Posted on 02/28/2002 6:35:58 PM PST by Heartlander
I trust you can prove this statement without citing the Bible? (Using the Bible's assertion of it's own divinity to prove it's divinity is a bit circular).
Turtle soup? But where did the kettle come from?
Yes. Should have been Duck Soup, but JimRob won't let that Marxist trash in here.
But where did the kettle come from?
Dunno... but I think most posters here would agree it is quite black.
I was quite impressed by their low-key message....
Come on, that's like finding writings about the Loch Ness monster and concluding it was not a myth because we can show that there was indeed a body of water that was known as Loch Ness.
Since the Bible was written by goat herders (okay, sheep herders too) it is likely they would incorporate common and then contemporaneous geographical knowledge. I mean the very first converts they are trying to win over are their fellow neighbors.
Don't you think it is interesting that the all knowing all seeing god that allegedly influenced the writing of the bible completely limits geographical information to a small region where the Bible was written rather than including, say, concurrent civilzations in the America's, in northern Europe, in Eastern Asia? It's as if the Bible was written by guys who lived and only knew their little region. Funny, that.
Further, to assume that an adherent of science is necessarily an athiest is absurd. I know many people who have reconciled religion and science quite nicely. I myself struggle to do so every day. I think it makes me a better Christian.
The beauty of the natural order can really only be appreciated through study and understanding. Fear of knowledge leads us down the road to ruin. See the Taliban.
Umm, "I’m tired of these atheists" is a whole bashing thread targetted against atheists. When religionists stop condemning me to hell etc, then I'll start worrying about their feelings as well.
All of them? What about, "What evidence exists for ID?" or "What were the last 10 articles published in major refereed scientific journals supporting ID?", or even "Has ID made more successful predictions than evolution?"
Careful, that sort of arrangement is still a victory for ignorance because our children remain unaware of the single most powerful and important explanatory and predictive concept in the life sciences. The only acceptable outcome is science in schools, religion in church.
Sure can, and thanks for your trust.
The Bible is chock full of prophesies that have come to be, such as the decendants of Abraham being more numerous than the sand on a beach. Or Daniels' prophecies which came to pass in the age of the Selucids, or Jesus' prophecy that the temple would be destroyed.
Or how about life teachings, such as the serpent tempting Eve that she "could be like God" if she would only rebel against Him. We see the same problem today as we toy w/ cloning and in the massacre of abortion. Are we trying to be "like God", and what will be the consequences of our arrogance? Can you say brave new world should we make that fatal error once again?
The simple truth of its own existence, virtually unpolluted for 3,000 years is testament to its value. What work of Socrates or Confucious has come down to us in such a complete and uncorrupted state?
My God, man, the existence of the state of Isreal in and of itself bears witness to the book's divinety. What other people in the history of the world has been so trampled upon, dispersed and abused as the Jews and yet not only survived, but returned enmass to their ancestral homeland--after 2 millenia?
You want proof???
The discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls which proved the purety of the text over the last 2,000 years is unprecedented.
Allow me to reiterate; The refusal to recognise wisdom is the definition of a fool.
Well, the NEA certainly agrees with you.
You atheists can send your kids to the public schools you helped create.
I'm no expert but I believe that Genesis and Exodus are credited to Moses who was no goat herder but in fact an Egyptian Prince prior to his calling. So, I'm afraid you're wrong (again).
The Old Testament is a dialogue between God and the Jews, His chosen people. He placed the wisdom of his Being in the hands of the one people that could have kept it safe down through the ages.
Analogies to the Loch Ness monster are cute, and I'm sure considered funny in some quarters, but they are very wide of the mark.
Your referencing differing translations of the same original is even more spurious, it's like asking which Bible is more accurate, the French or the English.
And frankly, I have no idea what the 1948 comment is about. Do you mean to say that re-establishment of Isreal was not prophesied? Or that its rebirth is merely a fluke of history unconnected w/ the book that defines its existence?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.