Visit the Ironworks Gaming Website Email the Webmaster Graphics Library Rules and Regulations Help Support Ironworks Forum with a Donation to Keep us Online - We rely totally on Donations from members Donation goal Meter

Ironworks Gaming Radio

Ironworks Gaming Forum

Go Back   Ironworks Gaming Forum > Ironworks Gaming Forums > General Discussion > General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-22-2003, 09:33 PM   #21
Yorick
Very Mad Bird
 

Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 46
Posts: 9,226
Quote:
Originally posted by Tancred:
quote:
Originally posted by Vaskez:
If one part of it's true, surely there is that little bit less doubt about some other parts of it and so on. What I'm trying to say is analagous to when a person tells the truth one time then you are more likely to believe them next time. The people writing the Bible had no reason to write things they believed were false so they were either deluded, misguided or right.
Using this line of reasoning, you could affirm the truth in all manner of things; Greek mythologies, the Arthurian legends, even other contemporary religions. That's insane! [/QUOTE]It's not insane. It's a perfectly solid line of reasoning. The Greek and Arthurian mythologies present facts which are clearly incorrect when compared against other historical works covering the same period. Therefore one can make reasonable assumptions about the correctness (or not) of those things which require a stretch of belief.

The Bible on the other hand, posseses an extraordinary dedication to accuracy. It'll bore you to tears if you read it cover to cover precisely because of many books long genealogical lists, measurements or other such detail.

Jesus/Y'shua's family line is recorded all the way back to David and then back to Adam.

See, though the creation may be difficult to swallow, each subsequent direct descendant of Adam is accounted for and listed in the Bible. It lists their ages relative time (to the fathers age) of birth so a date for creation can be set to circa 4001 B.C.

Another thing about the bible is that it crossreferences itself. Another is that 25,000 archaelogical sites have been found that are mentioned in the bible.

Another point is that there are vastly more copies of early manuscripts found within a shorter time frame from time of writing. We have manuscriptes of the New Testament dated to being copied 50 years after Y'shua's death.

The number is something like 44,000 copies or some other ridiculously high figure.

Other historical works like Tacitus and Herodotus have only a handful of manuscripts found, with copies dating in some cases, hundreds of years after it was written.

This site has interesting points:

http://lifeandtruth.com/thebible.htm

In any case, back to the "insane" argument, it is an argument used in courts of law today. Much hinges on a witnesses trustworthiness. If they are found to have been dishonest or lied in the past, their word is not upheld.

So, it is quite clearly a solid line of reasoning. Far from "insanity".
__________________

http://www.hughwilson.com
Yorick is offline  
Old 09-22-2003, 11:20 PM   #22
Luvian
Ironworks Moderator
 

Join Date: June 27, 2001
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 6,750
Quote:
Originally posted by Yorick:
quote:
Originally posted by Tancred:
quote:
Originally posted by Vaskez:
If one part of it's true, surely there is that little bit less doubt about some other parts of it and so on. What I'm trying to say is analagous to when a person tells the truth one time then you are more likely to believe them next time. The people writing the Bible had no reason to write things they believed were false so they were either deluded, misguided or right.
Using this line of reasoning, you could affirm the truth in all manner of things; Greek mythologies, the Arthurian legends, even other contemporary religions. That's insane! [/QUOTE]It's not insane. It's a perfectly solid line of reasoning. The Greek and Arthurian mythologies present facts which are clearly incorrect when compared against other historical works covering the same period. Therefore one can make reasonable assumptions about the correctness (or not) of those things which require a stretch of belief.

The Bible on the other hand, posseses an extraordinary dedication to accuracy. It'll bore you to tears if you read it cover to cover precisely because of many books long genealogical lists, measurements or other such detail.

Jesus/Y'shua's family line is recorded all the way back to David and then back to Adam.

See, though the creation may be difficult to swallow, each subsequent direct descendant of Adam is accounted for and listed in the Bible. It lists their ages relative time (to the fathers age) of birth so a date for creation can be set to circa 4001 B.C.

Another thing about the bible is that it crossreferences itself. Another is that 25,000 archaelogical sites have been found that are mentioned in the bible.

Another point is that there are vastly more copies of early manuscripts found within a shorter time frame from time of writing. We have manuscriptes of the New Testament dated to being copied 50 years after Y'shua's death.

The number is something like 44,000 copies or some other ridiculously high figure.

Other historical works like Tacitus and Herodotus have only a handful of manuscripts found, with copies dating in some cases, hundreds of years after it was written.

This site has interesting points:

http://lifeandtruth.com/thebible.htm

In any case, back to the "insane" argument, it is an argument used in courts of law today. Much hinges on a witnesses trustworthiness. If they are found to have been dishonest or lied in the past, their word is not upheld.

So, it is quite clearly a solid line of reasoning. Far from "insanity".
[/QUOTE]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]
__________________
Once upon a time in Canada...
Luvian is offline  
Old 09-22-2003, 11:50 PM   #23
Gangrell
Iron Throne Cult
 

Join Date: January 2, 2003
Location: Big Castle in the Sky
Age: 31
Posts: 4,835
Quote:
Originally posted by Cerek the Barbaric:
quote:
Originally posted by The Hierophant:
Well, I think it's a nice find. It's always pleasant when your hypothesis matches with hard evidence.
Yet it's somewhat funny how christian scientists view radiocarbon dating as all well and good when it supports the structure of their church and beliefs, yet is viewed as frivolous and transitory when applied to theories of evolution.
By the same token, Heirophant, most non-believers dismiss the Bible as "nothing more than a book of fables" and claim they only believe in those things that can be scientifically proven. Then science comes along and verifies that a specific portion of the Bible is true and non-believers dismiss this as being meaningless also.

Tit for Tat.
[/QUOTE]Cerek, not even science is accurate in most cases. Most of these scientists think it's all fables because there are some stories that seem exaggerated and they think, no, they know they can find the truth! (until they invent the time machine, then they can give me a call [img]tongue.gif[/img] ) Now I think it's nice that they have found some actual evidence before condemming it as unprobable, and in most cases they push the idea of them being real aside because they see no evidence of it (which isn't a bad thing) but some of the explanations that I've heard from them are out of this world.

Scientists for awhile have been trying to explain the phenomena of Moses parting the Red Sea. When I heard how they explained how it happened, I couldn't get over it. I forget the name of it but how scientists explain it, there was supposed to be a volcano off the coast of the desert, and it erupted so greatly, it sent out a shockwave that pushed the water of the Red Sea back with the volcano itself being 500 miles away from Moses. Now, that may be probable, but you're talking a blast so big, it would give enough time for hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people to venture over an entire sea bed? Doesn't seem likely to me [img]tongue.gif[/img]
Gangrell is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 12:21 AM   #24
Yorick
Very Mad Bird
 

Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 46
Posts: 9,226
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
__________________

http://www.hughwilson.com
Yorick is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 02:06 AM   #25
Luvian
Ironworks Moderator
 

Join Date: June 27, 2001
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 6,750
Well... first of all, just because someone wrote that list of names does not prove they existed. Can you give me undisputable proof of the existance of Seth? How about the existance of Adam? Did they find his skeleton? Was it missing that bone god used to create Eve? And for that matter, how can they prove Mary (if that's also her english name) didn't have sex? Wasn't she maried with her husand?

Just without considering all the inbreeding, do you have any idea how long it would take for two people to populate the earth? And that's without considering all the plagues, wars, and the great flood...

I don't doubt there are good life lessons to be found under all the sexist crap, and I don't doubt the bible is based on facts and real people, but there are some things that are simply impossible... The idea that some guy built a big boat and put a couple of every animals plus all the food necessary in it is one of those. There might have been a flood, there might have been lots of death, but sorry, I won't believe in a giant magical boat.

You know, you say it's obvious I am not Elvis. Well... to me, the existance of a giant boat, a guy able to seperate a river, or even an omnipotent all powerfull entity seem a lot less likely than me being a celebrity... How is it that you accept those things so easily? The fact that the different places and political figures in it really existed give no proof at all about the existance of a god. Just because an apostle talked about the king of some old city, does not mean his belief on an entity he never saw is founded.

Just look at the Raelians. They are basing their religion on a real setting, and alien life is statisticaly almost impossible not to exist. Do you believe in them, too?

Just as there is no real 100% sure evidence that I'm not Elvis, there is no evidence in the existance of god and all the "magical" things hapening int he bible.

You know, I have my own religious opinions, I'm not convinced there is no god, but I still find it very hard to accept all the "miracles" written about in the bible.
__________________
Once upon a time in Canada...
Luvian is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 05:26 AM   #26
Yorick
Very Mad Bird
 

Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 46
Posts: 9,226
Quote:
Originally posted by Luvian:
Well... first of all, just because someone wrote that list of names does not prove they existed. Can you give me undisputable proof of the existance of Seth? How about the existance of Adam? Did they find his skeleton? Was it missing that bone god used to create Eve? And for that matter, how can they prove Mary (if that's also her english name) didn't have sex? Wasn't she maried with her husand?
Can you give me indisputable proof of the existence of Plato? Did they find his skeleton? How about bones from Hannibal? Or what about Hammurabi? Or Cyrus the Great? Any bones of their found? Do you deny their existence? The "list of names" I posted is in the new testament. The list gets longer from genesis onward as the bible goes on. It's cumulative recording Luvian. Knowledge based on knowledge.

I have a family tree my grandfather researched. He went to Scotland and found gravesites and birth records. I trust him and his dedication to accuracy. Therefore I can rely on the fruit of his work, rather than do it all myself. This is a foundation of human aquisition of knowledge Luvian. Without this principle each human would be reinventing the wheel.

Now, If I pass on the writing to my children, adding my name to the list, the record expands. If they add their names the list expands again.

You seem awfully quick to dismiss a work which has been revered and dutifully copied again and again with extreme dedication to accuracy for the last 4000 odd years.
Quote:

Just without considering all the inbreeding, do you have any idea how long it would take for two people to populate the earth? And that's without considering all the plagues, wars, and the great flood...
How long to rats or rabbits take to breed?

Inbreeding. Let's look at that for a moment. The Bible speaks of the first humans living 600 years plus. Unbelievable? What if we are the mutants resultant from such inbreeding Luvian? Madness, attention deficite disorders, cancers, sickness, immune problems, shorter and shorter lifespans, skin blemishes etc etc. Not to hard a stretch. What if Adam was as fast as a human could be? As strong as a human could be? As smart as a human could be? What if Adam was created perfect, and we are all living in various levels of imperfection? Blue eyes are a regressive gene for example.

Adam and Eve only procreated after "the fall" when sin entered the world. As such we all inherited imperfection from those two.

Or did we? The bible doesn't say God didn't create others. The bible speaks of Cain, Abel and Seth, but doesn't say they didn't have other children.

I certainly don't know the exact picture. But I do know the bible presents Adam as a factual person.

As far as how long would it take to populate the planet... well I'm no mathematician, but take the Five billion people in the world and start dividing backwards.

Take 2 perfect people.
Within 20 years they have 20 children. (No contraceptives)
The second generation have children by the age of 20, and by age 50 have at least 20 kids for every two people say...
So by the time the youngest is 50 there'd be at least 200. The next generation would number 2000.

This presuming those two perfectly made people are only fertile for the first 20 years of their 500 year marriage. I'd bank on them bonking for much longer.

Anyhow the next generation is 20,000 and the next 200,000 and so on.

Following that pattern in 180 odd years you could have a tenth generation of at least 2 billion people.

Before you decry "unrealistic" bear in mind, Brazils example of huge 13 member families is more historically "realistic" than the contraceptivly stunted families of one or two children. There were twelve children of Jacob who initiated the various tribes of Israel for example.

As far as Mary goes, she was unmarried.


Quote:
I don't doubt there are good life lessons to be found under all the sexist crap, and I don't doubt the bible is based on facts and real people, but there are some things that are simply impossible... The idea that some guy built a big boat and put a couple of every animals plus all the food necessary in it is one of those. There might have been a flood, there might have been lots of death, but sorry, I won't believe in a giant magical boat.
Why not? He allegedly built the boat over a huge number of years. He had 120 years warning. Some estimate it could have been built in 65 years under a worst case scenario.

The Ark was 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high. It also had three decks. Thus the overall volume of the Ark was:

450 x 75 x 45 = 1.52 x 106 ft.3

He didn't have to transport the Ark anywhere, despite being ridiculed for building it far away from water, the flood came to the ark.

Quote:
You know, you say it's obvious I am not Elvis. Well... to me, the existance of a giant boat, a guy able to seperate a river, or even an omnipotent all powerfull entity seem a lot less likely than me being a celebrity... How is it that you accept those things so easily? The fact that the different places and political figures in it really existed give no proof at all about the existance of a god. Just because an apostle talked about the king of some old city, does not mean his belief on an entity he never saw is founded.

Just look at the Raelians. They are basing their religion on a real setting, and alien life is statisticaly almost impossible not to exist. Do you believe in them, too?

Just as there is no real 100% sure evidence that I'm not Elvis, there is no evidence in the existance of god and all the "magical" things hapening int he bible.

You know, I have my own religious opinions, I'm not convinced there is no god, but I still find it very hard to accept all the "miracles" written about in the bible. [/qb]
Of course it's hard to accept. That's why it's called faith. You know what I'm working on at the moment? Expanding my faith. Not just believing they happened then, but that with faith they are possible now. That is my challenge. I believe that with faith I can tell a mountain to move and it will.

The problem is I don't have that sort of faith. I know I will never have the faith to walk on water. But I believe that had I the faith I would.

POSSIBILITY.

It is mind expanding. It challenges me to expand my thinking. Expand my horizons. Increase certainty. Faith is incredible Luvian. Did you know that singing is totally centred around confidence? That's the first thing I work on when teaching someone. You must be confident you will hit the note to hit it. There is no try. There is only faith you will suceed. It is such a simple law within music, yet works in so many other areas of life.

If you believe no-one will ever love you, no-one will. Self fulfilling. If you walk in a building like you are meant to be there, the odds of being stopped are far less than if you walk in hesitantly. Hope is a source of human life. Faith is moving towards that hope with confidence.

Having faith in God, having spirituality has only increased my life-faith more and more. I have seen amazing healings brought on by faith in Jesus, in both myself and others close to me.

The bible contains facts. The bible contains poetry and wisdom. The bible contains revelations on who God is, and what life is for. Some of what the Bible contains requires faith to accept. Not a groundless faith, but faith nonetheless.

This is part of the cost. Seperates the sheep from the goats as it were.

But when we see historical evidence backing up some of the historical elements, it's encouraging. When we see personal growth backing up some of the promises the bible contains it;s also encouraging. None of the proofs exist in isolation. All the proofs are complimentary.

Anyhow I need to get some sleep.

See ya. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 09-23-2003, 05:33 AM: Message edited by: Yorick ]
__________________

http://www.hughwilson.com
Yorick is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 05:41 AM   #27
Yorick
Very Mad Bird
 

Join Date: January 7, 2001
Location: Breukelen (over the river from New Amsterdam)
Age: 46
Posts: 9,226
Oh, and I'm "agnostic" as to the existence of aliens. I don't believe we could say there are not, for we only know this miniscule part of the universe. That's part of my beef with people who declare with certainty that their is no God. Have they covered every inch of the universe to make sure? Are they so quick to devalidate a believers reality and experience by declaring it null and void?

Anyhow, I have not yet seen enough evidence of aliens to presume that they do exist. Simple statistical possibility is not enough for me to accept alien lifeform.

Regardless, I have no care either way as to whether they do or do not. I already don't believe we are "alone" due to my theism, so there is no necessity for belief.

You?
__________________

http://www.hughwilson.com
Yorick is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 06:32 AM   #28
Cerek the Barbaric
Ma'at - Goddess of Truth & Justice
 

Join Date: October 29, 2001
Location: North Carolina
Age: 55
Posts: 3,257
Quote:
Originally posted by Luvian:
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...
First of all, I question that "most people accept the theory of evolution as the truth". That's discounting a LOT of people of several different faiths. It also discounts many of the agnostics (those who aren't sure if God exists or not).

There is also a flaw in considering belief in God and belief in evolution to be mutually exclusive. I do believe that evolution has occurred within the human species, I just don't believe evolution is responsible for the "creation" of the human species.

As for how the Ark could have held all the animals and enough food to feed them, here is a link that addresses that.

Could Noah's Ark hold all the animals and their food

As Yorick mentioned earlier Luvian, accepting the existence of God and the Divinity of Christ require faith, but it is not a blind faith. God constantly provides proof to the believer that the Bible is true. Sometimes it is an example like this, where science has independently confirmed something written within the text, and other times it is answer to prayers or beseechment upon the part of the believer.

As I've mentioned before, according to "medical science", I should have died 6 years ago because of internal injuries I had. But I later learned there were many, many people back home praying for me while I underwent emergency surgery. A surgery that even the surgeon said would be insufficient to save my life. He only gave me 72 hours to live after the surgery was over. Fortunately, he was wrong.
__________________
[img]\"http://img.ranchoweb.com/images/cerek/cerektsrsig.jpg\" alt=\" - \" /><br />Cerek the Calmth
Cerek the Barbaric is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 06:50 AM   #29
johnny
40th Level Warrior
 
Ms Pacman Champion
Join Date: April 15, 2002
Location: Utrecht The Netherlands
Age: 52
Posts: 16,977
Just out of curiosity.... how does the Koran explain how the first humans got here ? I take it they don't have the version of Adam and Eve ?
__________________
johnny is offline  
Old 09-23-2003, 06:55 AM   #30
Link
Jack Burton
 

Join Date: May 15, 2001
Location: The Netherlands
Age: 33
Posts: 5,888
The root of the problem lies with the fact that both parties (atheists and believers) want themselves to be able to say: "Look, I got the truth here, and you don't"

It's a nasty habit of us humans.
Link is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Deport her to America!(proven to be false, but still funny anyway) Stormymystic General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 38 09-08-2004 03:50 PM
Guilthy until proven innocent?! Dreamer128 General Discussion 5 12-28-2003 01:27 PM
Demons of the Old Testament Azimaith General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 12 09-25-2003 01:15 PM
The Brick Testament Spelca General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 4 05-12-2003 02:59 PM
my theory has been proven! SSJ4Sephiroth Baldurs Gate II: Shadows of Amn & Throne of Bhaal 2 08-13-2001 07:33 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2017 Ironworks Gaming TM & The Great Escape Studios - All Rights Reserved