Religion thread...

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
The bible doesn't really address that. One of the most frustrating things about discussing/debating the bible is that you first have to wade through the muck of bad biblical teaching before you can even begin the dicussion. There are so many extra doctrines and tradtions that various denimonations have come up with it is crazy. Most are working from a foundation of misconception when debating the bible. Lots of it is stuff that some dude said and then it becomes a doctrine that people spend years debating about. Somehow it works it's way into discussion with people who are using bad doctrine to debate against the bible. That is pure frustration because at that point you aren't debating sound biblical references. You are simply debating religious teachings. Thankfully there are still good sound bible churches who are textual teachers.

Example: somebody hears some baptist dude say some thing like, dem damn people crazy talkin but dem aliens and stuff...can't be cuz the bible says they ain't nun. The some other dude comes along and is like, the bible can't be true because there is no way in hell we are the only life in the universe (not a proven fact, simple conjecture) and the bible says we are the only life form here (again, not true at all). So you end up having someone trying to prove that the bible is not correct by using someting that isn't proven (life forms other places) and bad theology. Sheesh...where to even start with that. None of it makes sense. Not even to a non-believer if he's honest with himself.
What exactly is sound biblical reference?

I am not trying to be funny but isn't any biblical reference up for interpretation?

Don't know what kind of church you go to but aren't you all interpreting the bible as you see it and what makes that the right one?

This is in no way a attack at you because when it comes to religion you are probably the most level headed when discussing these things, just want to know how your church comes to its understanding of the bible.
 

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
11,888
What exactly is sound biblical reference?

I am not trying to be funny but isn't any biblical reference up for interpretation?

Don't know what kind of church you go to but aren't you all interpreting the bible as you see it and what makes that the right one?

This is in no way a attack at you because when it comes to religion you are probably the most level headed when discussing these things, just want to know how your church comes to its understanding of the bible.

For starters, your don't make up doctrine that doesn't exsist in the bible. Lots of people do that. I think that people feel insecure about their beliefs and try to conjure answers that aren't there. It is also pretty common for people to not know the bible well at all, which is really sad. The end result of that is people simply regurgitating stuff they heard and try to make it biblical truth. I think this topic is a great example of that. I've heard it say before that the bible isn't teue because there must be other life forms out there. Well the bible doesn't assress that so I'm not sure who came up with that.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
For starters, your don't make up doctrine that doesn't exsist in the bible. Lots of people do that. I think that people feel insecure about their beliefs and try to conjure answers that aren't there. It is also pretty common for people to not know the bible well at all, which is really sad. The end result of that is people simply regurgitating stuff they heard and try to make it biblical truth. I think this topic is a great example of that. I've heard it say before that the bible isn't teue because there must be other life forms out there. Well the bible doesn't assress that so I'm not sure who came up with that.
What about the earth being 6000 years old thing?
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,246
What about the earth being 6000 years old thing?
A day in the life of God could be 10,000 days in the life of a human. #vague
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,700
What about the earth being 6000 years old thing?
I don't have the time or inclination to go in to it but that Is a contrived time based on a record of known descendents that Moses had access to. Even he did not date the age of the earth. He only recorded generations. There is no known record of when the earth was actually created the bible. Adam is the first recorded person made in the image of God ( whatever that actually means) but not the first living being created.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
I don't have the time or inclination to go in to it but that Is a contrived time based on a record of known descendents that Moses had access to. Even he did not date the age of the earth. He only recorded generations. There is no known record of when the earth was actually created the bible. Adam is the first recorded person made in the image of God ( whatever that actually means) but not the first living being created.
See that's the type of stuff that boggles my mind add in the theory that we are all basically the product of incest and things get really weird.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,700
See that's the type of stuff that boggles my mind add in the theory that we are all basically the product of incest and things get really weird.
Adams son went to another land and had his family there. No indication of incest. There is an indication however o f further or different creations of humans.
 

Jiggyfly

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
9,220
Adams son went to another land and had his family there. No indication of incest. There is an indication however o f further or different creations of humans.
Between Lot and Noah a lot of incest happened to populate the earth.

Isn't a whole tribe of people based on lot's daughters?

I admit I might be getting some of this wrong.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,700
Between Lot and Noah a lot of incest happened to populate the earth.

Isn't a whole tribe of people based on lot's daughters?

I admit I might be getting some of this wrong.
I don't know about Lot but there was possibly incest from Noah's family.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,700
Between Lot and Noah a lot of incest happened to populate the earth.

Isn't a whole tribe of people based on lot's daughters?

I admit I might be getting some of this wrong.
Y
I don't know about Lot but there was possibly incest from Noah's family for more than one generation. Lot did have children by his daughters but after the initial generation it is likely a lot of outside sources were involved to procreate subsequent generations so everyone wouldn't necessarily be incestuous products.
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,246
I don't have a lot of time tonight, but let's dig into the discussion at hand.

And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.”

Genesis 1:14

So, the universe revolves and was created around our tiny little planet in the middle of billions of other planets and galaxies. Wow.

__________________________

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

Genesis 1:26

Here is where is clearly states that god created mankind. It isn't specific about lower mankind-like animals that came before, but it is quite specific that this (according to the bible) was the beginning of what we call humans. There is no way around the incest thing. Unless by the vagueness that is the bible it is insinuated that we mated with other creatures on the planet. Not sure which would have been worse.

______________________

All done in 7 days... which is explained away by a day in god's world could be like 10,000 days (or 1,000 or whatever it is). So, that is how the age of the earth is explained away. Granted I don't know many christians now who truly hold to the 6,000 year thing. Science pretty much crushed that idea. Just a few questions just in the first chapter of the book.

______________________

Then the Lord God formed a man[c] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

Genesis 2:6

Sure sounds like the good book is talking about Adam as being the first man on the planet. How many years ago that supposedly happened is up for debate because the book is so vague.

__________________

Food for thought for now.

Check back later.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,700
I don't have a lot of time tonight, but let's dig into the discussion at hand.

And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.”

Genesis 1:14

So, the universe revolves and was created around our tiny little planet in the middle of billions of other planets and galaxies. Wow.

__________________________

Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”

Genesis 1:26

Here is where is clearly states that god created mankind. It isn't specific about lower mankind-like animals that came before, but it is quite specific that this (according to the bible) was the beginning of what we call humans. There is no way around the incest thing. Unless by the vagueness that is the bible it is insinuated that we mated with other creatures on the planet. Not sure which would have been worse.

______________________

All done in 7 days... which is explained away by a day in god's world could be like 10,000 days (or 1,000 or whatever it is). So, that is how the age of the earth is explained away. Granted I don't know many christians now who truly hold to the 6,000 year thing. Science pretty much crushed that idea. Just a few questions just in the first chapter of the book.

______________________

Then the Lord God formed a man[c] from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.

Genesis 2:6

Sure sounds like the good book is talking about Adam as being the first man on the planet. How many years ago that supposedly happened is up for debate because the book is so vague.

__________________

Food for thought for now.

Check back later.
Dig a little deeper and you will find that the Jewish style of writing Is an overview followed by a repeat with more detail. Further into Genesis the same.e
information is more detailed about the creation and you will find that Adam who was created in God's image was the only man created without sin at that time. As an aside Jesus is the second Adam in that he was conceived with sin. Within the creation these were the only ones created in this manner. Eve was created as a helpmate only after God offered all his other creation to be his helpmate first but they were unsuitable per Adam. Who knows who and what God created not in his image (without sin) even before Eve. In addition Cain went to the land of Nod to find a wife so there was other humans on t he earth but none were created like Adam or Eve.
 

VA Cowboy

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
4,710
See that's the type of stuff that boggles my mind add in the theory that we are all basically the product of incest and things get really weird.
I'm sure there's incest in your not too distant genealogy, and definitely in someone like Smitty's. :tippytoe
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,246
Dig a little deeper and you will find that the Jewish style of writing Is an overview followed by a repeat with more detail. Further into Genesis the same.e
information is more detailed about the creation and you will find that Adam who was created in God's image was the only man created without sin at that time. As an aside Jesus is the second Adam in that he was conceived with sin. Within the creation these were the only ones created in this manner. Eve was created as a helpmate only after God offered all his other creation to be his helpmate first but they were unsuitable per Adam. Who knows who and what God created not in his image (without sin) even before Eve. In addition Cain went to the land of Nod to find a wife so there was other humans on t he earth but none were created like Adam or Eve.
Yeah, Cain went into Nod finding his wife (out of nowhere) among a people that didn't exist before what 20 years before the creation of man? Maybe that people already existed. Like I said... vague. It's not explained, and it can't be explained. Faith is all anyone can lean on, and I can't make that leap, and to be honest, I can't fathom how anyone can.
 

boozeman

28 Years And Counting...
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
123,059
[h=2]My Most Retweeted Tweet[/h]
December 26, 2014 at 9:17pm
Well. It's official. Far and away my most re-tweeted tweet appeared Christmas day. Here are the 125 characters (my usual length) in their entirety:


"On this day long ago, a child was born who, by age 30, would transform the world. Happy Birthday Isaac Newton b. Dec 25, 1642"



Everybody knows that Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus on December 25th. I think fewer people know that Isaac Newton shares the same birthday. Christmas day in England - 1642. And perhaps even fewer people know that before he turned 30, Newton had discovered the laws of motion, the universal law of gravitation, and invented integral and differential calculus. All of which served as the mechanistic foundation for the industrial revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries that would forever transform the world.


My sense in this case is that the high rate of re-tweeting, is not to share my enthusiasm of this fact, but is driven by accusations that the tweet is somehow anti-Christian. If a person actually wanted to express anti-Christian sentiment, my guess is that alerting people of Isaac Newton's birthday would appear nowhere on the list.


Some even called for me to delete the tweet. But instead, earlier today, I tweeted this:


"Imagine a world in which we are all enlightened by objective truths rather than offended by them."


A few facts: My average re-tweet rate falls between 2,500 and 3,500. My fun tweets can go somewhat higher - up to 10,000. My boring tweets barely break 1,000. The Newton Christmas day tweet, as of this writing - a day after posting -- is rising through 62,000 re-tweets.


I wonder if you are as astonished by this fact as I am. For example, I've made direct reference to Jesus in previous tweets that have not come close to this number. How about:


"Some claim the USA is a Christian nation, compelling me to wonder which assault rifle Jesus would choose: the AR-15 or AK-47."


Posted September 7, 2014, that one garnered 13,000 re-tweets. So I can honestly say that I don't understand the breadth and depth of reaction to the Newton tweet, relative to all my other tweets over the years.


In any case, I'm happy to see that many people liked my "Santa knows Physics" tweet from Christmas day:


"Santa knows Physics: Of all colors, Red Light penetrates fog best. That's why Benny the Blue-nosed reindeer never got the gig"


I worked hard on that one, which has received 13,000 re-tweets in a day -- a factor of 4-5 times my average.


One last bit of historical fact. All of England was celebrating Christmas the day Newton was born. But the Gregorian Calendar (an awesomely accurate reckoning of Earth's annual time), introduced in 1584 by Pope Gregory, was not yet adopted in Great Britain. To do so required removing ten days from the calendar -- excess time that had accumulated over the previous 16 centuries from the mildly flawed Julian Calendar, introduced by Julius Caesar in 46 BC. These remnants of the turbulent schism between the Anglican and Catholic churches meant that Catholic Christendom was celebrating Christmas ten days earlier than anybody was in England.


If you wanted to reckon Newton's birthday on today's Gregorian Calendar, we would place his birth on January 4, 1643.


Happy Holidays to you all. And a humble thanks for your continued interest in what I have to say about life, the universe, and everything. But most importantly, enjoy a Happy New Year. A few days after, I'll be tweeting about Earth's perihelion. Just a head's up in case people want to avert their eyes over that one.


I am, and always will be, a servant of your cosmic curiosity.


-Neil deGrasse Tyson, New York City


p.s. For those who are Facebook-friendly but Twitter-averse, my tweets stream, almost in real time, to this Facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/TysonsTweets
----------------

This was hilarious. A big segment of religious conservatives really get off on being victims.

Nothing Tyson said was anti-Christian.

It is almost like they go looking for reasons to feel oppressed.
 

skidadl

El Presidente'
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2004
Messages
11,888
I'll eventually get back to this thread....eventually...
 

jeebs

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
670
I'll eventually get back to this thread....eventually...
It is hard to take the time to argue that the sky is blue when anyone who wanted to be convinced need only look up.
 

jeebs

Brand New Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
670
Yeah, Cain went into Nod finding his wife (out of nowhere) among a people that didn't exist before what 20 years before the creation of man? Maybe that people already existed. Like I said... vague. It's not explained, and it can't be explained. Faith is all anyone can lean on, and I can't make that leap, and to be honest, I can't fathom how anyone can.
Imo, you are arguing against the stories but they are merely the stories that teach us our religion. Destroying the story leaves the underlying religion intact. We are talking about the existence of god, and your response is to question thousands of year old genealogical tables, "oh a mistake was made by these Bronze Age authors, god does not exist".
 

Cotton

One-armed Knife Sharpener
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
120,246
Imo, you are arguing against the stories but they are merely the stories that teach us our religion. Destroying the story leaves the underlying religion intact. We are talking about the existence of god, and your response is to question thousands of year old genealogical tables, "oh a mistake was made by these Bronze Age authors, god does not exist".
I'm arguing against the basis of your religion.
 
Top Bottom