It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Jehosephat
There has not been any external evidance to contradict the bible.
You forget that the bible is largely a historical text.
There is details that are covered like the age of the patriarchs and the geneology that makes no sense if it was purely symbolic. Are ytou saying all the Jewish laws covered in Numbers and Duteronomy are just there for show, and guidlines? and have no meaning beyond that?
you cannot pick and choose which parts you want to follow in the bible and then say whatever you don't want to follow is a parable.
Originally posted by AkashicWanderer
Originally posted by Amethyst
Yes, the creation account is a literal account, not symbolic, not mythical.
How do you know this?
I've always thought about it symbolically...
you cannot pick and choose which parts you want to follow in the bible and then say whatever you don't want to follow is a parable.
Originally posted by Jehosephat
can you please provide examples of external evidance that contradicts the bible?
Archeologests discovered Jericho and one of the interesting facts is the walls fell outwards while the city itself was suddenly deserted. not to metion a small section where a couple of Isrealites escaped, jsut as it was recorded int he bible.
Thus a place where contradiction could occur, but instead fully supports the bibilical account of the fall of jericho
you sir, have just contradicted yourself.
And have ignored previous statments I have made.
If you deny parts of the bible that are suppose to be litteral and factual (which i have given reasons based on Herbew definitions of words),
You are stating that you do not belive the bible is a complete whole.
To me anyone who denys the bible is a complete whole is lacking in faith, and thus is not a true christian or beliver of the bible.
You can pick apart my statmes and pull them out of context, but i see no further point in this discussion when you seem to only read the parts of my post you feel you can attack, while ignoring the rest