Online Now 1926

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

Online now 2048
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Reply

The bible and Greek mythology

  • Bucknuts

    devidee

    cjbama said... (original post)

    Where is the missing link?

    You know, that creature that 100%, infallibly relates us to the apes?

    We have genetic markers found in several animals that still roam the earth today. Pigs, apes, etc... Did those animals get together have a big orgy to create the homosapiens?

    Science can neither prove or disprove the existence of an omnipotent being such as God. If you choose to believe your existence began with some particles randomly interacting in open space that created this massive solar system we live in, then more power to you.

    Here's the question to ponder? What if you're right... well, then I've lived my life for a being that doesn't exist and I wasted my time here on earth while looking toward my eternal life. My mistake. I don't get a redo.

    What if you're wrong? Well, then you will have lived your life a fool and will be punished in ways that are not explainable for an eternity while I get the privilege of worshiping my creator in a place simply described as Heaven.

    I know... I know... I'm weak minded. I'm ignorant. I know... I guess the next time I give a biology lecture to my students or when I look at my PhD in Biology (just working out the kinks on my dissertation) I can think about how weak minded I am and how ignorant I really am.

    We take calculated risks every day. You seem to be taking a very hefty one when considering the simple questions I asked.

    Again, if your belief system is based on not wanting to burn in hell for all of enternity it is an extremely weak belief system.

    And yes, you are a complete fool for denying the one and true GOD: the GSM.

    This post has been edited 3 times, most recently by devidee 3 years ago

    signature image
  • UA2005 said... (original post)

    Did you not say (albeit about 7 days ago) that there are certain behavioral codes of morality with animals as there is with humans...Like murder is bad? Or did i just interpret that incorrectly?

    It was not me who said it but if you even look at the quote you responded to, I thought it made it very clear that it references certain animals that formed social groups.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • Horns247

    Rivver

    goodnews said... (original post)

    It does make sense.

    Maybe if you're a child.

  • goodnews said... (original post)


    They don't seem to be claiming, from the few I saw, that the Bible has that many contradictions with itself. Rather, they were claiming that the Bible contradicted with their version of science and reason.

    I recommend you take another look when you have a free moment. They are not talking about that what so ever, but direct contradictions within the bible itself.

    I linked a few random examples (They have pleanty more haha) (Note: As you can see, they also link to Christian Responses attempting to explain the contradictions.)

    As you can clearly see, they are not talking about any type of issue with science and reason.

    EDIT: Linked to the full list of Contradictions in a better format.

    The Scripture Project |

    Project Reason

    http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/The_Bible:Has_there_ever_been_a_righteous_person/

    http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/The_Bible:Has_there_ever_been_a_righteous_person/

    The Scripture Project |

    Project Reason

    http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/The_Bible:Was_Joseph_the_father_of_Jesus/

    http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/The_Bible:Was_Joseph_the_father_of_Jesus/

    The Scripture Project |

    Project Reason

    http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/The_Bible:When_was_the_Holy_Ghost_given/

    http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/The_Bible:When_was_the_Holy_Ghost_given/

    The Scripture Project |

    Project Reason

    http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/Category:Annotations::Contradiction/

    http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/Category:Annotations::Contradiction/

    The Scripture Project |

    Project Reason

    http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/The_Bible:Does_God_approve_of_slavery/

    http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/The_Bible:Does_God_approve_of_slavery/

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by theyellowdart 3 years ago

    signature image signature image signature image

    You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • goodnews said... (original post)


    I appreciate your input, I really do. But, your lecture here in unfounded. And, my friend, you are abslolutley incorrect if you think that the world hasn't been profoundly changed, and for the better, in the last 2,000 years by the Church.


    No, it's actually completely founded. If you make claims, you need to support them. in that instance you made 3 claims with no support. I'm not looking for sources or cites either... simply support for the claims. There is a very large difference there.

    I'm not looking or asking you to go back and read all (or any) of the posts in the thread. But don't make claims like this "Even though it can't happen overnight, thr world was actually more violent and oppressive the last 150 years. " While leaving the huge question of... Compared to what?! You can't say a time period is more violent and oppressive than something, and not even mention what that something is.

    Also, I never came close to claiming that the world hasn't been profoundly changed in the last 2000 years for the better. It obviously and without question has. But if you think I'm going to give sole credit to the church for that I'm literally laughing out loud. The church has without question aided and helped society over the past 2000 years, as it has also without question harmed and held society back.

    signature image signature image signature image

    You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • goodnews said... (original post)

    That's a good question. The Bible is the inspired Word of God, written through the free minds of the Biblical writers. It actually makes the Biblical message that much more impressive. God chooses to reveal himslef through fallible human agents. So, the world changing power of His Word is that much more impressive since it seems to filter through that which is very fallible.

    Seems like you sidestepped that one. Are you saying fallible or infallible? I think you are saying that you believe the Bible is not the unmediated voice of God. The accounts of the Bible are the writer's perspective of what happened/what God wanted, while the the Gospels actually provide the unmediated voice of God (Jesus). This is the only way I can think of to reconcile the savage, city-leveling, man/woman/child killing Yahweh of the Old Testament with the "Love your enemy...Turn the other cheek" Jesus of the New Testament.

    Thoughts?

    signature image signature image signature image
  • goodnews said... (original post)

    It's different b/c God is uncreated and not of the physical universe and so not beholding to its laws. This makes sense when you consider He's the Creator of said universe. However, matter and energy are beholding to certain laws. And, these laws don't lend themselves readily to the notion that matter, and the present organization of the universe, occurs by itself and/or from nothing. Rather, these laws demand a first cause, and they definitely prefer a first cause that has a mind rather than an accident.

    How's god uncreated? Where did he come from? Did he just pop into existence?

    This post was edited by theyellowdart 3 years ago

    signature image signature image signature image

    You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • theyellowdart said... (original post)

    I recommend you take another look when you have a free moment. They are not talking about that what so ever, but direct contradictions within the bible itself.

    I linked a few random examples (They have pleanty more haha) (Note: As you can see, they also link to Christian Responses attempting to explain the contradictions.)

    As you can clearly see, they are not talking about any type of issue with science and reason.

    Ok. I genuinely want us to discuss the difficult Biblical passages and dialogue about ones that could truly seem contradictory. I really do. So don't take the following as an attempt to blow you off. But, It took me about 10 seconds each to know why the 5 examples you posted from that website are way off base. That website represents another dishonest and/or extremely ignorant attempt at discrediting the Scriptures without any real understanding of them. Please don't post any more examples from that site as they are a waste of my time. I'm asking, much like you have in an above post, that you actually do your own research in this rather than posting bush-league online resources. In order:

    1. The Bible is clear that righteousness is not something we have naturally, but rather something we attain. So, the Bible can speak of the unrighteousness of mankind as a general rule, while also speaking of individuals who have attained righteousness.

    2. This one is particularly laugable b/c the "project reason" people claimed that there were conflicting passages about whether Joseph was Jesus' father when they actually presented supposedly conflicting verses on the Holy Spirit and David. Now, to squash the point they were probably trying to make. In ancient Near eastern (and even modern NE) geneology one could be spoken of as your father who in fact was generations previous to you in your family line. This is especially true of the prominent members of a family line. So, it would not be unusual for Abraham or David to be called father by one of their ancestors many generations after them. It's actually pretty amazing how God predicted that Jesus (the Messiah) would come in that line centuries before He was born. Joseph was simply Jesus' earthly father in the sense that He was raised in Joseph's home. And, the Spirit of God is the one who conceived Jesus in Mary's womb.

    3. In pre-Pentecost accounts the Holy Spirit (the third person of the Trinity) was given in some specific circumstances to individuals, particularly the prophets. Post-Pentecost it was given wholesale to the Church. The Bible is consistent on both points.

    4. The top passages are indicative of times where God appeared to a handful of individuals in various forms and are specifically mentione b/c they are unusual. The bottom ones simply reflect a general rule that, unlike the other supposed gods around the world, who are made of stone and wood, God is invisible and cannot be seen by mankind.

    Nothing to see here.

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by goodnews 3 years ago

    signature image

    South Carolina Gamecocks. The 2010 National College Baseball Champs.

  • theyellowdart said... (original post)

    No, it's actually completely founded. If you make claims, you need to support them. in that instance you made 3 claims with no support. I'm not looking for sources or cites either... simply support for the claims. There is a very large difference there.

    I'm not looking or asking you to go back and read all (or any) of the posts in the thread. But don't make claims like this "Even though it can't happen overnight, thr world was actually more violent and oppressive the last 150 years. " While leaving the huge question of... Compared to what?! You can't say a time period is more violent and oppressive than something, and not even mention what that something is.

    Also, I never came close to claiming that the world hasn't been profoundly changed in the last 2000 years for the better. It obviously and without question has. But if you think I'm going to give sole credit to the church for that I'm literally laughing out loud. The church has without question aided and helped society over the past 2000 years, as it has also without question harmed and held society back.

    Your last statement was unsourced. I have given many sources in this behemoth of a thread when it was necessary. If I've made a few statements, based upon much reading in the past, that I didn't source b/c I don't have all the sources in front of me at the moment, then please forgive me. What I can promise is that i won't make a statement that I haven't thoroughly studied or thought through.

    signature image

    South Carolina Gamecocks. The 2010 National College Baseball Champs.

  • nirvanabama said... (original post)

    Seems like you sidestepped that one. Are you saying fallible or infallible? I think you are saying that you believe the Bible is not the unmediated voice of God. The accounts of the Bible are the writer's perspective of what happened/what God wanted, while the the Gospels actually provide the unmediated voice of God (Jesus). This is the only way I can think of to reconcile the savage, city-leveling, man/woman/child killing Yahweh of the Old Testament with the "Love your enemy...Turn the other cheek" Jesus of the New Testament.

    Thoughts?

    My bad if i wasn't clear. What i'm trying to say is that the Bible is the infallible Word of God. However, God accomplished the giving of the Word through the personalities of individuals who actually put the pen to paper. This makes its immeasurable impact on the world even more impressive. The infallible God accomplished exactly what He wanted to accomplish through fallible individuals. Thus making the feat of Scriptural infallibility even more impressive.

    signature image

    South Carolina Gamecocks. The 2010 National College Baseball Champs.

  • goodnews said... (original post)

    Ok. I genuinely want us to discuss the difficult Biblical passages and dialogue about ones that could truly seem contradictory. I really do. So don't take the following as an attempt to blow you off. But, It took me about 10 seconds each to know why the 5 examples you posted from that website are way off base. That website represents another dishonest and/or extremely ignorant attempt at discrediting the Scriptures without any real understanding of them. Please don't post any more examples from that site as they are a waste of my time. In order:


    I guess we can go our separate ways here. We obviously see the world in two very distinctly different ways. I can't debate with someone whose reality is so different than mine.

    signature image signature image signature image

    You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • theyellowdart said... (original post)

    How's god uncreated? Where did he come from? Did he just pop into existence?

    (you also really didn't answer my question, other than saying that God is uncreated.)

    I went back and read your original post again. I appreciate your willingness to say "I don't know." And your right that physics/QM cannot answer all of life's questions, and it never will. Now, where dod God come from? I don't know. The Bible is clear that He didn't pop into existence. And that's consistent with the rest of its teachings b/c it teaches that God exists beyond the realm of time. "Popping into existence" assumes that something has a beginning. Eternity doesn't allow for a beginning or an end since time doesn't exist there. Then everything else falls nicely into place with logic and our observable universe since we have a reasonable first cause.

    signature image

    South Carolina Gamecocks. The 2010 National College Baseball Champs.

  • theyellowdart said... (original post)

    I guess we can go our separate ways here. We obviously see the world in two very distinctly different ways. I can't debate with someone whose reality is so different than mine.

    Actually, our realities are very similar. Our presuppositions are different. I'vs stated to a few others on this thread that i used to think very much like you do. You seem to be a reasonable person, which makes my time worthwhile. But, I came to my current position b/c it seemed the most reasonable. The website you posted was just so lacking. My guess is you posted it to get the discussion going, and that's fine. If your getting off here, then thanks for your time.

    This post was edited by goodnews 3 years ago

    signature image

    South Carolina Gamecocks. The 2010 National College Baseball Champs.

  • goodnews said... (original post)

    I went back and read your original post again. I appreciate your willingness to say "I don't know." And your right that physics/QM cannot answer all of life's questions, and it never will. Now, where dod God come from? I don't know. The Bible is clear that He didn't pop into existence. And that's consistent with the rest of its teachings b/c it teaches that God exists beyond the realm of time. "Popping into existence" assumes that something has a beginning. Eternity doesn't allow for a beginning or an end since time doesn't exist there. Then everything else falls nicely into place with logic and our observable universe since we have a reasonable first cause.

    Just out of curiosity, I am just wondering if you have ever thought it be possible that there never was nothing?
    If God has always existed and would be outside of time, why couldn't matter have always existed?

    I just don't understand the whole, how did something come from nothing argument when neither side believes something came from nothing.

    It is either everything came from God or everything started when matter collided and formed the big bang (or whatever other beginning of time scenario).

    In both scenarios, something came from something that always existed.

    signature image signature image signature image
  • goodnews said... (original post)

    Actually, our realities are very similar. Our presuppositions are different. I'vs stated to a few others on this thread that i used to think very much like you do. You seem to be a reasonable person, which makes my time worthwhile. But, I came to my current position b/c it seemed the most reasonable. If your getting off here, then thanks for your time.

    At one time, you may have shared a similar view of the universe and our world as I do. But I believe we think about things rather differently. The ways you reinforce your belief in religion, and discredit science are not similar to how I reinforce science and discredit religion.

    The way you support your arguments and debate is also very different from pretty much any atheist/agnostic I know (even those that became believers later in life, most still thought the exact same ways they had before, but simply started coming to different conclusions.) You really debate like most theist who engage in debates (And I'm sure I sound like most atheists who engage too :) )

    All that being said, I actually greatly enjoyed debating with you, the majority of the believers I debate fall back onto ad hominem attacks, or quickly decide that they actually don't want to have a debate and end things. (Not all by any means, as you are a clear example of). Simply feel like we've reached a point where we would have to go pretty off the path to realistically continue in my eyes.

    Also, I apologize if my tone was strong at certain points. Re-reading some of my posts it certainly comes off a lot strong than I ever intended. You were very kind, patient, understanding and professional throughout, and I appreciate your time as well. cheers

    This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by theyellowdart 3 years ago

    signature image signature image signature image

    You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

  • nirvanabama said... (original post)

    Just out of curiosity, I am just wondering if you have ever thought it be possible that there never was nothing? If God has always existed and would be outside of time, why couldn't matter have always existed?

    I just don't understand the whole, how did something come from nothing argument when neither side believes something came from nothing.

    It is either everything came from God or everything started when matter collided and formed the big bang (or whatever other beginning of time scenario).

    In both scenarios, something came from something that always existed.

    I have thought of that. But, for me, since all matter, that we know of, is breaking down it's difficult to imagine it as eternal. I think the realities of matter betray a need to be created.

    And, God didn't come from anything. When talking about God I think you really need categories we're not capable if conjuring.

    signature image

    South Carolina Gamecocks. The 2010 National College Baseball Champs.

  • theyellowdart said... (original post)

    At one time, you may have shared a similar view of the universe and our world as I do. But I believe we think about things rather differently. The ways you reinforce your belief in religion, and discredit science are not similar to how I reinforce science and discredit religion.

    The way you support your arguments and debate is also very different from pretty much any atheist/agnostic I know (even those that became believers later in life, most still thought the exact same ways they had before, but simply started coming to different conclusions.) You really debate like most theist who engage in debates (And I'm sure I sound like most atheists who engage too :) )

    All that being said, I actually greatly enjoyed debating with you, the majority of the believers I debate fall back onto ad hominem attacks, or quickly decide that they actually don't want to have a debate and end things. (Not all by any means, as you are a clear example of). Simply feel like we've reached a point where we would have to go pretty off the path to realistically continue in my eyes.

    Also, I apologize if my tone was strong at certain points. Re-reading some of my posts it certainly comes off a lot strong than I ever intended. You were very kind, patient, understanding and professional throughout, and I appreciate your time as well. cheers

    yellowdart - Thanks for your kind words. And, no need to apologize about strong opinions. You have an agile mind and likable style that is appreciated. It was my pleasure to discuss some things with you. And, for the record, I'm not trying to discredit science as much as I'm for using science correctly. Peace.

    signature image

    South Carolina Gamecocks. The 2010 National College Baseball Champs.

  • So many people put just as much faith in the Greek Gods as Christians do for Jesus today. I wonder if Christianity will be considered mythology a few thousand years from now?

    signature image signature image signature image
  • nirvanabama said... (original post)

    So many people put just as much faith in the Greek Gods as Christians do for Jesus today. I wonder if Christianity will be considered mythology a few thousand years from now?

    Should be. Those cultures will have new messiahs. Although, by then, I wouldn't be surprised to see religion completely wiped out because of how much we will have discovered about the universe by then.