The first mistake in the bible!
#76
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
The bible in my opinion was created as a highway code of life. To put "the fear of god " into people.
I was once at a funeral where the minister was explaining why the elderly gentleman who was a great believer had suffered such a traumatic and horrendous end to his life over a 3 year period and that god had wanted him to suffer as god did at the cross.
Thats ok then.......WTF
I was once at a funeral where the minister was explaining why the elderly gentleman who was a great believer had suffered such a traumatic and horrendous end to his life over a 3 year period and that god had wanted him to suffer as god did at the cross.
Thats ok then.......WTF
#78
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Back home :)
Posts: 1,706
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
So true. A true god would not want you to suffer just because he did. As the fanatics tell us, God is the father and creator, what decent farther want's pain and suffering for his children just because he stubbed a toe once or twisted his back whilst planting the apple tree in Eden. It's just an excuse they give because if there really was a god, then there would be no pain and suffering, mankind wouldn't be bad to each other either as that's clearly a design flaw. If HE created us with such a fundamental flaw then he made a mistake and God's don't make mistakes do they.
#79
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
Not really, just someone who DOES have a mind of their own to think and not believe something to be catagorically true because someone in a white coat told me so.
You state that scientist have 'proven' we came from goo, and that there's no proof whatsoever that the Bible is anything other than a fairytale. Well I haven't seen any proof - just a bunch of scientists who refuse to believe that there could be any other possibility than us all evolving from goo. And by the way - I'll repeat - 'where did the goo come from?' Where did the chemicals come from that sparked a reaction?
If you have a sane and rational mind, with no insecurities how can you possibly believe we all came from goo?
I'm not going to harp on about the AD/BC thing - but it's not just a date in time where someone decided to call it year zero. It marks the time when a guy called Jesus was on this earth (BC - Before Christ / AD - Anno Dominai, Year of our Lord) and was killed. People of the time obviously thought it an important enough event to base time on the event. Read into that what you will.
Anyway, I'm off.
Graham
You state that scientist have 'proven' we came from goo, and that there's no proof whatsoever that the Bible is anything other than a fairytale. Well I haven't seen any proof - just a bunch of scientists who refuse to believe that there could be any other possibility than us all evolving from goo. And by the way - I'll repeat - 'where did the goo come from?' Where did the chemicals come from that sparked a reaction?
If you have a sane and rational mind, with no insecurities how can you possibly believe we all came from goo?
I'm not going to harp on about the AD/BC thing - but it's not just a date in time where someone decided to call it year zero. It marks the time when a guy called Jesus was on this earth (BC - Before Christ / AD - Anno Dominai, Year of our Lord) and was killed. People of the time obviously thought it an important enough event to base time on the event. Read into that what you will.
Anyway, I'm off.
Graham
I'm sure if I was born 2000 years ago and caused a ruckus then we might now be measuring the years as AA. History and the calander was written by the victors and the Christians were the victors and so saw fit to set time zero on their fairy tale hero.
#81
BE Forum Addict
Joined: Apr 2007
Location: Back home :)
Posts: 1,706
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
PS Try n get a copy of Cooking with Fernet Branca by James Hamilton Patterson (its not a cookery book). Reckon you'll like, its funny, very dry and'll make a change from the big book
#82
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
>> This isn't aimed at you JTL, but isn't it interesting how much time and money many people (who publicly call people idiots who even half believe in there being a creator) waste on buying books and reading up on the issue?! <<
I wouldn't call it a "waste". If one does, then presumably buying a bible or koran is the same?
>> It really interests and fascinates people. <<
The origin of everything is probably the most interesting question ever posed - of course it fascinates many people.
>> Various people state with absolute conviction that it's all rubbish and anyone who believes it is a freak - there's absolutely no evidence etc.,, etc... <<
Sensible people don't entirely rule out some sort of "creator" - but extraordinary claims demand extraordinary eveidence to be acceptable. To me there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for a god.
The pink teapot theory - whimsical, yes, but valid in this context - can be invoked. If i state that there's an intelligent pink teapot orbiting the sun and that communicates with me by thought waves, you cannot disprove it. I may be completely convinced myself, but it is not proveable or unproveable. If I write it all down and a few hundred people also are convinced - with no evidence - then in a few hundred years it might be a respectable religion. There have been many equally bizarre cults taking in millions of people.
>> Well here's a simple, non inflamatory question - why are we in the year 2007AD? AD being Anno Domini. Surely that must mean something? <<
Various societies have different dating systems, usually based on religious anniversaries - which would you accept??
>> Also, as a passing comment, I personally find it far more unbelievable that we all evolved from some cosmic goo - this is what the most (apparently) intelligent scientists would have us believe!!!! WTF?! Are you for real? Ooooh yeah, a bit of goo (oh, by the way - how did the goo get there?) that developed into what we see in 2007. Oh yeah - I buy that LOL <<
Inventing a supernatural entity doesn't explain anything at all - it just pushes the question further back. If the believer asks "But what came before the big bang, or did time stretch back infinitely?" I think one's entitled to ask "So what made god, or came before him?" An answer to one is the answer to both.
>> Sorry, this is long winded. But what annoys me is people who catagorically say it's crap and it's 'obvious' that we just happened to be and quote some book written by a scientist as 'proof'. What crap.
Graham <<
Absolutely - what ****. But no-one is saying that. A classic Straw Man argument.
I wouldn't call it a "waste". If one does, then presumably buying a bible or koran is the same?
>> It really interests and fascinates people. <<
The origin of everything is probably the most interesting question ever posed - of course it fascinates many people.
>> Various people state with absolute conviction that it's all rubbish and anyone who believes it is a freak - there's absolutely no evidence etc.,, etc... <<
Sensible people don't entirely rule out some sort of "creator" - but extraordinary claims demand extraordinary eveidence to be acceptable. To me there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for a god.
The pink teapot theory - whimsical, yes, but valid in this context - can be invoked. If i state that there's an intelligent pink teapot orbiting the sun and that communicates with me by thought waves, you cannot disprove it. I may be completely convinced myself, but it is not proveable or unproveable. If I write it all down and a few hundred people also are convinced - with no evidence - then in a few hundred years it might be a respectable religion. There have been many equally bizarre cults taking in millions of people.
>> Well here's a simple, non inflamatory question - why are we in the year 2007AD? AD being Anno Domini. Surely that must mean something? <<
Various societies have different dating systems, usually based on religious anniversaries - which would you accept??
>> Also, as a passing comment, I personally find it far more unbelievable that we all evolved from some cosmic goo - this is what the most (apparently) intelligent scientists would have us believe!!!! WTF?! Are you for real? Ooooh yeah, a bit of goo (oh, by the way - how did the goo get there?) that developed into what we see in 2007. Oh yeah - I buy that LOL <<
Inventing a supernatural entity doesn't explain anything at all - it just pushes the question further back. If the believer asks "But what came before the big bang, or did time stretch back infinitely?" I think one's entitled to ask "So what made god, or came before him?" An answer to one is the answer to both.
>> Sorry, this is long winded. But what annoys me is people who catagorically say it's crap and it's 'obvious' that we just happened to be and quote some book written by a scientist as 'proof'. What crap.
Graham <<
Absolutely - what ****. But no-one is saying that. A classic Straw Man argument.
#83
Australia's Doorman
Joined: Jan 2005
Location: The Shoalhaven, New South Wales, Australia
Posts: 11,056
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
Damn those scientists and their scientific ways. Damn electricity, damn medicines, damn doctors too while we're at it. Freaks in white coats mumbling hocus-pocus about 'elements' and 'atoms'. Damn all those odd-balls in white tunics, like Aristotle, who lived before the sandal wearer from Nazareth and introduced such bizarre freaky concepts as biology and medicine, instead of doing parlour tricks. Burn them all and burn their heathen books too.
I am the way, the truth and the shite.
I am the way, the truth and the shite.
#84
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
Damn those scientists and their scientific ways. Damn electricity, damn medicines, damn doctors too while we're at it. Freaks in white coats mumbling hocus-pocus about 'elements' and 'atoms'. Damn all those odd-balls in white tunics, like Aristotle, who lived before the sandal wearer from Nazareth and introduced such bizarre freaky concepts as biology and medicine, instead of doing parlour tricks. Burn them all and burn their heathen books too.
I am the way, the truth and the shite.
I am the way, the truth and the shite.
#86
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
I'm not going to harp on about the AD/BC thing - but it's not just a date in time where someone decided to call it year zero. It marks the time when a guy called Jesus was on this earth (BC - Before Christ / AD - Anno Dominai, Year of our Lord) and was killed. People of the time obviously thought it an important enough event to base time on the event.
And most of the people who do use the date 2007 probably do not believe that it marks 2007 years since the son of God walked the earth.
#87
Account Closed
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 3,533
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
I'm not going to harp on about the AD/BC thing - but it's not just a date in time where someone decided to call it year zero. It marks the time when a guy called Jesus was on this earth (BC - Before Christ / AD - Anno Dominai, Year of our Lord) and was killed. People of the time obviously thought it an important enough event to base time on the event. Read into that what you will.
Graham
I also agree with the other posters who say that the majority of the Bible is a load of old tosh, but....I do believe there was a preacher called Jesus. I don't know what he did, I seriously doubt he performed miracles and the like, and I absolutely don't believe his mother was a virgin, but I do like to believe he tried to encourage other human beings to be better people. I like to think that was a good thing.
#88
Account Closed
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 15,455
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
I have to say, in fear of getting stoned and whipped, but I agree with this point here. If nothing important happened at that time, why was the event marked in such a significant way?
I also agree with the other posters who say that the majority of the Bible is a load of old tosh, but....I do believe there was a preacher called Jesus. I don't know what he did, I seriously doubt he performed miracles and the like, and I absolutely don't believe his mother was a virgin, but I do like to believe he tried to encourage other human beings to be better people. I like to think that was a good thing.
I also agree with the other posters who say that the majority of the Bible is a load of old tosh, but....I do believe there was a preacher called Jesus. I don't know what he did, I seriously doubt he performed miracles and the like, and I absolutely don't believe his mother was a virgin, but I do like to believe he tried to encourage other human beings to be better people. I like to think that was a good thing.
Now I've heard everything.
#89
Re: The first mistake in the bible!
Thanks Sally. Carry on 'Thinking less, breathing more' - that's a great philosophy. Just trying to play devils advocate ('scuse the pun).
Sorry if I've offended anyone for having a slightly different opinion to the masses. It's also interesting to note that whilst people here say they can't stand God botherers because they alway think they're right and you can't win an arguement with them no matter what you say - well what is everyone doing on this thread?? Exactly that I'd suggest - 'we're right, you're wrong, you're stupid for thinking any differently to us'. Brilliant.
Graham
PS For the record I'm not a practising Christian or anything else.
Sorry if I've offended anyone for having a slightly different opinion to the masses. It's also interesting to note that whilst people here say they can't stand God botherers because they alway think they're right and you can't win an arguement with them no matter what you say - well what is everyone doing on this thread?? Exactly that I'd suggest - 'we're right, you're wrong, you're stupid for thinking any differently to us'. Brilliant.
Graham
PS For the record I'm not a practising Christian or anything else.