Flaw in Christian beliefs

[QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"]

Yeah, jeez god, give the early north americans a break ay?

Another flaw is that the earth is clearly not 6,000 years old lol. (carbon dating etc.)

MetalGear_Ninty

Yeah because the words of men are more reliable than empirical evidence. There is so much evidence for evolution that we may as well just call it fact.

Those who deny evolution simply do not understand it or understand the vast amounts of evidence for it.

If I do something that modern science says is impossible, does it mean I didn't do it? No, it means modern science needs to change like it always does. In a few years, this illogical, irrational theory called evolution will be proven false just like tons of other theories.

Ummmm, I thought a fact was something that could be proven behond doubt?

Lansdowne5

[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"]

Yeah, jeez god, give the early north americans a break ay?

Another flaw is that the earth is clearly not 6,000 years old lol. (carbon dating etc.)

Silenthps

Yeah because the words of men are more reliable than empirical evidence. There is so much evidence for evolution that we may as well just call it fact.

Those who deny evolution simply do not understand it or understand the vast amounts of evidence for it.

If I do something that modern science says is impossible, does it mean I didn't do it? No, it means modern science needs to change like it always does. In a few years, this illogical, irrational theory called evolution will be proven false just like tons of other theories.

Science doesn't say that anything is absolutely impossible.

You are beyond reason, it would be futile to have a debate with you.

[QUOTE="stepnkev"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"][QUOTE="stepnkev"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"]

Yeah, jeez god, give the early north americans a break ay?

Another flaw is that the earth is clearly not 6,000 years old lol. (carbon dating etc.)

Robinho1873

Carbon dating isn't used to date the Earth.....:roll:

Oops wrong words sorry. I meant fossils etc. You, sir, are right to roll your eyes.

Where does it say the earth is 6000 years old in the Bible?

I don't know. I've never read it. But you always here evolutionist biologists saying that is one of the major flaws in the bible. And fossils were what lead Darwin on the path to write ''The Origin of Species''. Theres a fascinating documentry on Channel 4 hosted by Richard Dwakins called ''The Genious of Charles Darwin'' which explains evolution well and why the earth is 4 billion years old.

Which leads me to believe these "evolutionist biologists" have never read the Bible since it never states how old the earth is.

How old the text is has nothing to do with how old the earth could be. I will say there are many Creationists that believe the earth is 6000 years old. I'm not one of them. I believe evolution exists and my personal belief is that the earth is much older than 6000 years old. I have also read the Bible numerous times and have come to the conclusion the Bible leaves the age of the earth open to interpretation. If anyone else has any input, please do. I'm always open to learning more and like to keep an open mind about such things.

[QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"]

Yeah, jeez god, give the early north americans a break ay?

Another flaw is that the earth is clearly not 6,000 years old lol. (carbon dating etc.)

MetalGear_Ninty

Yeah because the words of men are more reliable than empirical evidence. There is so much evidence for evolution that we may as well just call it fact.

Those who deny evolution simply do not understand it or understand the vast amounts of evidence for it.

If I do something that modern science says is impossible, does it mean I didn't do it? No, it means modern science needs to change like it always does. In a few years, this illogical, irrational theory called evolution will be proven false just like tons of other theories.

Science doesn't say that anything is absolutely impossible.

You are beyond reason, it would be futile to have a debate with you.

I second that.

You wanna know whats really funny? People who believe in this fairytale called evolution :lol:Silenthps

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

Ummmm, I thought a fact was something that could be proven behond doubt?

quiglythegreat

Yes, but we only have the complete fossil record of the horse and isn't it slightly perculiar that in the last 2000 years or so since we have been studying animals, not onespecies has ever evolved in that time?

[QUOTE="Silenthps"]You wanna know whats really funny? People who believe in this fairytale called evolution :lol:quiglythegreat

I believe it has been taken on as a common saying, 'You know what's really funny?' and so on. Therefore, it is not nessesserally being used to refer to the actual emotion but rather to make a point.

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

Ummmm, I thought a fact was something that could be proven behond doubt?

Lansdowne5

Yes, but we only have the complete fossil record of the horse and isn't it slightly perculiar that in the last 2000 years or so since we have been studying animals, not onespecies has ever evolved in that time?

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

Ummmm, I thought a fact was something that could be proven behond doubt?

Lansdowne5

Yes, but we only have the complete fossil record of the horse and isn't it slightly perculiar that in the last 2000 years or so since we have been studying animals, not onespecies has ever evolved in that time?

YES!!!! Animals have evolved, stop spreading lies.

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Silenthps"]You wanna know whats really funny? People who believe in this fairytale called evolution :lol:Lansdowne5

I believe it has been taken on as a common saying, 'You know what's really funny?' and so on. Therefore, it is not nessesserally being used to refer to the actual emotion but rather to make a point.

[QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="felixlynch777"][QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"]

Yeah, jeez god, give the early north americans a break ay?

Another flaw is that the earth is clearly not 6,000 years old lol. (carbon dating etc.)

felixlynch777

Yeah because the words of men are more reliable than empirical evidence. There is so much evidence for evolution that we may as well just call it fact.

Those who deny evolution simply do not understand it or understand the vast amounts of evidence for it.

If I do something that modern science says is impossible, does it mean I didn't do it? No, it means modern science needs to change like it always does. In a few years, this illogical, irrational theory called evolution will be proven false just like tons of other theories.

Oh my, please stop saying such funny and amazingly retarded things, if I carry on laughing my sides are gonna split. And just when I stopped laughing from your first post!:lol:

Please just leave. You have contributed nothing but pure idiocy.

Actually, do you know why most people believe in Evolution? For the same reason that people used to believe in the Bible, because the majority of other people do. This is called Agumentum ad Populum.

im tired of these threads. I notice many people on gaming forums dont believe in god and always try to put down ones religion without knowing what the hell they are talking about and making little jokes that are inappropriate and disrespectful. Tjeremiah1988

Agreed, though most of the time the religious people start it off with dumb jokes that never were really funny in the first place.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

Ummmm, I thought a fact was something that could be proven behond doubt?

felixlynch777

Yes, but we only have the complete fossil record of the horse and isn't it slightly perculiar that in the last 2000 years or so since we have been studying animals, not onespecies has ever evolved in that time?

YES!!!! Animals have evolved, stop spreading lies.

What the.....? Which animals? Name any animal that has notably evolved since we have been studying it. I dare you.

[QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="Silenthps"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"]

Yeah, jeez god, give the early north americans a break ay?

Another flaw is that the earth is clearly not 6,000 years old lol. (carbon dating etc.)

MetalGear_Ninty

Yeah because the words of men are more reliable than empirical evidence. There is so much evidence for evolution that we may as well just call it fact.

Those who deny evolution simply do not understand it or understand the vast amounts of evidence for it.

If I do something that modern science says is impossible, does it mean I didn't do it? No, it means modern science needs to change like it always does. In a few years, this illogical, irrational theory called evolution will be proven false just like tons of other theories.

Science doesn't say that anything is absolutely impossible.

You are beyond reason, it would be futile to have a debate with you.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

Ummmm, I thought a fact was something that could be proven behond doubt?

quiglythegreat

Yes, but we only have the complete fossil record of the horse and isn't it slightly perculiar that in the last 2000 years or so since we have been studying animals, not onespecies has ever evolved in that time?

Name a species that is proved to have evolved from its past ancestors.

No comment, I'm tired of OT becoming a damn religious battlefield.ahriman2

Just a suggestion, but why don't you just not go on the religious threads if your tired of them.

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

Ummmm, I thought a fact was something that could be proven behond doubt?

Lansdowne5

Yes, but we only have the complete fossil record of the horse and isn't it slightly perculiar that in the last 2000 years or so since we have been studying animals, not onespecies has ever evolved in that time?

Name a species that is proved to have evolved from its past ancestors.

"When the human race has once acquired a superstition, nothing short of death is ever likely to remove it."

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

Ummmm, I thought a fact was something that could be proven behond doubt?

quiglythegreat

Yes, but we only have the complete fossil record of the horse and isn't it slightly perculiar that in the last 2000 years or so since we have been studying animals, not onespecies has ever evolved in that time?

Name a species that is proved to have evolved from its past ancestors.

I think you mistunderstand what Evolution is. It is not a change in the species, but rather a change in the species DNA. Such as when a dog breeds with another dog and creates an offspring which is not nesesserally the same as its parents but has the same traits and behaviour patterns, this is not evolution.

Idon't get those who object to religious/philosophical discussion on GameSpot.

Isn't that what a forum is for, for the purpose of discussion.

Idon't get those who object to religious/philosophical discussion on GameSpot.

Isn't that what a forum is for, for the purpose of discussion.

MetalGear_Ninty

yes, but the majority of them dont know what the hell they are talking about and make outrageous, stupid, nonsense threads with idiotic and rude comments towards said religion.

[QUOTE="stepnkev"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"][QUOTE="stepnkev"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"]

Yeah, jeez god, give the early north americans a break ay?

Another flaw is that the earth is clearly not 6,000 years old lol. (carbon dating etc.)

Lansdowne5

Carbon dating isn't used to date the Earth.....:roll:

Oops wrong words sorry. I meant fossils etc. You, sir, are right to roll your eyes.

Where does it say the earth is 6000 years old in the Bible?

I don't know. I've never read it. But you always here evolutionist biologists saying that is one of the major flaws in the bible. And fossils were what lead Darwin on the path to write ''The Origin of Species''. Theres a fascinating documentry on Channel 4 hosted by Richard Dwakins called ''The Genious of Charles Darwin'' which explains evolution well and why the earth is 4 billion years old.

Which leads me to believe these "evolutionist biologists" have never read the Bible since it never states how old the earth is.

Well actually..... if we assume what is said in the Bible to be correct. Then the Earth was made during the 7 days of Creation. So that is roughly seven days to start off with. After this point, it says that Adam was the first man. It also gives us an average of how long each man lived for in the Bible, and actually records every direct descendant of Adam until Jesus. Because we can't be 100% accurate about how long each man lived for however, when calculated we get an age of between 4000 years to 6000 years for the age of the Earth. You are completely right that it never catagorically says the age of the Earth in the Bible, but then, there wouldn't have been a proper record of time back then anyway.

This is why I believe the Bible leaves the age of the earth open. The Hebrew word "Yom" has more than one meaning. In Hebrew texts the word "Yom" could mean 24 hours, a year, a time period, etc. This is actually a debate that has been going on for quite some time. You can google Yom and read about it.

There is also an issue with not knowing how long Adam was in a deep sleep. See Genesis 2:21.

Another interpretation question arise when we consider the very first part of the Bible. Genesis 1:1

"In the beginning, God created the Heaven and the Earth"

This does not say there was nothing before, it simply says the earth was created. Many people interpret this to mean God created the earth out of nothing but since no one was living back then, we really don't know. There could have been something there before, for, I don't know, billions of years.

This is what I mean when I state the Bible leaves the age of the earth open to interpretation. There are many ways someone could interpret something another way. In the end, I'm not so sure it matters whether or not we believe how old the earth is. What may matter more is how we treat others.

[QUOTE="Robinho1873"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="stepnkev"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"][QUOTE="stepnkev"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"]

Yeah, jeez god, give the early north americans a break ay?

Another flaw is that the earth is clearly not 6,000 years old lol. (carbon dating etc.)

Lansdowne5

Carbon dating isn't used to date the Earth.....:roll:

Oops wrong words sorry. I meant fossils etc. You, sir, are right to roll your eyes.

Where does it say the earth is 6000 years old in the Bible?

I don't know. I've never read it. But you always here evolutionist biologists saying that is one of the major flaws in the bible. And fossils were what lead Darwin on the path to write ''The Origin of Species''. Theres a fascinating documentry on Channel 4 hosted by Richard Dwakins called ''The Genious of Charles Darwin'' which explains evolution well and why the earth is 4 billion years old.

Which leads me to believe these "evolutionist biologists" have never read the Bible since it never states how old the earth is.

Well actually..... if we assume what is said in the Bible to be correct. Then the Earth was made in 7 days. So that is seven days to start off with. After this point, it says that Adam was the first man. It also gives us an average of how long each man lived for in the Bible, and actually records every direct descendant of Adam until Jesus. Because we can't be 100% accurate about how long each man lived for however, when calculated we get an age of between 4000 years to 6000 years for the age of the Earth. You are completely right that it never catagorically says the age of the Earth in the Bible, but then, there wouldn't have been a proper record of time back then anyway.

Ah at last! A more knowledgeable man than myself saves me from my flounderings in scriptoral evidence. What I do know however is that evolution is FACT.

Ummmm, I thought a fact was something that could be proven behond doubt?

What people don't consider is that fact is not only based on what is known it's also based on what isn't known as well as what may be suspected. You didn't do the research so you only know what someone else has determined to be the plausible explanation.

The closest thing you can get to an irrefutable fact would be the obvious, that's it. The only thing you can prove with a theory is that what you think is logical therefore it's possible.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"]

Ummmm, I thought a fact was something that could be proven behond doubt?

felixlynch777

Yes, but we only have the complete fossil record of the horse and isn't it slightly perculiar that in the last 2000 years or so since we have been studying animals, not onespecies has ever evolved in that time?

YES!!!! Animals have evolved, stop spreading lies.

Humans for one. Look at the example that Charles Darwin saw when visiting pidgeon shows. Breeders would take the characteristics of the pidgeon which the liked the best and breed it with another similarly good bird. When teh new pidgeon was born, after surprisingly few generations a very effecient carrier pidgeon was bred. Evolution takes place all around us with subtle changes being noted al the time. Obviously ''artificial selection'' will be quicker than ''natural selection'' because whole species have to die off in the wild before the fittest can survive.

[QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="stepnkev"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"][QUOTE="stepnkev"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"][QUOTE="Lansdowne5"][QUOTE="Robinho1873"]

Yeah, jeez god, give the early north americans a break ay?

Another flaw is that the earth is clearly not 6,000 years old lol. (carbon dating etc.)

stepnkev

Carbon dating isn't used to date the Earth.....:roll:

Oops wrong words sorry. I meant fossils etc. You, sir, are right to roll your eyes.

Where does it say the earth is 6000 years old in the Bible?

I don't know. I've never read it. But you always here evolutionist biologists saying that is one of the major flaws in the bible. And fossils were what lead Darwin on the path to write ''The Origin of Species''. Theres a fascinating documentry on Channel 4 hosted by Richard Dwakins called ''The Genious of Charles Darwin'' which explains evolution well and why the earth is 4 billion years old.

Which leads me to believe these "evolutionist biologists" have never read the Bible since it never states how old the earth is.

Well actually..... if we assume what is said in the Bible to be correct. Then the Earth was made during the 7 days of Creation. So that is roughly seven days to start off with. After this point, it says that Adam was the first man. It also gives us an average of how long each man lived for in the Bible, and actually records every direct descendant of Adam until Jesus. Because we can't be 100% accurate about how long each man lived for however, when calculated we get an age of between 4000 years to 6000 years for the age of the Earth. You are completely right that it never catagorically says the age of the Earth in the Bible, but then, there wouldn't have been a proper record of time back then anyway.

This is why I believe the Bible leaves the age of the earth open. The Hebrew word "Yom" has more than one meaning. In Hebrew texts the word "Yom" could mean 24 hours, a year, a time period, etc. This is actually a debate that has been going on for quite some time. You can google Yom and read about it.

There is also an issue with not knowing how long Adam was in a deep sleep. See Genesis 2:21.

Another interpretation question arise when we consider the very first part of the Bible. Genesis 1:1

"In the beginning, God created the Heaven and the Earth"

This does not say there was nothing before, it simply says the earth was created. Many people interpret this to mean God created the earth out of nothing but since no one was living back then, we really don't know. There could have been something there before, for, I don't know, billions of years.

This is what I mean when I state the Bible leaves the age of the earth open to interpretation. There are many ways someone could interpret something another way. In the end, I'm not so sure it matters whether or not we believe how old the earth is. What may matter more is how we treat others.

Also, Genesis says man brought death into the earth. Natural selection = death brough man into the earth.

[QUOTE="mindstorm"]

Every person who is a Christian was led by God to be one so God does still lead people.

About being a Creationist and Evolutionist... One can indeed be a Theistic Evolutionist in believing God used evolution to create the world as it is now. I used to be one myself even. Sure I debate Young-Earth Creationism all the time here but what is important for a Christian to believe most of all is that God did indeed create the world and miracles like that of the resurrection of Jesus Christ actually occured.

Robinho1873

There's just to much evidence to deny evolution. Even breeders of dogs and Pidgeons are showing examples of evolution. Taking characteristics which they like and breeding with another. In other words ''Artificial selection'' rather than ''natural selection'' If people choose to beleive in God thats fine but if they deny evolution then they just can't see the wood for the trees.

[QUOTE="mindstorm"]

Every person who is a Christian was led by God to be one so God does still lead people.

About being a Creationist and Evolutionist... One can indeed be a Theistic Evolutionist in believing God used evolution to create the world as it is now. I used to be one myself even. Sure I debate Young-Earth Creationism all the time here but what is important for a Christian to believe most of all is that God did indeed create the world and miracles like that of the resurrection of Jesus Christ actually occured.

felixlynch777

How the hell can we prove that the resurrection is true? If it is the zombie apocalypse has already begun!

Hitler was a Christian, was he led by God to do what he did?

Here is a paradox in the bible

Genesis 1

(24) And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so

(26) Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness;

Genesis 2

(15)The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it

(19) So out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air

Alright so what came first Man or the animals?

The reason for this contradiction was that these two sections were written by different people in different time periods (genesis 1 being written about 500 AD if Im not mistaken) neither of these are the word of god they are interpretations by his followers. The bible was not written by god or Jesus so how it should be taken word for word is beyond me.

Here is another line from genesis 3

(16) (as punishment for eating the fruit) To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you

Who would have thought that god was such a blantent sexist, so childbirth pain is something all women deserve because of one womans mistake?

Here is a paradox in the bible

Genesis 1

(24) And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so

(26) Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness;

Genesis 2

(15)The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it

(19) So out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air

Alright so what came first Man or the animals?

The reason for this contradiction was that these two sections were written by different people in different time periods (genesis 1 being written about 500 AD if Im not mistaken) neither of these are the word of god they are interpretations by his followers. The bible was not written by god or Jesus so how it should be taken word for word is beyond me.

Here is another line from genesis 3

(16) (as punishment for eating the fruit) To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you

Who would have thought that god was such a blantent sexist, so childbirth pain is something all women deserve because of one womans mistake?

Power_47

2:15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

2:16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

2:17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

2:18And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

2:19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

In Genesis 1 its talking about the creation of the earth. In these verses its talking about him forming animals in the garden for adam to name.

[QUOTE="Power_47"]

Here is a paradox in the bible

Genesis 1

(24) And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so

(26) Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness;

Genesis 2

(15)The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it

(19) So out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air

Alright so what came first Man or the animals?

The reason for this contradiction was that these two sections were written by different people in different time periods (genesis 1 being written about 500 AD if Im not mistaken) neither of these are the word of god they are interpretations by his followers. The bible was not written by god or Jesus so how it should be taken word for word is beyond me.

Here is another line from genesis 3

(16) (as punishment for eating the fruit) To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you

Who would have thought that god was such a blantent sexist, so childbirth pain is something all women deserve because of one womans mistake?

Silenthps

2:15And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it.

2:16And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat:

2:17But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

2:18And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

2:19And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

In Genesis 1 its talking about the creation of the earth. In these verses its talking about him forming animals in the garden for adam to name.

2:19 And out of the ground the lord god formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam

It still says he formed them after Adam whereas in the first one it was the animals then man.

And you still didnt explain the childbirth thing, try finding a loophole out of that one ;)

I have always found it a bit odd that God couldn't be bothered to tell most of the world about his existence.Funky_Llama

oh, that day is coming and you might not like it.

[QUOTE="zzz20"]religion is bsC_BozkurT_C

I just can't stand the people who try to convert you.

I can't tolerate having someone shove their "beliefs" down my throat.

I love questioning them and making them feel dumb. Once I even tried to show them the beginning of Zeitgeist, which they were only able to bare it for so long before leaving.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]I have always found it a bit odd that God couldn't be bothered to tell most of the world about his existence.Tjeremiah1988

oh, that day is coming and you might not like it.

I was under the impression that that day happened two millenia ago. ;)

[QUOTE="C_BozkurT_C"]

[QUOTE="zzz20"]religion is bsTruth_Seekr

I just can't stand the people who try to convert you.

I can't tolerate having someone shove their "beliefs" down my throat.

I love questioning them and making them feel dumb. Once I even tried to show them the beginning of Zeitgeist, which they were only able to bare it for so long before leaving.

Talking of BS, the begining of Zeitgeist..

I have always found it a bit odd that God couldn't be bothered to tell most of the world about his existence.Funky_Llama

You need faith to get to Heaven. If God was here with us now there would be no need for faith. Therefore, we would not be believing because of our love for God but purely because we could see with our own eyes.

Have you seen Indian Jones and the Last Crusade? With the leap of faith? Well that is along the same lines.

[QUOTE="Funky_Llama"]I have always found it a bit odd that God couldn't be bothered to tell most of the world about his existence.Lansdowne5

You need faith to get to Heaven. If God was here with us now there would be no need for faith. Therefore, we would not be believing because of our love for God but purely because we could see with our own eyes.

Have you seen Indian Jones and the Last Crusade? With the leap of faith? Well that is along the same lines.

No, no, I'm talking about people who don't even know of Christianity; those for whom, because of ignorance, there is no chance of faith in something they don't even know about.

Here is a paradox in the bible

Genesis 1

(24) And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so

(26) Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness;

Genesis 2

(15)The LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it

(19) So out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air

Alright so what came first Man or the animals?

The reason for this contradiction was that these two sections were written by different people in different time periods (genesis 1 being written about 500 AD if Im not mistaken) neither of these are the word of god they are interpretations by his followers. The bible was not written by god or Jesus so how it should be taken word for word is beyond me.

Here is another line from genesis 3

(16) (as punishment for eating the fruit) To the woman he said, "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you

Who would have thought that god was such a blantent sexist, so childbirth pain is something all women deserve because of one womans mistake?

Power_47

You've taken those out of context and by the way, the Bible is the inspired word of God. All authors of the books of the Bible were under the influence of the Holy Spirit and therefore all of the Bible's teachings are the pure, holy and correct Word of God.

Genesis 1 is basically a summary, and Genesis 2 is a walk through of that summary. Neither contradicts one another, if anything they compliment.