Christianity is a lie, since Adam wouldn't need/have a bellly button.

Not nearly as bad as what you posted above.

 

"Were you there to witness the event? No? Then you don't know anything about what happened there other than what is reported in the scripture."
I believe that is the whole premise to religion or not religion. How accurate is scripture? Who compiled the scripture? When was this scripture compiled? What were the motives behind this compilation? Just a few questions that most would like answers to.
No one was there to know what really happened. You can only surmise and believe.

 

That's like evangelicals saying that evolution is fake, because the Atheists planted the dinosaur bones.

 

You can prove with utmost certainty that it is not 100% accurate in all details.

From there, the question becomes how accurate any of it is.

If it has to be 100% literal or lie, well, we know then which it is.

 

Close enough, they are both pretty dumb.

 

Then you are suggesting that your hands and fingers have a mind of their own and you have no control over what they do? What you have stated above shows that you did not intend to write (type) what you typed. You do indeed have a strange set of motor functions within that body of yours.

Then you are admitting that you have no evidence to support your claim.

Your statement above is an example of you doing things which you have no control over.

Could you provide a listing of those things that you believe are not "literally true" and those things that you believe are "not accurate"?

Can you prove that they never happened? No? Gee.... Your science is lacking.

I suppose what version of history and who wrote the history would be the determining factor. Who is your favorite historian who KNOWS what took place centuries before he/she was born?

I suppose it would also be so abundant that this forum could not handle a link to where the information could be found?

Approximate? Are you suggesting that you are now guessing? Guessing results in approximations.

Since when are there varying degrees of 'true'? Does the scientific community work on a sliding scale of 'truth'?

 

The bible was written by humans because of God. Just remember that. Human error is possible in nearly everything.
Im just facinated in what the starter of the thread sees in belly buttons.

 

Hey, those ideas sound very biblically compatible. What say you? It sounds a lot like biblical ideas of spirit, and like the non-biblical Hebrew idea of the golem.

 

It doesnt fascinate me, to each their own.

I dont agree with the god part of why the bible was written, but its nice when someone is rational enough to see it cannot be 100% accurate.

 

there are no mistakes in the Holy Bible.

Jonah and the whale are metaphor, Noah ,metaphor.

All vital for humans to live a better life .

People do not realize that touching God with your mind or angels for that matter can cause insanity.
It's not meant to be.

Jesus was human and we were fortunate enough to have Him and be able to converse in real life with God.

there was a History channel show on i watched about the history of mankind.

one third of the earth's population believe in Jesus.

This insignificant crucifixion witnessed by a few of His family and friends, changed the world we live in.

when i say insignificant i quote the narrator who explains crucifixions were common place in the Roman empire at the time and actually quite ordinary.

So...you ask yourself why then.

how can this be.

It's God's Will and God's Son who died on that ordinary day

 

You previously stated "I think for one, intent is a necessary aspect of it, and no attack was intended."
I concur that 'intent' is a necessary function to any human action. The end item result may not have been the intent of the action, however, the end item result is due to the 'intended' action which created the unintended result. Now did you or did you not intend to write what you wrote? As for the pragmatics of the definition of 'attack'... let us examine what an attack is:
"at·tack (-tk)
v. at·tacked, at·tack·ing, at·tacks
v.tr.
1. To set upon with violent force.
2. To criticize strongly or in a hostile manner.
3. To start work on with purpose and vigor: attack a problem.
4. To begin to affect harmfully: a disease that attacks the central nervous system.
v.intr.
To make an attack; launch an assault: The enemy attacked during the night."

As you can see, the meaning of attack includes criticisms... criticisms of a person, a persons intelligence, a book or series of books, a life style, a belief system. It would appear that anyone on this forum criticizing another member because of his or her belief system (or lack of a belief system) would be 'attacking' that other person. (Yes I am including myself as one of those attackers.) Now argue with the definition about how strange that definition is.

Then provide a link to where the evidence can be reviewed.

How so? By telling the truth that you admitted to. You admitted that you typed something that you should not have typed.

Examples of what? Your overactive imagination?

If you cannot prove something, then why use that something as a piece of alleged evidence of something? Everything is under scrutiny waiting for proof.

Your reassertion of the same claim means little without any supporting evidence.

Well, you are the one who is making the claims, so it is up to you to provide the information that supports your claim. I don't believe that anyone on this forum is a mind reader and therefore, we/they/all the members are dependent upon you to provide access to the information that convinced you to make such a claim. You do want to be convincing don't you?

"approximate
adj [əˈprɒksɪmɪt]
1. almost accurate or exact
2. inexact; rough; loose only an approximate fit
3. much alike; almost the same
4. near; close together"

Gee.. It seems that approximations are not quite fitting the picture.

Ahhh. I suppose that my being (as you describe it) an absolutist is what enabled me to obtain a degree in Computer Electronics. All those 1's and 0's floating around in my head... you know... binary information... gee that would mean that the machine you are using is processing information just like you claim that I do.... There are no gray areas in the binary code system... it is either 'true' (on) 'false' (off) with those little components in the computer.

Wrong. The movement of electrons in a circuit is either 'on' or 'off'. 100 % accurate.

Absolutely.

 

If you believe your New Testament, Jesus never treated Jonah as a metaphor. It was a miracle the same as his death and resurrection - the same 'sign', in fact!

Hey, did you know there's a whale constellation in the south? Its name is Cetus..

 

The book of Jonah is a comic nouvella about Jonah's xenophobia.. and God's love for even the people of Nineveh.. an enemy of Israel.

 

No, the bible was put together by a bunch of priests devoted to Constantine, designed to enslave the early Christians. There are more scriptures not in the bible than are in the bible. Those were written by men that were inspired to write them, by their love of their perception of God.

 

There are some christian religions that believe the bible is 100% literal. I belong to one of them. Catholics, I believe, used to be one of them. Don't think that is the case anymore.
While 33% of the world are christians, there are literally 1000s of versions and 10,000 different beliefs from that, IMO.

 

It's just the TRUTH.

 

So do you believe that "30 cubits' is exactly literally true?

 

I guess my point of this thread SHOULD have been how its amazing that people can't agree AT ALL on this topic, because it seems like 1/2 the people, like you, say "yes", and have the people say "no". Points out how illogical the story is in the first place, like most fairy tales. And of course Jesus is too busy causing babies to be born with life-threatening birth defects ("acts of god" and all), and causing the tornado that killed over 130 people awhile back (yet another benevolent "act of god", eh?) to bother to clear ANYTHING about religion up for us.....should we still kills gays(?) - Jesus is silent....should we accept slavery like jesus did in the NT - Jesus is silent.
Jesus, bigfoot, and Wotan clearly don't care about us enough to even BOTHER themselves to clear up these questions. Same as if they didn't exist at all....

 

My opinion? Not hardly.. it is the opinion of those scholars who compiled that dictionary.

Wrong again... it is not a matter of personal preference as to whether or not it is construed as an attack... it is a matter of absolute definitions declaring it to be an attack. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

Been there, done that. Now what?

No. Admit as in voluntarily confess.

Now this thread is relegated to the status of 'casual conversation' while others like to profess that it is 'debate'. Not the use of the word, but the meaning of the word.

To seek truth in all things. Even in these 'casual conversations'.

What tone?

Then prove both of your claims.

But I did not say that you claimed that ww2 really happened.. so why present strawman arguments?

In other words, you can't be convincing, much less be an 'educator'.

Then you admit that you don't know what a cubit is therefore, all of your claims pertaining to Pi are all Bs.

According to you it is.

Nope. But I can observe the effects of what I have been taught to understand are electrons. Want to argue that point?

I have already accomplished such a feat. The testimony given by me was absolutely perfect from the perspective in which I was a witness. Standing at position x, I saw such and such happen at location z. Absolutely perfect. On the other hand, someone standing at position b perhaps saw something different happening at location z due to the difference in perspective. Ever hear of perspective drawings?

"ab·so·lut·ism (bs-ltzm)
n.
1.
a. A political theory holding that all power should be vested in one ruler or other authority.
b. A form of government in which all power is vested in a single ruler or other authority.
2. An absolute doctrine, principle, or standard.
abso·lutist n.
abso·lu·tistic (-l-tstk) adj."

Does it matter what I 'think'? It should only matter what I can prove. Proof is what you are seeking is it not?

 

Then leave religion....today. You can do it.

 

You're a relentless god(*)(*)(*)(*)ed whiner. How's that for an attack?

 

Evolution is tangible proof that the creator god is a lie.

 

Evolution is only a theory. Hence the title "Theory of Evolution". Write informatively.


http://www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com/
"Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature). "