(Un)Intelligent Design

[NitroNutter]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

The bible was written by people who believed the earth was flat! Anyway, if you are using the bible as your source of proof for miracles then you really have to go back to the drawing board. The bible is an unverifiable source of information. You may choose to believe what is in it but you cannot prove (or disprove) that information. Because of that, it is no better than hearsay.

Is that so ? Or is that what you assume ?

[me283]

Originally Posted by Russ D

I don't think it literally took 6 days, as God isn't bound by the same restraints of time as we are, but I don't believe the earth is millions and millions of years old as most scientists seem to theorise. I believe it was only written as 'days' in the Bible in order for people of the day to understand - it's unlikely that anyone of those times could have legitimately understood the number of years it would have taken.

Joining this one late in the day, so sorry if I'm repeating anything.

The quote above is IMO an example of why many people don't follow religion/the Bible etc. When somebody quotes the Bible claiming for example that there are "plenty of miracles in it, they expect the book to be taken literally. But when they are presented with something in the Bible that is harder to believe (e.g. the world being created in six days) they start talking about how it shouldn't be taken literally. The question is, who decides what should and shouldn't be taken literally/metaphorically?

I read a couple of interesting books recently: The Hiram Key and Holy Blood, Holy Grail. Both have given me a few interesting insights into the Bible, and how it has used/misused through the ages.

In addition, I have long been a fan of the theories of Erich von Daniken, but that throws a whole different light on things.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by me283

When somebody quotes the Bible claiming for example that there are "plenty of miracles in it, they expect the book to be taken literally.

I've never said the Bible had to be taken literally.

Originally Posted by me283

The question is, who decides what should and shouldn't be taken literally/metaphorically?

That's easy - the individual.

[me283]

Originally Posted by Russ D

I've never said the Bible had to be taken literally.



That's easy - the individual.

So does that mean that the Bible tells you whatever you want it to? The individual can interpret it as they see fit? When it suits the individual, it states the truth; when it doesn't, it's actually just written in terms that us mere mortals can understand?

[Russ]

Originally Posted by me283

So does that mean that the Bible tells you whatever you want it to? The individual can interpret it as they see fit? When it suits the individual, it states the truth; when it doesn't, it's actually just written in terms that us mere mortals can understand?

I'm speaking from my own experiences - other are free to view the Bible as they see fit.

The Old Testament tends to be rather vague in the early days - the vast majority of the rest of the Bible was written from witness accounts. We don't know how (or by who) Genesis was written. There was no-one with a calender to measure how long it took God to create everything.

The vast majority of the NT is from witness 'statements' and could be seen as more accurate.

In answer to your inital question, I'm sure anyone will read whatever they want in to the Bible (and some evidently do).

[me283]

That's a fair point. But one thing that my recent readings threw up was that the different gospels seem at first sight to contain many contradictions. But I guess a lot of the writings were hearsay anyway.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by Russ D

The vast majority of the NT is from witness 'statements' and could be seen as more accurate.

I was under the impression that most parts of it where written a hundred years or so after the events.....ie. not eyewitness accounts

---------- Post added at 16:20 ---------- Previous post was at 16:13 ----------

lol.......it's fact.
It is impossible to prove or disprove the miracles depicted in the bible.....

---------- Post added at 16:30 ---------- Previous post was at 16:20 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ D

I don't think it literally took 6 days, as God isn't bound by the same restraints of time as we are, but I don't believe the earth is millions and millions of years old as most scientists seem to theorise. I believe it was only written as 'days' in the Bible in order for people of the day to understand - it's unlikely that anyone of those times could have legitimately understood the number of years it would have taken.

I'm sorry Russ but you have an indefensible, unjustifiable stance here concerning the bible. On one hand you dismiss my claims that the miracles mentioned in the bible (or even other events in the bible) are to be looked at with scepticism.....yet you feel free to pick and choose how to interpret what is written in the bible when you feel you can't believe it.

[NitroNutter]

As it goes I was questioning the flat earth element of your statement. Just because some factions at the time beleived the world to be flat or a flat disc does not mean everyone of the era thought the same. I dont remember any passage of the bible indicating the earth is flat, not that I have read it recently, and hebrew was not nessecarily a culture that in its entirity or even a majority believed the world was flat either.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

As it goes I was questioning the flat earth element of your statement. Just because some factions at the time beleived the world to be flat or a flat disc does not mean everyone of the era thought the same. I dont remember any passage of the bible indicating the earth is flat, not that I have read it recently, and hebrew was not nessecarily a culture that in its entirity or even a majority believed the world was flat either.

lol.....that was a throwaway comment but here is the wikipedia entry that shows a mixture of beliefs but does suggest that some early christians were against a spherical earth on theological grounds....though what those were, it doesn't say.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by me283

That's a fair point. But one thing that my recent readings threw up was that the different gospels seem at first sight to contain many contradictions. But I guess a lot of the writings were hearsay anyway.

Which contradictions are they?

Originally Posted by Ramrod

I'm sorry Russ but you have an indefensible, unjustifiable stance here concerning the bible. On one hand you dismiss my claims that the miracles mentioned in the bible (or even other events in the bible) are to be looked at with scepticism.....yet you feel free to pick and choose how to interpret what is written in the bible when you feel you can't believe it.

Not at all. I said the book of Genesis may be open to question however that's not to say the same level of potential doubt can be applied to all the books.

[Ramrod]

Leaving aside my suspicion that you probably harbour doubts about other parts of the bible (and have rationalised them away)......if you doubt the events in one book (and a pretty important one at that) but are prepared to accept all else as 'gospel' (without a shred of evidence beyond faith) then you can see why I am sceptical about your objectivity here.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

Leaving aside my suspicion that you probably harbour doubts about other parts of the bible (and have rationalised them away)......if you doubt the events in one book (and a pretty important one at that) but are prepared to accept all else as 'gospel' (without a shred of evidence beyond faith) then you can see why I am sceptical about your objectivity here.

Clutching at straws there....

I don't doubt the events, only the way they are described. I don't doubt God created the world in the way He did, but try explaining thousands (or millions?) of years to the people of the time.

Apart from being the events described from Jesus onwards, do you actually know what the New Testament is? I suspect you don't.

[Xaccers]

It's the new covenant

Fortold by Jeremiah, giving forgivness not to mankind, but to the house of Israel and Judah.

Before we get taken off topic again, what exactly does this have to do with (un)intelligent design?

[NitroNutter]

Originally Posted by Ramrod

lol.....that was a throwaway comment but here is the wikipedia entry that shows a mixture of beliefs but does suggest that some early christians were against a spherical earth on theological grounds....though what those were, it doesn't say.

Your talking about european christianity, whereas the bible is a compilation of gospels of some of the first christians who were Jewish teachers. (Hebrews) There is no indication that the flat earth was one of their teachings or that this is what they believed, that is just yours, and many others judgment based on a potentially misconstrued assumption.

[Ramrod]

Originally Posted by NitroNutter

Your talking about european christianity, whereas the bible is a compilation of gospels of some of the first christians who were Jewish teachers. (Hebrews) There is no indication that the flat earth was one of their teachings or that this is what they believed, that is just yours, and many others judgment based on a potentially misconstrued assumption.

.....and as I said, a throwaway comment, and since I don't know enough about the period and location I can't disprove you....I'll retract it if you prefer

---------- Post added at 21:23 ---------- Previous post was at 21:11 ----------

Originally Posted by Russ D

Clutching at straws there....

Not at all. I am merely pointing out to you how your objectivity is in question if you are happy to arbitrarily re-interpret some parts of the bible whilst not entertaining my idea that perhaps other parts of the bible may be incorrect.

I don't doubt the events, only the way they are described. I don't doubt God created the world in the way He did, but try explaining thousands (or millions?) of years to the people of the time.

I see your point but if you think that descriptions of some events may be factually incorrect how can you have such faith in the descriptions of other events?
In fact, it would be odd if everything written in the bible did happen because you know how unreliable things written down are.....books contain massive errors, newspapers publish inaccuracies or even untruths every day. Peoples recollections are imperfect and biased. For the bible to be factually correct would be astounding.