Who has actually read Darwin's Origin of Species?
Arctic_Menace @ Sat Mar 31, 2007 11:11 am
$1:
Cain eventually marries and has all kinds of descendants, as does Seth, his younger brother.
It's funny - the same people who insist the Bible shouldn't be taken literally do just that when trying to debunk it.
It's funny - the same people who insist the Bible shouldn't be taken literally do just that when trying to debunk it.
where did all these other people come from?
Arctic_Menace @ Sat Mar 31, 2007 11:31 am
Tricks Tricks:
Wanna know how I know the bible isn't true?
Cause GOD told me!
Cause GOD told me!
Arctic_Menace @ Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:39 pm
$1:
Don't know, don't really care.
The point is, the Bible doesn't claim that everyone descended from Adam and Eve.
The point is, the Bible doesn't claim that everyone descended from Adam and Eve.
Tell that to B_C.
I know that everything in the Bible isn't meant to be taken literally. Anyone with an ounce of sense wouldn't be a Christian if you had to take the Bible seriously. It is the world's best-selling fairytale designed toe ducate us about how the world works and to attempt to give us a moral code to live by.
Tricks @ Mon Apr 02, 2007 8:01 pm
So..should anything in the bible be taken literally? Or only some parts?
Tman1 @ Mon Apr 02, 2007 8:06 pm
I haven't read his actual treatise but I know his theory pretty well. Interesting stuff and pretty simple for non-biologists.
Arctic_Menace @ Mon Apr 02, 2007 8:35 pm
$1:
I'm not even tallking about taking it literally. If you read Genesis, nowhere does it say that Adam and Eve were the only 2 people on earth.
True; it only said that they were the first.
But what about Noah and the Ark? Does it not say that he gathered two of every animal on earth?
Biblical_Christian @ Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:10 pm
I think to really fully understand thje Bible. One has to go to the original meanings. the real interpretations. The old testament was written in hebrew , the new testament was written in Greek. I believe there cannot be any english words that can fully find the true meaning of certain words are certain scriptures. Thus, that is why the Bible has been seen as conradicting itself. For example take the word"Heed" in english it means, "mark my words" But you take the same word and go to greek definition it means " Obey." The Bible came frm the East. From Israel. I think thats where the original manuscripts originated from.
Arctic_Menace @ Mon Apr 02, 2007 9:24 pm
$1:
I think to really fully understand thje Bible. One has to go to the original meanings. the real interpretations. The old testament was written in hebrew , the new testament was written in Greek. I believe there cannot be any english words that can fully find the true meaning of certain words are certain scriptures. Thus, that is why the Bible has been seen as conradicting itself. For example take the word"Heed" in english it means, "mark my words" But you take the same word and go to greek definition it means " Obey." The Bible came frm the East. From Israel. I think thats where the original manuscripts originated from.
..............................................
Are you really Biblical_Christian?
Biblical_Christian @ Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:09 pm
The Bible is very accurate. Why do people misenterprate it? Or why do people cannot understand it? It is because the Bible has symbolically written to coincide with Eastern, Middle east, culture (Jewish) meanings. So we cannot try to interprate it according to english standards. People have tryed thus the many english versions. But continuosly misenterprate it. One must go to the original real interpritations, which is Greek, and hebrew.
Tman1 @ Mon Apr 02, 2007 10:21 pm
lily lily:
Tricks Tricks:
So..should anything in the bible be taken literally? Or only some parts?
Yes, the entire books of Psalms, Solomon and Revelations should be taken absolutely literally.
Just like the magical world of Disney right?
Biblical_Christian @ Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:11 am
Tman1 Tman1:
lily lily:
Tricks Tricks:
So..should anything in the bible be taken literally? Or only some parts?
Yes, the entire books of Psalms, Solomon and Revelations should be taken absolutely literally.
Just like the magical world of Disney right?
Tricks @ Fri Apr 06, 2007 10:00 am
lily lily:
Tricks Tricks:
So..should anything in the bible be taken literally? Or only some parts?
Yes, the entire books of Psalms, Solomon and Revelations should be taken absolutely literally.
Tricks @ Fri Apr 06, 2007 10:27 am
lily lily:
Psalms is poetry, Solomon is allegory and Revelations is something else again.
No, I wasn't being serious.
Ok so you didn't answer my question. It was a serious question.
No, I wasn't being serious.
Arctic_Menace @ Fri Apr 06, 2007 10:31 am
$1:
The Bible is very accurate.
$1:
It is because the Bible has symbolically written to coincide with Eastern, Middle east, culture (Jewish) meanings. So we cannot try to interprate it according to english standards.
Interpretations of something, doesn't mean that you get the right idea from it...
$1:
Heres the real scenerio? lol. The missing link has been found........in a picture, unfortunately. No body, no Bones.
You used an editorial cartoon.
Editorial cartoons are designed to show one person's opinion or visualisation of a situation, whether based in fact or not. It cannot be used as an argumentative weapon...
Biblical_Christian @ Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:01 am
You used an editorial cartoon.
Editorial cartoons are designed to show one person's opinion or visualisation of a situation, whether based in fact or not. It cannot be used as an argumentative weapon... [/quote]Editorial cartoons are no different from your phoney baleney believes, Arctic. Get it?