What part of the Bible is a fact?

Jump to Last Post 51-100 of 205 discussions (840 posts)

73
retellectposted 14 years ago
Is that another argument?

I forgot to answer the whole question. It said what PART of the Bible is FACT..............well the part that is not OPINION must be be FACTUAL.

To recap, a fact can be proven, whether it is right or wrong. Example - I broke a mug this morning. It is a FACT that I broke the mug, only because I said so. Anyone could have broke the mug for all I care.
reply report
1. 61
  Bovine Currencyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, very good I was referring to the whole science vs religion mumbojumbo sort of fact, an what a scientifc fact is. you are talking about a primary observer (you) knowing the mug was broken, and the person whom broke it was you. But, if you told me it was broken, I wouldn't have a clue would I
  
  So, the FACTS in the bible? How would any of us know?
  reply report
63
pjk_artistposted 14 years ago
Great question. I know I'm jumping into this very long thread and I didn't read it all so if somebody else has already given you this answer...I guess I'll be redundant.

Let's say something real happened to you. Something so profound and unique that you decided everyone must hear about it. So you create a story about it and the story gets written down and passed on from generation to generation for 2000 years. It gets re-translated and re-written over and over and the names eventually changed to fit better with the rest of the stories in the ancient sacred tome your story now resides in. A sacred tome which is now used to control and lead the minds and actions of the human race by those who are inclined to do so.

One day, 2000 years later, somebody asks on a computer "What part of this story is true?" People reply but none really answer the question. Would that make you sad?

The fact is ...

Many people in the past experienced the birth of God within themselves and recorded their experiences in the form of parables. What we have left from that today is the bible.

We can use the stories in the bible to recognize the birth of God in ourselves. You should read my Neville Goddard hubs for more details.

-Peter
reply report
61
Bovine Currencyposted 14 years ago
What is Fact?

Read the above link. Fact.
reply report
61
Bovine Currencyposted 14 years ago
oh golly you can't preach to the converted!
reply report
58
Jeramiposted 14 years ago
Go ahead I am all ears. Tell me what parts are facts, which ones aren't and how you know the difference.

There are no facts that can prove anything to a skeptically closed mind. Only something like a face to face with God can do that.
reply report
1. 72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  This is ridiculous. That's all I'm saying on it, for now.
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Well you have to remember - only the truly open minded can believe something this ridiculous.
  
  See?
  
  Believing religionist garbage with no evidence = open minded. Simple.
  reply report
2. 0
  sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  She's not looking for proof, she just wants the facts. What is wrong with you people?
  reply report
58
Jeramiposted 14 years ago
Regardless of the subject matter, there is no facts than can prove anything to the skepticaly closed mind. I do not find this fact hard to understand; or funny.
reply report
1. 59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So you are going with the pink unicorns?
  
  Or are you open minded enough to accept that your beliefs are funny?
  reply report
  58
  Jeramiposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think that I am open minded to believe that "anything" is possible. I might even be able to stretch my mind enough to believe that "all" things are possible.
  
  Many years ago I thought that only a few things were possible. And then my mind which was limited by it's own logic was opened. I can now see farther than I had ever thought possible.
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Is that a "yes"?
  reply report
58
Jeramiposted 14 years ago
Is that a "yes"?

Sure, that is definately a possability
reply report
1. 59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Cool - you won't be upset then?
  reply report
  58
  Jeramiposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I very seldom get upset.
  reply report
0
Jawa Lunkposted 14 years ago
I'm glad everyone is having a good laugh. There will come a day when the laughter ends, and the reality sets in.

1 second after you die, you are going to have an eternity to lament over your behavior and the fact that you passed up your salvation.

Laugh all you will, in the end, like it or not, every knee will bow and every tongue will confess Jesus Christ is Lord.
reply report
1. 59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  LOLOLOL
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You are kidding right?
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You have read the bible - right?
  
  That is what they all believe. Must believe - or else.
  
  No matter how they might speak - this is key and crucial to their beliefs system.
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Still waiting
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  LOL How old was Noah again?
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Ida was the missing link, right?
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I have completely read the bible, from cover to cover 3x.
  
  I never saw thru it, but had many questions. Then I did my own research. Learned to break thru and self-realize he doesn't exist.
  
  Yes, the programming of religion is powerful stuff.
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Sheeple.
  
  Still waiting on your research.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What is it that you want to know?
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Where did you find research that showed you people were not conscious in jebus's time?
  
  Third time of asking.
  
  Or do I need to add "In my research" to "it is said" and "I have heard" ?
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You can find all the work and research you need on the mind and it's evolution- Dr. Julian Jaynes- The Origins of the Bi-cameral Brain.
  
  I found this research, which explained the Evolution of our consciousness. There were many people who were conscious during Jesus' time, but most didn't have a clue.
  
  This at a time in history, which was recorded, about Jesus' death. The events leading up to execution were directed by religious leaders. Jesus' work was 'coded', so his work would sound like religious preaching, but was based on consciousness teaching. Plus, there was a very primitive language then, not much to work with. Mostly religious material.
  
  Research shows that the hand-writing analysis of those before Jesus, there were many people who would live normal daily lives, but be completely unconscious or aware of their own existence.
  
  Other stuff I found, showed me how to descriptively change Jesus' original message and put it into context. This tidbit of information I am restricted to share openly, because of reasons I'm bound by, for which I am responsible for the information and can not divulge to the public.
  
  If I could, I would, without a doubt, because I think the world needs to know.
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Esoteric huh?
  
  Sounds familiar. I will take your word for it though.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Esoteric?
  
  Don't think of it that way. I'm from a different sort of teaching.
  
  There is a lot of knowledge in my research, I just pick out that tool, to best explain, how evolution worked in mankind.
  
  And, why religion exists.
  
  I have many other things included, but I'm unable at this time to share all of it, because it's too much all at once to process. I need to do my work, just like Jesus did his, very slowly and almost on a one-to-one basis, to break them free of the mystic hold on them.
  
  I have my own understanding, back by multiple sources of science, philosophy and physiology, as well, as biological.
  
  It's vast.
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So you won't even give your old chum Evo the 'facts'....
  
  "can not divulge to the public" - Oh Please, you can't speak of 'things that you can not divulge to the public" and then complain about believers not producing 'facts' that meet with your approval.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You know, you're pathetic.
  
  I can not divulge information which isn't mine to release to the public. So, kiss my you know what.
  
  I have information, which isn't mine. Do you get that? Or, Do I need to explain it a little further.
  
  I can point people in a direction that will ultimately change their minds, providing they remain in contact with me- DUH!
  
  Just like Jesus did his work. And, if you weren't busy perpetuating the hoax that you so willingly do, free of choice, so you can manipulate them into remaining faithful.
  
  You're pathetic and deceitful, just like the church. Which one? PICK ONE!
  
  Either way, You're out of line. And, of course,....the perfect 'idiot-god-man", who claims to the know the bible inside and out- can't even be honest with himself, nevermind others.
  
  The pot calling the kettle black? WOW! You're ignorant.
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  To be perfectly modern 'Whatever'
  reply report
  76
  spiderpamposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hey aqua! How ya been?
  report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Pam,
  
  Missed you last night, I'm on Central European time so I was off to bed,as you were posting!
  
  I'm fine, still amazed that anybody bothers to converse with these fine atheist hubbers, who are only here to disrupt good Christian discussion.
  
  I think that IF I can be bothered to write on the forum, I will ONLY respond to believers quotes, it's a 'pearls before swine' thing! - and my Fathers pearls are just too precious to waste on these swine,
  report
  76
  spiderpamposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I glad to hear you are well. They are literally powerless to stop. They are driven to disrupt, blasphemed and insult Christians and The Bible, if you get my drift, it’s sad to watch really.
  report
  0
  Scott.Lifeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  How does insulting non-believers, comparing them to swine, and belittling them the same way they do you, in any way with keeping to a moral message, or with what Jesus taught? How do you justify such behavior in light of your own self proclaimed beliefs and adherence to scripture? Seriously I'd like to know how you legitimize condemning people, when you follow a God that says it is his alone to do so? Or in predicting the end of something that Jesus said even he did not know? You point to growing signs and events while touting scripture that says the end will come like a thief in the night, quiet and unlooked for. How do you make all this fit together?
  report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hi Scott,
  
  My conversation with Pam and the reference to 'pearls before swine' was just quoting scripture, and yes I did direct it at our local atheist cabal, who I'm sure are all nice chaps and chapesses, but who have all rejected God and more specifically Christ, therefore they fit exactly the scripture I quoted.
  
  If they get offended by that 'Christian speak between believers' sort of rhetoric, they need not stay in this Christian forum debate.
  
  Am I not allowed to also be offended by a 'fool' (as in a fool says in their heart "There is no God") spouting 'Jeebus' at anyone who believes, or answers LOLOLOLOLOL and expects that to be considered a valid reply to a (normally) serious question or enquiry?
  
  Jesus did not suffer fools either and I suspect that when He was tossing the stalls of the merchants out of the Temple there were probably plenty of Pharisees tutting and murmuring about how rude He was.
  
  The 'white washed tombs' He addressed were also probably offended by His rhetoric.
  
  Personally I take it as a good sign that these people abuse me and other believers.
  
  If they liked me I would be worried, for you cannot be a friend of this world and enter the kingdom.
  
  Christ told us plainly that they would hate US for His sake.
  
  If I believed for one second that these fools would eventually come to Christ, I would go the extra mile for them, but individually and as a cabal they have shown all the signs that they are under the control of Satan and are indeed 'sons of Satan' in the same way that believers are 'sons of God'
  
  In that instance, we are commanded to dust our sandals and move onward to other more rewarding situations.
  
  I will save them any further offence by simply ignoring them and (as I said) only responding to believers quotes.
  
  They simply need to not read mine and then there will be no offence possible.
  report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Please stop hijacking this thread. Please stop calling people fools and please stop saying you are being abused by non believers... atheist because it is not true and you can look through the entire thread if you like.
  
  But please, I ask again. Please stop hijacking the thread.
  
  The OP: What parts of the bible are facts and how do you know the difference.
  report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Calm down.
  report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Quite right Daddy. You are just passing on what god said and are therefore not responsible for what you say. What a convenient cop out.
  
  It must be very, very satisfying to be speaking for god and not have to worry about any come backs. And of course - the hatred is completely unsolicited as you are just saying the Truth - right? Daddy? No responsibility whatsoever. And you knew you would be hated when you said it - which is why you said it. Now you can claim to be persecuted and downtrodden and attacked.
  
  Thank you once again for reminding me why I do not believe this clap trap. I really appreciate it.
  report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Please stop hijacking the thread.
  report
67
Rudraposted 14 years ago
most holy books of all religions are just bogus.
reply report
72
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
The saddest part of this whole ordeal is that the believers continually argue their position.

The FACTS are the argument originates from centuries ago, and it has always been battled by the religious faithful on the basis that the bible is indeed fact.

However, what they do not realize or refuse to accept is that science, many years ago debunked the "god" concept, for what it is, but many don't believe.

On another hand- they also fail to realize- the argument is weak, at best- Reality says- God doesn't exist.

It is NOT for the non-believers to provide proof to the believers that God doesn't exist? This is a stupid argument and baseless.

The argument is for the Believers to PROVE he does exist.

The problem is- the believers only have ONE reference of so-called proof, which has more holes than there is in any science theory ever. And, isn't support by any secondary source. All religions are categorized together, as one source. If you as a believer can provide PROOF of his existence, then people will be open to listen.

Since you can not come up with a secondary source to support? That's your problem- everything else we know of - tells us God doesn't exist.

Your hope isn't going to make it real.
reply report
69
aguasilverposted 14 years ago
There are 688 fulfilled prophesies in the bible, fulfilled meaning they came true 100%, not 99% 0r 98%, no siree, they came the full 100% right. On the Hub forums, there are always athiests and evolutionaries shouting their religious mantra "show me the scientific proof".

Well this chap Peter Stoner wrote a book called Science Speaks (Moody Press, 1963) to show that coincidence is ruled out by the science of probability.

Stoner says that by using the modern science of probability in reference to eight prophecies, "we find that the chance that any man might have lived down to the present time and fulfilled all eight prophecies is 1 in 1017."

That would be 1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000.

In order to help us comprehend this staggering probability, Stoner illustrates it by supposing that "we take 1017 silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They will cover all of the state two feet deep.

Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state.

Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one.

What chance would he have of getting the right one?

Just the same chance that the prophets would have had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man.

Stoner considers 48 prophecies and says, "we find the chance that any one man fulfilled all 48 prophecies to be 1 in 10157, or

1 in 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.

The estimated number of electrons in the universe is around 1079.

It should be quite evident that Jesus did not fulfill the prophecies by accident."
reply report
72
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
Prophesies?

Mystics, oracles and prophets, all knowing who 'god' is?

Really, if you actually did any scientific research on the human brain, then you would know that prophesis you claim are real- were illusions.

Thank you for your time.
reply report
1. 69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You know that's why I consider trying to deal with you people a waste of time, you are just too condescending to even bother with.
  
  Either deliver up your 'facts' that you cannot tell 'us' about or shut up.
  reply report
72
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
I believe it. From you, I can see it.

Nothing else.

You willingly deceive people, when you yourself know it's a hoax.

You can't be this stupid and not know 'religion' a hoax, unless you use it to your advantage, so you can get what you want.

I'm sorry, you're cover is now blown wide open.

You know- I knew there was something about you that I didn't get. Because, you're not like some of the others. You are more refined, almost to human perfection.

You purposely deceive people for your personal gain. You're no better than the POPE or any of the stupid bishops.

They all know it's hoax, the only reason they don't come out and say it is because of GREEDY HANDS.

And YOU are no better. It's so blantant obvious, you know it's a hoax, because you go thru so much trouble just to defend your belief.

It's pathetic. ANY normal person would have given up by now, quit the arguing and would have gone on their merry way.

But, you....YOU keep coming!

Go away deceitful fool.
reply report
0
sandra rinckposted 14 years ago
13 pages no facts and blatant denial to give Anna the facts. Nice!
reply report
1. 0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The Bible has 66 Books, 1,189 chapters, 31,102 verses, 773,693 words, and 3,566,480 letters. I posted several others so has Aquasilver and others, but if she really wants to know google it, search engine, bible facts dott org or pick up The Evidence Bible.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I know your gonna get irritated when I say this but...
  
  There are discrepancies. You would have to be specific about which Bible contains these exact specifications. The Catholic Bible has more books in it so I would deduce that it also has more chapters, verses, words and letters.
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  If you really have problem with the bible go back to the Greek!
  reply report
  76
  spiderpamposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hey Sandra,(hope you are well)
  Compare the Dead Sea Scrolls, and all the ancient biblical texts today's bibles not some of the newer ones because they tend to paraphrase. but the NASB, KJV, ASV, LTV, NKJV. They were taken from the original and you'd be surprised how accurate those books are compared to the originals. There are online resources and books that we can use to help us understand the original meanings of biblical text.
  Hey Truth!
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes maam, Catholics tend to use some the Gnostic “gospels”(which which largely discredited by the biblical scholars and skeptics) in order to justify they're non-biblical traditions. Don't get me started.
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  But you have already admitted you cannot read the originals and are therefore lying when you say "you would be surprised." because you have never read them - or the translations. And you are getting all your "proof" from "online resources" who are feeding you with these lines to say.
  
  How sad. I pity you.
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Lying? Ok Mark, Because she uses online resources that translate biblical texts? When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found 95% matched the KJV bible. The other 5% were mere spelling differences that no way affected the meaning of the texts. Those are the facts! Sorry your irrational faith in Atheism is misplaced.
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Nonsense. It is all but impossible to translate anything that accurately. Let alone an esoteric text like this. I have an original King +James bible and it bears little relationship to either the dead sea scrolls (what I can understand of them) or the current sheeple guide.
  
  And pretending to have personal knowledge is lying. She cannot make a statement such as she did because she doe not have any personal knowledge of either document. This is lying.
  
  You are also lying in your assertion that the KIng James Sheeple Guide matches the dead sea scrolls 95% LOL Pulling BS figures out of thin air is the same as lying.
  
  No one can agree what the dead sea scrolls actually say and the religionists are still fighting over what to say they say.
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You're right some schlors say 99%.
  The Dead Sea Scrolls and Biblical Integrity
  by Garry K. Brantley, M.A., M.Div.
  Archer, Gleason, Jr. (1974), A Survey of Old Testament Introduction (Chicago, IL: Moody).
  
  Archer, Gleason, Jr. (1980), “Modern Rationalism and the Book of Daniel,” Bibliotheca Sacra, 136:129-147, April-June.
  
  Archer, Gleason, Jr. (1982), Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker).
  
  Brantley, Garry K. (1994), “Biblical Miracles: Fact or Fiction?,” Reason and Revelation, 14:33-38, May.
  
  Bruce, F.F. (1988), The Canon of Scriptures (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press).
  
  Collins, John J. (1992a), “Daniel, Book of,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday), 2:29-37.
  
  Collins, John J. (1992b), “Dead Sea Scrolls,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday), 2:85-101.
  
  Cross, Frank Moore (1992), “The Historical Context of the Scrolls,” Understanding the Dead Sea Scrolls, ed. Hershel Shanks (New York: Random House).
  
  Geisler, Norman and Ronald Brooks (1989), When Skeptics Ask (Wheaton, IL: Victor).
  
  Geisler, Norman and William Nix (1986), A General Intorduction to the Bible (Chicago, IL: Moody).
  
  Harrison, R.K. (1969), Introduction to the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans).
  
  Hasel, Gerhard (1992), “New Light on the Book of Daniel from the Dead Sea Scrolls,” Archaeology and Biblical Research, 5[2]:45-53, Spring.
  
  Josephus, “Antiquities of the Jews,” The Life and Works of Flavius Josephus, (Chicago, IL: John C. Winston; translated by William Whiston).
  
  Major, Trevor (1993), “Dating in Archaeology: Radiocarbon and Tree-Ring Dating,” Reason and Revelation, 13:73-77, October.
  
  Roberts, B.J. (1962), “Masora,” The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible (Nashville, TN: Abingdon), 3:295.
  
  Seow, C.L. (1987), A Grammar for Biblical Hebrew (Nashville, TN: Abingdon).
  
  Shanks, Hershel (1991), “Carbon-14 Tests Substantiate Scroll Dates,” Biblical Archaeology Review, 17[6]:72, November/December.
  
  Whitehorne, John (1992), “Antiochus,” The Anchor Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman (New York: Doubleday), 1:269-272.
  
  Yamauchi, Edwin (1972), The Stones and the Scriptures: An Evangelical Perspective (New York: Lippincott).
  
  Yamauchi, Edwin (1980), “The Archaeological Background of Daniel,” Bibliotheca Sacra, 137:3-16, January-March.
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  As I said - Lying is not really helping your case one whit. I know that is one of the ethics your jeebus favors, but still.......
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Deleted
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Skeptics admit the impeccable accuracy too. oops
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You know I propose. Since it is always Mark vs. Christianity.
  
  Let's open up a thread between Mark vs. Spiderpam and thetruthhurts09.
  
  Let it be a real debate. No one else can join the thread. I think there would be some way to work this out with admin.
  
  Discussion on the exchanges made between you, SP and TTH can be addressed on separate thread so that the thread doesn't become hijacked.
  
  Let me also be fair. For the debate let me lay out the rules.
  
  1. both sides must use at least two separate resources.
  
  1 being the Bible any version though you have to stick with that version throughout the entire debate.
  The other must be from the opposing side.
  
  ie: tth and sp have an advantage using two different versions of the Bible (if they so agree to do that) and whatever opposing reference they want to.
  Mark would obviously using a bible as his opposing source and whatever publication you feel is necessary.
  
  2. We need a fact checker. All the references used have to be verified through another source. This would be separate from what you guys are doing... sorta like Jeopardy.
  
  Now we need a fact checker that both parties can agree on.
  
  3. Obviously you should refrain from name calling and sarcastic outburst but that is not likely to happen so. If in the event it happens, both parties will just have to suck it up and move on like big kids.
  
  The topic is to debate the facts about the bible. Not beliefs and faith. Just the facts. The topic must also not trudge down the path of evolution vs. creation. I don't care about that... just the facts.
  
  What ya'll say? You down for the challenge? Mark vs. Spiderpam and thetruthhurts... Bible facts vs. Bible fiction.
  
  -edit- I almost forgot. I will ask the questions.
  reply report
  76
  spiderpamposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  How did I lie? I simply stated that there are many online sources that decipher biblical text. No where did I say I can read Greek that's why I find the translations. Where did get that “degree” from anyway Dawkins U?
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Wow, that one really pissed you off... wonder why? Truth hurt?
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Whose angry? u maybe? I won't assume to know.
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You should apply that to the bible too.
  reply report
0
thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years ago
Sorry Mark,but Dawkins would so proud!
reply report
1. 59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  LOLOLOLOLOL
  
  Sorry your beliefs have been proven to be garbage. No really - You must be very angry.
  
  What exactly do you hope to achieve by attacking scientific knowledge?
  
  You think if you can find a 1% question over geological age, this will some how make your fairy tail come true? Because if it was true - I can't see why anyone would spend this much energy on it. Seems to me the only person you are trying to convince is yourself.
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  LOL! Scientific knowledge? Certainly NOT from you. You have avoided any and every question discrediting your myth. What a fundamentalist. Let's try this one last time.
  
  Scientist agree with are made of information(DNA). Where did the information come from?
  
  What is the scientific justification to study abiogenesis in contradiction to the law of biogenesis?
  
  What evidence justifies the evolution proposal that life spontaneously arose from non-living material in spite of the calculations showing that such occurrence is astronomically improbable.
  
  Why have new body plans not developed since the Cambrian explosion?
  
  Take your time “scientist”
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You know, this entire argument is B.S.
  
  You know why? Because, it doesn't matter.
  
  It no longer matters, HOW life came to be on Earth? This question need never be answered. How is irrelevant! It only supports the mystical inclinations for religion.
  
  It is only supported from one position and can not be proved at this point in time. The support for it stems from the 'bible', which was man-made. DUH!
  
  Since, mankind DOES NOT know how mankind came to be?
  
  Then, what in the world would make you believe that the bible, which is man-made, is actually true?
  
  I mean, come on people- USE the BRAIN in your HEAD!
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What an elegant cop-out My brain tells me Design requires a Designer!
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  There is not a specific design for life? How dense could you possibly be?
  reply report
  0
  sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Please stop hijacking the thread. The op asks what parts of the bible are facts and how do you know?
  reply report
58
Jeramiposted 14 years ago
We argue that in knowledge, is found freedom of thought and yet We define knowledge with how many other people that our thinking is in alignment with. Seems as though the more educated you become, the more dependant your thinking becomes to what other (more intelligent) people tell you to think.
I am starting to believe, that everyone is in bondage to analytical systems.
different people looking at the same facts using diffrent analytical systems firmly establish opposing truths.
reply report
0
Scott.Lifeposted 14 years ago
I understand where alot of the reasoning for Atheists and their dislike of religion and faith comes from, often times stemming from what is seen as a failure of God, and faith in their own lives, the real question I have is what would posses a believer to spend day after day online fighting, battling, and arguing against a scientific theory. What exactly is it that you hate about science and evolution, has it somehow failed you or made your life cheap and demeaning? Where does this intense hatred come from?

I could understand if you were evangelizing or trying to save the souls of the Atheists you debate, but I struggle to see the love contained inside the barbs, insults, condemnation, and general attitude of superiority. What are you really trying to accomplish. If God and his word is beyond contestation, then what's all the arguing for? I am starting to feel that all this back and forth has nothing to do with God or in spreading his word but in proving yourself to be right and win an argument, a worldly, petty argument that does little to glorify God or those who follow him.
reply report
1. 59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Actually - my personal distaste for religion and lack of belief stems from these people. Not some "failure of god or faith," which Is rather condescending on your part actually Scott and the first time I have seen you make an assumption of that type, but speaks to the ingrained nature of your beliefs.
  
  The simple fact is, without the shackles of blind belief, the Christian religion makes very little sense. And quite honestly - these people are merely spouting the hatred their book tells them to.
  
  My issue with religion starts with the book. If you read it and understand it - it is the biggest load of hypocritical, self serving, bigoted war mongering I have had the displeasure to read.
  
  Only if you turn it inwards instead of outwards does it begin to make any sense.
  
  But I encourage the religionists because - as I keep saying - these are public forums for all to read - and they are doing themselves no favors. Sadly the personal nature of their negative energy is draining to say the least. Especially the really nasty ones. You can feel the bad vibes through the screen with some of them.
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  AWWWWW! Look at Dawkins Jr.
  reply report
  0
  Scott.Lifeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  AWWWW...look I give you the opportunity to answer a question about your own thoughts feelings, and motivations, and you reply with a joke, a name, and a smiley face. So much for helping people to understand where you're coming from, and so understand what your trying to say, but I guess when your purpose is stirring up strife and anger then your reply was perfect, bravo...thanks for making my point for me.
  reply report
  0
  Scott.Lifeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I said alot, not all, or each and every one, but I should rephrase that to maybe say many, or several, or even to say many Atheists I personally know. I do not ever ask where your Motivations are Mark as you have expressed them before and I have talked to you on it. Maybe I should instead say many Atheists formally believers, as I know there are many Atheists who have never believed in God, and come to their conclusions in other ways. However it was an example to illustrate that there are underlying reasons for everyone involved, and I would like to hear some of the believers explain where this drive to debunk evolution comes from, and how they perceive it as threatening and insulting. I apologize if you felt I was including you in my example,perhaps I should have been more clear, as I was not, but the correction has been stated. Thanks for pointing it out.
  reply report
  59
  Evolution Guyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh no - no offense taken, but I feel the need to re-iterate that atheism is a lack of belief in a deity. Now - the religionists have sought to change this to a belief, and I personally have chosen to state it as an absolute because it drives these people crazy. Look at them - calling for proof, accusing me of having "faith" as though that was a bad thing.
  
  And they do not see the irony. I simply do not believe their god exists. And nothing in their behavior or demeanor or day to day actions is going any way to persuading me other wise. I am a little confused as to why they try and as I keep telling them - seem to me the ones they are trying to convince are themselves. But the massive contradiction in trying to believe the literal creation story in the face of overwhelming evidence is coming out in strange ways. Spend your energy attacking the unbelievers instead of looking inside.
  
  I do not quite understand their attack on evolution although I am happy to play it out.
  
  The simple fact is that is like saying, "Well, if there are no unicorns, that proves there are goblins."
  
  Having said that - as far as I am concerned - evolution proves a number of things:
  
  There could not have been a developmental destination or a guiding hand.
  
  Therefore the christian god does not exist. Therefore these people are wrong. Sadly the distraction is just another one provided by the powers that be to keep our eyes off the real issues.
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Where has it ever been observed life coming from non-life?
  The minimal gene-set concept scientist have not been able to reduce the cell to zero in fact that can only go to 397. For evolution to be true must start from 0, it's impossible! It's called origins. Sorry mark you're wrong, again.
  reply report
72
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
Saying that "LIFE" is intelligent design or the work of one entity is stupidily stupid.

It's like say, "What's the meaning of mankind?"

The answer is to never need be answered, because there IS NOT a collective meaning for mankind.

DUH!

We all have individual minds, consciousness, consciences and subconsciousnesses and free will of thought.

There is NO collective meaning for mankind.

You create your own future. It's not pre-planned or pre-written.

It's ridiculous to think that one entity has the power to control every thought, of every human being in the world, and/or plan out their entire life, before it's been lived.

You're really, really reaching if you think so. I mean it.

Keep it real!
reply report
1. 0
  Denno66posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  But, what is reality, really?
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The only thing we know- everything we know. Reality is all knowable. Reality consists of all things that are real and in existence, and all knowledge we have is included.
  
  That's what reality really means.
  reply report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Really, Really?
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yeah, that means the "BIBLE" is known to be false. Just because it deals in the mystical, which has been deemed not real.
  reply report
  0
  Denno66posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  It IS a real book.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Made by man?
  
  How can man make such a book, if they themselves don't know themselves?
  
  Are only specific people allowed? No!
  
  It's a guise, to control others.
  reply report
  0
  Denno66posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I never said it was a book I follow, I merely stated that it is a real book, therefore, that is a factual aspect of said book.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, in fact- the book does exist. And, again, man created it.
  
  I will give you that much. But, what's in it, is the problem.
  
  It's based on mystical insight? Which isn't verifible. Only one source for it, can not be backed up by anything else.
  
  That means, it's baseless and not of facts. Yes, the book itself, does exist, but that doesn't mean it's contents are factual.
  reply report
  0
  Denno66posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Perhaps, but the fact of the matter is: if you remove the jelly from a peanutbutter and jelly sandwich, it loses the overall effect for which it was meant.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Actually, if you've ever made a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, you wouldn't be able to take out the jelly, not completely.
  
  The bible is part history and part mythology. The written scriptures are suppose to be facts. Much of the others things are mystical in nature.
  
  The simple fact- history recorded- after Jesus was executed, his teachings were incorporated to religious text. He wasn't a teacher of religion.
  
  That's the HOAX of religion. His words are also purposely made out of context, SO people have to make a leap of faith. DUH!
  
  I thought that part was obvious, considering almost no one knows what parts are real or not.
  
  It's easy to see the difference between Jesus' teachings and the proper translation, compared to all the other garbage that's in it.
  
  Do the research- you'll come up with the same thing I did.
  
  Jesus' work is what's most important, but since it's out of context, forcing people to make a leap of faith- it's made to perpetuate a hoax.
  reply report
  0
  Denno66posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Um, okay. So, you DID get the gist of what I was saying; albeit in your usual wordy explanation.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, I got the gist of what you were saying. But, the fact that itself exists- doesn't make it's contents factual.
  
  The topic is What part of the Bible is a fact?
  
  The only fact is it's a real book that man made. Yes, that's a fact.
  report
  0
  Denno66posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Jesus was a man. He spoke to people. He died. That about wraps it up in a few short sentences.
  report
  0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "known to be false" man you are obtuse.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You know, that's what's wrong with you people. You pick out little things, and point to them to distract people from the overall context of a sentence.
  
  You ripping out what I said is ignorant, because you take not all of the sentence in context.
  
  DUH!
  
  Why or How "known to be false" is BECAUSE it deals in the mystical.
  
  What part did you forget to use?
  
  See, you take a piece, but it's out of context and you manipulate it to your own advantage.
  
  Not too bright!
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "Just because it deals in the mystical, which has been deemed not real."
  
  Who deemed it not real?
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Mankind as a collective, through what we know.
  
  DUH! I thought you use your brain?
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  But Mark, at least one third of mankind hold the bible to be absolute fact, whereas there are only between 4% (pure atheists holding that God does not exist) and a maximum of 25% (if one includes agnostics as well in the quota) who seem to claim the right to speak for 'collective mankind'
  
  Well you don't speak for at least 2.5 billion people, though you may possibly be able to speak for between 250 million and 1.5 billion at maximum, that in no way constitutes 'collective mankind'.
  
  I suspect that the Muslims would also side with the Christians in stating that the bible is absolute fact, though they would disagree on how some facts are interpreted. So that's another 25% in favor of accepting the bible as fact.... hey what do you know, the MAJORITY of people in the world agree that the bible is FACT.
  reply report
  0
  Scott.Lifeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  A great many Christians and Jews do feel the Bible is fact, but not all of these two religions. Here in America of all places those who claim to be Christian and actually believe in the Bible and follow it are two vastly different numbers. This is a very precarious claim to make Aqua, and it relies on alot of assumption towards believers. Though I understand the point you are making. Just the same, there are an estimated 2.5billion Christians, and several million Jews out of a population of over 6 Billion and counting. This alone would point to the fact that a majority do not agree that the Bible is fact, at the most it shows that just under half believe in some kind of God. Claiming to believe in God, and saying the Bible is all fact is not the same and out of line with many "Christians" throughout the world. Trying to attack the argument of another does not strengthen your own, once again if you really believe in God, and his message, show it with the life you live. Not hollow words that contradict your actions.
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Scott, I don't think you are qualified to speak of the life I lead, and whether it complies with YOUR concept of what a Christian should be like, any more than I can judge your life, whoops, we must not judge, except ourselves...
  
  For what it's worth we follow a Matthew 25 type of Christianity when not wasting my time on forums, and since finding these hub pages, I am exploring the way they can be used for outreach to the lost and lonely.
  
  The forum is really only useful for hits, as I think you have said before, because it seems that ANY Christian discussion is hijacked by the atheist cabal tag team.
  
  Now, back on subject shall we...
  
  Professing (as in they accept the bible as fact) Christians: 33%
  Muslims: 25%
  Jews: 2%
  Looks like 60% which is a majority.
  
  Now I accept that there are many views about the bible and it's inerrant accuracy, indeed there are 31,000 denominations as far as I know, but ALL people who wish to be called Christian and accepted as such by the main Christian church groups, agree that Christ is God and that the bible is the Word of God.
  
  So Cag's is making a wild statement when he tries to say that his beliefs are subscribed to by 'collective mankind' when in fact his beliefs are at best only NOT disagreed with by a maximum of the 4% of atheists and 19% agnostics that comprise non religious people.
  
  Lets see what Cag's got to say shall we?
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Sorry Scott, missed a point:
  
  "Trying to attack the argument of another does not strengthen your own..."
  
  Isn't that what a forum debate is about, trying to refute those who are trying to refute your position?
  
  Cags made a statement which if left unchallenged could be accepted as fact, when it was and is not fact.
  
  That deserves to be challenged.
  
  Likewise, you forgot to include Muslims in the 'who believes the bible is fact' statistics.... they are 25% of the world and they do believe the bible is fact, the also believe in the Quran, but thats' not an issue in this debate.
  report
  0
  Scott.Lifeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I think you once again presume too much, Most Muslims do not hold the Bible to be fact at all but the twisting of God's message and filled with inconsistencies and omissions of God's true intended word thus prompting a re-write to address this turning of God's word, and the birth of a new and more truthful faith in their eyes.
  
  While Cagsil may be prone to lengthy posts saying if you don't attack him it will only lead to his words becoming fact is just a little preposterous and at the least silly. Once again you are merely justifying distasteful behavior that is contradictory to your own professed beliefs by falling back on the old "They did it first routine" Are you not the Christian that is once again supposed to rise above such pettiness and worldly stuff? You are becoming very adept at twisting facts to new perspectives to legitimize your own actions. Even the fact that you bring up Cagsil only highlights this point, he is not the one claiming to represent the good word and teachings of God, that would be you, but you are deflecting the attention back on him, to avoid answering your own contradictions in behavior. Calling yourself a believer and even a Christian carries with it a certain limit on actions and behaviors to be followed in defiance of all earthly temptation and hardship. Either what you believe is true and reflected by your actions, and deeds, or you are nothing more them a hypocrite spouting dogma you yourself can not abide by. When will you as a person stop turning everything around at other people and look at your own self for the problem. The weakness of actions and faith has not been in those who support evolution, or science but those proclaiming a message they have repeatedly shown incapable of living on this very forum daily.
  
  PS, if you don't want people to make comments on the life you lead then don't post it all over the forum along with your beliefs, what a classic deflection of someone who makes a habit out of making assumptions on the people he criticizes, it's okay for you but not for others, fair enough. As for your "version" of Christianity, shouldn't you be following God's version, not the one you picked and like best? Don't criticize others for doing exactly what you do, I know you're not qualified to.
  report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Scott, you are of course entitled to your own opinions, as to following 'my' version of the bible, that version would be the one that I personally believe to be most correct, as would be the same for any believer.
  
  In the final analysis we will all answer to Christ for our actions and words, yes I do get frustrated by the atheist cabal, as do many other believers who care passionately about our faith. I also accept that this is exactly why Satan causes them to work at aggravating Christians, in order that we may react rather than respond.
  
  I'm not perfect, far from it, but I think there are a few believers here who do support what I say in forum, they may not measure up to your standards, but as I say, you're welcome to your opinion.
  
  I see my question which prompted your remarks remains unanswered.
  
  BTW if Muslims disagree with the bible being the word of God, why do they call us 'people of the book' with some respect for our beliefs.
  report
  59
  UpHisAssposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Well done, Excellent dismissal of the atheists. They cannot think for themselves and their opinion is just put there by My Master. They are frustrating, we agree, but keep on dismissing them in public. Eventually they will bow down.
  
  And your ignorance of the Muslim faith makes us proud. Keep it up - they respect you. - yes they do. They believe you did not pervert the word of Jesus.
  
  Well done. we like the energy you create with these posts. Wonderful energy created............
  report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you for proving my point.
  
  Now away with you and await your fate in the pit.
  report
  59
  UpHisAssposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What point was that? I was agreeing with you. Dismissing the atheists in public as worthless - like you did - creates a great energy. We love it. They will of course react negatively and attack you back. This is good. Well done. And demonstrating your total ignorance of the Muslim faith was genius. Even more ill will there. Well done. We thank you. The energy you give off is very special. We will be sending you a present soon.
  report
  61
  tantrumposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  A Masterpiece , Uphis !
  report
  61
  Anna Erwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  You think they got sticks to roast hot dogs down there?
  report
  61
  tantrumposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  it's a fact !
  report
  61
  Anna Erwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Sweet, when did you make your last trip? I am preparing to go there for a thousand years or so, just making sure I don't need to bring my own stick.
  report
  61
  tantrumposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I live in there.
  Where do you live ? Another planet ?
  report
  61
  Anna Erwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Well, my ancestors came from the planet Zion. Right now I am currently residing on Earth but I grew up on Planet Xtixion ( the human tongue has a hard time pronouncing it so I just say planet X). I figured before I head back to the Heavens and continue on my eternal journey I might as well stop in Hell. The locals tell me that it is a great tourist spot.
  report
  0
  Scott.Lifeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Sorry took so long to get back, had to go to the Gym, as for the "people of the book" the refer to us all as having a common ancestor in Abraham, as described in the book. Beyond that though they feel that scripture has been twisted by first the Jews and then the Christians in order to downplay the importance of Islam, among other things they accuse the Bible of replacing Ishmael with Issac, and so on. Next, "my standards" are not my own, but the ones listed in the Bible you hold so dear. Funny how if someone points out an obvious contradiction in your behavior then they're judging you. Seems more like they're merely stating what is apparent to all. Unlike calling a group of people swine because they disagree with you. Your rules are enough to condemn others but when you are in violation people are judging you, how convenient for you.
  
  As you say it is only my opinion though but if you are uncomfortable being called an arrogant, discriminating hypocrite, my best advice is don't behave like one. You see Aqua, I am aware of my behavior and so do not get offended by the truth and if brutality and harsh words are the only way to silence such hate filled rhetoric as you and those like you prescribe then so be it, because you deserve every last ounce of anger, hate, and unforgiveness that you give out yourself. I am comfortable with the responsibility of my words because I do not hide the anger and hate in my heart behind religion and the Bible. maybe you should just try that too, in the meantime a spade is a spade no matter what pretty costume it hides behind.
  report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  1. Islam came into existence in 610, so any claim by Muslims that the bible was corrupted is obviously false as the books of the bible were all written before Islam even reared it's ugly head.
  
  2. Actually it was the words of Christ I quoted, who was obviously calling some group of people swine, by your standards:
  Matthew 7:6
  Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
  
  ....turn again and rend you...hmmm.
  
  Like Forrest Gump says; simple is as simple does.
  
  Now if you have finished your personal attacks on me, shall we get back to the subject, and maybe someone will answer my original question rather than change the subject and get into personal attacks, which I believe are not allowed.
  
  I must be doing something right in the spiritual realm, I have Satanists, atheists, evolutionists and even professing Christians attacking....turning again to rend me.
  
  2 Corinthians 10:3-5 (King James Version)
  For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh:(For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
  
  Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.
  
  Words have power and no word of Gods EVER returns void.
  
  Please don't attack me for quoting scripture, especially when dealing with atheists and Satanists.
  report
  0
  Scott.Lifeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Am I an Atheist or a satanist? I certainly know I'm not, but once again you missed the point. As for why the Muslims think the words were changed I don't know, ask a few hundred and see what they say, I'm only expressing what a few hundred told me in Iraq and Afghanistan, they feel that Jews and Christians have twisted the words of God originally given to them by God, and so began a movement to correct this. Again, are you listening?
  
  As to your quoting scripture and feeling persecuted whatever man, you're no prophet and no one is persecuting you, but yourself. Get a grip on reality for a change and quit with the drama. It's the same old thing every time. You quote to give a list of reasons why it's okay to act the way you do, and to justify being the way you are, while ignoring the other scripture that tells you, you are wrong, nothing new. If you feel the need to demonize and marginalize those who expose your bigotry and notions of superiority based on a personal belief go ahead. With the words you use to condemn non-believers you condemn yourself so just keep on talking and preaching.
  
  Finally you may be doing something right in the spiritual realm, then again you might just be acting like a pompous condescending hypocrite, who knows, I guess only God will tell, but I would tone down the exalting yourself and patting yourself on the back stinks too much like pride, not humility or patience.
  report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Scott, you have made some good points and I will receive them, as for the Muslims you met in Iraq, I thank you for having gone, there so that we don't need to have the same conversations in our home countries.
  
  But the fact that they are wrong, is sufficient, and if they are not corrected, they continue in their error.
  
  It's near midnight here and I'm off to bed, but maybe I'll just leave the forums to the atheists and fellow travellers, especially as (you correctly point out) they bring out the worst in me!
  
  What you described as "patting yourself on the back stinks too much like pride, not humility or patience" was actually irony, but I guess that's not allowed when you are in the forums either, unless your in the tag team.
  report
  0
  Scott.Lifeposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Get some sleep and have a great night over there, I am sure I will speak to you later and we can continue this tennis match of follies and silliness.
  report
0
Scott.Lifeposted 14 years ago
I feel in my own study of things that there are many factual components of the Bible, such as place, and city names, the names, and reigns of kings, and other empires and kingdoms. We know from comparing archeological evidence and dating techniques to written records that some events happened as described, and we can also use this information to establish common time lines and dates. We know that descriptions of the Roman invasion are for the most part accurate as are the exile to Babylon/Persia. Without the science or archeology to confirm and provide the data in which to compare to other civilizations records though then we would be left with little that we knew to be fact and a whole lot of conjecture and argument, just like now. The Jews, the original writers and the first collectors of what would become scripture after their return from exile have on several occasions affirmed that the further back you go in the OT the harder it is to know what is fact, and what is not. Exodus is in FACT the oldest manuscript in the Jewish bible when compared with writing styles, language usage, and alphabet.
reply report
0
Scott.Lifeposted 14 years ago
Here's another fact. Hebrew, and Greek translate into English poorly. For example look at the Greek words for love, all represented by one word in English, thus leaving the reader to interpret the meaning them self. Look at the Hebrew meaning of the description of the morning star in Isiah, that ended up becoming the Latin word Lucifer= Light bringer, and argument and questions ensued for centuries. Moving on. Unless we as an audience can travel back in time to hear Jesus speak, or Moses, or Abraham, we have only another choice, learn to read ancient Hebrew, and Greek, or even Aramaic. Beyond mastering these ancient languages which would further necessitate finding original documents in these languages, most everything we know about the intent and meaning of scripture is merely interpretations and matters of perspective. The book is called living because it easily means so much to so many different people. As men move forward in time the meanings and intents of the words change to meet this movement. Meaning literally what you pull from the Bible is directly related to the Attitude you have going into it. To deny this is simply to lie to oneself. If you go into this book looking for a reason to justify your hate and discrimination , you WILL find it, on the opposite if you seek love and compassion you will likewise find it. For example many people use Leviticus to justify their dislike of homosexuality, completely ignoring the other things the law prohibits in this book, like eating shellfish, wearing blended clothing among just a few. There are limitless ways that this one book can speak for or against any belief or view, you need only participate in the forums to see this fact proven.
reply report
0
Denno66posted 14 years ago
Come on, Cags. The curtains about to go up......
reply report
61
Valerie Fposted 14 years ago
Heh. Sorting the literal facts from the fables in an anthology of various literary genres that's around 1400 pages long is not something that can be easily answered in a post. Studies of literary analysis, history, and archaeology can confirm that the Bible contains some facts- or that to interpret a Biblical passage as literal fact would entirely miss the point.
reply report
1. 69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "various literary genres" is one of the things which convinced me that the bible we have is factual and real.
  
  When over 60 authors, who did not know of each others existence in the main, wrote at different periods of time, lived in different countries then make prophesies that are factually able to be confirmed as accurately fulfilled, which are later collated into one consistent book, and which 33% of the world use as a guide and morality resource on a daily basis.
  
  When I realise that, I see that a divine hand is at play and whatever the vociferous minority wish to attempt to make 'real' - the truth is that the majority of mankind disagree with the atheists premise and reject their rationalist thinking.
  reply report
2. 0
  Denno66posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  A Hub perhaps?
  reply report
0
Denno66posted 14 years ago
Oh boy.
reply report
69
aguasilverposted 14 years ago
Please keep to the subject and stop hijacking the forum.
reply report
1. 61
  Anna Erwinposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh you killed it a long time ago. Your religion has taught you well.
  reply report
  61
  tantrumposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  You should know ! It's your thread !
  reply report
0
SirDentposted 14 years ago
The resurrection of Jesus Christ is fact.
reply report
0
ralwusposted 14 years ago
Well, it's evident there is one, millions of them, it's a fact. The Bible is a fact. It can be very valuable too for researching ones family tree. Facts
reply report
58
Jeramiposted 14 years ago
Concerning the New testament, I think that all of it was truthfully recorded in the original letters. I also believe that as is true when a large group of men gather together to make decisions THERE IS NEGATIVE forces at work. The inclusion or exclusion of certain letters was strategically orchestrated.
I would imagine that a bit of word manipulation was present when the cannon was assembled.
We should also remember that Satan was always present.
And that the council of Nicea was assembled by the Roman Empire with the Emperor as the ultimate authority of this New religion.
Over all; the vast majority of the bible is TRUE
Just enough interpretation was inserted to influence further interpretation.
It is interpretation of prophesy that has caused all of the confusion since the beginning.
reply report
61
diamondtipposted 14 years ago
Contrary to popular belief, the Bible is not a product of, nor does it glorify, the civilization of the West. Almost the entire Bible was written in Oriental countries. The men who wrote it down were all Orientals. One thousand years before Buddha, Moses, a man of God who lived in the Middle East, was inspired by God to write the first book of the Bible, called Genesis. From this beginning, the Bible follows one harmonious theme right through to its final book of Revelation. The last book was written about six hundred years after Buddha. Did you know that the Bible is made up of sixty-six different books? Yes, the Bible is a library in itself! Over a period of 1,600 years, from Moses’ time on, some thirty-five different men shared in writing the completely harmonious record of the Bible. They testify that their writings were inspired by a Power far higher than mortal man. The Christian apostle Paul wrote: “All Scripture is inspired of God and beneficial for teaching, for reproving, for setting things straight, for disciplining in righteousness.” (2 Timothy 3:16) And the apostle Peter explained: “No prophecy of Scripture springs from any private interpretation. For prophecy was at no time brought by man’s will, but men spoke from God as they were borne along by holy spirit.”—2 Peter 1:20, 21; 2 Samuel 23:2; Luke 1:70.
reply report
1. 60
  matt6v33posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for sharing, some great points/facts...
  reply report
2. 69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Amen, at last a sensible comment, don't expect the atheist rabble to answer you, except maybe with a few scornful lines and a row of cheap smiley faces... they normally stay well clear of anybody who actually knows their stuff.
  reply report
60
matt6v33posted 14 years ago
Hello All! I'm the new kid on the block. Wanted to Thank Everyone here, for all of your "Food For Thoughts" regarding this question. u all have given me a new idea, to write about. thank you all, very much.. great feedback from u guys! much appreicated...
reply report
60
topgunjagerposted 14 years ago
it is written shamelessly by men=)
reply report
59
marinealways24posted 14 years ago
The most and biggest part of the bible I believe true is that it attempts to govern by creating a one conscience belief.
reply report
1. 58
  Jeramiposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The hardest thing that I have a problem with is that when I
  "pick one" particular aspect of scripture to believe is to remember that even this truth that I want to accept has diffrent levels of truth that I am unaware of.
  reply report
2. 72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Hey Marine,
  
  Kind of like I was saying- "Religion is a business, based on a code of ethics, bound to a higher power or cause".
  
  Nothing else sums it up any better.
  reply report
0
lyricsingrayposted 14 years ago
There are a lot of words
reply report
1. 72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Agreed, there are a lot of words in the bible.
  reply report
70
pylos26posted 14 years ago
That it contains primarily fraud, lies and impositions.

why? by reading it.
reply report
68
Anamika Sposted 14 years ago
I don't care what is fact or what is fiction. But the Bible surely has laid the rules on how we should lead life.
reply report
1. 72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And, you can't do that yourself?
  
  Why not?
  reply report
2. 79
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So I guess you follow this?
  
  Whoever denies “that Jesus is the Christ” is a liar and an anti-Christ. 1 John 2:22
  
  Christians are “of God;” everyone else is wicked. 1 John 5:19
  
  The non-Christian is “a deceiver and an anti-Christ” 2 John 1:7
  
  Anyone who doesn’t share Paul’s beliefs has “an evil heart.” Hebrews 3:12
  
  False Jews are members of “the synagogue of Satan.” Revelations 2:9, 3:9
  
  Nasty lying little god!
  reply report
79
earnestshubposted 14 years ago
Here are some of those "life rules"
The first rule is to be an isolationist and a zealot!

Don’t associate with non-Christians. Don’t receive them into your house or even exchange greeting with them. 2 John 1:10

Shun those who disagree with your religious views. Romans 16:17

Paul, knowing that their faith would crumble if subjected to free and critical inquiry, tells his followers to avoid philosophy. Colossians 2:8

Narrow minded little god!
reply report
60
topgunjagerposted 14 years ago
Here's a fact, Jesus finally showed himself to end all this religious nonsense and for all of you to see the truth=)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAXaRcO2 … re=related
reply report
1. 79
  earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And this truth will set you free! A must see!!
  reply report
60
davecunningposted 14 years ago
There's plenty of historical accuaracies and verifications. Mention of historical figures like Caesar, Pontius Pilate, and of course, Jesus, are legit and can be found in any high school Social Studies textbook. So are the locations of biblical events--most bibles include a map in the back, but you could look them up in any atlas you wanted. Many people believe that Noah's Ark is resting on Mt Ararat in modern day Turkey, and there's some interesting pictures out there. Interestingly, the Turkish government will not allow any scientific investigation of the area. There's plenty more; here's a few links to some pages that could take you deeper:

http://www.christiananswers.net/archaeology/
http://www.creatingfutures.net/archaelogical.html
http://www.carm.org/christianity/bible/ … dor-people
http://www.facingthechallenge.org/outside.php

I'd be happy to provide more, if you wanted.
reply report
1. 59
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  Thanks for the laugh.
  
  What is wrong with believing by faith exactly?
  
  Noahs Ark?
  
  Many people?
  
  The Turkish government won't allow scientific investigation?
  
  Deary me. Thank you for reminding us all why Christianity is to be avoided. I can give you some actual facts if you would like......
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Funny, all those links appear to be non functioning, maybe they were put their by a liar hoping to prove his point with a cheap laugh... well you got the cheap laugh, so I guess your content.
  
  Cheap laughs are just that, sensible debate takes a mite more than posting a line of funny faces.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes Daddy.
  reply report
2. 0
  thetruthhurts2009posted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thank you sir.
  reply report
69
MikeNVposted 14 years ago
Here is a little experiment I would like for you to try.

Close your eyes.

Now look around.

See any facts?

What is a fact if not based on a belief?
reply report
1. 72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  And, where are you heading with that question?
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I reckon he was suggesting that some things are not based upon hard evidence you can touch feel and dissect, and that ruling those events out of ones life is a narrow bigoted attitude for a super intelligent being to take.
  
  But I could be wrong...
  reply report
66
lionswhelpposted 14 years ago
All of it is fact! You were made in God's image and you look like one of them, Genesis 1:26-27. You are an air breather and you will die,Genesis 2:16-17; Genesis 3:1-5,19, 22-24, as all humans are only worthy of death for all have sinned, John 1:6-10. Read 2 Timothy 3:16-17. Jesus Christ fulfilled Genesis 3:15, 1 Corinthians 15:45-51. This a fact because Hebrews 11 shows you al these people who died in faith and are now waiting in their graves for Jesus Christ's second coming.

If you are one of those scoffers then you need to get a new life, 2 Peter 3:2-11,12-15. Try the Spirit of Life, Romans 8:1-5,13-14,15-16.

Jesus Christ is coming soon, Revelation 22:12-13,14-16.

Where will you be then? Get a new life, Acts 2:38-39.
reply report
1. 72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  On what planet is the bible all fact? Not on earth.
  
  It's never proved factual in any manner. There is science and history which dates some of the events stated, but from a societial side.
  
  The bible and it's scriptures are written by man and open to interpretation. Besides, anything other than the original apostles, Jesus direct followers, those of the last supper, are the only ones who KNEW Jesus to begin with. Most of their work, was done 30-40+ years later. Not even all of Jesus' work is in the bible. Wonder why that is? What's the church got to hide?
  
  When you look at history, mankind's evolution over time, and you put ancient writings into proper notation, as it should be, then you learn that you are the ONLY god of your life.
  
  Religion is a business, specifically based on a code of ethics, bound to a higher cause.
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  "Most of their work, was done 30-40+ years later."
  
  That's a good time to write about events, right now the true accounts of 'Nam are surfacing, written by people who were 'on site' at the time, and with the benefit of being written in the cold light of day, rather than the heat of the moment.
  
  History is always best served cold.
  
  Likewise there are now plenty of Beatles accounts and Sixtie's history about, you would have missed first hand experience of these things, you were simply too young to know or take in what was happening, so to try and pour scorn on biblical matters because they were written 30-40 years later is ridiculous.
  
  The time lag ensures greater accuracy in the accounts, and please remember ALL bar one of the disciples were killed in horrific fashion and NONE recanted their beliefs.
  
  One or two men may be able to form a tight conspiracy, more than two and it becomes proportionately more difficult to maintain secrecy, especially when you are being hung upside down on a cross and having 6" nails hammered into your feet and wrists.
  
  Only the other night I as watching a programme about Fleetwood Mac, who I had been informed were witches, but seeing them give witness 40 years later dismissed that concept for me, they had no sign of witchcraft on them and it was good to hear the full story over their time in the rock era's.
  
  Sorry Cags, that does not wash, the scriptures may have been written by man, but they were written by over 60 men during a 2000 year period and had prophesy written thoughout, nearly 700 specific propheises ALL of which have been fulfilled excepting the 30-40 still to be fulfilled because they refer to the future still. The mathematical probablity of that occuring by chance is alone sufficient to establish that the bible had ONE author, it may have had many writers, but ONE HAND is seen throughout it's content.
  
  Satan has been trying to achieve two things since time began for humanity:
  
  1. To get men to believe he does not exist.
  2. To get men to try and discredit the Holy Bible.
  
  That you choose to believe the first and do his works in the second is your decision, that I choose to refute you, and those who follow you, is my decision.
  
  For as long as you choose to try and discredit the bible, we are locked into this discussion.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  @aguasilver
  
  You know, you keep coming at me, but don't like it when I respond and you chose to actively bait me. If you don't like what I have to say, then DO as you're pathetic god says to do.
  
  Shut up and mind your own business. The fact: you stepped into a conversation I chose to have with someone else, that isn't you, doesn't give you the right to interrupt my conversation, with your pathetic long post. Which really didn't say anything.
  
  Again, like I said- I KNOW 'what' you 'are' and if I need to, I will show all the people of the forum, exactly what that is.
  
  Now- again, I have no religion or religious belief. So, I answer to myself for my action- YOU DO NOT! You answer to a higher authority, for which, tells you to cause NO harm to your fellow human beings.
  
  Yet, you are out here, supposedly claiming to understand your religion, so much so, that you think you can defend your position. And, do it well. How ever, what you fail to realize is that it is showing your character as a person and that character is now in question, because, you can't even follow your own god's will and remain quiet and submissive.
  
  So, you can take your pathetic view and go home.
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  When you stop trying to detract from the bible accounts accuracy with false statements, I'll stay silent on you.
  
  You are also exposing who you really are, I am content to do as I choose.
  
  This free will stuff goes both ways you see, and I choose to use my free will to show the world what Gods word states about matters that you and you kind like to try to decry.
  
  So you get off attacking the bible and I will ignore you for ever, with great pleasure.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  The only thing I'm showing to the people is the truth about the piece of garbage you call a bible.
  
  Attacking the bible? I'm not attacking the bible.
  
  I am ATTACKING ALL RELIGION that deals in the mystical worship of a non-existent entity, who YOU know isn't real.
  
  The fact- that you don't follow your own God's will is living PROOF you are a 'false' worshipper and/or a liar.
  
  How I am showing myself? I'm speaking the truth and putting people on the right path. A World without GOD. Why? Because the myth is NO LONGER required.
  reply report
  0
  Deborah Sextonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Above you told one person this is a debate then you just told this man to take his views and go home.
  What's wrong? A debate is about disagreeing..I guess just not with you. Should we kiss your ring before we type.?
  reply report
67
C. M. Hoisingtonposted 14 years ago
It doesn't matter whether its fact or not. No history of any kind is ever fact. Fact can only happen when it happens, beyond that it becomes memory and imagination.

What's important about the Bible is what it says to us personally. There is no debate on it's importance in our World. There is a reason for that and it has nothing to do with whether its factual or not.
reply report
1. 72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Yes, there is a debate. Why do you think you are here talking about it? WOW! Open your eyes.
  reply report
  67
  C. M. Hoisingtonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  There is no debate about the importance in our world. You can debate whether its true or not, but not whether its influenced the world. Argumentantive ignorance that has no cognitive ability is useless.
  reply report
59
Mark Knowlesposted 14 years ago
Cagsil -

I think you underestimate the value of people like aquasilver to push people way from religion.

Admittedly - the negative energy is palpable and difficult to deal with, but is worth the effort, I think.

If you feel yourself being dragged down by his negative energy and passive/aggressive attacks - it is better to spend a day or two away from the discussion and come back refreshed. I had a great mountain bike ride this afternoon and feel much better.

Sadly - no matter how many times I tell these people they are doing the work of their satan by their standards - it does not matter. They are driven by a need to not look inside and will continue to create conflict and hatred while claiming to be loving.

It will take generations to eradicate this approach to spreading their religion.
reply report
72
Cagsilposted 14 years ago
Mark Knowles-

I get it. I really do. I understand where someone comes, when they speak of faith in God. I know, I was or use to be in that position, until I had my eyes truly opened, by work/study/reseach of my own, through honest conscious thought and tough action.

It was a harsh reality to realize that God didn't really exist and I know how deflating it can be. Unfortunately, the blindful ignorance of some people who open attack isn't because they understand their own beliefs, but more along the effects that they know that God doesn't really exist, but perpetuate the hoax of religion for their own usurp of power and to take advantage of those who don't know any better.

It is this pathetic crowd I attack, because they are no better than the religious leaders who support religion. They themselves are cheaters of mankind, improperly living off other people's fear or lack of knowledge.

This USURP of power is pathetic and must be beaten down, in order for society to evolve to the next level.
reply report
1. 69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh Boy are you guys on some major ego trip....
  
  What valiant warriors for truth you imagine yourself to be, and sooooo verrry superior to we mere mortals who have nothing but the Word of God to stand upon.
  
  I have NEVER made any living or cash from my beliefs, indeed holding belief in Christ and obeying His commands has stopped me making money in the 'world' and cost me in how I have reacted to His commandments.
  
  Anybody who is in religion for profit is fooling themselves, sure you can open a megachurch for the gullible and make a fortune selling prosperity messages...and I would be right behind anyone exposing that form of false religion.
  
  Such men /and women) have their reward here and get nothing from God in eternity.
  
  OK, you guys have decided that religion is the whole problem, well that's fine and dandy for you and your small cabal of followers... I think you have about 6 million believers in nothing but themselves in the world.
  
  If religion is nothing - why must you continually attack it, if God is real, you will fail anyway, and if God is false, then you will win eventually as people 'come aware' of the fact that they should be worshipping you two and your intellects, not one (false) God.
  
  I suggest you get on with your super charged lives and stop trying to disprove something that you cannot do.
  
  Herr Goebbbels taught you well, keep repeating a lie and soon enough people will lose the ability to recognise the truth.
  
  That's why I will continue (when it suits me) to monitor your posts and refute your nonsense and false claims.
  
  Like it or not.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Who mentioned money?
  
  Religion is a powerful fear based tool and needs to be combated.
  
  Thanks for reminding us of that.
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh well , that's OK because I do not use fear either, God did not give us a spirit of fear, fear comes from Satan.
  
  God brings conviction, via His Holy Spirit, now I have seen that bring hard men to their knees, bring liars to redemption and bring fools into wisdom.
  
  Of course some people are just too 'conscience seared' to be reached or convicted of their sin... I guess you guys never sin huh?
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/25714
  
  LOLOLOLOLOLO
  
  No - I am sin free. Thank you for asking, Daddy.
  reply report
  72
  Cagsilposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  
  reply report
0
lyricsingrayposted 14 years ago
the pages or paper are thin
reply report
0
lyricsingrayposted 14 years ago
someone said money
reply report
1. 69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Mark Knowles:
  
  "It is this pathetic crowd I attack, because they are no better than the religious leaders who support religion. They themselves are cheaters of mankind, improperly living off other people's fear or lack of knowledge."
  reply report
69
aguasilverposted 14 years ago
Though you guys may be interested in what Herr Goebbles had to say on what you are perfecting:

GOEBBELS' PRINCIPLES OF PROPAGANDA

1. Propagandist must have access to intelligence concerning events and public opinion.

2. Propaganda must be planned and executed by only one authority.
a. It must issue all the propaganda directives.

b. It must explain propaganda directives to important officials and maintain their morale.

c. It must oversee other agencies' activities which have propaganda consequences

3. The propaganda consequences of an action must be considered in planning that action.

4. Propaganda must affect the enemy's policy and action.
a. By suppressing propagandistically desirable material which can provide the enemy with useful intelligence

b. By openly disseminating propaganda whose content or tone causes the enemy to draw the desired conclusions

c. By goading the enemy into revealing vital information about himself

d. By making no reference to a desired enemy activity when any reference would discredit that activity

5. Declassified, operational information must be available to implement a propaganda campaign

6. To be perceived, propaganda must evoke the interest of an audience and must be transmitted through an attention-getting communications medium.

7. Credibility alone must determine whether propaganda output should be true or false.

8. The purpose, content and effectiveness of enemy propaganda; the strength and effects of an expose; and the nature of current propaganda campaigns determine whether enemy propaganda should be ignored or refuted.

9. Credibility, intelligence, and the possible effects of communicating determine whether propaganda materials should be censored.

10. Material from enemy propaganda may be utilized in operations when it helps diminish that enemy's prestige or lends support to the propagandist's own objective.

11. Black rather than white propaganda may be employed when the latter is less credible or produces undesirable effects.

12. Propaganda may be facilitated by leaders with prestige.

13. Propaganda must be carefully timed.
a. The communication must reach the audience ahead of competing propaganda.

b. A propaganda campaign must begin at the optimum moment

c. A propaganda theme must be repeated, but not beyond some point of diminishing effectiveness

14. Propaganda must label events and people with distinctive phrases or slogans.
a. They must evoke desired responses which the audience previously possesses

b. They must be capable of being easily learned

c. [color=#ff0000]They must be utilized again and again, but only in appropriate situations

d. They must be boomerang-proof

15. Propaganda to the home front must prevent the raising of false hopes which can be blasted by future events.

16. Propaganda to the home front must create an optimum anxiety level.
a. Propaganda must reinforce anxiety concerning the consequences of defeat

b. Propaganda must diminish anxiety (other than concerning the consequences of defeat) which is too high and which cannot be reduced by people themselves

17. Propaganda to the home front must diminish the impact of frustration.
a. Inevitable frustrations must be anticipated

b. Inevitable frustrations must be placed in perspective

18. Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the targets for hatred.

19. Propaganda cannot immediately affect strong counter-tendencies; instead it must offer some form of action or diversion, or both.

I think you will find that your atheist cabal operates very well within the proscribed form listed above.
reply report
0
lyricsingrayposted 14 years ago
OK here is what we know is fact about the bible;

It is the largest selling book in the world selling 300,000,000 copies annually.

It was first printed in 1528

It has been translated into 1100 languages

It carries 1189 chapters over a 1500 year span-old having 929 chapters and new with 260

It has 773,692 words

It has 3,566,480 letters

It's longest chapter is Psalms 119 and shortest Psalms 117

It was written by some 50 men ranging 40 generations, of whom one was a gentile

most importantly,

It is a book.
reply report
1. 69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Excellent, as you started the post, it is suitable that you should answer it in a manner that you approve.
  
  I only add one thing, the bible is truth not because it is the word of God, but because God spoken it, so it's bit more than just 'a book' - it's a book that 2.5 billion people base their lives upon to one degree of another.
  
  Is the subject now closed?
  reply report
  0
  lyricsingrayposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  ouch, don't jump down my neck, subject is now open. Wjo shit in your cereal this morning and what have I done to you? You don't know what I believe or don't but by you making assumptions makes me wonder if you know what you believe so back off cowboy
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I'm not making assumptions, I've read your stuff, I like your hubs and appreciate you have had a varied life, you know what your about, and no offence was meant, so apologies if I caused you any, unfortunately dealing with the abuse from MK and Cags makes one suspicious of all others, unless their intentions and belief is clear.
  
  Stay Blessed and cool!
  reply report
  0
  lyricsingrayposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  are you being kind to back off - there's no war here
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Have you seen the'intelligent' replies Cags and MK make?
  
  Hardly peaceable, they just don't like getting hit as hard as they try to hit others.
  
  There's a war going on al right, but my bible tells me resist the devil and he will flee, and that's a fact from the bible and experience, and you know that to be true, however you view your higher power.
  reply report
  60
  jobisterposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Can 2.5 billion people be wrong?
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Gets worse, because in total about 55% of the world hold the bible to be the word of God, they may not like each other, but they agree about that fact!
  
  So if 55% of the world are wrong.... what hope do the rest have!
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh one other fact, the exact middle of the book is Psalm 118:14
  
  The LORD is my strength and song, and is become my salvation.
  
  Rather apt considering...
  
  The shortest chapter is Psalm 117:
  
  Psalm 117 1:2
  
  O praise the LORD, all ye nations: praise him, all ye people.
  
  For his merciful kindness is great toward us: and the truth of the LORD endureth for ever. Praise ye the LORD.
  
  And as you said, Psalm 119 is the longest...
  
  Curious how they just happened to be in that order!
  reply report
81
pay2cEMposted 14 years ago
I think a better question addresses the degrees of certainty of finding fact in the bible:

100% Certainty: ie Galilee is a REAL city bordering on a sea; Caesar Augustus was a REAL Roman emperor governing at the time of the events of the Gospels; a soft answer deflects anger better than a harsh one. If it is verified by external (non-biblical) documented sources, modern archaeology, or is a statement of advice consistent with what we experience today, it's safe to assume it's correct.

Probably or likely: Claim that people living on the Sea of Galilee tended to go into fishing as a livelihood at the time. Why not? What else are they gonna do?

Unverifiable: The walls of the (factual) city of Jericho actually collapsed from the affects of a trumped-wielding parade.

Unlikely: Claim that the Jewish Sanhedrin would quickly assemble for a midnight gathering on the most holiest of Holy Sabbaths in the year - breaking their Law - to hold a spontaneous trial for Jesus, who was accused of violating their Law. (this is probably why John contradicts the other Gospel writers on which day of the week the Last Supper was held.) Or that the Roman Empire - which has no records of the alleged census Issue by Caesar in the Nativity story - would require all its citizens to switch towns in order to be counted. This was never done for any of the other censuses that ARE on record, and is pointless besides. (this likely fabrication was a plot device of the ever-inventive Matthew to get Mary and Joseph from Nazareth to Bethlehem for the birth of Christ. Luke just avoids the mess and simply starts them out in Bethlehem to begin, and not moving to Nazareth until several years later.)

Patently false: there are several categories into which these might fall...

Historically inaccurate: Combined, Matthew and Luke tell us that Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod, while Quirineus was governor of Syria. But all the external historical records we have of that time tell us that Herod died in 4 BC, while Quirineus didn't become governor until 6 AD.

Scientifically inaccurate: the mammalian bat is a bird, insects are 4-legged creatures, rabbits are cud-chewing animals, the sun rises and sets and is capable of standing still, every city on earth can be viewed from the top of a mountain in Israel, etc.

Prophetically inaccurate: That Damascus would cease to be inhabited (it is very much inhabited to this day), that Tyre would be destroyed and never rebuilt (it's doing fine now), That Egypt would by destroyed by the Assyrians and uninhabited for 40 years (never happened), that 5 cities in Egypt would one day speak the Canaanite language (nope), etc.

Sequentially inaccurate: After Jesus' baptism, one Gospel tells us that he is immediately driven into the wilderness for 40 days, and upon return, begins selecting his first disciples; another account of the baptism tells us that 3 days later he's at a wedding with all his disciples, turning water into wine. Of the 2 stories of Creation, in the first, God makes plants, then animals, then man and woman at the same time. In the second version, he makes plants, then MAN - alone - THEN all the animals, and then finally woman.

Arithmetically inaccurate: God predicts that the Israelites would be in Egypt 400 years, then were are told they were there 430 years, then we add up the ages of the generations we know were there we find the maximum time it could have been is 350 years, and THEN we get to the NT where it's suggested they were only there 215 years.
reply report
1. 69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I agree with ernest, good post, I'll check it out and get back to you.... want to id yourself really, because you just joined, have no hubs and are obviously a plant under an assumed name... it's just nicer to know who ones talking to!
  
  Anyhow, off to bed now, but I look forward to researching your post over the next few days, you made a lot of points, so it will tale some time to answer.
  reply report
  81
  pay2cEMposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Thanks for the advice. I got a picture up, now just have to start some hubs.
  
  Also, I just edited my post slightly after realizing I had accidentally spliced the ending of one paragraph onto the wrong beggining of another.
  reply report
2. 69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  OK heres a start of replying to your queries...
  
  I'm afraid there is a lot more than the one liner you used to start the query with, but when Gods word is challenged you can expect to do a bit of reading when you receive correction.
  
  I would hate for you or any of our resident atheists to use this chestnut again, having been corrected on it, that would be lying, and all liars.... (we all know what happens to all liars!)
  
  "rabbits are cud-chewing animals,"
  
  http://www.comereason.org/bibl_cntr/con055.asp
  Does the hare really chew cud?
  
  To your question. Deuteronomy 14, verses 6 and 7 read as follows, "You may eat any animal that has a split hoof divided in two and that chews the cud. However, of those that chew the cud or that have a split hoof completely divided you may not eat the camel, the rabbit or the coney. Although they chew the cud, they do not have a split hoof; they are ceremonially unclean for you " This seems pretty straightforward on the face of it. I'm going to make the assumption that you are questioning the idea that a hare chews cud at all. Let's examine the question rationally.
  
  Some background information:
  
  Cud chewers are generally classified as belonging to the order of ruminants- (a sub order of artiodactyls) - and are defined as an "even-toed animal that regurgitates and masticates its food after swallowing. " This means that a cow, for example, will eat vegetation and swallow it. The cow's stomach is divided into four chambers where some of more easily digestible nutrients are absorbed by the body while other more fibrous material is stored in the stomach and then regurgitated. The cow will re-chew this material and re-swallow it so that it can digest it as well.
  
  Rabbits and hares, however, do not have a chambered stomach such as the cow. They also do not regurgitate their food. What they do perform is a function named cecotropy. I will quote the process as cited at http://www.mhhe.com/biosci/genbio/rjbio … ELO45.html
  
  SYMBIOSIS WITHIN THE VERTEBRATE DIGESTIVE SYSTEM
  
  Bacterial Digestion of Cellulose Within Animals - Vertebrates lack enzymes to digest plant material. Some bacteria can do so and are harbored by animals... Rats and rabbits redigest cellulose another way. [They] eat feces and literally redigest them a second time. Efficiency approaches that of ruminants.
  
  In a more detailed version, Margert "Casey" Kilcullen-Steiner, (M.S., L.A.Tg) writes:
  http://microvet.arizona.edu/Courses/MIC … abbits.htm
  
  Rabbits are sometimes called "pseudo-ruminants"... The rhythmic cycle of coprophagy of pure cecal contents practiced by all rabbits allows utilization of microbial protein and fermentation products, as well as recycling of certain minerals. Whereas the feces commonly seen excreted by rabbits are fairly large, dry and ovoid, excreted singly, and consist of fibrous plant material, cecotrophs are about half that size, occur in moist bundles stuck together with mucus, and are very fine textured and odiferous. They are seldom seen, as the rabbit plucks them directly from the anus as they are passed and swallows them whole. Normal rabbits do not allow cecotrophs to drop to the floor or ground, and their presence there indicates a mechanical problem or illness in the rabbit.
  
  And Janet Tast, D.V.M. notes:
  http://www.ultranet.com/~hrs/artcl03.htm
  
  Cecotrophy by Janet Tast, D.V.M. "Cecotropy is the process by which rabbits will reingest part of their feces directly from the rectum. This should not be confused with the term coprophagy (eating fecal material) since rabbits only ingest the soft "night" feces or cecotrophs."
  
  Caryl Hilscher-Conklin (M.S. in Biology, University of Notre Dame) also makes this claim:
  http://www.rmca.org/Articles/coprophagy.htm
  
  "One may not give much thought to the lazy chewing of the cud that we observe cows doing all the time, but this behavior is analogous to coprophagy. The only difference between cud chewing and coprophagy is the point in the digestive tract at which nutrients are expelled and then placed back into the mouth."
  
  Now, we must also remember that artiodactyls were first defined as a separate order in 1847 by Richard Owen and the behavior of cecotropy was first recognized in 1882. Deuteronomy, however, was written approximately 1500 BC in an ancient Hebrew. It would be intellectually dishonest for someone to claim that a 3500 year old writing is contradictory because it doesn't match with a scientific classification invented only about a hundred years ago. Further, if the ancient Hebrews defined 'cud-chewing" as that process where half digested vegetation was re-chewed by an animal for easier re-digestion ( and that is a very specific and scientific definition), I would say the hare fits here fine.
  
  Whenever someone translates an ancient language or writing, some word for word parallels are not going to be available. Most scholars understand this and accept the cultural backgrounds and meanings for what they are. This is why hermeneutics is a serious field of study in higher education.
  
  I hope this has cleared up any misconceptions you may have had on the accuracy of the Biblical text.
  
  Read more: http://www.comereason.org/bibl_cntr/con … z0YHdvrhDL
  
  More to follow as it comes together, as stated you asked a whole heap of queries at one time, they are apparently mostly 'old chestnuts' brought about by those who seek to dilute Gods word or try to prove the bible to be errant, and for me they do represent problems, however I am also amember of a great study group of about 50 very devoted Christians, and for them, this is a job of searching out stuff already used to destroy false challenges in the past.
  
  Satan is not new to the propaganda game and as he is the father of lies, the deceiver and the accuser, it is to be expected that he will 'inspire' these sorts of nonsense attacks...
  
  as I said, more to follow as they come.
  
  BTW it seems that my friends have quoted scientific papers for this proof, so I'm surprised that the scientists amongst our esteemed ranks failed to correct the query when it was posted, but maybe they are not so interested in proving the bible.
  
  I answered two ''show me the proof' queries from some loud-mouthed atheist (can't remember which one) and as they were obviously accurate (because the bible IS accurate, or rather God is) there was no other peep from their camp, except to make inane smiley face replies and put the normal LOLOLO type of asinine comments.
  
  Never mind, we (and there is a 'we' here now) shall keep hitting back with the truth until they stop spouting these lies.
  
  So people will be able to see how inaccurate these challenges are for quite a while, or at least until the points have been all answered.
  reply report
  0
  Deborah Sextonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  **********************
  Let's start with a few items
  First of all it was Herod Antipas who was ruler of Galilee during Yeshua's time not his father Herod the Great who died 4 BC. Herod Antipas ruled from 4 BC-39 AD
  
  Bats-This was just the times when people didn't know everything we do today. We know it only because we have been taught.
  
  Chewing the cud-Rabbits eat their own feces and re-ingest it. The feces pellets go to a fermentation chamber where undigested food goes. And again, back then they didn't know that when a rabbit sits and chews, it wasn't exactly like the cows.
  
  The Sun-They still call it rising and setting so.......
  
  This just means the ancient people didn't have the internet to look up stuff. I don't think God took the time to teach them about cuds.
  From the time it was discovered Pluto was labeled a planet, now it's not. In 2000 years they will read many of our books that say it is a planet. They too will say our writings are in error. However in 2000 years, they'll be smart enough to know, since the books were written we had to have existed.
  I am certainly not saying the English Bible is correct, in some parts but not most. But it's the translations that has caused what seems as contradiction .
  
  Since your list is so long, I'll get back to you.
  reply report
3. 0
  Deborah Sextonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  According to the cantillation signs placed in the Hebrew text of Genesis 15:13 by the scribes, the phrase "400 years" refers back to the words, "your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs." The years of Abraham's offspring being strangers in a strange land BEGAN with the birth of Isaac (2048 AM), NOT with the Egyptian enslavement. Therefore the text ought to be understood as follows: "Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs . . . 400 years." Adding 400 years to the date of Isaac's birth brings us to 2448 AM, which is the year of the Exodus and the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai.
  The 30-year difference in the number of years mentioned by Paul in Galatians 3:17 and the number of years specified to Abram by God is due to two different starting points for the same ending point. The first covenant (Gen. 12:1-3) was instituted 430 years before the Law was given on Mount Sinai, while Genesis 15:13 refers to 400 years between the birth of Abraham's chosen offspring, Isaac, and the Exodus from Egypt. This means that God made the first covenant with Abram in 2018 AM, 30 years before Isaac was born. Therefore, we can deduce that Abram left Ur at the age of 70, spent 5 years in Haran, and then left Haran in 2023 AM at the age of 75, as Genesis 12:4 tells us. The covenant of the pieces (Gen. 15) was probably made in the year 2033 AM, just before the birth of Ishmael in 2034 AM.
  However, because of a statement made by Stephen, many think that Abram didn't leave Haran until after his father died:
  ACTS 7:4 "Then he came out of the land of the Chaldeans and dwelt in Haran. And from there, when his father was dead, He moved him to this land in which you now dwell."
  
  Based on the biblical chronology shown above, we know that Terah was born in 1878 AM. Genesis 11:32 tells us that Terah lived 205 years. So simple math establishes that Terah didn't physically die until 2083 AM (35 years AFTER the birth of Isaac). There is no way to reconcile Stephen's statement if we apply it to Terah's physical death. Therefore, unless we assume (incorrectly) that Stephen was mistaken, we have to realize that he was referring to Terah's spiritual death, not his physical death.
  Many times the Scriptures speak of the living as being dead because of sin (Rom. 6:13; Col. 2:13; Eph. 2:1, 5; I Tim. 5:6; I John 3:14; I Pet. 4:6; Rev. 3:1). We know that Terah worshiped other gods (Jos. 24:2). Clearly Stephen was referring to Terah's spiritual state, not his physical state, when he mentioned his death.
  Exodus 12:40-41 tells us the very day that God first made His covenant with Abram:
  The Bible tells us that the Israelites started their trek out of Egypt on the 15th of the month of Abib (Num. 33:3). Therefore, we know that 430 years earlier, on 15 Abib (or Nisan), God first told Abraham to leave Ur of the Chaldees and promised to bless him if he did.
  Some argue that Exodus 12:40-41 shows conclusively that the Israelites were slaves in Egypt for 430 years. However, the focus of these verses is the SOJOURN of the children of Israel. Literally, this sojourn began when Abraham left Ur at the age of 70.
  The maximum possible time for the sojourn is only 350 years. We see that the biblical chronology does not allow for 430 or 400 years in Egypt. So what is the correct number of years in Egypt? To find this out, we need to go back to the year of Isaac's birth and work our way forward.
  We've already determined that it was 400 years from the time of Isaac's birth until the Exodus (2048 AM + 400 = 2448 AM). Isaac was 60 when he had Jacob and Esau (Gen. 25:26), which means Jacob was born in 2108 AM. Jacob was 130 years old when he moved his family to Egypt (Gen. 47:28), which indicates that this move occurred in 2238 AM. The time period between 2238 AM and 2448 AM is 210 years. So it was 210 years from the time Jacob moved his family to Egypt until the Exodus took place.
  However, it was AFTER the children of Israel had multiplied and filled the land of Egypt, and a new Pharaoh who did not know Joseph had arisen, that the Egyptians enslaved the Israelites. We do not know for sure how long the enslavement lasted. But since Joseph died in 2309 AM (Gen. 50:22), it was probably a generation or two after this that the slavery began. My best guess is that they were enslaved approximately 100 years, give or take a decade or two.
  For those of you who haven't studied Jewish sources, the time period of 210 years has long been known and proclaimed by the Jewish sages. But for many reasons, Christian scholars tend to disdain and dismiss Jewish understanding of the Scriptures. By doing so, they (and we) are missing out on some deeper insights into God's word. This is not to say that the Jews are right in all their beliefs and teachings. We are told to prove ALL things, but to only hold fast to that which is GOOD (I The. 5:21).
  We tend not to look deeply enough into the Scriptures to find the full answer. "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, but the glory of kings is to search out a matter" (Pro. 25:2).
  
  This type of presentation of information is one of the tests God built into the Scriptures to frustrate those who don't truly want to obey Him. God tells us how we must approach our study of the Scriptures: "For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line, here a little, there a little" (Isa. 28:10, 13).
  
  Most Christians do not use this method to study. Instead, they proof text and play "trump the verse." Proof texting is finding a Scripture that seems to agree with one's point of view and then using that Scripture to override any apparently contradictory Scriptures. Instead of trying to harmonize ALL the Scriptures on a particular topic, most Christians support those Scriptures that fit their particular beliefs and then ignore or overturn others that don't fit their doctrines. This is one of the main reasons we see so many denominations within Christianity. Is Christ divided (I Cor. 1:13)? Unfortunately, in this age of itching ears (II Tim. 4:3), the answer is "yes."
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  What is the point of stealing other people's opinion and posting it as your own words?
  
  http://www.herealittletherealittle.net/ … s-in-Egypt
  
  I see a lot of you religionists doing this. What does it achieve exactly?
  reply report
  69
  aguasilverposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Well I guess it answers fool questions that have already been answered elsewhere and saves time, at least they have taken the time to research and answer the question.... which takes a little bit more effort than sticking snide remarks on everything you disapprove of but cannot refute.
  reply report
  59
  Mark Knowlesposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  So stealing is OK then?
  
  Odd that you missed that point. Refute what? Why should I even bother refuting anything you say.
  
  As the other religionist pointed out - I am sure you can find an appropriate scripture to "back up" whatever point of view you have.
  reply report
  0
  Deborah Sextonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Due to the complexity of putting these time lines together and finding someone who was smart enough to, I used the work of Brian T. Huie. I forgot to post the link. When I came back to this post someone (Hummm) had permalinked and I couldn't edit my own post in order to add it.
  The above information is from http://www.herealittletherealittle.net/
  written by: Bryan T. Huie  May 3, 2002
  Revised: October 24, 2009
  reply report
  61
  Bovine Currencyposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  I just saw your latest post come up, I am over all that. I was wrong to butt in really, it is not my business. My apologies. I just read this post top to bottom and I appreciate that this particular way of reading scripture is something you value and I found it rather interesting. However, it doesn't point to any more grand truth than any other interpretation, it doesn't point to any truth. It doesn't make any sense. I have been locked up in psychiatric institutions for beliefs that are less reasonable. I take offense to that but I don't want to argue about it. I am not sure hate is the right word but if I were to hate anything, it would be religion, it is a distraction from the here and now and the suffering of here and now, religion only seeks to squander its faithful in the past, in fantasy, it makes me sick. My point stands, I don't want to dispute your faith, I am just putting my experience across, I read yours, I apologised for my mistake earlier. I hope you can respect what I have said. Thanks.
  reply report
  0
  Deborah Sextonposted 14 years agoin reply to this
  Oh boy. I was just trying to show a time line because of something someone said. I am not showing religion.
  Explaining this over and over is getting boring.
  
  No problem Have a great night
  reply report
79
earnestshubposted 14 years ago
pay2cEM

I found this information to be accurate from my knowledge of the bible.
You have stated your points succinctly, nice post.
reply report
58
Jeramiposted 14 years ago
Cagsil wrote:
@aguasilver

You know, you keep coming at me, but don't like it when I respond and you chose to actively bait me. If you don't like what I have to say, then DO as you're pathetic god says to do.

Shut up and mind your own business. The fact: you stepped into a conversation I chose to have with someone else, that isn't you, doesn't give you the right to interrupt my conversation, with your pathetic long post. Which really didn't say anything.

Again, like I said- I KNOW 'what' you 'are' and if I need to, I will show all the people of the forum, exactly what that is.

Jerami said... I like what you said in this reply except for one thing.
I think that you should read your own words; be able to see the wisdom in them, and apply them to yourself as well as shouting them off of the roof top at everyone else.
reply report
73
cheaptrickposted 14 years ago
There is irrefutable proof in the Bible that Skin stretches further than rubber cause Joseph tied his Ass to a tree and walked forty miles...So there...
reply report

Post a Reply

jump to first post

Previous 1 23 4 5 Next

Necessary
HubPages Device ID	This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
Login	This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google Recaptcha	This is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
Akismet	This is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google Analytics	This is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic Pixel	This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web Services	This is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
Cloudflare	This is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted Libraries	Javascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)

Features
Google Custom Search	This is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google Maps	Some articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google Charts	This is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host API	This service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTube	Some articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Vimeo	Some articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Paypal	This is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Login	You can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Maven	This supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)

Marketing
Google AdSense	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClick	Google provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index Exchange	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Sovrn	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook Ads	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad Marketplace	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexus	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Openx	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon Project	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLift	This is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say Media	We partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing Pixels	We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels	We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.

Statistics
Author Google Analytics	This is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
Comscore	ComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking Pixel	Some articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
Clicksco	This is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)

What part of the Bible is a fact?

Arts and Design

Autos

Books, Literature, and Writing

Business and Employment

Education and Science

Entertainment and Media

Family and Parenting

Fashion and Beauty

Food and Cooking

Games, Toys, and Hobbies

Gender and Relationships

Health

Holidays and Celebrations

Home and Garden

HubPages Tutorials and Community

Personal Finance

Pets and Animals

Politics and Social Issues

Religion and Philosophy

Sports and Recreation

Technology

Travel and Places

About Us

This website uses cookies

What part of the Bible is a fact?

Related Discussions

This website uses cookies