The Greatest lie ever told - The Bible

page: 8
19
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 03:28 AM
link   
Originally posted by Quantum_Squirrel

[QUOTE[
you are miss quoting me the paragraph above pertains to adults and God.

Not that they beleive in the tooth fairy, then figure it out for themselves .. they believe in the Bible/God and then atempt to figure it out for themselves.

[/QUOTE]


that is my point, it is KNOWN that the tooth fairy is an invention by adults who take the tooth and replace it with coins, we can have no such proof (possibly either way) that the Bible (or one of the other religious texts) is not the inspired word of God- hence people can become religious well into adulthood for the first time but no adult suddenly believes in the tooth fairy


[QUOTE]
Did you know that God created the universe in the dark!!!!!! how amazing is that?? he did it all then said 'let their be light' that means he did it all in the dark!!! wow!!!!
[/QUOTE]

to be fair, if God exists, he is at a different level, dimension whatever you wish to call it, so if he created it in a field full of talking fish with dimly lit mood lighting, we still couldn't really fathom it.

I'm not saying that as a cop out, I am not an "anti scientist", science has vastly improved the lives of people immeasurably, all I am saying is that the mysteries of the macro and micro universe really are something else, and I don't believe we will ever fully be aware of them in this mortal coil


[QUOTE]
Yes he is
powerfull but riddle me this.................

If God is for all time , and he knows what is going to happen (because he is the creator of time, he/she is outside of time). You see if God is linked with time then God must have had a begining and an end (when time ends). thus there must have been a point were God was created with time.. making him not God at all !!
[/QUOTE]

That would make sense in our mortal 3 dimensional coil, but as you rightly state God is "outside of time", meaning such concepts do not apply- that is the point, if God exists notions of time, space etc cease to apply. I cannot fathom it, nor can you I'm sure, if it is true then we will know when we get there.


[QUOTE]
Then why would such a benevolant creator allow all this suffering to happen after knowing before hand that this would be the case???.

and don't give me the free will crap!!!!!... if God knows all he knows whats going to happen so free will is an illusion!!!

its just sick!!!
[edit on 26/9/07 by Quantum_Squirrel]

I am not a Christian (but ask me to deny Christ and I won't, maybe it is my upbringing!), I certainly don't live a Christian life or know the bible overly well, so you'd be better asking that to a Christian.

The point is, how could one begin to understand, comprehend etc the thoughts, meaning etc of a creator, someone who can make the universe and all it contains- we simply can't.

Reading an excellent book at the moment called THE GOLDILOCKS ENIGMA, it isnt a religious book, but written by a rather clever scientist. Bascially the gist of it so far is that the universe (on so many different levels) is "JUST RIGHT" for life, ie an imbalance here or there, if things happened slightly different at any stage of the development of the universe, none of this would exist.

There is a lot of wonder out there, I don't have the answers for sure, but I have strong belief that there is a God behind it all




posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 05:13 AM
link   


Reading an excellent book at the moment called THE GOLDILOCKS ENIGMA, it isnt a religious book, but written by a rather clever scientist. Bascially the gist of it so far is that the universe (on so many different levels) is "JUST RIGHT" for life, ie an imbalance here or there, if things happened slightly different at any stage of the development of the universe, none of this would exist.


dude lol its one of my favourite books .. i have it beside me right now its a great read all round and has actually been the catalyst for a couple of my favourite threads like Are we Living in a simulated Universe?

Again like i said in my original post i DO believe in the possibility of an intelligent creator in whatever form that may take .. i also believe in the possibility that its just all a coincedence and we sprung from nothing.

you have to be open to all ideas ... however this thread does not really focus on this big question.

It focuses on the Bible as a Book and what the book stands for.



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 05:18 AM
link   
Just like all great art, many people will have their own opinions of it and take away from it their own thoughts...

Just like the Bible, and any other religious book for that matter, is a tremendous work of art, and they all contain their own symbolisim and idea's of ways to live life. They are no more than guidelines, take what you want from them, I tend to live my life the way my parents taught me. Always be open-minded to other aspects and cultures of life and be good to others and things will work out for you in the end.

I don't have any faith in God, or any other spiritual being, and I'm happy to live my life like that. However, what I can''t stand are people from either side of this arguement, (which is a fine one when argued correctly
), enforcing their beliefs on others. I'm referring to a post I was reading no less than 5 minutes ago, which sadly was stating that if 'we' believe in 'God' or not, 'he' is correct, and we should live our live's according to him.

I have no problem with people who choose to live like this, hey, I have many friends like that, but a choice is exactly that, you choose to believe the word of 'God'. I don't. Please don't try and enforce beliefs on others and I apologise if they do that to you, but just think to yourself, if someone does, what would your 'God' do in your position?. I think the term is forgive and move on, it's their life lol.

Anyway, love the topic, I kinda think that I may have someone turn around and pick something out about what I said and turn it against me, but 'meh', honestly don't care (no offense intended of course
)

Keep up the discussion,

TheSecretTruth

ps. What would you think of a whole 'Good Vs Evil' Debate, just to tie it in with this one? Just a thought....Just a thought....

[edit on 27-9-2007 by TheSecretTruth]

[edit on 27-9-2007 by TheSecretTruth]



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 05:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Quantum_Squirrel


Reading an excellent book at the moment called THE GOLDILOCKS ENIGMA, it isnt a religious book, but written by a rather clever scientist. Bascially the gist of it so far is that the universe (on so many different levels) is "JUST RIGHT" for life, ie an imbalance here or there, if things happened slightly different at any stage of the development of the universe, none of this would exist.


dude lol its one of my favourite books .. i have it beside me right now its a great read all round and has actually been the catalyst for a couple of my favourite threads like Are we Living in a simulated Universe?

Again like i said in my original post i DO believe in the possibility of an intelligent creator in whatever form that may take .. i also believe in the possibility that its just all a coincedence and we sprung from nothing.

you have to be open to all ideas ... however this thread does not really focus on this big question.

It focuses on the Bible as a Book and what the book stands for.



fair enough, cheers for the heads up on that other book, I'll make a point of getting a copy



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by TheSecretTruth
 


nice well thought out post.

yes someone will probably take 3 words of one of your paragraphs and use it as evidence that you sacrifice virgins, and smear blood on dead chickens in worship of satan lol.

Good v's Evil debate ? sounds good why don't you start one? er.. actually before you do what side are you on good or evil?


the problem with the above idea is i can't see many people saying they are on the side of evil (unless cheney and bush drop in ) .. eeek sry american brothers/sisters

And if they do they will probably be attention seekers or nut jobs.


ty for your thoughts.

Oh and Blue_Order there isn't areference to another Book , the simulated universe is a thread i started here at ATS , that was inspired by a paragraph in 'THE GOLDILOCKS ENIGMA' keep reading its near the end


[edit on 27/9/07 by Quantum_Squirrel]



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 05:32 AM
link   
Originally posted by Quantum_Squirrel


Oh and Blue_Order there isn't areference to another Book , the simulated universe is a thread i started here at ATS , that was inspired by a paragraph in 'THE GOLDILOCKS ENIGMA' keep reading its near the end


[edit on 27/9/07 by Quantum_Squirrel]


ahh, saved me from an embarrassing online non existent book search



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Quantum_Squirrel
 


Thanks, just thought I should air that opinion lol

Yeah I'm on the falling side of good. Have you noticed that there seems to be a lack of morals these days. For examle respect to elders and just good 'ol fashioned kindness?? lol

I think there is going to be a massive problem in the near future with people and the way they treat each other.

What side do you fight the 'good battle' on?



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 06:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by dAlen



1) Salvation:
a) once saved always saved
b) loose your salvation right after you leave the alter for crossing your eyes wrong
c) predestination (you had no choice and your a clay pot that is either made for heaven or hell.

Now the above is the major, pivotal point of Christianity - the issue of ones salvation -yet it is the least understood among Christians themselves.

2) Holy spirit (I could go on about who gets this and who doesnt, but lets figure out a,b,&c first of #1

Anyway... enough to start the wheels spinning.


Peace

dAlen



I really wasn’t attempting to discuss Christianity or trying to ‘convert’ anyone. We (humans) believe what we want, if you want to believe 1+1=3 that’s your purgative but that doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s true. Does it? So my question is, since no one can prove or disprove the existence of God anymore than they can prove or disprove how the universe was created. I think simple common sense can tell us if God does exist He exists in a different dimension than our 3d world. Are we (humans) just that, flesh and blood or is there more to us? When we (humans) die is that it or are we more than just flesh and blood and if we are more than flesh and blood what is the more part?

As far as your perspective on salvation I agree there are many different ideas on what it is. I believe (a) OSAS and predestination doesn’t mean one person is to be saved and another is to be lost. Anyone at any time can become one of the predestined; since nobody knows the outcome of their life everyone has the opportunity to be one of the predestined. Oh, you left out….

d) loss of salvation because of not hopping into the church on your left foot while rubbing your head with your right hand.


Now as far as the HS and baptism, a large part of people claiming to be Christians really don’t know or understand much about it.



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Just thought I'd mention that the 'Good Vs Evil (Who's winning?)' thread is now running for anyone who's intrested


TheSecretTruth

[edit on 27-9-2007 by TheSecretTruth]



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 07:12 AM
link   
reply to post by TheSecretTruth
 


Good of course i even tried to start something here a lil while ago .. but thats all i am gonna say for fear of getting my knuckles rapped again.

i truly believe that the majority of people are Good on this planet , they all have mothers and fathers so the capacity to love. i just don't think they get as much press as the bad guys .



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Quantum_Squirrel
 


I dunno, I think that people have the ability to be good, but make the 'wrong' choices.

But then again, what my opinion of right and wrong is, could be completely different from everyone else. So in some sense of the way, I might be considered 'evil' by some lol

TheSecretTruth



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 08:30 AM
link   
I always love debating the bible, and the belief in God as a whole...

Because there has been so many talks about whether or not this that or another exists. let me stay on the topic at hand, and comment of the proof of the original arguement.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxx
CREATION

Lets start with the first two books of the bible and Genesis.
The first chapter states that God creates Adam and Eve at the same time,

In the 2nd chapter God creates Adam, then Adam wanders around, names the animals does a few things, then he talks to God and Say's he is lonely, so God says Ok i will provide you with a mate so he takes the Rib and creates Eve.

In the first Two chapters of the book are conflicting Creation stories , so which is true? Now Believers will say "well it's just two different versions of the same story" this is fine but then don't say in the next Breath that the Bible is meant to be taken litterally and when it says something it means it!! because it obviously does not.

Modern man has 24 ribs. Did Adam have 25, 24 or 23? Did he grow a new rib to achieve 24 or did he have the spare 25th to begin with? If God made Adam, why couldn’t he make Eve in the same manner? Making Eve from Adam’s rib is like cloning, which would make their physical union a variation of incest.Maybe God just forgot the method He used to make Adam? The Bible turns the possibilty of God being an amazing scientist and demotes him into being a carnival magician..
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxx

Since in essence we are talking about DNA, lets take a look at DNA evidence.

www.godandscience.org...

The Summary of this, is that through an estimation of Carbon Dating, A common ancestor of man is only at most 50,000 years old. This being said, if we had ancestors older then this, we would basically breed ourselves into extinction because of the mutation rate of certain parts of dna.

You say, o.k., well that still debates the bible because most christians believe that we are not 50,000 years old.

Here is my evidence and argument that carbon dating, which is used to date much studies are in accurate.

www.christiananswers.net...

In this it basically states that carbon dating is inaccurate, and that it can give a ruff estimation, but as you look further back in history, it gets further inaccurate.

This being said, you say, o.k., why is there no evidence for civilisation in those ancient times. Well, there is,

www.hissheep.org...

Look particularly for the bell found in coal, as well as other artifacts. If a modern science believes, how is this possible? You asked for proof, the guys phone number that found the bell is right there, Call him. This also lead credence to the next debatable topic, The Flood.

Here is documentation on possible ark looks.
www.noahsarksearch.com...

Additionally, Here is evidence found in the bottom of the black sea.
archives.cnn.com...

which if there was civilisation there, then ultimately, the sea level would have been much lower, and as a result, people would have naturally lived in the lower lying areas. If this was infact the case, then wouldn't many civilisations show that a flood occurred, not just from the middle east but elsewhere? They do.

www.talkorigins.org...

Thats the list. Enjoy.

This brings us into the next topic, Moses and the red sea.
wnd.com... ---evidence of the chariot.

www.arkdiscovery.com... more info on chariots, and also the pillars king solomon had erected.

The last 2, the bible and jesus, I can not show enough evidence on, this being said, there are several ancient documents with similar tails to them in the bible. I wish you all luck in your research.

Camain



posted on Sep, 27 2007 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by camain

Since in essence we are talking about DNA, lets take a look at DNA evidence.



No in essence we are not talking about DNA , we are talking about the Bible, the Bible states that God just made adam from the Dust and eve from Adams rib, DNA and the Bible do not go hand in hand.




The Summary of this, is that through an estimation of Carbon Dating, A common ancestor of man is only at most 50,000 years old. This being said, if we had ancestors older then this, we would basically breed ourselves into extinction because of the mutation rate of certain parts of dna.



Is that a joke? you would rather me believe that all the diversity that exists now in human beings came from .........two people.....Adam and Eve....D.N.A? if this was the case our D.N.A would be completely screwed by now due to not enough diversity.





In this it basically states that carbon dating is inaccurate, and that it can give a ruff estimation, but as you look further back in history, it gets further inaccurate.



carbon dating can give you a reading of upto 60,000 years , the accuracy of the carbon dating depends on the size of the sample ...under 1gram and you really start to struggle. but new mewthods are now combating this. it is vastly more accurate than you give it credit for as the radioactive decay of carbon atoms are pretty much a constant.




Look particularly for the bell found in coal, as well as other artifacts. If a modern science believes, how is this possible? You asked for proof, the guys phone number that found the bell is right there, Call him. This also lead credence to the next debatable topic, The Flood.



Your links are getting desperate..'christian answers', hissheep etc etc what do u expect to read there..an unbiased view? i think not just men putting up webpages for other men/women to read with there own thoughts nothing more.




Here is documentation on possible ark looks.
www.noahsarksearch.com...



yet another non substantiated site with a completely biased view, they don't even consider the possibilty there is no ark its there mission in life to find it .. so useless.




Additionally, Here is evidence found in the bottom of the black sea.
archives.cnn.com...



Bravo the first real piece of evidence you have presented. but wheres the follow up ? i am sure if they did date some of the wood here and found it matches the correct time you would have posted that link instead.. u didn't because nothing came of this.

additionally i point out that MANY, MANY underwater cities have been found ALL over the world challenging even the real history books .. some of these much much older than the Bible could allow.




which if there was civilisation there, then ultimately, the sea level would have been much lower, and as a result, people would have naturally lived in the lower lying areas. If this was infact the case, then wouldn't many civilisations show that a flood occurred, not just from the middle east but elsewhere? They do.


there are floods all over our planet right now as i type, our planet has been through many weather changes in its history including ice ages, the fact that most parts of the world have flooded at some point is weather not religion.





This brings us into the next topic, Moses and the red sea.
wnd.com... ---evidence of the chariot.

www.arkdiscovery.com... more info on chariots, and also the pillars king solomon had erected.



both of these links do not work , probably taken down but i am sure they are like all the above links (with exception of CNN article) , could have been put together by anyone with a simple web base knowledge a few photos a bit of pro speculation and this is were u take your facts from??!!??

i do remeber a while back radar or sonics had shown a massive boat shape under mounnt ararat and a team of scientist went back there to do an extensive survey .. the results where not in your favor.




The last 2, the bible and jesus, I can not show enough evidence on, this being said, there are several ancient documents with similar tails to them in the bible. I wish you all luck in your research.




This suprises me as i think there is quite a bit of evidence that a man named jesus did exist i thought you would have jumped all over this point..



i am sorry but 90% of the links you have supplied are Biased, and could have been written by even the simplest of computer users with a keyboard in one hand , and google images in the other.



posted on Oct, 26 2007 @ 11:49 AM
link   
ok first, i am actually happy with the op and the way he presented this because i think he did it openly and with his opinions but it did not seem to me that he attacked anyone. second of all, the bible does have a lot of questionable statements but let me point out that the alot of the things mentioned were from the old testament, the hair, selling your daughter, and most of it probably comes from leviticus which was a ton of rules...not saying it makes it any better, i just wanted to point that out...its not necessarily the message. thirdly, the homosexuality part, i guess its ok to be a lesbian? i dont believe that was ever discussed. or maybe paul discussed it in romans, either way...it is foolish to believe every single word point blank and blindly without doing research. christians would be a lot more respected if they could adress the more controversial issues with something other than "its the word of god, repent of your sins!" I used to be one myself that coudlnt answer all the questions but i just decided that i have felt the presence of a loving god and he knows i love him and i am loyal to the end but one organized religion for all?? a little absurd to me, especially how ancient they are in the first place. To me, there is a god, if he hates gays, or wants disobediant children killed, then to me he is not a good god but i believe differently.



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 06:56 AM
link   
Camain



Lets start with the first two books of the bible and Genesis.
The first chapter states that God creates Adam and Eve at the same time,

In the 2nd chapter God creates Adam, then Adam wanders around, names the animals does a few things, then he talks to God and Say's he is lonely, so God says Ok i will provide you with a mate so he takes the Rib and creates Eve.

In the first Two chapters of the book are conflicting Creation stories , so which is true? Now Believers will say "well it's just two different versions of the same story" this is fine but then don't say in the next Breath that the Bible is meant to be taken litterally and when it says something it means it!! because it obviously does not.



The two chapters don't conflict. God creates mankind on the sixth day - both man and woman and they are NOT Adam and Eve. Adam is formed on the eighth day and Eve comes along later.




Modern man has 24 ribs. Did Adam have 25, 24 or 23? Did he grow a new rib to achieve 24 or did he have the spare 25th to begin with? If God made Adam, why couldn’t he make Eve in the same manner? Making Eve from Adam’s rib is like cloning, which would make their physical union a variation of incest.Maybe God just forgot the method He used to make Adam? The Bible turns the possibilty of God being an amazing scientist and demotes him into being a carnival magician..
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxx



The word "rib" as used in that scripture could also have been translated as "curve." Could that be the helix curve? The DNA of Adam to form Eve. She was "bone of my bone and flesh of my flesh." If God started with the same human that His Son would eventually come from then he was the perfect beginning. God took the female part from the male and they were the perfect man and woman to begin the line to Christ.




Since in essence we are talking about DNA, lets take a look at DNA evidence.

www.godandscience.org...

The Summary of this, is that through an estimation of Carbon Dating, A common ancestor of man is only at most 50,000 years old. This being said, if we had ancestors older then this, we would basically breed ourselves into extinction because of the mutation rate of certain parts of dna.

You say, o.k., well that still debates the bible because most christians believe that we are not 50,000 years old.



There is NO COMMON ANCESTOR of man. Man is as God made him, in His image.




Here is my evidence and argument that carbon dating, which is used to date much studies are in accurate.

www.christiananswers.net...

In this it basically states that carbon dating is inaccurate, and that it can give a ruff estimation, but as you look further back in history, it gets further inaccurate.

This being said, you say, o.k., why is there no evidence for civilisation in those ancient times. Well, there is,

www.hissheep.org...

Look particularly for the bell found in coal, as well as other artifacts. If a modern science believes, how is this possible? You asked for proof, the guys phone number that found the bell is right there, Call him. This also lead credence to the next debatable topic, The Flood.

Here is documentation on possible ark looks.
www.noahsarksearch.com...

Additionally, Here is evidence found in the bottom of the black sea.
archives.cnn.com...

which if there was civilisation there, then ultimately, the sea level would have been much lower, and as a result, people would have naturally lived in the lower lying areas. If this was infact the case, then wouldn't many civilisations show that a flood occurred, not just from the middle east but elsewhere? They do.



The earth itself is ancient. There was an age before our present one and there were cities in that age. This is stated in the Bible. During that time Satan rebelled and God destroyed that earth age (not the earth) but the age. This present 2nd age began about 14,000 years ago.


That first age was the one in which the dinosaurs walked the earth. Man was here too but not in flesh form. An angelic body has substance, mass - it is not an ethereal, whispy form. They were in their spiritual body, just as we will be in the next age. For that reason, we will see that the earth is very old and will find remains of animals from that first age but you will not find remains of humans. There is NO Missing Link.



.............Whirlwind



posted on Nov, 1 2007 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by whirlwind
 



There is NO COMMON ANCESTOR of man. Man is as God made him, in His image.


I think what he meant was this:
en.wikipedia.org...

Or perhaps this:
en.wikipedia.org...

Don't let the names fool you, this doesn't support the "Adam and Eve" theory. It's just a few scientific concepts that took their name from mythology, kind of like astronomy. :-)

It does, however, show that mankind can trace its geneology back much, much further than the Bible portrays mankind to be.



posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
reply to post by whirlwind
 



There is NO COMMON ANCESTOR of man. Man is as God made him, in His image.


I think what he meant was this:
en.wikipedia.org...

Or perhaps this:
en.wikipedia.org...

Don't let the names fool you, this doesn't support the "Adam and Eve" theory. It's just a few scientific concepts that took their name from mythology, kind of like astronomy. :-)

It does, however, show that mankind can trace its geneology back much, much further than the Bible portrays mankind to be.



Thank you for the links but doesn't the following paragraph, taken from the first link you provided tell us that the "humans alive today is different from"...what they believe are "the ones at some point in the remote past" and what does "or future" mean?


Y-chromosomal Adam is not the same individual at all points in human history; the Y-mrca of all humans alive today is different from the one for humans alive at some point in the remote past or future: as male lines die out, a more recent individual becomes the new Y-mrca. In times of rapid population growth, patrilineal lines are less likely to die out than during a population bottleneck.


It sounds like a lot of double-talk to me - although, admittedly, I don't have a scientific leaning at all.


...........Whirlwind



posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 12:20 PM
link   
What it means is that in the past, say, 1,000 years ago, there may have been a male line of ancestry that wasn't descended from this person. And 1,000 years from now, there may be a more recent common ancestor because bloodlines that are not related to whoever that person may be, could die out by then.

It's important to remember that they aren't saying Y-Chromasomal Adam and Mitochondrial Eve are not the first known people, they are just the most recent man and the most recent woman to be an ancestor of everyone alive today.

What's kind of gross, to me, is that whether you adhere to science or creationism you still go by the belief that everyone you've ever slept with is a distant relative. Well, hopefully a "distant" one.

[edit on 2-11-2007 by mattifikation]



posted on Nov, 2 2007 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by mattifikation
 


Guess that would make the world in a sense one giant Alabama. LoL!!




posted on Nov, 3 2007 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by WraothAscendant
 



Guess that would make the world in a sense one giant Alabama. LoL!!


Hey...Not funny, I'm from Alabama.





top topics
 
19
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join