Whats your religion

[Tanas]

The Bible isn't scientifically coherent in the first place.

Why is it you say that?

Probably down to such nonsense such as the cure for leprosy, as described here.

Leviticus 14:4-9 Then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two birds alive and clean, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop: And the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water: As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water: And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open field. And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days. But it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall wash his clothes, also he shall wash his flesh in water, and he shall be clean.

Much more valid and scientific than today modern cure, wouldn't you say?

 

[mysticwaterfall]

This is probably the only long post in this entire topic that I've read through completely to the end. I thought the points you brought up were interesting, mysticwaterfall. I'm not a Christian, but at least I can respect your well-thought-out discourse. I can only hope this would set the bar for what other posts in this topic should be like.

Thanks I'm glad someone appreciated it.

-Dinosaurs
I'm sure dinosaurs on the ark were meant as a joke, but that would be impossible, as we all know they were long gone by then. Some people then ask, why aren't they mentioned in the Bible? Simply put, they aren't important in the grand scheme of things. If you're telling people in the desert 3,000 years ago about how you created the universe, would you mention animals that died 65MYA? I doubt it. You try writting a one page summary of 4.5BY of creation and see how well you do

I'm not sure if you're familiar with Job 40:15-24, but it describes a large animal that doesn't match the description of any animal alive today. I'm not saying this is proof of anything, but it's just interesting to note.

I've heard all theories before, but I personally think thinks like the behomoth, levithan, etc were just unusual creatures to the hebrews, not Dinosaurs. I do appreciate things like this that actually try to research, but I think too many of these apply a modern lens instead of a lens of the time. Yes, it was the biggest animal known to the patriarchs - this doesn't mean it was the biggest animal currently or ever.


QUOTE(pyrmon24 @ Apr 11 2011, 12:45 PM)

Your point of view is surprisingly similar to the one the Muslims have. Might I suggest you read the Qur'an? Very interesting book.

I've looked through parts of it before, and I've looked through some gnostic stuff as well. But in general I defer to St. Paul in Gal 1:8 ("But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! "NIV) which would seem to me to counteract any later gospels, et al. I know that muslims believe that the transmission was corrupted and that they have the "pure" version, and I can respect that, I just don't agree with it. I'm preatty accepting of other faiths, barring bizzare cults. Now, if somebody tries to force there faith on me, well, that's a different story. Then the gloves are off. But a discussion about it, no problems with that.

-----------
Moving back to Noah's ark:
As I said in my previous post, considering the flood was local, we just need the animals known to the patriarchs, which severely limits the number.
Certainly there weren't penguins, polar bears, whatever else on the ark.

 

[ProtoKun7]

The Bible isn't scientifically coherent in the first place.

Why is it you say that?

Probably down to such nonsense such as the cure for leprosy, as described here.

Leviticus 14:4-9 Then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two birds alive and clean, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop: And the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water: As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water: And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open field. And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days. But it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall wash his clothes, also he shall wash his flesh in water, and he shall be clean.

Much more valid and scientific than today modern cure, wouldn't you say?

It may have aided in some way, it may have been symbolic, but when you consider that as the nation had God's support he could have told them to do anything else and they could still be healed.
Pretty sure throwing a body on a dead man's bones wouldn't bring them back to life in modern times as resurrection isn't being used at the moment, but when the body of a person was thrown onto Elisha's bones the man was resurrected.

 

[MFDC12]

The Bible isn't scientifically coherent in the first place.

Why is it you say that?

Probably down to such nonsense such as the cure for leprosy, as described here.

Leviticus 14:4-9 Then shall the priest command to take for him that is to be cleansed two birds alive and clean, and cedar wood, and scarlet, and hyssop: And the priest shall command that one of the birds be killed in an earthen vessel over running water: As for the living bird, he shall take it, and the cedar wood, and the scarlet, and the hyssop, and shall dip them and the living bird in the blood of the bird that was killed over the running water: And he shall sprinkle upon him that is to be cleansed from the leprosy seven times, and shall pronounce him clean, and shall let the living bird loose into the open field. And he that is to be cleansed shall wash his clothes, and shave off all his hair, and wash himself in water, that he may be clean: and after that he shall come into the camp, and shall tarry abroad out of his tent seven days. But it shall be on the seventh day, that he shall shave all his hair off his head and his beard and his eyebrows, even all his hair he shall shave off: and he shall wash his clothes, also he shall wash his flesh in water, and he shall be clean.

Much more valid and scientific than today modern cure, wouldn't you say?

because all modern technology was available for leprosy (or any sickness really) back then

 

[djleviticus]

Jesus is the way, the truth and the life. Knowone gets to God, but through him. Whether u believe it or not its true!!

 

[Tonitonichopchop]

I'm Jewish by blood, but it isn't my religion, so I'm secular. In all honesty, I couldn't stay religious after looking at the facts from a logical, unbiased stand point. I have respect for religious people, and in some ways I envy them, but it isn't for me.

 

[jurassicplayer]

Haruhiist/Kyonkoist

With all honesty, my god is smexy.

 

[Pyrmon]

The Bible isn't scientifically coherent in the first place.

Why is it you say that?

The Bible say that plants were created before the Sun. That would be pretty useless, as plants need the Sun for photosynthesis.
God made Night and Day before there was stars. The Earth was made before the Sun.

 

[ProtoKun7]

The Bible isn't scientifically coherent in the first place.

Why is it you say that?

The Bible say that plants were created before the Sun. That would be pretty useless, as plants need the Sun for photosynthesis.
God made Night and Day before there was stars. The Earth was made before the Sun.

The sun was already there.

Think of the process this way:

The first day had light come to Earth, but from an observer's view it's overcast so it's more of a general light rather than identifiable from any particular direction.
Plants were created on the third day, when the diffused light is quite strong and more than adequate for photosynthesis.
On the fourth day the luminaries came to make a division between day and night; the sources of light were made more clear at this point.

The original language words in that account refer, to the first day, to light as a general sense, and on the fourth, to the source of the light.

 

[kupo3000]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcWR9sjBy3A[/youtube]

 

[Pyrmon]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcWR9sjBy3A[/youtube]

ROFL!
Funniest shit I have seen in a long while!

 

[Sterling]

That's ridiculous. It's absolutely hilarious though. xD

 

[Tanas]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcWR9sjBy3A[/youtube]

This is not a fairy tale, you'll find that this is a true story.

Heres the proof.
http://www.allonlinebible.com/read.php

 

[injected11]

snip

This is not a fairy tale, you'll find that this is a true story.

Heres the proof.
http://www.allonlinebible.com/read.php

Sorry, but posting a link to an online bible doesn't make it a true story.

 

[Gameking-4]

the power of RELIGION!!1!ONE!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBVrPG2qmnI[/youtube]

LOL

 

[KingdomBlade]

snip

This is not a fairy tale, you'll find that this is a true story.

Heres the proof.
http://www.allonlinebible.com/read.php

Sorry, but posting a link to an online bible doesn't make it a true story.

Agreed. How is the Bible proof of that? When I clicked on the link, I was hoping it was some sort of essay or article.

 

[Vulpes Abnocto]

Having a few laughs is one thing, but this has been a good discussion for a long time now.
Lets not make this into a topic fit only for the EoF, now.
Thank you.

 

[The Pi]

I'm an atheist. I depsise fundamentalist religions (yes, there really was a talking snake), as it removes freedom, however, more liberal religions do help people i.e The bible, The Qur'an etc are more of a moral guide rather than blatant truth in spite of this you DO NOT need a piece of text to make the "right" decision given any situation. Utilitarianism is unarguable really, only which form it takes is up for debate (total v average etc)

 

[stinkoman]

snip

This is not a fairy tale, you'll find that this is a true story.

Heres the proof.
http://www.allonlinebible.com/read.php

Sorry, but posting a link to an online bible doesn't make it a true story.

Agreed. How is the Bible proof of that? When I clicked on the link, I was hoping it was some sort of essay or article.

Actually I debated with a Christian about religion once and they cited the bible as proof.

 

[Thesolcity]

snip

This is not a fairy tale, you'll find that this is a true story.

Heres the proof.
http://www.allonlinebible.com/read.php

Sorry, but posting a link to an online bible doesn't make it a true story.

Agreed. How is the Bible proof of that? When I clicked on the link, I was hoping it was some sort of essay or article.

Actually I debated with a Christian about religion once and they cited the bible as proof.

I'm christian, but citing the bible as proof is a load of bull. I use external sources, besides the bible. I don't like people who use the bible as evidence for the bible, it makes christians like me look bad >>. Along with young-earth creationists, they make people like me look retarded. But, I also see this in media, so I can't help it. You hear about smart christians in the media just about as often as you hear about non-violent muslims. :/