It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


A serious flaw in the bible...

page: 13
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 21 2009 @ 09:24 PM
THERE IS NO SERIOUS FLAW IN THE BIBLE. Only certain parts of the bible are the words of God the father or his Son Jesus Christ. Those area are normally in Red Type. In the beginning, when the heavens were formed
and then the place we call Earth was formed it was formed during 7 time periods. Those time periods were later called days as there were no days per se because the moon and other lighted objects that cast light were not there until after the earth was formed so the periods were not 24 hr. days they were time periods of unknown duration with breaks in between the durations of unknown time periods which could have been very long in time as we know it. Don't forget time as we knowit is only relative to this earth. If is different for Mars, Saturn, Jupiter etc. You can dwell on this information and you can see how ,we really do not know how long it took to form the Earth. Based on this concept, Cabron dating or items found buried for hundred of thousand of years is really a moot point and has no real bearing on how old the earth is. If this is a new concept for you, maybe you should look around for another church, one that has the truth.This is not a new concept , this informatin has been available for over a hundred years. I rest my point..........KMG

posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 01:19 AM
back in the biblical times the calander wasnt the same as present one....

actually carbon dating is seriously flawed on top of that. science is in pre historic stages of modern technology, science in 2000 more years will be mre accurate if people make it that far...

posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 01:56 AM
reply to post by kissmygrits

I suggest reading through the thread before wasting your time...we've discussed it all thoroughly...and I'm sick of hearing the same thing over and over...

posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 07:44 AM
reply to post by CHA0S

You'll be hard-pressed to show me a line from the bible that states how old Earth is. You'll be even harder-pressed to disprove the bible, as it's a collection of vague statements and allusion stolen from other cultures and fine-tuned over time.

posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 08:16 AM

Originally posted by CHA0S
reply to post by kissmygrits

I suggest reading through the thread before wasting your time...we've discussed it all thoroughly...and I'm sick of hearing the same thing over and over...

I love how you wave a hand and dismiss people.

Please answer his question respectfully please.

posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 08:30 AM
Old Testament = Historical collection of cultural folk lore, tall tales, Fables, superstitions, and historical events recorded in writings after being an oral tradition for thousands of years. Due to the word of mouth transmission for much of the time, it is a given that much of it is probably inaccurate from its origins. It does nothing more than give the background and indoctrinated worldview of the cultural world that Jesus came from.

Four Gospels = The core of Jesus' teachings, his ministry, and sacrifice along with his attempts to explain spirituality to those who also came from the traditions of the old testament in terms that they could understand and apply to their day to day lives. Jesus helped them apply the laws and restrictions they already knew into his radical new perspective as a way to ease believers into this new lifestyle. He even utilized ancient prophesies to help explain the significance of this spiritual revolution. This is what a Christian should focus on more than anything.

Rest of the New Testament = An historical account containing personal letters, testimonies and political writings of the early Christian church and its struggle to apply what Jesus taught and ultimately survive persecution.

posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 02:34 PM
reply to post by CHA0S

The Roman selection of writings you call the bible to day is completely misrepresented and misunderstood by human primates.

These writings now in the Roman bible are only a few selected writings from those days and is totally misrepresented by the Roman church and all their breakaway denominations.

To say that all creationists are religious is complete rubbish. Religion is a human institution that distorts the writings by humanising a parable.

These writings are in fact about the metamorphoses of the Soul which is in fact the body or living machine in the form of a processor that manifests your experience in it which is referred to this little Universe, Earth and human body.

As written in The Gospel of Thomas....


39. Jesus said,

“The Pharisees and the Scribes
have taken The Keys of Knowledge
and Hidden Them.

They themselves have NOT entered,
nor have they allowed to enter
those who wish to.

You, however, be as wise as serpents
and as innocent as doves.”

The writings (in the bible) are a parable, that record the creation of the Soul and also the program (Universe, Earth, and human experience), the Birth of the "Inner" Soul Construct, how to operate this system, as well as a full history of the Metamorphoses of the Soul.

The writings really have nothing at all to do with the Primate, but instead to do with the Soul!

The Soul is Not in your Universe but instead, the Universe is manifested in each Soul as a program which we can also access.

The Souls work within a huge network like a lattice-work of Light cords.

From the very beginning, (Cain born of Eve and the wicked one) the family and descendants of A'Dam have tried to covert the Soul.

A'Dam & Eve were the titles given to the Primate.

Man & Woman were the titles given to the Soul.

It is written in Genesis that Man & Woman were created in the Image of God.
It in No way says that A'Dam and Eve were Created in the Image of God

But because of envy the descendants of A'Dam, the human primates have claimed the title of Man & Woman which is nothing more or less than the act of fornication by the descendants of A'Dam & Eve.

As for the record of the days in the first chapter of Geneses this interpretation is plain rubbish as the day "Evening to Morning" is Not a day on Earth or for that matter any other day representing time...

The Day refers to the dividing of Darkness and the forming of Light out of Darkness, before the heaven was Created that our experience appears in.

This is why it is written Evening to Morning, and Not the other way round as on Earth!

This gives us the Darkness (Night) Greyness and the Morning (Day Break) or the Dawn of LIGHT, which of course is the dividing of the Components of Gray being Black & White!

Light is Created by separating the components of Darkness (Greyness), where Gray is a mixture of two components, Black & White.
Light is the Oscillation between Black and White.

This is expressed in wave Length, where light is Alternating, displayed as a sine wave.
The Black is represented by the midway position between the thresholds of the sine wave.
The centre being assigned 0, is the representation of the Black and the peaks of the sine wave + & - are the white thresholds.

posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 02:42 PM
reply to post by CHA0S


Just wondering where I can find in Genesis or any other part of the bible old/new testaments a revelation saying on what date God created Earth?

The making of Adam and Eve I could see as being relative to a date of about six thousand years, but the forming of the planet I cannot find?

Couldn't God have formed the planet during the last billion years and planted life on it six or even ten thousand years ago, once inhabitable?


posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 03:03 PM
Don't lump us all in, there. See my sig.
The earth is 4.5b years old. The universe is 13b years old. Evolution is real (though there are valid questions). Not all Christians are closed-minded whackos.

posted on Oct, 22 2009 @ 11:18 PM
reply to post by Decoy

Check out my post above yours in this thread, as it explains the meaning of the "Evening to Morning" phase called the Day and the Light coming out of darkness in the beginning according to Genesis Chapter 01 for more info visit, A Chronicle Account of The First Book of Moses Called Genesis, the Link can be found in my signature box.

I think most of your questions will be answered in the opening post...

[edit on 22-10-2009 by The Matrix Traveller]

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 06:31 AM
reply to post by texastig

Actually it does matter, because if that is wrong, what else is wrong?

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 01:37 PM

Originally posted by Angus123

There isn't a date mentioned saying the earth is 6,000 years old. That number comes from people doing the math implied in the text. So and so begat so and so, who begat so and so going all the way back to Adam.

It's all rubbish of course, but it's one of the main pillars of fundamentalist dogma.

Yes, I know. If memory serves it was calculated by some monk from this implied data. That monks name is probably buried in the 10+ pages of this topic that should have gone 2 pages at the most. But since I replied I suppose I am guilty too.

It's implied things like this that turn a simple faith into a overly complex sickening twisted parody of itself.

We're explicitly told not to add to or take away from scripture, but that is "damn" near all they ever do. And they wonder why people see them as idiots. Go figure.

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 05:48 PM
Much more then the bible to learn and read from. God also made animals that could talk, they had a human voice but God also destroyed them all. Most people have only heard about the serpent. These animals were around during the time Adam and Eve were here.

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 06:03 PM
Just to clarify. i am an athiest. but carbon dating has not and can not date the age of the planet...

Carbon dating only goes back up to 65,000 years. not millions to billions. There for your information in your first post is already in correct. and your argument already flawed. Carbon dating can only find the ages of organic matter, meaning rocks cannot be dated with carbon dating.

Other Radiometric dating methods can however date the planet.

Creationists dont really say your quote about carbon dating. they most likely will say "carbon dating doesnt work". it's much more simple for them. incorrect, but simple.

Light from stars is probably your only good argument within the first post. sorry!

posted on Oct, 23 2009 @ 07:42 PM
reply to post by CHA0S

Radiometric dating is by far one of the biggest scams in history. The accepted dates are actually selected dates, here's a scientist actually showing the problems with it, it's full of faulty assumptions. Also one of the guys who invented carbon dating discovered it takes C14 around 30,000 years to reach equilibrium. It still hasn't!

part 2

part 3

Also we now now from C14 in tree rings that there was 70% less C14 around 4000-4100 years ago, making things seem extremely old when using their bogus assumptions about the amount of C14 today in the atmoshphere being the same.

posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 07:10 AM
I think the word of god ties in with string theory.
Everything vibrates from the word of god. Make sense?
I have a theory on this subject that can explain a lot of discussions on this website, but with no facts.

posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 07:17 AM

Originally posted by Thymos
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

Isn't that a nice quote? I always was amazed at how astute John was and how poetic. But then I learned that this is Platoism and it would have been known to the people of Johns time. It may be true, but the words were ripped off from Plato.

posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:07 PM
This is a much simpler flaw:

If Eve was the first woman where did the second woman come from and who was the fourth man and where did he come from?

The bible is a story book to guide people to a moral life, nothing more, it becomes a problem when idiots take it literally!

posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 02:16 PM

Originally posted by malcr
The bible is a story book to guide people to a moral life, nothing more, it becomes a problem when idiots take it literally!

Quoted for truth.

posted on Oct, 25 2009 @ 01:52 AM
reply to post by malcr

You are Correct!

The Name A'Dam was given to the Primate Body of Flesh.

The Name Man was given the Soul Body of Light.

However Cain's first Son Enoch (The first Enoch, Not the E'Noch, the 7th from A'Dam) took a wife and as it does not say that this wife was of the descendants of A'Dam & Eve, can only suggest that she was alien, but from where is not mentioned in the bible, or any other writings, as far as I am aware.

But one thing for sure, she Cain's wife was NOT a descendant of A'Dam & Eve, otherwise she would be named in the generations...

In the Books of Enoch it says...

Then sware they all together and bound themselves together
by mutual imprecations upon it.

And they were in all two hundred;
who descended in the days of Jared
on the summit of Mount Hermon,
and they called it Mount Hermon,
because they had sworn and bound themselves
by mutual imprecations upon it.

And these are the names of their leaders:
Semiazaz, their leader,
Arakiba, Rameel, Kokabiel, Tamiel, Ramiel, Danel, Ezeqeel, Baraqijal,
Asael, Armaros, Batarel, Ananel, Zaqiel, Samsapeel, Satarel,
Turel, Jomael, Sariel.

These are their chiefs of tens.

And all the others together with them took unto themselves wives,
and each chose for himself one,
and they began to go in unto them
and defile themselves with them,
and they taught them charms and enchantment’s,
and the cutting of roots,
and made them acquainted with plants.

And they became pregnant,
and they bare great giants,
whose height was Three Thousand Ells:

Who consumed all the acquisitions of men.
And when men could no longer sustain them,

But what are these writings really about ????

The Primate (The descendants of A'Dam & Eve) or are the writings about MAN the Soul and The Metamorphoses of the Soul ???

[edit on 25-10-2009 by The Matrix Traveller]

top topics

<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in