Not in a literal sense, no. I believe people can act like angels (i.e. be good, selfless, etc.), but I don't believe in physical angels.
quote:
The universe is her, the question is was hit guided in its formation by a designer, or did it happen by chance, either way the universe forms in roughly the same way. The point is the universe did for perfectly and the question is how.
You just described my dilemma. The reason I find it hard to believe the universe was designed is that I find it hard to believe in a designer. How could there possibly exist a being that powerful, and why would he/she/it care about creating us? And where would such a being come from?
quote:
In this theory a supernova caused an increase of radiation that reached earth after Human life had established it’s self on earth. This increase of radiation conceded with a reduction of the ozone, and the result was a much grater exosphere and a beginning in the reduction of human life spans.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you're saying that Earth got a nice dose of exploded star radiation at the same time the ozone layer thinned out? If what I know about solar radiation and ozone layers is true, that would either result in mutant humans or dead humans, not shorter-lived humans. Sounds like funk science to me.
Besides, you say this happened before humans "established" themselves on Earth. The events of Genesis are thought to have happened roughly 6000 years ago. 6000 years ago, there were humans in nearly every part of the world. The Americas had already been populated, Europe was developing farming, and Oceanic peoples were sailing all over the place. I would say humanity was pretty well established and spread out by that time.
No, it's the whole "God created the heavens and the earth" bit that I find a bit unbelievable.
Why? The universe is her, the question is was hit guided in its formation by a designer, or did it happen by chance, either way the universe forms in roughly the same way. The point is the universe did for perfectly and the question is how. I hope that made sense
quote:
Like 900-year-old people and angels waving flaming swords? I can't quite remember all that's in Genesis.
They have several theories of how people could have lived longer; I will expand on the predominate theory. In this theory a supernova caused an increase of radiation that reached earth after Human life had established it’s self on earth. This increase of radiation conceded with a reduction of the ozone, and the result was a much grater exosphere and a beginning in the reduction of human life spans. So people in the early passages of genesis would have lived before this event.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
That is not what I said, let me clarify. I did not say the bible was not true I said much of what you here about genesis is not true.
My bad. I thought you were talking about what was in Genesis, not what people say about it.
Anyways, I'm not getting information from other people. I read Genesis and it seems outlandish. And I'm not talking about the days bit, which I can see being interpreted in many different ways. No, it's the whole "God created the heavens and the earth" bit that I find a bit unbelievable.
The Revelation to John is a chronicle of exactly what is going to happen (supposedly) when Christ returns to earth. All of the hellfire and horsemen are supposed to be here
Please note that what is in revelation was in a vision, and visions oftentimes are wrapped in sybolism and metaphor, in images that mean something else. For example an aquaintance of mine paints what he sees in visions to the Otherworlds, and one of said paintings was of an elk, flying through a red sky. You could interpret this to mean that an elk really will fly, which is quite unlikely, or that your spiritual self will ascend to something greater.
As a note: in religon most things are used as a metaphor, whether they happened or not. They are all in the bible to teach a lesson. This one was to highlight the fall of man. They actually ate the fruit and its symbolism is up to you to decide.
quote:
So, with the exception of the tiny area around the tigris and the euphrates, how would these Biblical people have survived
Not everyone dies in the desert. Some people thrive in it. ( haven't you read Dune? )
...a Wandering Star for whom the black darkness has been reserved forever...
Would you like to point out which part of these statements contradicts what you just said?
In the first case the bible is not being metaphorical, sin really did enter the world after they ate the apple, but it was not the chemical make up of the apple that caused sin to enter the world, it was the act of eating the apple.
In the second case the bible is not being metaphorical it is mostly referring to events in the spiritual realm.
quote:
Wouldn't that mean that the centre of any landmass would be desert? So, with the exception of the tiny area around the tigris and the euphrates, how would these Biblical people have survived?
No it would not. The atmosphere of earth was a lot thicker, a lot more mist and fog, water would have been delivered in a more evenly way constant saturation instead of short bursts.
quote:
Not true? So you admit the Bible has factual errors? See, this is exactly what I was talking about. The Bible was written at a time when people didn't understand the world. So they wrote about how they thought it worked. Genesis, with it's six-day creation story and mystical garden, is no different than, say, Hindu holy books that talk about cities on the moon. We know now that there are no cities on the moon, just as we know Earth wasn't created in six days.
That is not what I said, let me clarify. I did not say the bible was not true I said much of what you here about genesis is not true. The problem started with a group if people who are called creation scientists, who attempt to disprove evolution. Apparently one of them had the stupid idea that they should contradict every thing that the evolutionists say and therefore they say that the earth is only around 6 thousand years old. This is not what the bible teaches. They also teach a global flood to account for why the earth looks old, again this is not what the Bible teaches, and is a result of their unbelief in an old earth.
I can’t begin to express my frustration with these people who say that they re teaching what the bible says when in reality they are twisting the bible to fit their beliefs. I have spent large amounts of time putting pressure on groups that I know support a strictly young earth position to try and get them to be inclusive of old earth, so far I have had very limited success, they can be very stubborn.
The bible does not say that the earth was created in 6 twenty for hour periods; instead it says that the earth was created in six days. Now there are several definitions of day, and one of them means a period of time with a distinct beginning and end. When you look at the book of genesis in the original Hebrew and take into account the sentence structure it because clear that genesis is refrying to a period of time with a specified beginning or end, basically an age. So the bible is compatible with the age of the earth and universe which are 4 and 15 billion years old respectively.
quote:
The spiritual realm is just one of the things I find non-credible. Also, it seems to me that Revelation does mention the physical world. I mean, how else can nations be destroyed and plagues kill off all the non-believers?
There are events in revelation that refer to events on earth, however much of it is referring to events in the spiritual realm, or spiritual beings on earth.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
As for revelations’ that book is talking about events in the spiritual realm, not the physical realm.
wrong sir
The Revelation to John is a chronicle of exactly what is going to happen (supposedly) when Christ returns to earth. All of the hellfire and horsemen are supposed to be here
"The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, "You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I'm just not close enough to get the job done"."
Not true? So you admit the Bible has factual errors? See, this is exactly what I was talking about. The Bible was written at a time when people didn't understand the world. So they wrote about how they thought it worked. Genesis, with it's six-day creation story and mystical garden, is no different than, say, Hindu holy books that talk about cities on the moon. We know now that there are no cities on the moon, just as we know Earth wasn't created in six days.
quote:
As for revelations’ that book is talking about events in the spiritual realm, not the physical realm.
The spiritual realm is just one of the things I find non-credible. Also, it seems to me that Revelation does mention the physical world. I mean, how else can nations be destroyed and plagues kill off all the non-believers?
The fruit was more of a symbol of disobedience, by eating the fruit they disobeyed God there by breaking the bond, and letting Satan and his influence into the world.
quote:
One think that you must take into account when reading the book of revelations is that most of it is referring to the spiritual realm not to the physical realm. Because of this things are going to sound a bit weird and different.
Would you like to point out which part of these statements contradicts what you just said?
quote:
Because of this there was not really rain as we currently any rain.
Wouldn't that mean that the centre of any landmass would be desert? So, with the exception of the tiny area around the tigris and the euphrates, how would these Biblical people have survived?
Only simple and quiet words will ripen of themselves. For a whirlwind does not last a whole morning, nor does a sudden shower last the entire day.
Genesis and Revelation are two of the reasons why I find it non-credible. And I don't have any evidence that it is false. Or at least, no evidence that you'd accept.
I already tried to explain those two chapters of the bible to you I will try again. A lot of what you here about genesis is not true, I would recommend you look at Hugh Ross’ book the Genesis question, and don’t worry it would be some boring preachy book, in fact many mainstream Christians hate the book. As for revelations’ that book is talking about events in the spiritual realm, not the physical realm.
quote:
When reading these books, we must take into account the use of metaphorical language and disregard scientific innacuracy because of their limited world and indeed universe knowledge.
But genesis is not metaphorical.
quote:
So every one will live forever unconditionally; it is just a case of how you wish to spend an infinite amount of time.
So spiritual death is eternal separation from God.
quote:
Rainbows are caused by light refracting and reflecting through water droplets, as in rain. Are you suggesting, seriously, that there was no rain while the sun was shining up till Noah's time? If the atmosphere was that different, then I would have thought that mass extinction would have preceeded the story of the flood because they wouldn't have sufficient humidity for plants to survive.
The atmosphere used to be much thicker, giving them the ability to live longer because of a greater shield against ultra violent rays. Because of this there was not really rain as we currently any rain.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
I hate to point it out, Nephilem, but you have just kindly proved my point for me. When a religions stories are misinterpreted, they appear to be simplistic and factually wrong. When reading these books, we must take into account the use of metaphorical language and disregard scientific innacuracy because of their limited world and indeed universe knowledge.
quote:
, what it was saying is that there was no spiritual death
Isn't it a flaw with Christianity that everyone will live forever? Because those who go to heaven will live for ever in happiness, and those who go to hell will spend eternity being punished for thier sins. So every one will live forever unconditionally; it is just a case of how you wish to spend an infinite amount of time.
quote:
There were not rainbows up to that point because the atmosphere was different
Rainbows are caused by light refracting and reflecting through water droplets, as in rain. Are you suggesting, seriously, that there was no rain while the sun was shining up till Noah's time? If the atmosphere was that different, then I would have thought that mass extinction would have preceeded the story of the flood because they wouldn't have sufficient humidity for plants to survive.
Only simple and quiet words will ripen of themselves. For a whirlwind does not last a whole morning, nor does a sudden shower last the entire day.
Why do you find it non credible? What evidence do you have that it is incorrect, or makes false claims?
Genesis and Revelation are two of the reasons why I find it non-credible. And I don't have any evidence that it is false. Or at least, no evidence that you'd accept.
quote:
serious factual errors
Any book that was written thousands of years ago is going to have factual errors because the writers didn't know enough about the world. The Bible has just as many.
I contest that Christianity is no different. I find it very non-credible.
Why do you find it non credible? What evidence do you have that it is incorrect, or makes false claims?
quote:
Revelation is a very unbelievable book. It goes over exactly what will happen during the Rapture, and none of it is very credible. Monsters from the sea? Bowls with plagues in them? Even taken metaphorically, it's hard to swallow.
One think that you must take into account when reading the book of revelations is that most of it is referring to the spiritual realm not to the physical realm. Because of this things are going to sound a bit weird and different.
quote:
God built a magical garden, where no one ever got old or died.
The bible never says that they would never die physically, what it was saying is that there was no spiritual death; man was not separated from God.
quote:
But then, because they ate a piece of fruit, the people in the magical garden gained a knowledge of good and evil.
The fruit was more of a symbol of disobedience, by eating the fruit they disobeyed God there by breaking the bond, and letting Satan and his influence into the world.
quote:
God decided to wipe out the human race, so flooded the whole world. Then the water 'drained' away to somewhere else
The bible does not actually say that the flood was global. At that time their knowledge of the expanse of the earth was limited so when they speak of the whole world they speak of the world that they knew. This idea of a global flood is pushed by creation scientists who refuse to believe in an old earth so they use a global food to explain why the earth looks old.
quote:
he gave us a rainbow to remind us of Gods mercy and covenant.
There were not rainbows up to that point because the atmosphere was different. Then God used this first rainbow as his symbol for the covenant with man.
quote:
True of all holy books.
Not so, there are many holy books that have serious factual errors, thus showing that the book can not be trusted, and thus destroying the validity of that holly book.
"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein
A real example of this is Hinduism which made the claim that man used to have cities on the moon.
God built a magical garden, where no one ever got old or died. But then, because they ate a piece of fruit, the people in the magical garden gained a knowledge of good and evil. Then God threw them out.
God decided to wipe out the human race, so flooded the whole world. Then the water 'drained' away to somewhere else and he gave us a rainbow to remind us of Gods mercy and covenant.
When the great skybird flaps it's wings, there is thunder and lightning.
You cannot just deny the truth of a religion based on the innacuracy of an unscientific age.
What happened to judging a religion by the actions of its worshipers? Something about the fruits of spirit being patcience and so on. New Testament, I'm sure you can provide it for us. That and something about if the fruit of the tree is good, then it is fine. Just possible references that I cannot remember the locations of.
quote:
It is a testable book which makes many specific claims that we can test to see if they are true.
True of all holy books.
Only simple and quiet words will ripen of themselves. For a whirlwind does not last a whole morning, nor does a sudden shower last the entire day.
Which is why the Mormon religion is not credible and is not the word of god but the word of man.
I contest that Christianity is no different. I find it very non-credible.
quote:
evidence to verify the religions that were cited in support of the idea that animals have souls
First off, it was Brehon who brought up the idea that other religions support that idea. Second, I claimed that nothing has a soul. However, I can no more prove that than you can prove that we do have souls. It's all about faith, or lack of it.
quote:
as for you interpolation of heaven, it is a little off and over simplified.
I took it straight from the Book of Revelation. Simplified, yes, but only because I didn't want to go into New Jerusalem's exact dimensions. Revelation is a very unbelievable book. It goes over exactly what will happen during the Rapture, and none of it is very credible. Monsters from the sea? Bowls with plagues in them? Even taken metaphorically, it's hard to swallow.
Topics 
)
