[MeRfCaKe]

Originally Posted by Flying_Dutchman

Science be praised

[Spock]

Originally Posted by MeRfCaKe

Stop it.

Eric Cartman is NOT God.

[aScreamingYeti]

Originally Posted by Flying_Dutchman

fixed


AscreamingYeti: Do you know how many different gods man has created? I could name over 20 right now but I'm not going to. Each god is dreamed up to fill holes in understanding, then once that hole is filled through scientific explanation, the god(s) lose their meaning and are passed off as mythology. Why do you think Christianity or the several other dominant contemporary religions will be any different? "Christian mythology" will most likely be a commonly used term in the future.

Was the bible initially meant to be interpreted and not taken at face value, as most Christians claim today? That idea didn't arise until science explained how most biblical scripture is simply untrue.

Science be praised

ok, well i'm glad you know what your talking about
Where in the Bible does it say that it's not to be taken literally? Does a science text book say anywhere that it's not to be taken literally?
So if I people in the future were to look back and read a Bible and a history text book how would they be able to know that none of it's true and it's just meant to help you along in life, and not be a literal account of the past?

[warbeak2099]

Originally Posted by aScreamingYeti

So if I people in the future were to look back and read a Bible and a history text book how would they be able to know that none of it's true and it's just meant to help you along in life, and not be a literal account of the past?

Common sense and/or rational thought. Hopefully the future has more of both.

[Flying_Dutchman]

Originally Posted by aScreamingYeti

ok, well i'm glad you know what your talking about
Where in the Bible does it say that it's not to be taken literally? Does a science text book say anywhere that it's not to be taken literally?
So if I people in the future were to look back and read a Bible and a history text book how would they be able to know that none of it's true and it's just meant to help you along in life, and not be a literal account of the past?

I'm saying that it was meant to be taken literally - and now that it has become relatively obvious (through science) that there was no Adam and Eve, etc., Christians are now claiming that it was simply metaphor, despite the fact that it was definitely initially intended to be taken literally. That's a huge reason Christianity loses credibility with me.

[Spock]

Originally Posted by aScreamingYeti

ok, well i'm glad you know what your talking about
Where in the Bible does it say that it's not to be taken literally? Does a science text book say anywhere that it's not to be taken literally?
So if I people in the future were to look back and read a Bible and a history text book how would they be able to know that none of it's true and it's just meant to help you along in life, and not be a literal account of the past?

The Odyssey doesn't say that it's not to be take literally. Does that mean I should literally believe that there was a Cyclops, a multi-headed monster called Scylla, a whirlpool called Charybdis, and a bunch of half naked Gods running around?

[SD-G-force]

Originally Posted by C MacKN

There is only one God, ya people in other countries claim to worship these other God's but there is only one.

i'm a christian too but that was uncalled for

[Pwned6911]

Originally Posted by aScreamingYeti

ok, well i'm glad you know what your talking about
Where in the Bible does it say that it's not to be taken literally? Does a science text book say anywhere that it's not to be taken literally?
So if I people in the future were to look back and read a Bible and a history text book how would they be able to know that none of it's true and it's just meant to help you along in life, and not be a literal account of the past?

You simply need to stop posting, or come back when you can see the ridiculous flaws in your thinking.

So if the Bible is literal as you seem to think, please, explain to me how one family built an ark, fit two of every animal on it which would be thousands upon thousands of animals and then fed them for 40 days/nights, and kept them from killing each other...

[CharlesM.]

Inbreeding ftw

[Pwned6911]

Originally Posted by CharlesM.

Inbreeding ftw

Oh of course, I forgot about that one! Well I guess he is right lol

[Spock]

Originally Posted by Pwned6911

You simply need to stop posting, or come back when you can see the ridiculous flaws in your thinking.

So if the Bible is literal as you seem to think, please, explain to me how one family built an ark, fit two of every animal on it which would be thousands upon thousands of animals and then fed them for 40 days/nights, and kept them from killing each other...

Actually, it's one hundred and fifty days, and it would have to be close to a million animals AND PLANTS, and that's assuming he didn't have to bring any animals who live in the water (although I can't quite understand how fresh-water fish could survive being immersed in salt water for 150 days) or any of the dinosaurs and all other species that are currently extinct (since they presumably were extinct before or as a result of the flood).

But who's counting?

The obvious answer is that the Almighty God made it possible, duh!

[Pwned6911]

Originally Posted by Spock

Actually, it's one hundred and fifty days, and it would have to be close to a million animals AND PLANTS, and that's assuming he didn't have to bring any animals who live in the water (although I can't quite understand how fresh-water fish could survive being immersed in salt water for 150 days) or any of the dinosaurs and all other species that are currently extinct (since they presumably were extinct before or as a result of the flood).

But who's counting?

The obvious answer is that the Almighty God made it possible, duh!

150?

[Spock]

Originally Posted by Pwned6911

150?

Yeah, it RAINED for 40 days and nights. The flood "abated" after 150 days. But they were on the ark a lot longer, actually more than a year: from 2/17 of the 600th year of Noah's life to 2/27 of the next year. So there was obviously some divine hocus pocus involved (even forgetting about the fact that Noah and his ancestors each lived for hundreds of years).

Genesis 7

11. In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;

Genesis 8

13 And it came to pass in the six hundredth and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from off the earth: and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and, behold, the face of the ground was dry.

14 And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, was the earth dried.

15 And God spake unto Noah, saying,

16 Go forth of the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee.

17 Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee, of all flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth; that they may breed abundantly in the earth, and be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth.

18 And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him:

[0aktree (Banned)]

prepare for more ark domination gentlemen!

[Laureate]

and not ONLY that but, if you are not a fundamentalist, you wave the flag of defeat. You see my friend, if you choose not to believe in all of the Bible, what premises do you have to judge what is and is not true? If you do not believe in one piece, what rationale supports the other pieces? NONE. It is a lose-lose situation. You either take it all the way or you do not. And you can quote me on this:

If religion is open to interpretation, than religion is anything you want it to be.

[Spock]

And I interpret the ark story as a metaphor for me rounding up my boys and tons of hot *****es, and going on a really long booze cruise, to be followed by weeks of non-stop "mating."

[Crede777]

Originally Posted by aScreamingYeti

Where in the Bible does it say that it's not to be taken literally? Does a science text book say anywhere that it's not to be taken literally?

Wow... So you really do have to be told what to think. Now it all makes sense.

[pimpinsaylor (Banned)]

Originally Posted by Derr

Uhh, dude. YOU made this thread. YOU already STARTED the argument. You have to back up your ****. You NEVER see an atheist making a thread like this. EVER.

Doesn't help that they act equally retarded.

He believes an eternal spirit created everything and watches over him, and you believe nothing created something, then that something evolved and created everything. Same level of sanity at this point.

[Strawberryblonde.]

Originally Posted by pimpinsaylor

Doesn't help that they act equally retarded.

He believes an eternal spirit created everything and watches over him, and you believe nothing created something, then that something evolved and created everything. Same level of sanity at this point.

Wow.

[Spock]

Originally Posted by pimpinsaylor

Doesn't help that they act equally retarded.

He believes an eternal spirit created everything and watches over him, and you believe nothing created something, then that something evolved and created everything. Same level of sanity at this point.

Wow, is that the definition of atheist? That's a new one to me.

[hsilman]

we're not going to argue about the origin of the universe, are we?