true."
Nothing wrong with that.
I don't see any reason why we can't come to that conclusion.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Side note:

I do believe in the bible is accurate in a lot of ways. For example all the cities and towns that still exist. I believe there was a jesus, moses, apostles and mary etc. Archaeologists are getting closer and closer all the time. I just don't believe in god, jesus as the son of god, divinity, heaven or hell. I do believe early christians used the bible as a means of suppressing and controlling entire races, countries and continents. I should restate this ... "all religions used their
special books (bible, koran, torah etc)to dominate and subvert other peoples in the name of their god."

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Interesting conversation, I wish i had found it sooner. If I said everything I am thinking of right now, It would take too long, I am tired so I will come back and add some stuff later, but for now.
1 The Bible was not written by man. Rather, God directed men to right what he wanted them too. The Theological term is inspiration. Someone mentioned the verse earlier, 2 Timothy 3: 16 "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." Also, "For the prophecy came not by will of man, but holly men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holly Spirit." I am tired right now, so I can't remember the reference of the second verse. I'll put that up later. The Bible was written over thousands of years, by over twenty different authors of every possible social position, on three continents in three languages. However, there is not a single contradiction in it. If that many people were to give a perfectly cohesive testimony like this in a trial, it would be called a conspiracy. Even if that many people all saw the same thing, they would have all remembered it slightly differently or would have seen it from a different perspective, thus there accounts would have differed some. However, the Bible does not. Every writer tells the same story proving that there is a single author behind them. aka, God. Thus treat Scripture as the perfect complete word of God. Not some wise sayings about a God who probably exists.
2I agree that the Bible is neither a Science text or a history book. However, there are parts where it mentions such things. For example the Hittites were used as evidence against Scripture, because the Bible mentions them several times, yet "History" said there had never been such a people. That is until archeologists discovered them. Also anyone who truly understands Scripture cannot believe in evolution of any sort. This would take a while, so if you want go look at the Rare Triple Tragedy Page to see some arguments against evolution that I brought up there. I'll expand upon this point later.
3 Just want to caution against getting all bent out of shape about the Constitution when we we are discussing the Bible. I am a History nut, and know that the Founding Fathers based the Constitution on Biblical principles and that a number of them were Christians. However, what a few of you seemed close to was something C.S. Lewis talked about in the Screwtape letters. He talks about how some people are Christians not because they truly believe the Bible and God, but because it is convenient in promoting what they do believe in. For example, one is a die hard conservative, and finds that Christianity is very compatible with his political beliefs and therefore becomes a Christian because of the political benefit. He has just shrouded his earthly ambitions in a pseodo-religios cloak. I am a supporter of our Constitution, don't get me wrong, and believe that Biblical principles should be the foundation of law, but we need to be careful about what ties we make between religious and non-religious things. Though I am not one of these keep the religion in the church on Sunday morning types, but just saying when you start being a Christian because it fits your politics, not choosing your politics because it fits your faith you have issues. Not saying that any of you necessarily did this but, a few posts could be taken that way.
Any way, I feel like I am rambling now so I am going to bed. I'll probably write more later.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from GENO wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

My dad has always told me this:

Take an expensive watch completely apart; all the gears, the screws, everything. Put the disassembled watch in a shoebox, and start shaking it. See how long it takes for the watch to reassemble.

The watch will never reassemble itself. Compared to cells, nerves, etc, a watch is very simple. I believe science is the result of God too. Humans are similar to tons of different animals, yet none of them posses the ability to communicate and advance like we do.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

The couple of times when it is phrased three days and three nights it was a figure of speech. Jesus uses plenty of them, a camel through the eye of the needle, if thy eye offend thee pluck it out, to name a couple. The emphasis throughout not only the gospels but the rest of the New Testament is that it was three days. When he said three days and three nights he just meant three days.

My rebuttal.

*Also you set yourself up as the authority. If we can pick what parts of the Bile we want to believe and what parts we don't want to believe, where does it end? If we allow even a single verse to be reinterpreted by man we open ourselves up to redefining the whole of Scripture. A buffet of a Bible that we can take the parts we like and leave the parts we don't.

+2 Good Comment? | | Report
from trapper4life wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

This could go without any discussion. Of course the Bible is true.

If you read the Bible, you will find that human life is based upon solid, Biblical principles. You will also find that the Bible has sensible, reliable answers to questions about moral and spiritual views, and other areas in life.

Read the Bible, and you will see...

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Fluger wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

1st of all Trapper 4life, I do believe that the bible is 100% true, perfect, and God inspired. I posted this simply to see what peoples views are and I am completely blessed to have you believe what you do with such a passion. Keep the good work up man.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sarge01 wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

From the quality of people that are on this site it would really surprise me if anyone , other thansomeone wanting to start trouble, would post that they truely believe that the Bible has been proven false. I believe 100% of what the Bible teaches and will go to my grave believing everything that the Bible has to say. I strive to live my life according to the Good Book but I fear alot of times that I come up short.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 3 years 9 weeks ago

It's proven true every day if you read it and pay attention. Just look at Egypt right now, prophesies are coming to pass every day. Hope we're all ready.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Sarge01 wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

Shazam,
I hate to disagree with you but to me the Bible is the absolute truth and every word is to be taken that way. If we live our lives by the Bible we will have eternal life. The Bible is more than just a bunch of good sayings. I wouldn't even think about saying the Bible was a piece of historical fiction. As staunch of supporter of the US Constitution that I am I couldn't even bring myself to compare it to the Bible. Of course every person to their own thinking. I wouldn't even think about comparing it to Aesops fables they are just good sayings by some guy.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from 007 wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

To me, the bottom line is what our pastor is fond of saying. "I'd much rather live my life like there was a Heaven and hell and find out later that there was none, than to live my life like there wasn't and find out later that there was."

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

Remember "journalists", and I use the term loosely, have resources and credentials to check and cross-reference. Not that they report factual info 100% of the time, but that's the general idea. Now the bible, where does this info come from? What are the major sources? Shall we put all of our faith in King James' interpretation? Also, when you say "Bible" does that include the Mormon bible? The Gnostic texts? "Bible" means different things to different folks.

In no way am I trying to uphold our pitiful examples of journalism these days (no such thing as unbiased news source anymore), but at least we can usually come to an agreement as to whether the event took place or not based on sources and cross-reference. Comparing newspapers and the bible, and consequently comparing the validity of claims by both is asinine.
Sounds like intentional stubbornness to believe what you want at all costs despite any evidence to the contrary.

I understand those who choose to follow the teachings of Jesus, as they seem to be solid principles that would be in accordance with any decent functioning society (love your neighbor, do unto others....etc..). The problem mainly is with those who wish to use the bible as a history or science book. Surely even the most pious would admit this was never meant to be so! It's meant as a religious tome! There's dozens and dozens of authors!
Could you imagine if we tried to push through the school system a textbook with dozens of unknown authors, and only scant historical sources to back up the text? Oh wait, Texas is doing that. It's the bible. (Again, Mormon? Baptist? Catholic?)
The bible is a religious document, not a history book and certainly not a science book. Can believers and non-believers at least agree on that?
I know we can agree on the beauty of a sunrise and the rise of a trout to a fly in cold clear water, let's start there.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from davycrockettfv wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

Some great points gumby! One thing to keep in mind is that "journalism" in the way it is recognized today, hasn't been around for more than a few hundred years. Before that, eyewitnesses who chose to record the things they had seen (even hearsay from a third party) were considered valid. The authors of the Bible simply did the same - they wrote down what they had seen and heard. This form of historical record is accepted as valid for other authors throughout history, but seems to be a stumbling block when it comes to Biblical accuracy. Doesn't seem to be a consistent way of looking at things. Even today, if twenty journalists were to independently report on the same event, each would write in a different style, report different details, yet agree with each other on the basics of what happened (this is for reporters, not columnists). And 100% of people would accept the account as fact. If you take even just a shallow look at the Bible (I refer to the Bible proper, which is ascribed to by those of the official Christian faith) you can see the same thing happened thousands of years ago. So why can't we, in similar fashion, accept that as fact?
That being said, I don't believe there is any way to "prove" the Bible is true in its entirety. I believe it is, but it's impossible to "prove", just as it is impossible to prove nearly ANYTHING scientifically. This is a well-known fact of the scientific method. We can only find evidence to support or refute what it is we are studying. The Bible is full of scientifically and historically accurate principles and events supported by modern-day professionals in the fields of chemistry, physics, astronomy, archeology, history, mathematics, geology, and so on. It was because of the Bible that mankind eventually discovered the concept of our solar system, the value of our blood staying INSIDE our bodies, the ruins of the Hittite civilization, etc. These cannot "prove" the Bible to be true, but they do give extensive and convincing support for its validity and reliability. No, the Bible was not intended to be a textbook, and should not be taken as such.
The men who wrote the Bible were completely aware of the importance of what they recorded, as well as the danger to themselves in doing so. This can also add to the veracity of the text. Many journalists of today risk their own safety to get a good story, but how many of them, years down the road, willingly suffered horrible deaths instead of denying the truth of their writings? People don't die for a lie. Some may die for a lie they believe to be true because of misleading information from others, but not for a lie they themselves made up.
We all have to make our choice. I've made mine, and it sounds like you've made yours. I respect your opinion, and the way you have stated and defended it.
I will, however, wholeheartedly agree with you on the beauty of nature. If you're ever in Arizona, let me know and we'll tickle a lake or scare up some quail, and just enjoy our freedom - without attempted "conversions" :-)

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from pbshooter1217 wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

The Bible is not proven. If it was proven, there would be no need for faith. I'm not saying I don't believe in the Bible, but no one can be 100% certain.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from GiantWhitetails wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Common sense. we all know what is right and what is wrong. no matter the religion, you should always be respectfull, honest, ethical, moral, and kind. be a heartless human being and youll eventually get whats comin. You shouldnt force your beliefs and demonize people who are different. didnt the the crusades end years ago? why do people hate others because of beliefs anyways? makes absolutly no sense to me.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Evangelical Christianity which insists on literal interpretations of scripture teaches...

God created the universe in 6 days

All life was created perfect and in its present form including man

Man turned from God and God cast man out of the Garden of Eden and condemned him to death and eternal damnation...

Eventually God grew so displeased with Man that he wiped out all but Noah and his family (and however many animals could fit on a really big boat)

All life since then has descended from the inhabitants on that boat a few thousand years ago.

Man is still not perfect thus God sent his son as a sacrifice as God may only forgive if blood is spilled in penance (good thing I dont make the same requirements before forgiving someone)

God will come again in judgment

Those who accept Jesus will receive salvation while those who do not will be cast out from God to spend all eternity in torment for their life (average 70 years or less) of "bad behavior".

Now if God is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient, then he is not bound by the laws of the universe which he created including the concepts of time and space. Thus these are not separate events...all are occurring and have already occurred as far as God is concerned...He exists according to Christian theology in all times and places.....God created.... as he judged.... as he sacrificed... as he saved... as he condemned. There is no difference in these events...at least for God....

And he did it all...knowing he was creating and condemning to hell for eternity at the same time?

Yet he is a loving God who wants us to be with him? and yet wants us to have free will to choose to do so? He created knowing that the VAST majority of humanity would NEVER know Christ existed..

from the stone age Neanderthal hunting to support his family 130,000 years ago....

to the farmer in China 2000 years ago who tilled the land for his warlord...

to the Amazonian native indian 500 years ago who never saw any humans but his own tribe...

to the Afghan farmer today...who lives in his remote mountain village all his life...tries to be a good Muslim...for it is all he knows, all he has ever been exposed to.......tries to provide for his family...care for his sons and daughters...

to the Somali child who dies of malnutrition tomorrow at age six, after a lifetime of suffering, starvation, and disease ...

None of these "knew Jesus"...none could accept him...none could receive "salvation"..all will burn in the fires of hell for all eternity and were condemned to do so from the instant of "creation"…And this is what is taught as a loving and limitless God?

The theological contortions boggle the mind.....

And none of those contortions even begin to address the FACTS that have been proven by scientific observation of the natural world....

Now through my observations of the world we live in and using the guidelines laid down in the scientific method I see overwhelming proof that…

1. The universe is old, it is in fact almost 14.5 billion years old, and that it, and that its contents may be traced back to a single point of origin.

2. that the earth itself is almost 4.5 billion years old

3. That life on earth has not always been the same, that is began with simple, single celled life forms and changes gradually over time, becoming more complex , undergoing occasional extinctions and also occasional rapid expansions in diversity ,

4.That this “evolution” of life also clearly shows a progression beginning in equatorial Africa that leads towards the development of modern man. That through simple mechanisms proposed by Charles Darwin we can understand the driving mechanisms that caused this change to occur.

5. That no "world wide" flood occurred within the last 10,000 years. There would be a world wide sedimentary layer!!!! There is not!!!!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

"Macomacus, I suppose it is true that faith doesn't always line up with reason, but name one religion, or walk of life that doesn't take faith. I don't think it exists. I personally have seen to many things that had not explanation at all to really believe that God isn't alive and at work in my life. The truth is, after all is said and done, there are to many things that you can't explain for God not to exist.
By the way, I really would like to hear more of your view on this, I do not want to argue, but rather have a good, healthy conversation."

You can't name one religion or "walk of life" that doesn't take faith - "faith" is the problem.

Another problem is this ... if a person can not explain something, why must it be divine interaction. The more we learn about the complexities of life the less divine it becomes.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

"The truth is, after all is said and done, there are to many things that you can't explain for God not to exist."

Really? ... let me give a relational example.

This line represents what humans knew and what they attributed to God thousands of years ago.

I--I----------------------------------------------------I

Here is that line today

I----------------------------------------------------I--I

Given enough time and research I think as a species we will overcome the concept of God.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Ok, it took me awhile to get through all of what you wrote, very interesting.
First of all, in your opening statement, "Evangelical Christianity which insists on literal interpretations of scripture teaches..."
I think of my self as Christian, I don't really care what labels other people put on me. What I have come to refer to my belief as is a theistic macro-evolution, that is, I believe that the earth is at least 4.5 billion years old, and that when God created the world, it wasn't in it's present form. (It would take me a lot of time to write down my entire beliefs, which I can if you so wish)
Secondly you say, "Man turned from God and God cast man out of the Garden of Eden and condemned him to death and eternal damnation..."
I would say that, yes, man did turn form his creator, and God cast man out of the Garden of Eden, but, I think, that rather then condemning man to hell,
The punishment for disobeying the laws that He clearly set out, was merely the absence of Himself, a.k.a hell.
Regarding your example on my statement '"The truth is, after all is said and done, there are to many things that you can't explain for God not to exist."' , I don't see how I would come to that conclusion, God is more complex in nature than man could ever figure out, and there is no way of knowing to what extent God is, so we can move what we know, but that only makes what we don't know all the more bigger.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

macomacus said, "all religions used their
special books (bible, koran, torah etc)to dominate and subvert other peoples in the name of their god."

Iron Giant said, "For example, one is a die hard conservative, and finds that Christianity is very compatible with his political beliefs and therefore becomes a Christian because of the political benefit. "

What we see is that yes, there are people within Christianity who step in and use it for their own ends, but they are not necessarily true to the faith. I would like to call attention to Jesus and the disciples. Jesus made the claim to be the Son of God, heresy in the Jewish culture of the day. He also claimed to have the power to forgive sins. This was considered heresy because only God could do that. Through the jealousy of the religious rulers of the day, Jesus was condemned to death though he did not do anything wrong. Being the Son of God, he did not lie in His claims. If he did not rise from the dead, and his remaining disciples (after Judas hanged himself) wanted to use the following to their own means, what would any person do? Normal people would try to gain some sort of power and rise to some rulership. Instead, these men carried out the command to love to their deaths. Stephen was stoned to death, Peter was crucified upside down, John was boiled alive (and lived through it) to name a few of the persecutions. Christians were literally covered in pitch, and were engulfed in flames to light the Roman Coliseum at night. If it were all a hoax, wouldn't the leaders have quit in the face of torture?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Ok, here is the thing... if we assume that there is an omnipotent god, then god could have snapped the universe into existence 5 minutes ago, with everything in place and looking aged just so. There is no way to "prove" otherwise. Thats the nature of omnipotence. However... we, as men, have a capacity to investigate the world, learn about it and build upon that knowledge. Everything we look at supports evolution as the best theory going. Do we know everything? Of course not. Are there still unanswered questions? Of course, and there probably always will be. However, if we run with the theroy of evolution as a working theory... along with DNA, RNA transcription, genetic drift, etc, etc, then we can make predictions, theorise further and conduct experiments to validate those theories. If we just accept "god made it" and "just because thats the way he did it" as answers, we will never investigate and never progress. That would be the true tragedy of "blind" religion.
Question everything. If there is a god, do you think he wants you to be stupid? At the end of the day, this should not take away from god... its a complex, beautiful world, and god was bright enough to lay it all out in seven days. He just put the mysteries out there to be solved. Use evolution, not because it is "against the bible", but because it is a tool to help us better understand the world we live in.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

"Dog Breeding" as a provable example of "Evolution"

The word "evolution" just means - change to the genetics of a population over time. So dog breeding is absolutely an example of evolution in action.

More specifically, it is the act of humans "manipulating" evolution by controlling the reproductive environment.

So if one were to design a "scientific experiment" to test the theory of evolution by natural selection, it would look like this:
1. Pick a species and divide it up into separated populations.
2. Subject each sub-population to different selective pressures. I.e. pick certain traits that determine which individuals get to reproduce more.
3. Allow this to continue for many generations.

If the theory of evolution by natural selection is false ... then there would be no visible changes to the population even over many generations.

If the theory of evolution by natural selection is true ... then the different populations will show noticeable differences in their physical traits ... traits that continue to be passed on through inheritance.

---

People who reply that "a dog is still a dog" are MISSING THE POINT!

Dog breeding demonstrates conclusively that genetics can change dramatically in even a tiny amount of geologic time, if there is a strong enough selective pressure.

That IS evolution, as defined by the people (i.e. scientists) who support it.

It is irrelevant how people who disagree with evolution want to re-define the word "evolution" in order to reject it.

So dog breeding demonstrates EVOLUTION IN ACTION ... as the word "evolution" is defined by those who accept it as a fundamental principle of biology.

Dog breeding is an "EXPERIMENT" that confirms the basic principles of the theory.

It demonstrates conclusively that even a short amount of time can produce a significant amount of evolution if the selective pressure is strong enough.

So this explains why HUGE amounts of time can produce HUGE amounts of evolution ... if there is "selection"!

Dog breeding explains why this can happen. But that is not the only evidence that it has happened. That is where all the other evidence (fossils, DNA, proteins, genes, embyology, morphology, biogeography, etc. etc.) comes into play.

People who oppose evolution can't just separate cause from effect, by an arbitrary order or decree.

Selection is the cause. Evolution is the effect. You can't just declare that X amount of evolution is a reasonable effect, but 2X or 100X amount of evolution is not.

----
Source(s):
Definition of 'evolution' from biologyonline.org:
http://www.biology-online.org/dictionary…

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

This is not even mentioning ‘prophecies‘ like the city of Tyre never being rebuilt (Ezekiel 26:14…Tyre is still around to this day)

Prophecies are like horoscopes, just depends on who reads them.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Almost everyone here makes valid points it seems besides GENO, I have no idea what you're saying dude.
If that watch were able to assemble itself it wouldn't be evolution, that would be MAGIC. I don't think evolutionists believe in Mary Poppins and I hope creationists don't either.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus1 wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

This is macomacus

I have been blocked using my other log in, they keep telling me I am posting spam. So this will be my final post. If there is one thing I can't abide, it is censorship.

I probably did steer this to an "Evolutionism Vs Creationism" debate. That was not my intent. As Iron Giant stated earlier there is literally hundreds of books on that subject.

You can't just declare that X amount of evolution is a reasonable effect, but 2X or 100X amount of evolution is not.

"But tell me how does a dog turn into something else?"

http://evolutionlist.blogspot.com/2009/02/macroevolution-examples-and-ev...

Tyre may not have been the best example. How about this one then.

In Matthew 12:40, Jesus said, “For as Jonas [Jonah] was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (see also Jonah 1:17). This prophecy is repeated in various forms in Matthew 16:4 and Luke 11:29-30. This is a very precise prophecy from the lips of Jesus himself about his own resurrection, and it is demonstrably false from the Bible itself.
The Gospels make very definite statements that Jesus died on a Friday afternoon and was raised around dawn on the following Sunday morning. This belief is foundational to Christian theology and is the basis for Good Friday and Easter rituals celebrated every year.
From Friday afternoon to Sunday morning is at most 40 hours, not three days and nights. Some argue this did include portions of three days, since Jewish days are counted from sundown to sundown, which stretches the facts but may appear plausible to some people.
However, there is just no way to get “three nights” out of this. The Bible says that Jesus died on Friday shortly before the Sabbath, which began at sundown (Mark 15:37-47, Luke 23:46-56, John 19:31-42). The Bible also says that Jesus was raised around sunrise on Sunday morning (Matthew 28:1-7, Mark 16:1-6, Luke 24:1-6, John 20:1). Friday afternoon to Sunday morning is two nights.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/proph/long.html for 100 more inaccuracies.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Obviously god does not set clear boundaries. You have literal parts and supposedly metaphorical parts and then you have the "what he meant" parts as interpreted by whomever. The problem is, the foundation IS the "bible", and it is flawed.

Been fun, but I'm done. Turkey season starts in a couple of weeks!

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 1 week ago

Maco, I know that you're done, but there are a couple of your statements about what you've heard from Christianity that I would differ on.

"Evangelical Christianity which insists on literal interpretations of scripture teaches..."

"All life was created perfect and in its present form including man."
God saw his creation and saw that it was good. When sin entered the world, it brought with it a curse. That curse is evident in the behavior of animals, the natural world, and man's self-destructive nature.

"Man turned from God and God cast man out of the Garden of Eden and condemned him to death and eternal damnation..."
God did not condemn mankind, but mankind condemned himself. John 3:17 says that God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but so that the world might be saved through Him. There is a difference between the thought that God condemned man and the thought that man condemned himself by making himself unable to approach God.

"Eventually God grew so displeased with Man that he wiped out all but Noah and his family (and however many animals could fit on a really big boat)."
I don't have a problem with this statement. I will note that animals of the day were different from animals of today. They did not have the "fear" of man in them yet, so they were more domesticated as opposed to wild at the time. There is a specific statement that two of every animal and seven of every clean animal came to the ark. Why seven of every clean animal? So that Noah could offer sacrifices to the Lord after deliverance.

"All life since then has descended from the inhabitants on that boat a few thousand years ago."
I have no issue with this statement.

"Man is still not perfect thus God sent his son as a sacrifice as God may only forgive if blood is spilled in penance (good thing I dont make the same requirements before forgiving someone)."
Sin is an imperfection that goes against the holiness of God. Because of this, nobody who is alive and has sinned can come into the presence of God. Blood must be shed. God introduced the animal sacrifice so that his people could offer up a life in their place to COVER their sin. It hadn't been taken away yet. There were strict rules about the sacrifice and how it must be visibly perfect. When Jesus came, he was sinless. Be being the human sacrifice, he completed the deal to actually take away sin for those who want him to take their place. If you accept the fact that there is a God and that you're a sinner, its pretty much a no-brainer solution for us. If it sounds too easy, God made it that way so that there isn't some intellectual test that people must past to get to this point.

"God will come again in judgment"
Sure He will. There is unfinished business on earth with His enemies, and even though He isn't taking action at the moment, he is giving everyone ample time to turn to Him. His record book is still being kept for those who do not choose to have their sin taken away through Jesus. I do disagree with using the argument of the coming judgement as a scare tactic to make people turn to Jesus though.

"Those who accept Jesus will receive salvation while those who do not will be cast out from God to spend all eternity in torment for their life (average 70 years or less) of "bad behavior"."
This is a reality that is a consequence of mankind's sin. If you want it taken away, the path is there.

"Now if God is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient, then he is not bound by the laws of the universe which he created including the concepts of time and space. Thus these are not separate events...all are occurring and have already occurred as far as God is concerned...He exists according to Christian theology in all times and places.....God created.... as he judged.... as he sacrificed... as he saved... as he condemned. There is no difference in these events...at least for God...."
There is nowhere where is says that man is able to fully conceptualize God. Men are limited in their ability to understand... this is an important realization that we must accept or else, we will drive ourselves insane in our attempt to know everything. If an artist were to create a 2D drawing, would the artist be limited to a 2D world?

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from OutdoorsDave wrote 3 years 1 week ago

First the Bible is not flawed. People have been trying for thousands of years to disprove the Bible and can't because they have no evidence on their side. I will make a case. In historical evidence, by looking at prophecies, and looking at eye witness accounts. But in the end I can argue all i want but if you have turned you heart against God nothing i say will matter. So please read this with an open mind.
1st Historical Evidence,
Lets look at a non Christian view, in the writings of Josephus the roman scholar. Josephus' writings cover a number of figures familiar to Bible readers. He discusses John the Baptist, James the brother of Jesus, Pontius Pilate, the Sadducees, the Sanhedrin, the High Priests, and the Pharisees. As for Jesus, there are two references to him in Antiquities. Concerning Jesus he wrote two passages. First, in a section in Book 18 dealing with various actions of Pilate, the extant texts refer to Jesus and his ministry. This passage is known as the Testimonium Flavianum referred to hereafter as the "TF".

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day.

Jewish Antiquities 18.3.3

Second, in Book 20 there is what could be called a passing reference to Jesus in a paragraph describing the murder of Jesus' brother, James, at the hands of Ananus, the High Priest.

But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as lawbreakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.

Jewish Antiquities 20.9.1

Price, Christopher. "Did Josephus Refer to Jesus." Bede's Library - Reasonable Apologetics. Web. 08 Apr. 2011. .

So even non Christians saw this happening in history.

2nd Prophesies

According to "How Many Bible Prophecies Did Jesus Fulfill? by JerryBallard | Eons.com." The Online Community for BOOMers | Eons.com. Web. 08 Apr. 2011. .
"Many of the prophecies concerning the Messiah were totally beyond human control: Birth: Place, time, manner of Death: People's reactions, piercing of side, burial Resurrection: Where did His body go? By using the modern science of probability in reference to just eight of these prophecies, the chance that any man might have lived to fulfill all eight prophecies is one in 100 trillion!
To illustrate this point: If we take 100 trillion silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas, they would be two feet deep. Now we mark one of these silver dollars and thoroughly stir the whole mass--all over the state. Now blindfold a man and let him travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick only one silver dollar.

What chance would he have of picking the marked one? The same chance that the prophets would have of writing just eight of these prophecies and having them all come true for any one man if they had written them without God's inspiration!
The chance of any one man's fulfilling all of 48 prophecies is one in ten to the 157th power. The electron is about as small an object as we can imagine. If we had a cubic inch of these electrons and tried to count them, it would take us (at 250 per minute) 19,000 times 19,000 times 19,000 years to count them.
Now mark one of them and thoroughly stir it into the whole mass. What chance does our blindfolded man have of finding the right electron?"
the likelihood the one man could fulfill all the prophesies gives some amount of credibility to the Bible.

3rd In eye witness accounts.
this is the most important topic to understand. because God knows that men doubt he appeared to over 500 people after he rose. Including Paul, The twelve apostles, 500 brethren, the two on the rode to amass, and others. These men say Jesus and wrote it down in the Bible. This book is not just some bums writing what they want, it is the Holy Spirit inspiring 40 men over 1600 years to write the account of Him and his Nation.

I pray you read this post and look further into what i am saying.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 4 days ago

ableskeever

Proselytizing my every remark does not prove your point in any way. Then on points 3,4 and 5 you just pose more questions for me to answer.

3. We're clearly not improving with life on earth. If we take a look at how fast different species are becoming extinct, we won't last much longer, how is it that we're supposed to be improving? Life is evolving. Some species have adapted and flourished and some have gone extinct. The species that are still around are definitely "improved" as they would have died off.

4.If this is true, why are we so different from animals? If it is just a more developed brain, then how come we're the only ones? How many transitional fossils are really out there? If someone took the skeletons of a frog during its development from a tadpole into an adult, how would they be able to distinguish from evolution? We were not the only ones with a more advanced brain. Homo erectus, hablis, ergaster, neanderthalensis, faber, ludens etc.

5.There is no sedimentary layer? Where we drill in East Texas, there is a sandstone layer at least 2000' thick 8,000 feet down. In addition to this, how would oil get so far underground unless there was a mass burial of organic matter under tremendous pressure (hundreds of feet of water). Most times when something dies, it is eaten by carrion animals and lays out in the sun for a long time until the bones are bleached in the sun. In addition to this, there are the vast oceans and land masses underneath that haven't had hardly any exploration done underneath. Also, there are marine fossils found on mountaintops. People haven't been able to go investigate Mt. Ararat (where the remnants of the ark are at) because the radical Muslims won't let anyone close. Would a recovery of the boat change your opinion of the matter?

There is no worldwide sedimentary layer 4500 year layers deep. Bringing up oil, and the depth it is at, only strengthens my position on how old the earth really is.

Genesis 6:15 clearly states the dimensions of the ark. Recent thought on the Ark's design is that it could have had a slightly tapered top at the front and back, instead of being squared off. But the famous rock formation near Mount Ararat with pointed ends, which some think is Noah's Ark, is definitely not.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 2 days ago

No, actually that is not proof at all. If that were all that was required for 'proof', then this debate would've been over by now. Also I have some beachfront property in Minnesota you might like...

Just say something to the effect of, "I don't care if my beliefs are actually true are not, I still want to hold those beliefs."
If the bible is allegorical, then all skepticism is valid and you can basically do what you want picking and choosing what you wish to "believe in." If it is literal then stonings are okay, dogs don't go to heaven, Noah's a drunk, Native Americans go to hell and we're all a product of incest. Oh and if you're Mormon you get to rule your own universe some day.
I just prefer to ask, "Why should I believe in any of this supernatural junk anyway?" Then I immediately feel a load lifted off my back and go fishing.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from shane wrote 3 years 1 day ago

Anyone that would ask this question is obviously ignorant, or just not thinking clearly. What parts of the bible would you like to prove or disprove? Some are obviously true. Some things are not true, or at least not good ideas (barbaric treatment of women kinda stuff). Some things in there can't possibly be proven one way or the other. That's why it's called faith.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from OutdoorsDave wrote 3 years 1 day ago

I am leaving now. But I will leave this comment to think about. Both sides here have to use an enormous amount of faith to believe that their side is true. So I'd say in the end we shall see who is true and who is false. (That is if we get to see those times or if they happen in years to come.)

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Maxx Smith wrote 21 weeks 1 day ago

Here are three questions to ask yourself and if your answers are no, no and yes you have just disproved the existence of god.
1. Was the world made in 7 days? No, the earth took billions of years to create. If you think otherwise you clearly have never read a book.
2. Is the world less than 10,000 years old? No, the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old. Read a book a non fiction book if you disagree.
3. Is evolution true? Yes, ABSOLUTELY it is a proven fact and as hunters you should be able to put two and two together. There is a reason deer are slowly becoming nocturnal animals, there is a reason certain ducks fly 60+ miles per hour. Whether creationists want to believe it or not you yourself are part of evolution. If you do not believe in evolution do not have kids because you will be proving evolution right. One example of evolution that has been seen over the past 200 years and guys are going to like this is womens breast size. In the past couple generations breast size has gone from an average of B to an average today of D. Men liked women with bigger breasts and so that trait was passed down to their daughters. If you think men have been skipped in the evolution cycle your very wrong the proof is, believe it or not, in your pants. Yes your package has grown exponentially over the past generations and thats because women like bigger things. If your wife or girlfriend says size doesn't matter she is just trying to comfort you and wishing you had evolved like every other average man. Finally look at the athletes that compete today they are bigger, faster, stronger and have better endurance. Darwin proved that evolution is real and showed that there is no god.

FACTUAL HISTORY LESSON
- There was no jesus of Nazareth. Nazareth wasn't in existance during "Jesus's" life.
- The writes of the gospels said they never knew "Jesus" they just took peoples word for it when they wrote the gospels decades later.
- 2 of the 4 gospels admitted that they wrote it for propaganda. The original uncle Sam.
- There was no Adam and Eve
- The earth is not flat
- The earth does not revolve around the sun
- The first human species were found in Africa not in the fertile crescent or the "garden of Eden"
- The bible plagiarized many works around it mainly one religion in Egypt. Hundreds of years before the new testament was written an egyptian religion had created a man who was born from a virgin birth, was the son of god, walked on water, healed the sick, died for his people and rose from the dead. HMMM sounds familiar!!!
- Jews were never slaves in Egypt. The people who worked and created the pyramids were paid with quarts of beer!!!
- No Jewish slaves means no Moses and 10 commandments.
- Christianity was created by taking buddhist, hindu and jewish values and combined them to create a religion that people could to relate to. If people cant relate the religion will die which means no power and money.
- Religion was used as a way of governing people. If they have a perfect place to go to people will be happier to die allowing government officials to gain more land and MONEY!!!!!!!!
- You can NOT rise from the dead.
- You can NOT walk on water unless its frozen!!!
- You can NOT cure the blind unless you have horrible cataracts then get them removed by a doctor.
- You can NOT multiply fish and bread by waving your hands over it.
- You can NOT get pregnant without having sperm cells. Reproductive cells carry half of the chromosomes required to create a child so when both meet a child is created.
- The catholic church has tried to cover up any scientists work that disproves them.

Final thoughts and facts-
1. If you still believe in god you are blatantly ignoring true facts to keep your beliefs alive.
2. The catholic church spends on average $300,000,000 of your donated money a year to keep molesting and abusive church officials out of prison. So thanks for funding that because clearly religious people are above the law and the pedophile down the road.
3. SCIENCE CAN PROVE ANYTHING!!!!!!!! 50% of the worlds great physicists say by the end of OUR lifetime we will be able to know what caused everything to come to be.
4. Who are you really going to believe sheep herders that didn't even know what a molecule or an atom was or scientists in the 21st century who can answer almost any question you have with a factual answer on a molecular level.
5. Im not trying to push Atheism upon you. I am just presenting facts that everyone should consider. If you do not and say history, science and I am full of BS I will judge you on your absolutely amazing and idiotic ignorance. No matter how much you pray or preach you can not stop the Atheist and Agnostic revolution. Like slavery eventually all religion will be abolished and people of the future will look back and think wow what a bunch of religious of idiots.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Edward J. Palumbo wrote 13 weeks 5 days ago

It is written that the universe was created in six days and on the seventh day He rested, and this is a stumbling block for many, until we consider that the word Hebrew "yom" (which appears in Scripture 1500 times) is the word used to describe the "days"…the word has more than one meaning. We are all aware of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, and other usages wherein "yom" means a day as we usually use it.
The word also means "epoch, age, or period", such as "King Arthur's day" or "in David's day". Thus we accurately translate it as "epochs or ages".
I must remind you, God does not wear a wristwatch. He stands outside of time. His work was accomplished in phases or ages, not in 24-hour days. The reason this is a stumbling block for many is they haven't had the resources to research it. One of my professors, Dr. Ed Curtis, had a doctorate in Hebrew, and was kind enough to clarify this (and much more) for me.
Mr. Smith, you have listed issues that many regard as obstacles to faith. I've heard these and many others. I am not qualified to be an apologist for Christianity, a humbling admission, I assure you, but I have satisfied myself that the Bible - the Old & New Testament - is my reference as a moral compass and a guide for issues requiring judgment and wisdom. On issues of faith, I am increasingly convinced that my limited intellect cannot understand or grasp a fraction of all that the Almighty is capable. I watched my wife deliver my children, and came to a better understanding and acceptance of God.
I was asked by a coworker to "prove there is a God", and I replied that I really didn't think that was my job; I made it my focus to prove or disprove it to myself and, having done that, I suggested he prove or disprove it for himself. With the understanding this is not the appropriate forum for this exchange, may I suggest you broach this topic with respect. When, as all of us must, you meet the Creator, it will give you less for which you must apologize. I ask you to keep an open mind, investigate thoroughly at more than a superficial level, and weigh your decisions carefully.
Respectfully,
Ed Palumbo

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from country road wrote 5 weeks 6 days ago

I'm kind of fond of the sketch "The Creator's Pet" done by Hal Holbrook from the writings of Mark Twain. There it is pointed out that in the name of religion, "Man has made a graveyard of the globe trying his level best to smooth his brother's path to heaven, and cuts his throat if his theology isn't straight."

The Bible has truth and falsehood, fact and fiction, wishful thinking and creative writing. Have any of you Bible scholars studied the history of the Bible? Which version do you adhere to---the King James version where Jesus spoke in red? The original Hebrew (it wasn't originally written in Hebrew)? Are you aware that the books of the bible were chosen by a committee?

I guess I'm a closed agnostic with a belief in a Higher Power, but I'm always astounded by otherwise intelligent people who blindly follow what they've been told to "have faith in".

Faith is believing in something you know ain't so.

There are some excellent directions for living found scattered throughout the bible if you can wade through the obfuscations to find them. I don't care who inspired it, it was written by men and men are creatures who tend to tell lies and get drunk when it suits them.

I don't know if shazam is still around, but I'd like to buy him a cup of coffee.

I've got cabin fever.

+1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

The Bible is the Word of God, if what it contains makes you uncomfortable, then there's probably a reason.
It makes me uncomfortable more times then not, that's almost it's purpose. As far as historical fiction, NO WAY! There is nothing fictional about the Bible, or God.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

Allow me to soften my last post a bit. I know people who believe strongly in the truth in the book. Good people. (some bad people too, but lets ignore them for a minute)
For me, I suppose I would have to qualify myself as agnostic. Religion generally and Christianity specifically seems to mean a lot to some people, and they draw strength from it. For someone who doesn't believe by faith, the arguments for and against have to be balanced... while some of it is probably true, the evidence is hard against enough of the other parts for me to find the whole thing to be literally true. As for faith... who should I believe? The Hindus? The Jews? The Scientologists? The Wiccans? Or one of the many interpretations and translations of what started out as an oral tradition thousands of years ago?
Maybe I will find myself at the pearly gates feeling pretty foolish in a few years, but it seems to me that there is an equal chance I'll have to explain to Odin how I happened to die in my bed.
If the bible works for you, more power to you. I don't mean to be rude, but if you are honestly asking for an opinion (and really want an answer) I would have to vote for fiction.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from longliner13 wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

shazam,

If you want to believe that the Bible is fiction, then all I can say is: 1.) You need some serious help. What you are saying is absolutely ridiculous. (Read what you wrote and think about what you are saying...ridiculous.)

2.) Have you even ever READ the Bible? I have a hunch that you haven't. And if you have, then not nearly enough.

As previously stated, the Bible is proven true every single day. This Country proves it true. Every day.

Maybe you should go to a Bible study and actually read the Bible, and learn what's in the Bible before you go spouting of to everyone whether or not the Bible is true.

Have a marvelous day.

---longliner---

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

Thanks QS.
It has been a while since I read it, so perhaps it does deserve a review. As I said, there must be something to it, since it evokes such strong passions from so many people.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

Shazam

You are certainly enttled to your beliefs, or perhaps more appropriately non-beliefs. Unfortunately, you will have an eternity to mull over your choices. John 3:16

Peace...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

Archeologists have been finding cities, places and events in archeological diggings proven the information in the Bible is correct and vise verse!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

Quinton Schmelz...

Nice to have a Biblical Scholar on board <><

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Clay Cooper wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

shazam

If' The bible is a nice piece of historical fiction?

Then explain why is the Bible the biggest and most archeologicaly proven by Archeologists!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from WA Mtnhunter wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

Well Shazam,

At least you have heard the Truth and have chosen another path.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

shazam,
again I say, give it a chance, and if you reread it, (and it goes without saying, I think anyone should) go into it as objective as passable, and try not to let the opinions of the world taint you ultimate outcome.

HunterDue,
In my mind, that comment was unnecessary and rude.

Clay Cooper,
thanks, not exactly a bible scholar, rather a fervent follower of the Lord Jesus Christ and want everyday to learn to follow Him better, reading the Bible is one way which I can do that.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

My advise would be to really think through anything you post, especially on bad days.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from davycrockettfv wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

Unfortunately, every religion has its share of people who don't represent the principles of their faith, and Christianity is no exception. I believe the Bible to be 100% true and applicable to this very day. HunterDue, I'm glad you retracted your first comment because there are too many people who call themselves "Christians" and are completely devoted to that point of view and worse. Shazam is right in that the vast majority of the world does not recognize Jesus as Lord, or believe in the veracity of the Bible. Many Christians take on the attitude of "I'm right, I know I'm right, and if you don't agree with me, you're going to hell". True as that may be, it's our ATTITUDES that turn people off the most. The best approach in today's "Your truth is not my truth" society is to follow the Apostle Paul's example in Greece, and meet people on their own terms with respect. Then we can EARN the right to be heard. Not compromising our own beliefs or skirting around the stuff that makes us uncomfortable, but not shoving it in someone else's face either - that can ruin any shot someone else may have down the road. I don't want to be that guy when I stand in front of my Savior!

Lawman, couldn't have said it better myself!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

well stated davycrockettfv, I was trying to think of a way to say exactly that, and you kit it right on the head.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

I agree with you pb,
I believe that we who believe in the Bible believe in It entirely by faith, not by sight. As the the Lord Jesus Christ said to Thomas "You believe because you see, but how much more blessed is he who believe without seeing?"
On the topic of faith, I believe that any religion requires faith. I also believe that it takes more faith to believe in a god that condemns his believers to hell, or a God who loves and saves His believers from an eternity of damnation.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Zacpro wrote 3 years 6 weeks ago

The Bible is 100% accurate when it speaks in scientific and historical terms(although, if you believe in evolution it's not)I believe every word in the bible is true. "For all scripture is GIVEN BY INSPIRATION OF GOD,and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in rightousness" (I cant remember the reference right now)

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 5 weeks ago

The Bible is not fully proven because of man's limitations at proving it.

As someone who fully relies on science and mathematics in the workplace, I've had to undergo a lot of learning regarding these subjects. The more I learn, the more gets revealed to me. For Example, I can better understand the Biblical accounts on how the earth went from a 360-day year to a 365.25 day year through the miracles of God. Ancient texts commonly refer to the year having exactly 360 days, 30 days per month.

http://www.amazon.com/Ancient-360-Day-Year-Changed/dp/1599320134/ref=sr_...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jrok6661 wrote 3 years 5 weeks ago

I just want to say I love the passion people have for the bible, but many do not live the life that is preached by Jesus. We all have different beliefs and ideas of who God is. For me God is loving and caring, not scornful and mean. I try to live the gospel preached by Jesus. That means that any book written by man is flawed just as men are. That does not mean I hate the book, but I do think it would be best to remember that it was not written by God or Jesus. It was put together at the Counsel of Nicaea in 327 A.D, by the Roman Emperor Constantine in an attempt to unite his empire. That does not make it bad. There are many things that I love about the bible. For one it does a great job of giving us a guideline on how we should live, but many things that people say are in the bible are not. We need to live the message and not what someone else tells us the message is. For me that message is to love everyone no matter who they are or what they do.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from abmcp13 wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Quinton S.- Thank you, that's what I meant for me being Christian, what I said was a little confusing. As far as the teaching goes I meant that for devout atheists, agnostics, or people of other faiths, they should still listen to what Jesus had to say because his teaching are something everyone could live by. It won't take them to heaven, but it will help make the world a much better place.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from abmcp13 wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

In my first post, the first line should read the NEW Testament, not old

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from fishfool wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Read it every day. Sometimes it's hard to relate but most of the time it hits home. Believe it. Jesus is the truth.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 4 weeks ago

Impressing ones beliefs on another has never been something that I agree with, that said, I don't think that witnessing is impressing, or I wouldn't be doing what I am out here doing, being a missionary to the lost of this world.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Witnesses tell the story as they experienced it. Lawyers are the ones impressing an opinion!

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

The bible has been proven wrong about a great number of things, not the least of which is its central idea: that a man rose from the dead. We know this is impossible. The bible makes a magnificent glory about such an event’s impossibility: otherwise, why would god be required? The problem is that there’s no evidence that it occurred. The same can be said for walking on water, living in the belly of a fish, staffs turning into snakes, people turning into pillars of salt, etc. This is not even mentioning ‘prophecies‘ like the city of Tyre never being rebuilt (Ezekiel 26:14…Tyre is still around to this day) or a global flood (which was completely missed in the historical records of civilizations like Egypt’s Sixth Dynasty, or the 7 cities that are still inhabited to this day that predate Noah's flood (2350 BC)like Beirut, Tyre, Athens, Jerusalem, Argo which should have been destroyed. What a hearty bunch they must have been…).

This is the problem with faith: it destroys our reason by removing all our standard checks for proof and accountability. This unmakes our ability to converse fairly and, in doing so, destroys our connection to one another. This is the faith they tell us is necessary to redeem humankind.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

They won't listen maco.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Macomacus, I suppose it is true that faith doesn't always line up with reason, but name one religion, or walk of life that doesn't take faith. I don't think it exists. I personally have seen to many things that had not explanation at all to really believe that God isn't alive and at work in my life. The truth is, after all is said and done, there are to many things that you can't explain for God not to exist.
By the way, I really would like to hear more of your view on this, I do not want to argue, but rather have a good, healthy conversation.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

I do want to point out that when you say that the world wide flood was never accounted for, I would like know of your informants,
because, from my understanding, there are a great many ancient civilizations that have a history, oral or written, giving some kind of documentary of a great flood, but, again, that is only my understanding, I have not done a whole lot of research on this.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

That's beautiful maco....brings a tear to my eye..

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Your belief as a theistic macro-evolution proves that as man learns more of the world around him and its complexities "faith believers" or "nondenominational christians" etc. tend also to make the bible fit the new discoveries. What was once taken as literal is now metaphorical.

The bible clearly states that there is a hell and what awaits you. Why create your own version of hell?

Matt 25:41: "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels."

Just an example passage, as you know there are many more.

Give your self some credit! Why would you limit your or mankind's capacity to understand. You just gave up with the last statement. You gave up just by saying "god is more complex than man could ever figure out." Thank God ;-) Edison, Bell, Ford, Newton, Einstein etc. didn't give up on a problem that easily! I say to you lets let mankind figure it out! What was once thought impossible, we barely give a second thought today! Space travel, flight, medical discoveries, and so on and so on. Just think of the exciting things that mankind will figure out next century - it'll boggle our minds and we thought it was too complex.

Also, just my thoughts. The creation of the earth and the universe and all the galaxies and everything in them would take a finite amount of intelligence (a whole crap ton of intelligence) - not an infinite amount.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from jplevine wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

I am catholic and I believe in god and jesus and all that but I think that some parts of it are a bit flawed like the part about the end of the world. that is just phsycopathic rantings. i also believe that adam and eve is a METEPHOR about human sin and temptation not the story of how man was created. also, if god hates gays so much how come all the bible says about that is "a man shalt not lay down with another man" but there are ten pages about how we should not eat pork but we do that anyway

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

macomacus: I think that rather then creating a different version of hell, my idea simply goes along with what the Bible already says, as you stated, "Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels." Therefor hell is, in essence, the absence of God. "Depart from me" would, in my mind, mean the departure from the prescience of God.

Also I am not saying that man has reached anywhere near what his capacity of learning is, however, I, myself, have learned that the more I learn of the world, the more I learn of its
Creator, and the more I learn of its Creator, the more I realize that I know so little of Him. I really believe that man can never reach the stagnation point in understanding, and, yes the understanding of the creation of the world and galaxies would take a measurable amount of intelligence, and I think that man's brain can have that capacity for intelligence, but, I believe that it is so large that no man can reach that point.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from 60256 wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

Belief in God essentially boils down to this debate:
Do you believe that the universe has always and will always exist?
OR
Do you believe that God has always and will always exist?

Me? I believe God always was and is. Even in the Bible it is asked "who are you?", and he responds "I am". I basically agree with all of Quinton's points.

Nate

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

sounds like you have many thoughts, interested to see what you continue to post,

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Christian Emter wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Or is it? The bibal has really never been proven it was made by god and his followers, its alomost like it is a book of stories past on from generations about the past.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

It depends on how you want to define it being proven true. Much of it is prophecy and most of that has already come true.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

ableskeever sounds like Clinton.
"It depends on how you want to define it being proven true." What?
"Depends on what your definition of 'is' is."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

I misspoke, gumby. It depends on your APPROACH, whether by prophecy or by scientific means.

maco, the original city of Tyre was destroyed... and the new city does not lie over the old one's ruins. What is nearby now? A fishing village where fishermen spread their nets.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

That is a horrible argument. The words "raise" and "dead" could have been lost in translation from the original texts, to actually mean "awaken from a coma."

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

you don't just go into a coma when crucified, or stabbed with a spear, and your legs don't heal that fast, from being broken by the soldiers

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

John 19:36 For these things were done, that the scripture should be fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

His bones weren't broken. His death came quicker than what was standard for a Roman crucifixion. Probably had something to do with the flogging beforehand (40 lashes are considered enough to kill a man anyways). It says clearly that when the soldiers came to him to break his legs so that he would suffocate, they saw that he was already dead. Then they thrust a spear into his side and the flow of blood and water confirmed that Jesus had indeed died. It is quite easy for a spear to go between ribs, and not break any bone.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

ableskeever that is what I'm saying with the above verse. Jesus' legs were not broken. Quinton was under the assumption that jesus' legs were broken as was the normal practice at the time.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

"But also, Jesus did raise from the dead, miraculously, who really cares about the time frame that He was dead?"

I care about the time frame because it means that the bible is inaccurate. Since the bible is the word of god, it means that the word of god is inaccurate and therefore fallible.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

I've hear d the explanation for the apparent discrepancy in timing. I can't remember how to explain it though. I will look it up and post it soon.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

I am sorry, I forgot about the not breaking of His legs. My fault.

another thing, this is not a bad conversation, but is F&S really the place to have it?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Maco,
In the Jewish system, the Sabbath (aka the next day) began at sundown. We know that Jesus died before that on Friday because the Jews who were to prepare His body before burial were not allowed to do work on the Sabbath. So, Friday is the first calendar day on which he was dead, the Sabbath (Saturday) was the second day he was dead, and he rose on Sunday, the third day. If it were to happen over a 72 hour period, then that would have made the resurrection on a Monday afternoon... four calendar days, which would have been obviously wrong according to prophecy.

Thats what I have off the top of my head. I'll have to go do some research if you want a more in-depth answer.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Jesus died on a wednesday and rose on friday. Actually, you can kind of prove either the wed. or fri. theory of his death, depending on the verse.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

All four Gospel accounts say that the resurrection occured on the first day of the week... the day after the Sabbath. I'm not sure where the Wednesday account came from that you're referencing.

Summarizing the account in Mark,
Mark 15:42-43 - Mentions that its the day before the Sabbath and Joseph of Arimathea comes to ask for the body of Jesus

Mark 15:44 - Pilate gets confirmation from the centurion that Jesus has died. (Death is something that a centurion would know about.) This is the same centurion who was standing right before Jesus when he breathed his last breath in verse 39.

Mark 15:45-47 - Pilate gives the body to Joseph of Arimathea and Joseph places the body in a new tomb hewn out of the rock. A stone is placed over it. The account in Matthew lists that the stone was sealed and a guard (sometimes referred as plural with guards) was placed over the tomb. Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joses followed the burial proceedings. (The reason is clear in the next verse.)

Mark 16:1 - Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of James purchased spices to correctly prepare his body according to the Jewish law. (Being it the day before the Sabbath, no work could be done to complete the job. Instead, it was a quick burial and then the correct preparation would be finished on the day after.)

Mark 16:2 - States that the day is the first of the week... the day after the Sabbath.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

There is also a Thursday theory. Just google "What day of the week did jesus die" and you'll find all sorts of theories from religious experts. It's another one of those deals where it is just too much info to list here.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

First of all the reason that Jesus died quicker than usual had nothing to do with the lashing before hand, everyone who was crucified got the same amount of lashings, usually 39 not 40. Why he died early had everything to do with His paying for sin, and voluntarily giving His life. Jesus endured far more than the average crucifixion victim. While on the cross He endured the unadulterated wrath of God for sin. Then He cried "Telestai" or "it is finished" and gave up the ghost. Jesus had earlier said(paraphrasing) that no one takes my life. I lay it down and I will pick it back up. His statement of "it is finished" was not the dyeing lament of a defeated idealist, but rather the victorious shout of a conquering King. Sin had been paid for. All that was left to do was die and rise again to prove His conquest over sin and death.

Also, ableskeever is right about the calendar day arguments. The couple of times when it is phrased three days and three nights it was a figure of speech. Jesus uses plenty of them, a camel through the eye of the needle, if thy eye offend thee pluck it out, to name a couple. The emphasis throughout not only the gospels but the rest of the New Testament is that it was three days. When he said three days and three nights he just meant three days.

The theories that Jesus died on a different day of the week than Friday are of relatively little importance. Any of those theories still put his resurrection three days later, they just have a different three days. I personally think the Friday theory works best, but it is not an issue of huge significance which day are in question since they all end up being three days.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 1 week ago

(cont.)

"Yet he is a loving God who wants us to be with him? and yet wants us to have free will to choose to do so? He created knowing that the VAST majority of humanity would NEVER know Christ existed.."
I can't speak for everyone else because I do not know exactly what God has revealed to them. When I do enter into His presence, I am accountable for myself who had received His Word. Before He ascended into the clouds, Jesus did give out what we call the Great Comission which is to go and preach to all nations the Good News that there is salvation available. Note what God said to Job (Job 38:4-6) on why God lets good people suffer:
Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding,
Who set its measurements? Since you know.
Or who stretched the line on it?
"On what were its bases sunk?
Or who laid its cornerstone,
Mankind lacks the understanding to know all facets of God.

"And none of those contortions even begin to address the FACTS that have been proven by scientific observation of the natural world...."
I believe that science is a tool of mankind to study the natural world. It has been changing, and I believe that we'll see some more changes in our lifetime...

"1. The universe is old, it is in fact almost 14.5 billion years old, and that it, and that its contents may be traced back to a single point of origin."
I'm not claiming to know it all, because thats impossible. I do know that God created the world. Many within the Christian community will argue that God had created something before the current Earth we're on but then destroyed it and started over. What we do have is that it was created. There are also those out there who claim the the Hebrew word "yom" (day) is also interchangeable with the meaning of a day being like an age. For instance, if referring to a different time, you could say "in the day of the Great Depression" and it could take on the meaning of being over a period of time. By leaving the details out, God didn't disprove his creation, but left room for us to investigate. If you believe in an all powerful God, then would it be out of the question that He might have created it with some age built into it? If you don't believe in God, then you've already shut your mind off to the possibility.

"2. that the earth itself is almost 4.5 billion years old"
In addition to the comments above, it is important to note that very little information is given to what was before mankind, and all the rest of the emphasis is back on mankind. That is where the importance is.

"3. That life on earth has not always been the same, that is began with simple, single celled life forms and changes gradually over time, becoming more complex , undergoing occasional extinctions and also occasional rapid expansions in diversity ,"
We're clearly not improving with life on earth. If we take a look at how fast different species are becoming extinct, we won't last much longer, how is it that we're supposed to be improving? Why is is that with our technolical advancements we aren't able to create structures that last a fraction of the time that ancient ones have stood for?

"4.That this “evolution” of life also clearly shows a progression beginning in equatorial Africa that leads towards the development of modern man. That through simple mechanisms proposed by Charles Darwin we can understand the driving mechanisms that caused this change to occur."
If this is true, why are we so different from animals? If it is just a more developed brain, then how come we're the only ones? How many transitional fossils are really out there? If someone took the skeletons of a frog during its development from a tadpole into an adult, how would they be able to distinguish from evolution?

"5. That no "world wide" flood occurred within the last 10,000 years. There would be a world wide sedimentary layer!!!! There is not!!!!"
There is no sedimentary layer? Where we drill in East Texas, there is a sandstone layer at least 2000' thick 8,000 feet down. In addition to this, how would oil get so far underground unless there was a mass burial of organic matter under tremendous pressure (hundreds of feet of water). Most times when something dies, it is eaten by carrion animals and lays out in the sun for a long time until the bones are bleached in the sun. In addition to this, there are the vast oceans and land masses underneath that haven't had hardly any exploration done underneath. Also, there are marine fossils found on mountaintops. People haven't been able to go investigate Mt. Ararat (where the remnants of the ark are at) because the radical Muslims won't let anyone close. Would a recovery of the boat change your opinion of the matter?

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from macomacus wrote 3 years 4 days ago

OutdoosDave

Historical evidence:Testimonium Flavianum

Concerns have been raised about the authenticity of the passage, and it is widely held by scholars that at least part of the passage has been altered by a later scribe. The Testimonium's authenticity has attracted much scholarly discussion and controversy of interpolation. Louis H. Feldman counts 87 articles published during the period of 1937–1980, "the overwhelming majority of which question its authenticity in whole or in part." Judging from Alice Whealey's 2003 survey of the historiography, it seems that the majority of modern scholars consider that Josephus really did write something here about Jesus, but that the text that has reached us is corrupt. There has been no consensus on which portions have been altered, or to what degree. However, Geza Vermes points out in an in-depth analysis of the passage that much of the language is typically Josephan, which not only supports the hypothesis that Josephus did write something about Jesus, but also may aid in determining which parts of the passage are genuine. In antiquity, Origen recorded that Josephus did not believe Jesus was the Christ. As I stated earlier, I do believe there was a Jesus, I just do not believe in his divinity.

According to "How Many Bible Prophecies Did Jesus Fulfill? by JerryBallard | Eons.com." The Online Community for BOOMers | Eons.com. Web. 08 Apr. 2011

Jerry Ballard is convinced that the fact that the story told in the Gospels so well matches the prophecies of the Old Testament proves the truth of Christianity.

Jerry fails to consider the alternative explanation: that the story as told in those Gospels was written with prior prophecies in mind. The earliest Gospel according to Mark was written six decades after Jesus’ birth by an author already convinced of his messianic status and no doubt familiar with all “574 Old Testament verses containing messianic prophesies.” We ought not be surprised, then, that Mark tells his tale in such a way as to fulfill those prophesies.

Thus, in order for Jerry’s argument to work, he needs to assume that the story of Jesus as presented by Mark, Matthew, Luke and John is truth instead of legend. In other words, Jerry must assume the very conclusion he is arguing for.

Eyewitness accounts:
Christians often argue that one reason we should believe in Jesus is because we have firsthand eyewitness accounts that testify of his divinity. They are speaking of the Gospels and Acts of course (Paul never claims to have met Jesus except in a dream). Yet the first Gospel in the Bible to be written (there are other Gospels that were not included in the Bible), the Gospel of Mark, wasn’t written until 65 – 80 years after the time that Jesus would have been crucified. Matthew wasn’t written for 80 – 100 years after, Luke & Acts – 80 to 130 years after, and John – 90 to 120 years after. These are hardly eyewitness accounts.

The lack of any eyewitness accounts of Jesus is a bigger problem than it may seem at first. It’s not just that there is one less reason to believe in Jesus. It’s that if the stories in the Gospels were true, there really should be eyewitness accounts – a lot of them.

Take Matthew’s story of Jesus’ birth for example (Mat 2:16)

When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi

Outside of the Gospel of Matthew written 80 to 100 years after Jesus would have been crucified, there are no firsthand accounts of Herod’s order to kill every Jewish firstborn in the city. Wouldn’t such a massacre be noteworthy? Shouldn’t we expect at least a mention of it in some writings from that period? In fact, there is no mention of it anywhere else.

Take Matthew’s story of Jesus’ death for another example (Mat 27:45, 27:51-53):

From the sixth hour until the ninth hour darkness came over all the land … At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split. The tombs broke open and the bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. They came out of the tombs, and after Jesus’ resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many people.

Rocks spontaneously splitting, the temple curtain spontaneously tearing (that would be THE curtain that separates the rest of the temple from the Holy of Holies where the Arc of the Covenant was kept), and the dead coming back to life and walking around Jerusalem – how often to these sorts of things happen? How “normal” are these events? How many people should have seen at least one of these events?

How plausible is it that all of these events really occurred AND that there are no firsthand accounts of any of the events? Certainly the lack of any firsthand account is a good reason to doubt that the events really happened, but isn’t the Gospel of Matthew THE firsthand account? No, the Gospel of Matthew was an embellishment of the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Mark does not mention any of the events except for the tearing of the Temple curtain. Paul’s writings, the earliest writings in the New Testament, says nothing at all about any of these events.
askanatheist.wordpress.com/2010/10/31/334/

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 4 days ago

If the gospels were made up, wouldn't there have been some conspiracy to be sure that all the stories lined up exactly right? I've heard of lawyers taking the four gospels and comparing the testimonies as they would in court and find out that because of some of the variances, this was not a man-made fabrication.

There are differences between the emphasis of the gospels because they were written for different audiences and purposes.
Matthew - Written for the Jews
Mark - Written for the Greeks
Luke - Written for the Romans
John - Written to emphasize the divinity of Christ

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 4 days ago

I'm not sure how recent thoughts on the Ark's specific shape have any bearing. If it wasn't specifically listed, then how would anyone know?

On the sedimentary layer, there is proof that a catastrophic event can pile up quickly and have multiple layers as well as create canyons quicker than normal. Look at Mount St. Helens.
http://aristophrenium.com/duane/mount-st-helens-witness-for-a-biblical-w...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Brennen Spann wrote 3 years 3 days ago

The Bible is absolutely been proven true... thousands of prophecy's in the bible have happened exactly how and when it was said they would happen... mathematicians have calculated that even 10 of these coming true is an impossibility but guess what... they did... shows how smart they are.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 3 days ago

LOL at Ableskeever, saying lawyers have proven the gospels divinely inspired. I'll have to remember that one...

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 3 days ago

Hey, taking them for what they do well, it does prove the point that it wasn't some made-up story by four guys.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 3 years 2 days ago

I don't think that property on Lake Superior counts as beachfront... but if thats how you call it up there, then thats fine.

I cannot say "I don't care if my beliefs are actually true are not" because I do care. I'm betting my life on these beliefs, so I want to be absolutely sure that those beliefs are in order.

In simplistic terms, the Bible is a combination of history, poetry, and prophecy. Throughout the years, men with self serving intent have created distorted views on interpretation. My suggestion to you is to bypass all the interpretations out there and start with the life of Jesus because He is the focal point of it all. Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John, they all tell the same story, but to different audiences with different emphases. If you were to give a presentation of hydroelectric power to a group of engineers, you would probably be more technical in the presentation. If it were to a group of investors, then it would be geared towards the costs.

There is nothing I can do to make you believe, but that isn't my job. I know that there is a cure to humanity's problem of separation from God and that the way is Jesus. I'm just here to let you know how to overcome that problem. The rest is up to you and God.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

In the way the Bible is written, different theories can be raised into the actual age of the earth. One thing that I gain from it is the fact that only one chapter was spent on the issue (which means that the details are not relevant to salvation), and the main point is the Creator which is constantly brought up in the other books. It tells me that the specific details are up to us to figure out if we're so inclined, but it is not the focus of our existence.

From what I understand, the Hebrew word for day (Yom) can be taken to mean either a 12 hour period, a 24 hour period, or a long time (like an age). We see similar uses in our culture where a calendar day is a 24 hour period while a work day can mean 8, 10, or even 12 hours. Also if I were to say "In the day of Rome's decline" it could mean a longer, but a finite amount of time.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from ableskeever wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

The significance is in the fact that God did it... and He did it just how it says in Genesis.

The way of evaluating the account in Genesis is in dispute as to the number of years. There is the account of the age of the men from Adam to Noah, but then its left off.

Though I lean towards the view of a younger earth, I've seen a very good point being made in the use of the word day to mean an age in Genesis 2:4.

If someone believes that God created the earth over a time that is longer than what I think it is, I don't doubt their salvation over it. Could God have chosen to create the universe in a period longer than 6 days? Sure he could have. Could he have the ability to create it in a split moment? Of course. Does the Genesis account have evidence to support some different timelines? I think that since there are arguments about this, it does. Personally, I think that God presented it in a way so that all it takes is a little bit of faith to believe it from whichever direction you're coming from.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from Maxx Smith wrote 21 weeks 1 day ago

Here are three questions to ask yourself and if your answers are no, no and yes you have just disproved the existence of god.
1. Was the world made in 7 days? No, the earth took billions of years to create. If you think otherwise you clearly have never read a book.
2. Is the world less than 10,000 years old? No, the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old. Read a book a non fiction book if you disagree.
3. Is evolution true? Yes, ABSOLUTELY it is a proven fact and as hunters you should be able to put two and two together. There is a reason deer are slowly becoming nocturnal animals, there is a reason certain ducks fly 60+ miles per hour. Whether creationists want to believe it or not you yourself are part of evolution. If you do not believe in evolution do not have kids because you will be proving evolution right. One example of evolution that has been seen over the past 200 years and guys are going to like this is womens breast size. In the past couple generations breast size has gone from an average of B to an average today of D. Men liked women with bigger breasts and so that trait was passed down to their daughters. If you think men have been skipped in the evolution cycle your very wrong the proof is, believe it or not, in your pants. Yes your package has grown exponentially over the past generations and thats because women like bigger things. If your wife or girlfriend says size doesn't matter she is just trying to comfort you and wishing you had evolved like every other average man. Finally look at the athletes that compete today they are bigger, faster, stronger and have better endurance. Darwin proved that evolution is real and showed that there is no god.

FACTUAL HISTORY LESSON
- There was no jesus of Nazareth. Nazareth wasn't in existance during "Jesus's" life.
- The writes of the gospels said they never knew "Jesus" they just took peoples word for it when they wrote the gospels decades later.
- 2 of the 4 gospels admitted that they wrote it for propaganda. The original uncle Sam.
- There was no Adam and Eve
- The earth is not flat
- The earth does not revolve around the sun
- The first human species were found in Africa not in the fertile crescent or the "garden of Eden"
- The bible plagiarized many works around it mainly one religion in Egypt. Hundreds of years before the new testament was written an egyptian religion had created a man who was born from a virgin birth, was the son of god, walked on water, healed the sick, died for his people and rose from the dead. HMMM sounds familiar!!!
- Jews were never slaves in Egypt. The people who worked and created the pyramids were paid with quarts of beer!!!
- No Jewish slaves means no Moses and 10 commandments.
- Christianity was created by taking buddhist, hindu and jewish values and combined them to create a religion that people could to relate to. If people cant relate the religion will die which means no power and money.
- Religion was used as a way of governing people. If they have a perfect place to go to people will be happier to die allowing government officials to gain more land and MONEY!!!!!!!!
- You can NOT rise from the dead.
- You can NOT walk on water unless its frozen!!!
- You can NOT cure the blind unless you have horrible cataracts then get them removed by a doctor.
- You can NOT multiply fish and bread by waving your hands over it.
- You can NOT get pregnant without having sperm cells. Reproductive cells carry half of the chromosomes required to create a child so when both meet a child is created.
- The catholic church has tried to cover up any scientists work that disproves them.

Final thoughts and facts-
1. If you still believe in god you are blatantly ignoring true facts to keep your beliefs alive.
2. The catholic church spends on average $300,000,000 of your donated money a year to keep molesting and abusive church officials out of prison. So thanks for funding that because clearly religious people are above the law and the pedophile down the road.
3. SCIENCE CAN PROVE ANYTHING!!!!!!!! 50% of the worlds great physicists say by the end of OUR lifetime we will be able to know what caused everything to come to be.
4. Who are you really going to believe sheep herders that didn't even know what a molecule or an atom was or scientists in the 21st century who can answer almost any question you have with a factual answer on a molecular level.
5. Im not trying to push Atheism upon you. I am just presenting facts that everyone should consider. If you do not and say history, science and I am full of BS I will judge you on your absolutely amazing and idiotic ignorance. No matter how much you pray or preach you can not stop the Atheist and Agnostic revolution. Like slavery eventually all religion will be abolished and people of the future will look back and think wow what a bunch of religious of idiots.

0 Good Comment? | | Report
from HunterDue wrote 3 years 7 weeks ago

sorry about the taliban and athiest comment. but if athiest could just find jesus life would be so much better. we see the world though the same eyes, but different glasses. and no athiest arent un american,i just said that because i was having a bad day yesterday.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from gumby wrote 3 years 3 weeks ago

maconacus -2
Quinton - 0

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

There are books worth of info on the stuff discussed on this page. Something I want to expand upon from my last post is that you can't be both a Christian and an Evolutionist. Evolution stands in direct opposition to Christianity. Scripture tells us that God spoke everything into existence. Evolution tells us that it all just happened. Can't really tell us how or why, but that it happened. Scripture tells us that man started off perfect and fell into sin by disobeying God. Evolution says that man started as goo and will continue to improve for forever. According to Scripture there is a just God to whom we are responsible for our deeds. Evolution says we are nothing more than animals and that right and wrong do not exist and that our concept of it comes from some trait that has helped us to succeed as a species. Something like a monkey figured out that for his species to win the evolutionary competition he couldn't kill members of his own species. And it got ingrained into genetic memory and we now think of it as a moral, not to kill. I will not go into how to prove that Creation fits the facts better than evolution because I spent a lot of time on that herehttp://www.fieldandstream.com/photos/gallery/hunting/deer-hunting/2010/12/triple-tragedy-three-bucks-drown-antlers-locked
The bottom line is that you can not believe in evolution and the Bible. Now I know you are going to say, "But what if God is the one who directs evolution." First realize that Theistic Evolution was thought up by men who questioned the authority of Scripture and wanted to conform to "Science." If you relegate the Old Testament to story or even mere metaphor you might as well not believe the New Testament either. The Theological problems encountered by picking what parts of the Bible you want to believe are enormous. For example.

* You make unnecessary Christ's death. If we relegate the account of man's creation and original sin to a mere metaphorical story, we take away the sin nature of man. If man is not sinful and in no need of rescue why did Christ die for us?

*You make Christ a liar. Some of you have said that true or not and regardless of the truth of the Old Testament we can follow the teachings of Christ. How? Christ quoted from the Old Testament. All the time. Read through the Gospels. Why would you hold as a wise teacher someone who is a blatant liar? Look at other books in the New Testament such as Romans. In Romans the Law is referenced repeatedly. Jacob and Esau are treated as real historical people. Hebrews has an immense amount of context material in the Old Testament. It also talks of may individuals from the old Testament. Even Enoch who was pre-flood. The amount of times the New Testament confirms the O.T. is staggering. If you won't believe the O.T. don't bother believing the N.T.

*Also you set yourself up as the authority. If we can pick what parts of the Bile we want to believe and what parts we don't want to believe, where does it end? If we allow even a single verse to be reinterpreted by man we open ourselves up to redefining the whole of Scripture. A buffet of a Bible that we can take the parts we like and leave the parts we don't.

*To believe in Theistic Evolution you have to make assertions that the Bible leaves no room for. The Creation account is very literal and to call it a metaphor is ignoring the text.

So Evolution of any sort is completely incompatible with Scripture. If you categorize yourself as both a Christian and an Evolutionist, I challenge you to seriously consider the ramifications of each world view. Read the Bible. All of it not just a few passages you like. If you are honest with yourself, you will realize that you can not be both. I pray that anyone in this situation will then turn completely to Christ, but even if you don't it would be better to at least not be sitting on the fence. I recommend that anyone interested in this look up the sermon "Evolution" by R.G. Lee. Lee explains in more depth and with better skill how completely incompatible Christianity and Evolution are.

2 Peter 1: 21 is the reference for the other verse I mentioned in my last post.

Depending on interest and time I might right a bit more about this later.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from davycrockettfv wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

One thing I have noticed in my studies of evolution is it's ability to explain the big picture, but also a lot of holes when you get down to the little things. It sounds very plausible when it gives a stage by stage account of how our present-day planet came into existence (i.e. this happened, then the next stage was the evolution of this characteristic, etc.). However, I have a lot of difficulty when I look more closely at the process and wonder how pretty much anything could have survived in between those different stages. Can you imagine a woodpecker without it's hardened bill or only half it's tongue? Or a giraffe with only half the "valves" in it's neck's circulatory system? It just seems to me that if changes happened leading to animals evolving into what they are today, those changes, when they ocurred, would have had to have been instant for survival to continue. It's just something I often see glossed over or maybe even avoided...

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

Your missing the point, first of all, the exact days could have been lost in the translation from the original Greek and Aramaic texts,
But also, Jesus did raise from the dead, miraculously, who really cares about the time frame that He was dead?

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from thegreatsantini wrote 2 years 41 weeks ago

Bible completly true and as a matter of fact I think that amaerica in gerneral has lost those traditional values that got us to be such a super power. Not rascist or hateing on the mordern world and what ever but if there were more ppl like the ppl on this site hahaah we would be much better off as a country

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Actually the age of the earth is of terrible significance to Salvation. If we believe that the world came into being billions of years ago and that life gradually evolved over those eons of time, that means that things had been dyeing for billions of years before God pronounced hid Creation, "Very Good." It makes the curse that God placed on the Universe when Adam sinned meaningless and redundant. He couldn't have cursed to death a univese in which death already existed. In turn Christ's death on the Cross becomes meaningless because he was not paying for sin. Death is the result of sin, thus death could not have existed before Adam fell.

Also, Yom can mean a long time or period, but never when in the context that it is in Genesis 1 and 2. Whenever it is used in a phrase like the morning and the evening were the 1st day it means a literal 24 hour day, and this is the context of Genesis.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from CHKILCHII wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

The bible has been proven true time and time again, and all those who do not believe that will all too soon find out just how true it was.

-1 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

The bible is a nice piece of historical fiction.
The US Constitution? Yeah, the bible is a big proponent of democracy...

Live your life how you want. Personally, I think that there are a lot of good messages in the bible. But you will find just as many is Aesops fables.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from iron giant wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

yeah, meant to get the to the Tyre thing. Good point AbleSkeever.

GENO's point is that order doesn't just happen. There must be someone ordering it. It takes a watch maker to put a watch together. Why would it be any different with anything else. It takes a creator to make life just like it takes a watch maker to make a watch.

Macomacus, you described a perfect example of micro-evolution. No informed Creationist will deny that genetic changes occur within species. This was a system given by God to help species survive. But tell me how does a dog turn into something else? You do realize that genetic information is lost in every generation. For macro-evolution to ever work there would have to be a gain of genetic information somewhere, not just a remixing of it.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Quinton Schmelz... wrote 3 years 2 weeks ago

It's not that we can pick and choose what we like and what not.
It's that God sets clear boundaries, and as long as you don't go outside of those clear cornerstone for the foundation of you belief, these other things just aren't the cornerstones,
You can have many types of houses built on the same foundation, but without that foundation, the house will not last.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ga hunter wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Wow this is one long thread! I believe the Bible is 100% true and i agree with Quinton on everything except that the earth is 4.5 million years old. Me personally i believe the universe is between 6 to 10 thousand years old but thats a story for a different day. Other people dont have the same beliefs. or they may not believe in the Bible at allbut we shouldnt bring them down. But what does the Bible say to do for those who dont believe in Gods word? Pray for them! I dont see how you can look at this universe and say there is no God and that the human race is basically just a big accident.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ga hunter wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Wow this is one long thread! I believe the Bible is 100% true and i agree with Quinton on everything except that the earth is 4.5 million years old. Me personally i believe the universe is between 6 to 10 thousand years old but thats a story for a different day. Other people dont have the same beliefs. or they may not believe in the Bible at allbut we shouldnt bring them down. But what does the Bible say to do for those who dont believe in Gods word? Pray for them! I dont see how you can look at this universe and say there is no God and that the human race is basically just a big accident.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from Ga hunter wrote 2 years 40 weeks ago

Wow this is one long thread! I believe the Bible is 100% true and i agree with Quinton on everything except that the earth is 4.5 million years old. Me personally i believe the universe is between 6 to 10 thousand years old but thats a story for a different day. Other people dont have the same beliefs. or they may not believe in the Bible at allbut we shouldnt bring them down. But what does the Bible say to do for those who dont believe in Gods word? Pray for them! I dont see how you can look at this universe and say there is no God and that the human race is basically just a big accident.

-2 Good Comment? | | Report
from shazam wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

The bible is a nice piece of historical fiction.
The US Constitution? Yeah, the bible is a big proponent of democracy...

Live your life how you want. Personally, I think that there are a lot of good messages in the bible. But you will find just as many in Aesops fables.

-4 Good Comment? | | Report
from HunterDue wrote 3 years 8 weeks ago

If you disagree with the bible you disagree with our founding fathers, therefore you disagree with the constitution, therefore you are anti-american. So you would be better off to go and live with the Taliban.

-5 Good Comment? | | Report

Post a Reply