Penn and Teller prove Bible is Bull

You didn't answer my question...

Donkey_Puncher

And which question was that?....I'm not going through a book the size of the Bible and explaining the entire thing to you.

There are some atheists that I don't mind discussing religion with since they post maturely. None of them are in this thread howvever. I'm not interested in his quesion. And I'm not interested in your persistence of it. If you want to know...study theology.

Regardless of what anyone says, the only way to disprove the Bible is to die and see what happens. Since nobody can resurrect themselves, we will never know until we die ourselves. That's why it says in the Bible that you have to have faith. If you die and there is heaven then great, if there isnt then you wont care, youll be dead. Its better to be safe than sorry.Taegukki

but what if you already know there isn't a heaven? theres just as much proof we go to heaven as there is us going to marshmallow land when we die.

Actually, the Theory of Evolution is not very conrcrete and there is not enough proof, and by far has ten fold more fallacies in it than neccessary. I'll give you an example. The current idea is that after man finished evolving, some 100 000 years ago (after evolving for an already several million years) it took him 96 400 years to discover basic farming and then a further more 6000 years to only scrape the surface of the complexity of life and the universe.

JadedEagle04

Not very concrete? Where do you get that from? Practically all of evolution has been proven, and I highly doubt it will ever step down from theory.

It doesn't take a day or two to discover something, it's all gradual, you would know this if you had studied evolution. Farming is only recent because it's not like you go out there and suddenly know that a seed will sprout into a flower. The same thing with everything else, things must be gradually discovered before you can discover something that's beyond your specie's grasp. There's a reason why people had no idea what stars were yet they had already developed a complex system of mathematics that could pinpoint their locations very accurately.

[QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"]

You didn't answer my question...

LJS9502_basic

And which question was that?....I'm not going through a book the size of the Bible and explaining the entire thing to you.

There are some atheists that I don't mind discussing religion with since they post maturely. None of them are in this thread howvever. I'm not interested in his quesion. And I'm not interested in your persistence of it. If you want to know...study theology.

like i said before. you dont have an answer. youre just using the theology thing as a scapegoat. and for the record i have never had a religious conversation with a christian who was logical andpresented any evidence to further his point.

[QUOTE="Taegukki"]Regardless of what anyone says, the only way to disprove the Bible is to die and see what happens. Since nobody can resurrect themselves, we will never know until we die ourselves. That's why it says in the Bible that you have to have faith. If you die and there is heaven then great, if there isnt then you wont care, youll be dead. Its better to be safe than sorry.Zero5000X

but what if you already know there isn't a heaven? theres just as much proof we go to heaven as there is us going to marshmallow land when we die.

Believe what you want.

[QUOTE="JadedEagle04"]

Actually, the Theory of Evolution is not very conrcrete and there is not enough proof, and by far has ten fold more fallacies in it than neccessary. I'll give you an example. The current idea is that after man finished evolving, some 100 000 years ago (after evolving for an already several million years) it took him 96 400 years to discover basic farming and then a further more 6000 years to only scrape the surface of the complexity of life and the universe.

DeeJayInphinity

Not very concrete? Where do you get that from? Practically all of evolution has been proven, and I highly doubt it will ever step down from theory.

It doesn't take a day or two to discover something, it's all gradual, you would know this if you had studied evolution. Farming is only recent because it's not like you go out there and suddenly know that a seed will sprout into a flower. The same thing with everything else, things must be gradually discovered before you can discover something that's beyond your specie's grasp. There's a reason why people had no idea what stars were yet they had already developed a complex system of mathematics that could pinpoint their locations very accurately.

Don't forget that it's much easier to discover new things once you don't need to spend all day hunting for food.

[QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"]

You didn't answer my question...

LJS9502_basic

And which question was that?....I'm not going through a book the size of the Bible and explaining the entire thing to you.

There are some atheists that I don't mind discussing religion with since they post maturely. None of them are in this thread howvever. I'm not interested in his quesion. And I'm not interested in your persistence of it. If you want to know...study theology.

I'm sorry I'm mature enough for you then. :|

I'll get back to you once I mature enough to talk to a "real adult".

Do me a favor, drop the condescending bullsh*t and answer the question, something a real "mature" adult would do. Set an example for all us childish kids right?

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]

I explained already that numbers were used symbolically by the Jewish people. They aren't meant to be taken literally...and that includes the 7 days of creation. The Bible used stories to get a message through.

Donkey_Puncher

You keep saying "Symbolically" and "not literal". Where on earth can you discern what's symbolic and what's not in the bible? Or what's literal and what's not?

It's a simple question, why not answer since you obviously "Have studied theology" and we haven't.

Well, since all symbols are explained in one method or another in the Bible, you'd know what those symbols are. Then the literal part, you would need to use common sense and think about the meaning implied. For example, Jesus taught people with parables, in them were symbols, and behind them was always a core lesson that was easy for the people to understand. This is backed up, because Jesus explained that when the disciples asked him why He teaches in Parables. Another example is the the bread and wine (flesh and blood). The meaning for this is not meant to be taken literally; that would be cannabalism, but rather if you would read other parts of the New Testament specifically, you would understand why the flesh and blood are represented through bread and wine.

Look now for the proof of what I have just said:

When Jesus gave 5,000 people bread and fish (John 6:1-15), Jesus gave them real bread to satisfy their physical needs, hunger. This one is easy, it is meant to be taken literally, it was actual bread. Later however, it reads thatJesus is "the bread of life" (verse 35). That is symbolical, Jesus is the bread of life, beacuse Jesus is the sourceand sustainer of eternal life(to feed that hunger, in this case the spritual necessity/hunger which can be satisifed through faith in Jesus). Furthermore, eternal life in heaven is only possible through Jesus.

John 14:6 -Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Jesus also said "Do not work for food that spoils, but for food that endures to eternal life" (John 6:27). This life giving food/bread that is the source of eternal life is Jesus!

Meh...I don't even enjoy their show...doubt I'd find that any better.LJS9502_basic

I hate them aswell, but I would recommend watching the video, it has good points about picking and choosing......

I'm sorry I'm mature enough for you then. :|

I'll get back to you once I mature enough to talk to a "real adult".

Do me a favor, drop the condescending bullsh*t and answer the question, something a real "mature" adult would do. Set an example for all us childish kids right?

Donkey_Puncher

I explained it several times in this thread. Perhaps you should read then.

lol "God."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8RV46fsmx6E

Zero5000X

There's nothing to prove, we already know that, it' been obvious. That's why it's considered fiction.Seems like they are really fishing formaterial to keep their show going. What's next? Why magic obiosly isn't real?

Isn't that a comedy show? Which intends to make people laugh?

About the picking and choosing... I've been saying that for years but now that it's on TV people listen. Now that two dweebs on television say it it's a brilliant revelation. ApparentlyTV is the causeof A.D.D.

like i said before. you dont have an answer. youre just using the theology thing as a scapegoat. and for the record i have never had a religious conversation with a christian who was logical andpresented any evidence to further his point.

Zero5000X

Answer to what? Your misunderstanding of the relativity of words like every...all...some? I explained that to you several times...you don't get it. It's pointless.:|

[QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"]

I'm sorry I'm mature enough for you then. :|

I'll get back to you once I mature enough to talk to a "real adult".

Do me a favor, drop the condescending bullsh*t and answer the question, something a real "mature" adult would do. Set an example for all us childish kids right?

LJS9502_basic

I explained it several times in this thread. Perhaps you should read then.

the Bible says we should kill kids if they dishonor or disrespect their parents. explain that one.

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="JadedEagle04"]

Actually, the Theory of Evolution is not very conrcrete and there is not enough proof, and by far has ten fold more fallacies in it than neccessary. I'll give you an example. The current idea is that after man finished evolving, some 100 000 years ago (after evolving for an already several million years) it took him 96 400 years to discover basic farming and then a further more 6000 years to only scrape the surface of the complexity of life and the universe.

Zagrius

Not very concrete? Where do you get that from? Practically all of evolution has been proven, and I highly doubt it will ever step down from theory.

It doesn't take a day or two to discover something, it's all gradual, you would know this if you had studied evolution. Farming is only recent because it's not like you go out there and suddenly know that a seed will sprout into a flower. The same thing with everything else, things must be gradually discovered before you can discover something that's beyond your specie's grasp. There's a reason why people had no idea what stars were yet they had already developed a complex system of mathematics that could pinpoint their locations very accurately.

Don't forget that it's much easier to discover new things once you don't need to spend all day hunting for food.

So what you are saying is that intelligence is a trait that can be passed down through DNA? Lets be hypotethical for agrumental sake, lets go back 100 000 years ago. Is it safe to say that in 100 000, if evolution would be true, very few if any biological/evolutions would occur in the Human? I beleive it the answer is a definitive no. Then, the only possible understanding is that it took the Human 96 000 years, about 4000BC to realize that plants can grow and therefore harvested? Let us not forget, that since Humans were supposedly "nomadic" they would have to have realized different seasons, dying vegetation in the winter and once again regrowth of new plants.

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="stewiegriffin78"]

....wow. It says, first of all, the creatures of the land. Think about all of the creatures IN THE SEA. When you think about it, there are far far more many sea creatures than land creatures. You could count insects, but I wouldn't know if God included insects. So it's quite possile he could've got all of the animals on there (especially if God helped). You're rather close-minded.

LJS9502_basic

He would've had to have done a whole bunch of stuff to get that many animals in the boat. Even if you only count the land animals, which is pretty much what every one else on this Earth was assuming since sea animals don't drown in floods (duh) you still got massive creatures that need to be feed thousands of pounds of food every day.

Then you still have the lack of proof to contend with. As of today, there is still no proof of a global flood, nor enough water to cover the entire Earth.

It wasn't a global flood....it was a flood where they lived. You do realize one views their world as the entire world? The world was much smaller to people who didn't have modern conveyances....or knowledge.

No one is argueing with your sound explaination.. They are argueing against the people on this board that take Noah's Ark literally instead of a exgerration.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"]

I'm sorry I'm mature enough for you then. :|

I'll get back to you once I mature enough to talk to a "real adult".

Do me a favor, drop the condescending bullsh*t and answer the question, something a real "mature" adult would do. Set an example for all us childish kids right?

Zero5000X

I explained it several times in this thread. Perhaps you should read then.

the Bible says we should kill kids if they dishonor or disrespect their parents. explain that one.

I follow the NT...doesn't say that. And since you haven't given me scripture source...I can't answer that.

[QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"]

I'm sorry I'm mature enough for you then. :|

I'll get back to you once I mature enough to talk to a "real adult".

Do me a favor, drop the condescending bullsh*t and answer the question, something a real "mature" adult would do. Set an example for all us childish kids right?

LJS9502_basic

I explained it several times in this thread. Perhaps you should read then.

I can I read what you haven't typed?

No one is argueing with your sound explaination.. They are argueing against the people on this board that take Noah's Ark literally instead of a exgerration.

sSubZerOo

So you're saying the dude that doesn't understand every as a relative term is arguing against literal vs symbolic. I don't buy that...

[QUOTE="Zero5000X"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"]

I'm sorry I'm mature enough for you then. :|

I'll get back to you once I mature enough to talk to a "real adult".

Do me a favor, drop the condescending bullsh*t and answer the question, something a real "mature" adult would do. Set an example for all us childish kids right?

LJS9502_basic

I explained it several times in this thread. Perhaps you should read then.

the Bible says we should kill kids if they dishonor or disrespect their parents. explain that one.

I follow the NT...doesn't say that. And since you haven't given me scripture source...I can't answer that.

its in the video. you have to accept both the new and old testament. both are the words of god. god said that you were supposed to kill your kids if they dishonored you. sounds like a pretty mean god to me.

I can I read what you haven't typed?

Donkey_Puncher

Then in regard to this particular instance I explained that numbers were symbolic...and that the flood was not global but local. What did you not get?

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

No one is argueing with your sound explaination.. They are argueing against the people on this board that take Noah's Ark literally instead of a exgerration.

LJS9502_basic

So you're saying the dude that doesn't understand every as a relative term is arguing against literal vs symbolic. I don't buy that...

WHEN we see the guy saying that the continent was one and that there weren't that many land based animals back then, we can assume safely that he is taking this literally.

Iits in the video. you have to accept both the new and old testament. both are the words of god. god said that you were supposed to kill your kids if they dishonored you. sounds like a pretty mean god to me.

Zero5000X

No. I want the Biblical text...not Penn & Teller.

[QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"]

I can I read what you haven't typed?

LJS9502_basic

Then in regard to this particular instance I explained that numbers were symbolic...and that the flood was not global but local. What did you not get?

Didn't God say that he was going to flood the whole world?

[QUOTE="Zero5000X"]

Iits in the video. you have to accept both the new and old testament. both are the words of god. god said that you were supposed to kill your kids if they dishonored you. sounds like a pretty mean god to me.

LJS9502_basic

No. I want the Biblical text...not Penn & Teller.

they show you the biblical text. also, if you're this big time christian you should know this already.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

No one is argueing with your sound explaination.. They are argueing against the people on this board that take Noah's Ark literally instead of a exgerration.

sSubZerOo

So you're saying the dude that doesn't understand every as a relative term is arguing against literal vs symbolic. I don't buy that...

WHEN we see the guy saying that the continent was one and that there weren't that many land based animals back then, we can assume safely that he is taking this literally.

I don't know who that is...

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Zero5000X"]

Iits in the video. you have to accept both the new and old testament. both are the words of god. god said that you were supposed to kill your kids if they dishonored you. sounds like a pretty mean god to me.

Zero5000X

No. I want the Biblical text...not Penn & Teller.

they show you the biblical text. also, if you're this big time christian you should know this already.

Christianity = NT. And I don't memorize numbers. I have a Bible...give me the verse. Should be easy if you are so familiar with it.

Well, since all symbols are explained in one method or another in the Bible, you'd know what those symbols are. Then the literal part, you would need to use common sense and think about the meaning implied. For example, Jesus taught people with parables, in them were symbols, and behind them was always a core lesson that was easy for the people to understand. This is backed up, because Jesus explained that when the disciples asked him why He teaches in Parables. Another example is the the bread and wine (flesh and blood). The meaning for this is not meant to be taken literally; that would be cannabalism, but rather if you would read other parts of the New Testament specifically, you would understand why the flesh and blood are represented through bread and wine.

JadedEagle04

Common sense then?

If we go by common sense we know the earth isn't 6000 years old, the flood didn't happen, the jews didn't wander around the desert for 40 years, that moses didn't part the red sea, that Jesus didn't turn water into wine, thata man didn'tlive in a giant fish,and that most importantlyJesus didn't rise from a grave.

Common sense would tell us that all of this is impossible.

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

No one is argueing with your sound explaination.. They are argueing against the people on this board that take Noah's Ark literally instead of a exgerration.

LJS9502_basic

So you're saying the dude that doesn't understand every as a relative term is arguing against literal vs symbolic. I don't buy that...

WHEN we see the guy saying that the continent was one and that there weren't that many land based animals back then, we can assume safely that he is taking this literally.

I don't know who that is...

Ready the earlier posts.. Some of the peoples defenses have been stating that there weren't as many animals back then, That it was ONE continent not multiple such as today (which would actually be harder to collect all the animals) as well as other things.. There are people on this topic that have been defending Noah's Ark as actuality. (not your very logical conclusion which is most likely true).

Didn't God say that he was going to flood the whole world?

Zero5000X

Again...relative to the people and where they lived. And a local flood did occur. So in that case history actually backs up the Bible.;)

[QUOTE="Zero5000X"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"]

I'm sorry I'm mature enough for you then. :|

I'll get back to you once I mature enough to talk to a "real adult".

Do me a favor, drop the condescending bullsh*t and answer the question, something a real "mature" adult would do. Set an example for all us childish kids right?

LJS9502_basic

I explained it several times in this thread. Perhaps you should read then.

the Bible says we should kill kids if they dishonor or disrespect their parents. explain that one.

I follow the NT...doesn't say that. And since you haven't given me scripture source...I can't answer that.

You might be correct about that being in the Old Testament, however it could be understood differently. It most likely means that one who dishonours his or her parents are as good as dead.

Deuteronomy 27:16

16 "Cursed is the man who dishonors his father or his mother."
Then all the people shall say, "Amen!"

The other solution is that they may have misinterpreted, and decided that stoning was the proper way. But if you remember correctly, what does Jesus say?

John 8

1Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.

2And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.

3And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

8And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.

9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

12Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

So what you are saying is that intelligence is a trait that can be passed down through DNA? Lets be hypotethical for agrumental sake, lets go back 100 000 years ago. Is it safe to say that in 100 000, if evolution would be true, very few if any biological/evolutions would occur in the Human? I beleive it the answer is a definitive no. Then, the only possible understanding is that it took the Human 96 000 years, about 4000BC to realize that plants can grow and therefore harvested? Let us not forget, that since Humans were supposedly "nomadic" they would have to have realized different seasons, dying vegetation in the winter and once again regrowth of new plants.

JadedEagle04

No, I never said that. I'm telling you that certain things must come before others and it was all very gradual until recently.

Intelligence wasn't passed down through the DNA, it was passed down either written using hieroglyphics or, when a real language was formed, books/paper and speech. The bible is a huge example of that.

They did realize that, the only problem was that they didn't know what was causing it. Different religions have a variety of gods that must be appeased in order for either the season to come by or for it to come by in full force, meaning a good yield or a plentiful amount of rain.

[QUOTE="Zero5000X"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Zero5000X"]

Iits in the video. you have to accept both the new and old testament. both are the words of god. god said that you were supposed to kill your kids if they dishonored you. sounds like a pretty mean god to me.

LJS9502_basic

No. I want the Biblical text...not Penn & Teller.

they show you the biblical text. also, if you're this big time christian you should know this already.

Christianity = NT. And I don't memorize numbers. I have a Bible...give me the verse. Should be easy if you are so familiar with it.

Indeed, christians follow the new testament. A lot has changed between the OT and NT, God was a lot more vengeful back then. The ten commandments is something we follow though. I dont take everything it says in the OT literally, obviously a lot of it is meant to be metaphorical...

[QUOTE="Zero5000X"]

Didn't God say that he was going to flood the whole world?

LJS9502_basic

Again...relative to the people and where they lived. And a local flood did occur. So in that case history actually backs up the Bible.;)

so you know what god was thinking?

[QUOTE="Zagrius"][QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="JadedEagle04"]

Actually, the Theory of Evolution is not very conrcrete and there is not enough proof, and by far has ten fold more fallacies in it than neccessary. I'll give you an example. The current idea is that after man finished evolving, some 100 000 years ago (after evolving for an already several million years) it took him 96 400 years to discover basic farming and then a further more 6000 years to only scrape the surface of the complexity of life and the universe.

JadedEagle04

Not very concrete? Where do you get that from? Practically all of evolution has been proven, and I highly doubt it will ever step down from theory.

It doesn't take a day or two to discover something, it's all gradual, you would know this if you had studied evolution. Farming is only recent because it's not like you go out there and suddenly know that a seed will sprout into a flower. The same thing with everything else, things must be gradually discovered before you can discover something that's beyond your specie's grasp. There's a reason why people had no idea what stars were yet they had already developed a complex system of mathematics that could pinpoint their locations very accurately.

Don't forget that it's much easier to discover new things once you don't need to spend all day hunting for food.

So what you are saying is that intelligence is a trait that can be passed down through DNA? Lets be hypotethical for agrumental sake, lets go back 100 000 years ago. Is it safe to say that in 100 000, if evolution would be true, very few if any biological/evolutions would occur in the Human? I beleive it the answer is a definitive no. Then, the only possible understanding is that it took the Human 96 000 years, about 4000BC to realize that plants can grow and therefore harvested? Let us not forget, that since Humans were supposedly "nomadic" they would have to have realized different seasons, dying vegetation in the winter and once again regrowth of new plants.

Oookaay.. First, yes, intelligence is passed down through DNA. Also, you have no idea how evolution works. Every generation of humans has some miniscule differences from the preceding generation (same with other species). Also remember that humans were nomadic at first. Also, it seems that agriculture was discovered at around 9500BC.

[QUOTE="Zero5000X"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Donkey_Puncher"]

I'm sorry I'm mature enough for you then. :|

I'll get back to you once I mature enough to talk to a "real adult".

Do me a favor, drop the condescending bullsh*t and answer the question, something a real "mature" adult would do. Set an example for all us childish kids right?

LJS9502_basic

I explained it several times in this thread. Perhaps you should read then.

the Bible says we should kill kids if they dishonor or disrespect their parents. explain that one.

I follow the NT...doesn't say that. And since you haven't given me scripture source...I can't answer that.

The NT, is just a careful choice of words, I don't understand how the people who witnessed jesus and his teachings, wrote the old testament, all of the negatives, like killing children that disobeyed you, then all the sudden somebody can change they're words.

If the NT is not taking half of they're words as fact, what means the other half of the words are fact?

Then in regard to this particular instance I explained that numbers were symbolic...and that the flood was not global but local. What did you not get?

LJS9502_basic

My question was simple.

If some things are literal, and some things aren't, how do you decide which things in the bible are to be taken as such?

For example, how do you know that the creation story isn't literal, but Jesus turning water into wine and rising from the grave is?

Both defy science, yet one's literal and the other isn't?

Deuteronomy 27:16

16 "Cursed is the man who dishonors his father or his mother."

JadedEagle04

Notice it says nothing about death? Being cursed is different.

[QUOTE="Zero5000X"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Zero5000X"]

Iits in the video. you have to accept both the new and old testament. both are the words of god. god said that you were supposed to kill your kids if they dishonored you. sounds like a pretty mean god to me.

LJS9502_basic

No. I want the Biblical text...not Penn & Teller.

they show you the biblical text. also, if you're this big time christian you should know this already.

Christianity = NT. And I don't memorize numbers. I have a Bible...give me the verse. Should be easy if you are so familiar with it.

Hmmm Many Muslims memorize the entire Koran. I guess they must like their religion more then you like yours. The God from the OT is the same god in the NT.

on the subject of the thread considering I didn't put much effort at all into reading the ENTIRE thread, i don't take any tv personality serious on ANY subject they try to prove. And to be honest, I sat down and read the entire bible and it led me from being atheis to agnostic. that is if you actually READ it. It has good thigs to live by,but you don't take it litteral. besides, if I rcall correctly, in the new testament, it says that Jesus came to change the laws from the old testament. If that hadn't happened, then Christianity wouldn't exist and the jews would still be killing the kids who disrespected their parents and killing the girls that aren't virgins on their wedding night and etc.
If someone can prove it wrong beyond all doubt, then show me because i've read it multiple times and I haven't found it contradict itself. If you can prove that it is beyond all doubt pure truth, then show me as well because most of it, i honestly believe is just stories with exampes for people to live by. I believe in the bible, they are made refference to as parables.

[QUOTE="JadedEagle04"]

Well, since all symbols are explained in one method or another in the Bible, you'd know what those symbols are. Then the literal part, you would need to use common sense and think about the meaning implied. For example, Jesus taught people with parables, in them were symbols, and behind them was always a core lesson that was easy for the people to understand. This is backed up, because Jesus explained that when the disciples asked him why He teaches in Parables. Another example is the the bread and wine (flesh and blood). The meaning for this is not meant to be taken literally; that would be cannabalism, but rather if you would read other parts of the New Testament specifically, you would understand why the flesh and blood are represented through bread and wine.

Donkey_Puncher

Common sense then?

If we go by common sense we know the earth isn't 6000 years old, the flood didn't happen, the jews didn't wander around the desert for 40 years, that moses didn't part the red sea, that Jesus didn't turn water into wine, thata man didn'tlive in a giant fish,and that most importantlyJesus didn't rise from a grave.

Common sense would tell us that all of this is impossible.

Furthermore, only some people believe that the Earth is 6000 years old; I prefer to think that since God has not told us what was on the Earth before he created man (and removed us from the garden of eden) we do not really know what was on the Earth before, if the Earth existed at all. The truth that is valid however, is that recorded history begins around 4000BC, so 6000 years approx.

Secondly, the flood is supported by the recordings of other civilizations/peoples scattered throughout the world. One in particular is the Epic of Gilamesh (in India) which is very similar. Therefore, the exsitance of a great flood is supported by history.

The Jewish people did wander around the desert for 40 years because they greatly displeased God, and so that was their punishment.

Well you can tell the bible is fake because on the second last page of the book in very small writeing it says, *Made in China*MidnightSasha

:lol: Maybe I'm easily amused, but I did find that to be slightly funny.

on the subject of the thread considering I didn't put much effort at all into reading the ENTIRE thread, i don't take any tv personality serious on ANY subject they try to prove. And to be honest, I sat down and read the entire bible and it led me from being atheis to agnostic. that is if you actually READ it. It has good thigs to live by,but you don't take it litteral. besides, if I rcall correctly, in the new testament, it says that Jesus came to change the laws from the old testament. If that hadn't happened, then Christianity wouldn't exist and the jews would still be killing the kids who disrespected their parents and killing the girls that aren't virgins on their wedding night and etc.
If someone can prove it wrong beyond all doubt, then show me because i've read it multiple times and I haven't found it contradict itself. If you can prove that it is beyond all doubt pure truth, then show me as well because most of it, i honestly believe is just stories with exampes for people to live by. I believe in the bible, they are made refference to as parables.

princess1087

the facts are what you should be looking at not the people. If the Devil told you that 1 + 1 = 2 you wouldn't believe him because hes the Devil?

[QUOTE="Zagrius"][QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="JadedEagle04"]

Actually, the Theory of Evolution is not very conrcrete and there is not enough proof, and by far has ten fold more fallacies in it than neccessary. I'll give you an example. The current idea is that after man finished evolving, some 100 000 years ago (after evolving for an already several million years) it took him 96 400 years to discover basic farming and then a further more 6000 years to only scrape the surface of the complexity of life and the universe.

JadedEagle04

Not very concrete? Where do you get that from? Practically all of evolution has been proven, and I highly doubt it will ever step down from theory.

It doesn't take a day or two to discover something, it's all gradual, you would know this if you had studied evolution. Farming is only recent because it's not like you go out there and suddenly know that a seed will sprout into a flower. The same thing with everything else, things must be gradually discovered before you can discover something that's beyond your specie's grasp. There's a reason why people had no idea what stars were yet they had already developed a complex system of mathematics that could pinpoint their locations very accurately.

Don't forget that it's much easier to discover new things once you don't need to spend all day hunting for food.

So what you are saying is that intelligence is a trait that can be passed down through DNA? Lets be hypotethical for agrumental sake, lets go back 100 000 years ago. Is it safe to say that in 100 000, if evolution would be true, very few if any biological/evolutions would occur in the Human? I beleive it the answer is a definitive no. Then, the only possible understanding is that it took the Human 96 000 years, about 4000BC to realize that plants can grow and therefore harvested? Let us not forget, that since Humans were supposedly "nomadic" they would have to have realized different seasons, dying vegetation in the winter and once again regrowth of new plants.

ASPM and Microcephalin genes are know to regulate brain development. So I would say that DNA is somewhat responsible for an individuals intellect, but nurture also plays a part.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="Zero5000X"]

Didn't God say that he was going to flood the whole world?

Zero5000X

Again...relative to the people and where they lived. And a local flood did occur. So in that case history actually backs up the Bible.;)

so you know what god was thinking?

If you want to know that...read the Bible..though again...a theology course will help you understand it.