Quote:
Originally posted by Luvian:
Well...yes, it's a bad line of reasoning. I've never lied to you, so if I was to tell you I'm actually Elvis, would you believe me?
Of course the historical setting is accurate. They could not have written a book at that time, with it happening in fake places, and then claim it's true. This book was written back then, not today. The people knew and even lived in all those places. I bet the Raelians would have a lot less followers if they tried to tell us New York doesn't exist, and that there is a continent called Atlantis in the middle of the pacific ocean.... If you want people to believe you, no mather if you are really saying the thruth or lying, you have to base your story on reality.
As for the Jesus's familly line, if it was true, it would mean human were created by god, and there was no evolution. I find this very hard to believe... If we go by your reasoning of "If someone keep saying truth, then what he say has to always be the truth". Then most people will have to consider the bible as false, as most people accept the theory of evolution as the thruth...
After hearing that, I have a lot less respect for the bible. How did they verify his family line? Did they dig up in the ruin of the Great flood? Actually, it's pretty irrelevent, as we are all encestors to Noa, right? He most have been a busy man... [img]graemlins/showoff.gif[/img]
|
Mate I don't know about you, but I'm a student of history. I've read a lot of it and studied it at University for a little while. I have a great respect for the process of gathering historical evidence, writings, allowing for bias, the differences between primary and secondary sources, internal crossreferencing, external proofs etc.
I'm not mucking around when I speak about the accuracy of the bible. I don't base my life, my entire being on a shoddy piece of mythological drivel merely because it took my fancy one day. The other "proof" of the bible, which I'm testing each day, is that it actually works.
The recommendations it makes for relational enhancement and inner peace WORK. Backed up by the historical co-alignment with other works, archaelogical findings and the testimonies of countless others as to the Bibles promises holding true in their lives, it's a LOGICAL FAITH in the promises yet to come, and pieces of information requiring more choice in accepting.
Your claim of being Elvis directly contradicts mountains of evidence to the contrary.
The Bible is very very honest. Every hero in the bible is flawed. The bible shows all their flaws. David, the most loved King of Israel committed one of the most heinous sins in the bible. The bible writers weren't being selective. They recorded truthfully, no matter how vile or difficult to believe.
Hezekiah, the central figure in the topical piece is an inspiring individual btw.
Regarding the lineage lists, they were recorded closer to the time of those alive. The descendents of Adam are listed up to Abraham. The descendents of Abraham are listed on up to David by writers around that era.
Abraham is of course the "Father of Three faiths". Islam, Judaism and Christianity. Jews and Arabs both trace lineage back to him. Ask them about the accuracy of lineages if you like.
Jesus/Y'shua being of the House of David is well known. He traces it back through both Mary (birth) and Joseph (adoption).
As for creation/evolution, why should a fact difficult to accept be automatically disqualified simply because you find it difficult to accept? You're basing the rejection of the entire scientific process of historical writing verification simply because you find it hard to accept God might have created humans.
Sorry Luvian, but that's a tad closed minded.
I don't know whether God created the world in seven days, or seven million years. I don't care wither. I simply believe a creator designed everything. I recognise the artists handiwork.
HOWEVER. Because of the accuracy of the Bible and the contained lineage lists, I certainly believe a man named Adam to have existed.
Luke 3:
Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph,
■■■■■■■ 24the son of Heli, the son of Matthat,
■■■■■■■the son of Levi, the son of Melki,
■■■■■■■the son of Jannai, the son of Joseph,
■■■■■■■ 25the son of Mattathias, the son of Amos,
■■■■■■■the son of Nahum, the son of Esli,
■■■■■■■ 26the son of Naggai, the son of Maath,
■■■■■■■the son of Mattathias, the son of Semein,
■■■■■■■the son of Josech, the son of Joda,
■■■■■■■ 27the son of Joanan, the son of Rhesa,
■■■■■■■the son of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel,
■■■■■■■ 28the son of Neri, the son of Melki,
■■■■■■■the son of Addi, the son of Cosam,
■■■■■■■the son of Elmadam, the son of Er,
■■■■■■■ 29the son of Joshua, the son of Eliezer,
■■■■■■■the son of Jorim, the son of Matthat,
■■■■■■■ 30the son of Levi, the son of Simeon,
■■■■■■■the son of Judah, the son of Joseph,
■■■■■■■the son of Jonam, the son of Eliakim,
■■■■■■■ 31the son of Melea, the son of Menna,
■■■■■■■the son of Mattatha, the son of Nathan,
■■■■■■■ 32the son of David, the son of Jesse,
■■■■■■■the son of Obed, the son of Boaz,
■■■■■■■the son of Salmon,[4] the son of Nahshon,
■■■■■■■ 33the son of Amminadab, the son of Ram,[5]
■■■■■■■the son of Hezron, the son of Perez,
■■■■■■■ 34the son of Judah, the son of Jacob,
■■■■■■■the son of Isaac, the son of Abraham,
■■■■■■■the son of Terah, the son of Nahor,
■■■■■■■ 35the son of Serug, the son of Reu,
■■■■■■■the son of Peleg, the son of Eber,
■■■■■■■ 36the son of Shelah, the son of Cainan,
■■■■■■■the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem,
■■■■■■■the son of Noah, the son of Lamech,
■■■■■■■ 37the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch,
■■■■■■■the son of Jared, the son of Mahalalel,
■■■■■■■ 38the son of Kenan, the son of Enosh,
■■■■■■■the son of Seth, the son of Adam,
■■■■■■■the son of God.
Adam, Seth, Enoch, Methuselah, Lamech, Noah, and Shem are the earliest and are all written about in the old testamnent. By Noahs time you have the Flood - Flood myths being prevalent in pretty much every major civilisations mythology we know of.
I'm fully aware that creationism is a stretch. Understand that so to is evolution, especially a Godless evolution. The odds of it all happening are ridiculous.
We don't know for certain how existence came into being. Nor do we know how long ago it was. Taking literally what the most verified work on the planet says - which has again and again been found to present scientific facts long before they are discovered - is certainly no less logical than relying on hypothesis and assumptions from biologists and astronomers.
Here is a link to a page detailing scientific facts the bible describes that have been backed up by scientific discovery:
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
As I said, I'm not an idiot. I don't go founding, rearranging and purposing my life on something
a) I haven't tested and researched
b) Something I don't perpetually test through application and examination
Give us a little more credit mate
