Buffy Posted December 3, 2007 Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 This is true as true can be. BrianThis is proselytizing: please review the rules for this forum... Thank you for your cooperation,Buffy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Dwight Posted December 3, 2007 Report Share Posted December 3, 2007 Please excuse, won't happen again. Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike C Posted December 4, 2007 Report Share Posted December 4, 2007 There's one God, plenty other gods. When I was fourteen my brother wanted me to go with him to steal gasoline. Our family wasn't church going family. I don't remember ever going to church as a family. We said grace before we ate and as other kids had heard of God. Anyway I prayed God if there is a God make my stomach hurt. I was lifted off my bed by my stomach. I prayed if I shouldn't go make my stomach hurt, again I was lifted off my bed.I went to jail for 7 months when I was 30. Studing the Bible the teachers were teaching me that the father, son and holy ghost made God I didn't believe it. I prayed God to help me with this. The brightest light hit my Bible where it wears a stain to this day. Opening to Isaiah 42. I was on my bunk and in the light, there was Angles singing praise to God. This is true as true can be. Brian Many people speak of such an event in their lives.As I have said, there are REAL spirits. But if you have a job and a means of support with a loving wife, then you have it made in our modern culture of survival.So, consider the 'dollar' as a surrogate god that the capitalists worship. They control our governments. Buffy, what Brian says is an experience he witnessed. So I would not consider that proselylizeing. Mike C Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Dwight Posted December 4, 2007 Report Share Posted December 4, 2007 I joined the forum to hopefully be able to ask some questions about electrolysis and membranes. Looking around the site I'm glad I did. I had to look up the word, proselytizing. I wasn't proselytizing. Have a good day everyone. Where would be the place where I could post a question about electrolysis and membrames? Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffy Posted December 4, 2007 Report Share Posted December 4, 2007 I wasn't proselytizing.Your statement was a form of insisting that your interpretation of the Bible is the one true interpretation based solely upon your belief, and that is indeed a form of proselytizing. You may believe that that your words here are not explicitly an "attempt to convert" but it is implied, and thus is against our rules.Where would be the place where I could post a question about electrolysis and membrames? BrianDepending on the exact nature of your question, it could be either the Chemistry Forum or the Biology Forum, although we do have a special forum that deals with questions that fall under the rubric of Science Projects and Homework if the question is in the form of a homework assignment for school or a project you're working on for any reason. Please feel free to ask any moderator if you have questions about Hypography! Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one, :rolleyes:Buffy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Symbology Posted December 7, 2007 Report Share Posted December 7, 2007 Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one, :rant:Buffy Good quote! Reminds me of a favorite comic from The Far Side: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrotex Posted December 7, 2007 Report Share Posted December 7, 2007 Going back to the start of the world, let's get really exact and technical. Genesis says that god created the world. It says nothing (NOTHING), zip, zero, nada, goose egg about WHEN this supernatural event occurred. EVERY attempt at assigning a "date" to the Genesis creation is a pure fabrication. But many folks have their favorite interpretation of "when" that occurred. These interpretations are pretty much spun out of thin air, using (incomplete and questionable) geneologies, assumed life spans, assumed intervals--and questionable logic. But if you want to get squeaky clean (metaphor!) about this, the Bible itself is silent on the subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
palmtreepathos Posted December 7, 2007 Report Share Posted December 7, 2007 Going back to the start of the world, let's get really exact and technical. Genesis says that god created the world. It says nothing (NOTHING), zip, zero, nada, goose egg about WHEN this supernatural event occurred.AMEN! :applause: You alluded to man's obsession with time, though, and that reminds me of something weird about language, it is filled with the trappings of time thought, but when it speaks on everlastingness, eternity, forever and so forth it reminds me of a verse that says "Even time indefinite he has put in their heart, that mankind may never find out the work that the [true] God has made from the start to the finish" (Ecclesiastes 3:11) Have the studies of humankind assigned any signifigance to the thoughts and fantasies of forever when no one has ever seen it? That verse indicates it was created in us so man would always have something to look foward to... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchr Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 The Bible is the word of it's fiction authors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 The Bible is the word of it's fiction authors Amen brother. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HydrogenBond Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 If you compare the earliest bible, i.e., old testament, with other books from that era, it is quite advanced. You can't compare it to modern books, but need to compare it to books written 5000 years ago, so we can get a feel for the relative ability of the authors. The analogy is say we took a book about modern evolutionary theory and brought it back into time, to the time of Darwin. It would seem inappropriate to the times, based on what could have been known. Either the author would be considered the world genius, head and shoulders above his contemporaries, or it may have been an average Joe who was inspired, sort of a one shot deal. There are many one hit wonders in music that come from an inspiration that can't be repeated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrotex Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 If you compare the earliest bible, i.e., old testament, with other books from that era, it is quite advanced. You can't compare it to modern books, but need to compare it to books written 5000 years ago, so we can get a feel for the relative ability of the authors. ....You make a good point there. We could gain some understanding of the OT by comparing it with other works of the same age or older. However, I disagree that the OT is obviously "more advanced". The many books written by the proto-Indian civilizations (many of them in Sanskrit) are considered by many scholars to be superior to the OT writings in a number of respects, including the structure and justice of civil laws, and the sophistication of the stories (or "myths" if you prefer), and references to internal thoughts and feelings. Many of them are far older than the OT. For many of them, we even know the authors. For the OT, there is only ONE book for which we know the author: Ezra. The "scriptures" of the Egyptians date back much older than the OT, but they had the handicap of being written in hierglyphs, which have a number of translational difficulties, though we can make out the general meanings easily. However, the Egyptians weren't into writing about emotions, ideas, concepts. They were straight story tellers and law givers. The oldest Greek writings (say, the Illiad, the Odyssey) were written about the same time as some of the older OT books, and some would say they tell a better story. Like the OT, the stories were transcripts of even older oral traditions. Like the Egyptians, the oldest Greek writings lack any reference to ideas, thoughts, feelings, concepts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunderbird Posted February 6, 2009 Report Share Posted February 6, 2009 However, I disagree that the OT is obviously "more advanced". The many books written by the proto-Indian civilizations (many of them in Sanskrit) are considered by many scholars to be superior to the OT writings in a number of respects, including the structure and justice of civil laws, and the sophistication of the stories (or "myths" if you prefer), and references to internal thoughts and feelings. Many of them are far older than the OT. For many of them, we even know the authors. For the OT, there is only ONE book for which we know the author: Ezra. The "scriptures" of the Egyptians date back much older than the OT, but they had the handicap of being written in hierglyphs, which have a number of translational difficulties, though we can make out the general meanings easily. However, the Egyptians weren't into writing about emotions, ideas, concepts. They were straight story tellers and law givers. The oldest Greek writings (say, the Illiad, the Odyssey) were written about the same time as some of the older OT books, and some would say they tell a better story. Like the OT, the stories were transcripts of even older oral traditions. Like the Egyptians, the oldest Greek writings lack any reference to ideas, thoughts, feelings, concepts. I agree, If the Bible was written by God it would need to be more advanced than other writings of the times.Sanskrit, which is the great spiritual language of the world, Joseph Campbell Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlton-temple Posted March 28, 2009 Report Share Posted March 28, 2009 A problem of timing? Those chappies who spend their time digging up bones and the like have more or less conclusively proved that intelligent humans have been knocking about the place slightly longer than Bishop Usscher "calculated". So long indeed one wonders why "God" didn't issue his general manifesto say some 500000 years earlier? Why did "He" wait till "modern" times, and then only hand out "His" "mode-de-emploi", in a limited edition, to a small bunch of cantankerous tribesmen lurking about the eastern Mediterranean. Not very "creationist" like surely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pyrotex Posted March 30, 2009 Report Share Posted March 30, 2009 ...why "God" didn't issue his general manifesto say some 500000 years earlier? Why did "He" wait till "modern" times...?...Uhhh... Maybe it was an afterthought? :P :( ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 So long indeed one wonders why "God" didn't issue his general manifesto say some 500000 years earlier? Why did "He" wait till "modern" times, and then only hand out "His" "mode-de-emploi", in a limited edition, to a small bunch of cantankerous tribesmen lurking about the eastern Mediterranean. Not very "creationist" like surely. Indeed. I request readers ask that same question of themselves, and review the point made here by Chris Hitchens around 2:30m into the video, which continues until roughly 4m in: YouTube - 3 Hitchens D'Souza Debate Book TV http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vMeAwpTW1I His opponent Dinesh is a good debater, but arguing the wrong side. The whole debate is quite good if you care to view it. Book TV on C-SPAN2 - Full Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Dinesh D'Souza Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted March 31, 2009 Report Share Posted March 31, 2009 See time point 2:30m to 4m Success! Here is the link I was actually searching for last night, where Chris Hitchens articulates this point much more clearly and plainly while debating his own brother: YouTube - Hitchens vs Hitchens Debate (6 of 14) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWL73vkNwpE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.