Utopia Temple
Main Forum Page Register an Account for Free! Calendar Frequently Asked Questions about this Board View New Posts Advanced Search Login
  Utopia Temple Forums > General Discussions > Respectable General Discussions > Religious Discussions

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Post New Thread Reply
Author Thread
(User is Banned)
Posts: 64/200
(15-Jan-2003 at 04:11)


They're just scared of The Bible

Lots of people who never read The Bible have a lot to say about it being made up or irrelevant. I think that subconsciously they are just afraid to find that they really do believe in its principles. Like being a believer is a wussy thing only wimps do or something. Its not like that. It isn't even really a choice you make, but a realization about yourself.
So many people make up their own minds about whether or not they believe in God, but how many actually seek to know whether they believe or not? Its one thing to not know oneself, but another to not care to know.

If it works for them, they will use it.
If it doesn't work for them, they may still use it.
#1  
View Public Profile Find more posts by TAB69 Add TAB69 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 545/4024
(15-Jan-2003 at 04:34)


Just no. I am not scared of a fictional book.

The bible meets the qualifications for a fictional novel. That is why I base it so. If someone can prove different, good.

Izzy is back and older than ever!
#2  
View Public Profile Visit Little Kid Izzy's homepage Find more posts by Little Kid Izzy Add Little Kid Izzy to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(User is Banned)
Posts: 65/200
(15-Jan-2003 at 04:38)


Scientists and explorers on The Discovery Channel and other stations prove it is real all the time. They proved the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, they proved all ten curses on Egypt, many of the original scrolls have been found and accurately dated to the period, they even think they have found Noah's Ark. Plus the history of the people in that area is the same, and the geography matches, they even found the exact location of the Garden of Eden.

If it works for them, they will use it.
If it doesn't work for them, they may still use it.
#3  
View Public Profile Find more posts by TAB69 Add TAB69 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 125/125
(15-Jan-2003 at 04:43)


you know what, im a roman catholic, and i belive in god and everything else...but i also do not put out the extreeme possibility that its all just made up, cause ya know what...chances are it is all fiction

"Who put a bengal tiger in the Kaiser's latrine?
#4  
View Public Profile Visit ezek's homepage Find more posts by ezek Add ezek to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 69/82
(15-Jan-2003 at 04:45)


Little Kid Izzy

remember the last time you said that, someone ALREADY told you the Bible is "real," so get with the program before you get into trouble with Duke or whoever again, and piss others off. True you are entitled to your own opinion but you also have to realize, people HAVE proved the Bible is real. So stop ignoring the truth.


Ignorance is bliss... nah..

Live the Moment because Yesterday is Gone and Tomorrow May Never Come - [James. brother of Jesus]
#5  
View Public Profile Find more posts by de S Add de S to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(Posted as Fisher)
Posts: 5/83
(15-Jan-2003 at 04:46)
Here's some proof nto totally erectified yet but soo to be



JERUSALEM (Jan. 14) - Israeli geologists say they have examined a stone tablet detailing repair plans for the Jewish Temple of King Solomon that, if authenticated, would be a rare piece of physical evidence confirming biblical narrative.

The find - whose origin is murky - is about the size of a legal pad, with a 15-line inscription in ancient Hebrew that strongly resembles descriptions in the Bible's Book of Kings. It could also strengthen Jewish claims to a disputed holy site in Jerusalem's Old City that is now home to two major mosques.

Muslim clerics insist, despite overwhelming archaeological evidence, that no Jewish shrine ever stood at the site. That claim was made by Palestinian officials in failed negotiations with Israel in 2000 over who would be sovereign there.

The origin of the stone tablet is unclear, making it difficult to establish authenticity.

The Israeli daily Haaretz on Monday quoted an unidentified source as saying it was uncovered in recent years, during renovations carried out by the Muslim administrators of the mosque compound known to Muslims as the Haram as-Sharif, or Noble Sanctuary, and to Jews as the Temple Mount.

From there, it reached a major antiquities collector in Jerusalem, Haaretz said. The Holy Land has a thriving trade in antiquities, often operating on the edge of the law.

The sandstone tablet has a 15-line inscription in ancient Hebrew that resembles descriptions in Kings II, 12:1-6, 11-17, said Israel's Geological Survey, which examined the artifact. The words refer to King Joash, who ruled the area 2,800 years ago.

In it, the king tells priests to take ``holy money ... to buy quarry stones and timber and copper and labor to carry out the duty with faith.'' If the work is completed well, ``the Lord will protect his people with blessing,'' reads the last sentence of the inscription.

The Jerusalem collector has declined to come forward, and David Zailer, a lawyer for the collector, would not say where the tablet was found or give any further details.

Gabriel Barkai, a biblical archaeologist, said the collector asked the Israel Museum to determine the authenticity of the inscription and was told the museum's experts could not rule out a forgery. The Israel Museum declined comment Monday.

The collector then took the tablet to Israel's Geological Institute, whose experts studied it over the past year. ``Our findings show that it is authentic,'' said Shimon Ilani, who performed geological tests on the inscription. Carbon dating confirms the writing goes back to the 9th century B.C., he said.

In the outer layer, Ilani and his colleagues found microscopic flecks of gold that could have been burnt into the stone when a building containing both the tablet and gold objects was destroyed.

This could mean the tablet was actually part of Solomon's Temple, which was destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 B.C., said Amos Bean, director of the institute.

``These specks of gold are not natural material, but a sign of human activity,'' said Bean. ``They could be from gold-plated objects in the home of a very rich man, or a temple. ... It's hard to believe that anyone would know how to do these things to make it look real.''

The stone itself was probably from the Dead Sea area and was originally whiter than its current dark gray, Bean said.

Hershel Shanks, editor of the Washington-based Biblical Archaeology Review, said the tablet, if authentic, would be ``visual, tactile evidence that reaches across 2,800 years.''

Barkai said the inscription's resemblance to biblical passages ``has far-reaching implications of the historical importance of the biblical text.''

Several other inscriptions excavated in recent years refer to characters or events from the Bible. A stone inscription found in northern Israel includes the phrase ``house of David.'' Most experts consider this to be the first ancient writing outside the Bible that refers to King David or the Davidic line of kings, which has corroborated the basic history of the Hebrew Scriptures.

Adnan Husseini, the director of the Islamic Trust that administers the Jerusalem mosque compound, denied Monday the tablet was found during renovation work there.

In recent years, the Islamic Trust has turned an underground vault in the compound into a large prayer area, prompting complaints by Israeli archaeologists that important artifacts are being destroyed. At one point, the archaeologists said truckloads of soil from the holy site were dumped uninspected into the nearby Kidron Valley.

The mosque compound is Islam's third-holiest site, while the adjacent Western Wall, the last remnant of the second Jewish Temple compound, is Judaism's holiest site. Most rabbis ban Jews from entering the Temple Mount for religious purity reasons.

When Israel conquered east Jerusalem in the 1967 Mideast war, it permitted Muslim clergy to continue administering the hilltop area to avoid conflict with the Muslim world.

The mystery surrounding the stone tablet - its murky origins, appearance on the private antiquities market and a collector unwilling to come forward - mirrors the controversy over an inscription on an ancient burial box that may be the oldest archaeological link to Jesus.

The burial box, or ossuary, had the inscription, ``James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus,'' leading some to believe it was used to store the remains of James, the brother of Jesus of Nazareth.
#6  
View Public Profile Find more posts by going to change Add going to change to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(User is Banned)
Posts: 66/200
(15-Jan-2003 at 04:51)


Hmm. I would like to know how you calculated that probability. Or did you just make it up?

By the way, did you know that according to the laws of probability, the Earth doesn't even exist? It is so mathematically unlikely that such a thing as life could ever possibly exist in terms of all the molecules and their possible configurations and their chemical relations to other molecules...and yet, here we are.

I'm just saying that instead of saying, "No it isn't true," ask yourself why you think it isn't true, because probability is not going to help you with that arguement. It is just too unlikely for probability to even exist, considering that life is essential impossible, and in order for probabilities to be considered, not only must there be life, but intelligent life.

If it works for them, they will use it.
If it doesn't work for them, they may still use it.
#7  
View Public Profile Find more posts by TAB69 Add TAB69 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 72/82
(15-Jan-2003 at 04:56)


Fisher, man if you THINK im going to read all that, you're crazy.

Live the Moment because Yesterday is Gone and Tomorrow May Never Come - [James. brother of Jesus]
#8  
View Public Profile Find more posts by de S Add de S to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 546/4024
(15-Jan-2003 at 04:57)


Quote:
(Originally posted by TAB69)

Scientists and explorers on The Discovery Channel and other stations prove it is real all the time. They proved the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, they proved all ten curses on Egypt, many of the original scrolls have been found and accurately dated to the period, they even think they have found Noah's Ark. Plus the history of the people in that area is the same, and the geography matches, they even found the exact location of the Garden of Eden.
They prove that events that are talked about in the bible are real, doesn't mean that it was god inspired. I could have lived back there and decided to make a book that talked about the some past empires, could I have not?

And De S, I think you are referring to the wrong person. Nobody ever gave me enough to proof to change it in my opinion, I don't require absolute, but more than what has been given. It is called mere coincidence, get over it.

Izzy is back and older than ever!
#9  
View Public Profile Visit Little Kid Izzy's homepage Find more posts by Little Kid Izzy Add Little Kid Izzy to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 74/82
(15-Jan-2003 at 05:06)


Quote:
And De S, I think you are referring to the wrong person. Nobody ever gave me enough to proof to change it in my opinion, I don't require absolute, but more than what has been given. It is called mere coincidence, get over it.
nah Izzy, you don't get it.
Im marely telling You to STOP saying the bible is "fiction" because its been proven that its real.

baada bing, badda boom

Live the Moment because Yesterday is Gone and Tomorrow May Never Come - [James. brother of Jesus]
#10  
View Public Profile Find more posts by de S Add de S to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(User is Banned)
Posts: 67/200
(15-Jan-2003 at 05:08)


To tell you the truth, I don't know what you would be capable of if you lived back then. Hell, I don't even know what you are capable of now.

By the way, "god" and "God" are two different words with two absolutely different meanings.
I am sincerely convinced that anyone who has such strong ideas one way or another is doing his or her self a great diservice by not reading The Bible. For example, The Bible makes the difference between a "god" and "God" quite clear and in many different contextual frameworks. It is absolutely absurd for a person to claim to know anything about great literature who has not read or who is not presently reading The Bible.

It is even more absurd for someone to claim belief or disbelief without having first read that which the belief or disbelief is concerning, in this case The Bible.

If it works for them, they will use it.
If it doesn't work for them, they may still use it.
#11  
View Public Profile Find more posts by TAB69 Add TAB69 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(Posted as MelonFarmer)
Posts: 47/789
Donated $1.36
(15-Jan-2003 at 05:10)


Quote:
Lots of people who never read The Bible have a lot to say about it being made up or irrelevant. I think that subconsciously they are just afraid to find that they really do believe in its principles. Like being a believer is a wussy thing only wimps do or something. Its not like that. It isn't even really a choice you make, but a realization about yourself.
You dont know what you are talking about. You just assume anyone who is an athiest is just a lazy person who doesn'y feel like going to church. I was a Christain since I was a little kid and went to Sunday school every Sunday, read during church sermons, been baptized and even been confirmed. You make it sound if as everyone is a christian they just havent realized it. I became an athiest after exploring the bible and what I was taught and found that I could no longer bring myself to believe that there was a god anymore. Its history has been used to control people and its basic teachings warped. It can be translated so many different ways that the bible could be interpreted to justify just about anything.


And Fisher your post does not prove the bible is correct it just suggests that christianity is a very old religion.
#12  
View Public Profile Find more posts by ghdfgsdrgsdfgdr Add ghdfgsdrgsdfgdr to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 1397/4208
(15-Jan-2003 at 05:12)


Quote:
By the way, did you know that according to the laws of probability, the Earth doesn't even exist? It is so mathematically unlikely that such a thing as life could ever possibly exist in terms of all the molecules and their possible configurations and their chemical relations to other molecules...and yet, here we are.
Laws of probability, eh? How big would you say the Universe is, exactly? Does it have a finite size? Scientists think that it doubles its size in a second, constantly growing, so can something infinitely growing have finite quantities? I don't think so. Not only is it probable that life on earth formed, it's also probable that there's an exact copy of the earth somewhere else in the universe. Probability. No matter what the odds, in an infinite universe, everything can and will happen at some point in time and space, and near as we can tell, this is an infinite universe. If the doppler shift changes to blue, then we'll know it's a finite universe, but it's red right now, and always has been as near as we can tell (There's a theory that the Universe grows and closes in on itself over and over and over throughout time, but that's more a product of rationalization than true theory).

As for God, I've read the bible, and I saw no reason to believe it's true. I've read a lot of books, and I don't think they're true, unless they're encyclopedia.

As for the Bible, let's list the examples you provided. Sodom and Gomorrah. If cities like Sodom and Gomorrah existed, they would be horribly afflicted by sexual diseases. The cities we think were Sodom and Gomorrah had skeletons that seemed to be afflicted with syphallis, but no more than your typical city from that time period. If those cities are Sodom and Gomorrah, they don't appear to have had lots of butt sex going on, since that transmits diseases a lot easier than normal intercourse. A city of sodomy would be horribly afflicted with diseases, yet Sodom and Gomorrah (if it's the actual cities) didn't appear any more afflicted than any other city from the time.

I don't know about the Ten Plagues that much, so I can't elaborate on them much, but let's go into a bit of biblical history I can go into. The Great Flood. There are two realistic theories going on this at the moment. One theory is that there used to be a natural dam holding back the Sea of Azov, and the Black Sea, or what we know now as the Black Sea, used to be tiny. People lived in that area, and one day, that natural dam broke due to massive flooding. This caused a torrential flood which wiped out hte Black Sea civilization. Another theory is that the Great Flood was nothing more than a really bad flood season in Mesopotamia. Both prove the point that the Great Flood wasn't global, as the bible suggests.

Sygnalor the Accountinator
Able to file 1040's faster than a speeding bullet
#13  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Sygnal Add Sygnal to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 1/1
(15-Jan-2003 at 05:18)
Quote:
Its history has been used to control people and its basic teachings warped.
Not a problem of God so to speak. Who warped the Bible? Who is responsible for the use of religion to control people? Not God. A common misconception of atheists is the idea that God is responsible for the actions of humans. If you really know anything at all (or at least enough to properly argue on this topic) about Christianity, you can see that God DELIBERATLY gave all humans free choice, in order that humans could choose between right and wrong freely. Giving humans this type of free reign has caused many 'problems', as humans are easily corrupt, such as it "...[being] used to control people...". Humans twisted the Bible, God didn't.

Last edited by Im Behind You, 15-Jan-2003 at 05:19.
#14  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Im Behind You Add Im Behind You to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(User is Banned)
Posts: 68/200
(15-Jan-2003 at 05:27)


My best friend was an atheist for many years. He carried a Bible with him at all times. Even though he was an atheist, he read the Bible in order to find weaknesses and flaws to support his arguement. We used to have hours of debates. It took years for him to realize it, but he eventually found that he believes.

The universe, that theory of it bending over in on itself again and again is one of Dr. Stephen Hawkings theories, and yes I agree with it. But, it does not include that time reverses, as was previously thought.
Not only does the universe grow, it is expanding faster and faster with every second, due to the fact that the farther apart the objects in space are, the less gravitational hold they exhibit on one another. The neutrino's do not have enough mass to slow the expanding universe down.

Sodom and Gomorah, I never said that there was rampant homosexual activity and disease there. From what I know of the place, it was described as a place where men sought "to know" one another. Many people think this means that they were all butt-humping each other, but it doesn't necessarily mean any more than that they were facinated with each other and sought to understand each other rather than to understand the mysteries of God. Iwas talking about the destruction of those two cities by sulfur from the sky. The sites where the cities existed have remains and are covered with sulfur pearl-nuggets from a nearby volcanic fissure that was dated to have erupted back then.

If the flood were not global, then how did that huge boat they found buried under an iceberg peak in the same mountains where Mt. Everest is get there?

If it works for them, they will use it.
If it doesn't work for them, they may still use it.
#15  
View Public Profile Find more posts by TAB69 Add TAB69 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(Posted as MelonFarmer)
Posts: 49/789
Donated $1.36
(15-Jan-2003 at 05:28)


I know that. Like I said I was a christian for a long time. That's not the only reason why i left christianity. I am tired of explaining it over and over so if you really want to know go look for it in some other religous thread. (Its a lot of writing and I dont feel like it right now)
#16  
View Public Profile Find more posts by ghdfgsdrgsdfgdr Add ghdfgsdrgsdfgdr to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(User is Banned)
Posts: 69/200
(15-Jan-2003 at 05:34)


That's cool. I'm not trying to change your mind.
But I believe in God, and The Bible says God is love. So love is the number one most powerful and beneficial thing, that's all I'm saying I believe when I say I believe in God. Basically, that love takes precendence over all other things in my life, because I think love is better than any other thing.

By the way, while I say I believe in God, I am in no way saying that I am a Christian. In other words, I follow God and not a religion that tells people what The Bible says.

If it works for them, they will use it.
If it doesn't work for them, they may still use it.

Last edited by TAB69, 15-Jan-2003 at 05:36.
#17  
View Public Profile Find more posts by TAB69 Add TAB69 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 4/7
(15-Jan-2003 at 05:53)
hey

Look at all the prophecies from the Old Testament fufilled in the New Testament. And how would 4 diff writers wrote the same account of Jesus in the 4 book of gospels? How could a book written over a period of so many centuries re interdependent? This book MUST be inspired by God and put together by God!
#18  
View Public Profile Find more posts by johnlin Add johnlin to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 1398/4208
(15-Jan-2003 at 06:21)


Johnlin, could it be because the Papacy modified the bible as they saw fit, repeately and often? No, gasp, shudder!

As for the boat on mount everest, more than likely it was wierd locals. The locals have a various assortment of odd (when compared to western standards) religons, and maybe one of them was for the creation of boats on the mountains in the sky to appease Gurdan or whoever.

By the way, it is used frequently in the Bible, "to know" means "to engage in intercourse with". Leviticus uses it a lot, that's the only one I can think of off the top of my head.

Sygnalor the Accountinator
Able to file 1040's faster than a speeding bullet
#19  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Sygnal Add Sygnal to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(User is Banned)
Posts: 70/200
(15-Jan-2003 at 06:52)


Perhaps, but that is not the only connotation for the words "to know." What it means in English is the way I read it since it is written in English. In English it means something other than to "butt-hump." If in the Hebrew it means to "butt-hump", then why does it in English say "to know?" Because it is used loosely, and its meaning is variable as the inhabitants of the cities were variable in thier knowing one another. Even Lot was considered to be displeasing to God at first, but since he was the most righteous, he found absolution. He was not described as being righteous amongst sinners, but only the most righteous of the sinners. He argued with God and through logic got what he wanted. Because he was rational and not only argued for himself, but for his family as well, found favor with God.

Regarding the priests changing it or whatever, I am argueing that God's will determines the way the world is and if that includes that some priests changed The Bible, then so be it. That point is irrelevant to what I am saying.
The principle that God is love remains unchanged.

A person can nit-pick about this or that little quote in The Bible all a person wants, and when things don't go a persons way, that person can claim the possibility that it has been changed or that Noah's Ark is really Gurdans boat or whatever, but the fact is that every religion that has the idea of a supreme being of any sort refers to it as "love" or a similar thing. That is the point. Everybody already knows that things change. Nobody is argueing against that universal truth. What I am argueing is the immutability of love in the lives of the steadfast despite man's attempt to meddle with it.

If you don't think that love is the most powerful, then try having a successful marriage or relationship with your family while living hatefully towards them. And if you don't believe in the efficacy of love (that is God), then you either are a very lonesome individual or you only say that you don't believe in love and in fact practice it.

The problem with all this argueing is that it is the result of everybody having different definitions for these different words. People have a tendency to find comfort in what comes easy to them, and if that means to settle for an innacurate or uneducated or biased definition or ideology of what "God" must mean, for atheisms sake or whatever, then that is what people will tend to do.

If it works for them, they will use it.
If it doesn't work for them, they may still use it.
#20  
View Public Profile Find more posts by TAB69 Add TAB69 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump:


All times are GMT+1. The time now is 07:50.

Powered by vBulletin (modified)
Copyright ©2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.