The soul is not physical. When you die (when your physical body fails), your soul lives on, according to accepted Christian thought. And as for that hole, I've never heard of such a thing. What exactly are you talking about?

quote:

What is so hard about that? What is so hard to understand?

Your interpretation of the Bible is hard to understand. I've never heard anything quite like it, and I've seen everything from the most conservative to the most liberal Biblical interpretations.

What do you mean humans came later?
The animals were created in Genesis 1:20-25.
Man was created in Genesis 1:26-27.They were in spirit form.
Man was form in Genesis 2:7. They were formed, meaning they got a human body.

What is so hard about that? What is so hard to understand?
You are just getting yourself more confused.

What do you mean it's not physical?
Humans can not live if we don't have souls.
Science has found a hole in the heart which they can't explain and so there for thebelieve that, that hole is our soul.

Living soul. Souls are not physical.

Anyways, I suppose I could give you that. But what about the order of animals? Genesis 1 says animals came at the same time as humans, yet Genesis 2 says humans came later.

Ok clpo13 I have decided to answer some of your questions, you post earlier.

quote:

Creation
Man and woman were created simultaneously. (Gen.1:27)

In Genesis 1:27 it saids that: So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Which means He created them in spirit form.

In Genesis 2:7 it saids that: And the LORD God formed man [of] the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

Which means He formed them in human form.
It saids that He breathed in to his nosrils the breath of life and man became a living soul.

Occam's Razor, north. The right answer is usually the simplest. Of course, you could make a case for both science and religion being the simplest. With science, you don't need to come up with some complicated creation story and a god and have it all make sense, but with religion, you don't have to think as much about equations and whatnot.

Anyways...

quote:

I bet you believe that Eve ate an apple in the Garden too.

I don't believe there ever was an Eve. What does that have to do with anything anyways?

And how exactly is your site supposed to help me out? It documents nothing more than a camera glitch. Strange lights have appeared in pictures I've taken with my Kodak digital camera, but I don't immediately take them to be evidence of God.

Here I have a website for you to see

http://www.biblebelievers.org/lhoust.htm

It will help you out.

quote:

Originally posted by rugar:
I bet you believe that Eve ate an apple in the Garden too.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha . . . die.

quote:

Theoretically, I could write a book saying that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created the Earth two days ago and everyone who remembers past that is a raving lunatic, and I'd be right because I'd put a little disclaimer in there that says, "This book is completely accurate."

I read an excellent book on the subject. It says that we must look at which object makes most sense, and which one needs more creativity to understand. First, we have evolution ex. with all of it's scientific evidence, with everything lain out for the eyes. We must only assume that DNA can change, and does. As for religion, we must assume A. There is a big person who preceeded creation. B. That this being created earth, as lain out in the Bible, and all the lovely other contradicitons that are spelled out with Baroque complexity in the Bible.

I bet you believe that Eve ate an apple in the Garden too.

Rugar, how can you completely disregard the blatant contradictions I pointed out? I just can't understand that kind of sheer bloody-mindedness.

Also, I'll kindly ask you not to assume I'm confused. I am very much not confused, especially when it comes to this issue. I've know the Bible more than most Christians twenty years older than me. Believe me when I say I know what I'm talking about.

But just to humor, why don't you explain the seeming contradictions I listed out? Is there some greater meaning to the differing commandments to "believe everything" and to "believe only what the evidence proves?" When the Bible says a man and woman can't divorce, but then later relents, is there meaning in that? Since you obviously have such of a revelation in regards to the Bible, you surely can answer these burning questions to an unintelligent heathen such as myself.

I still believe that the bible does not contradict itself.
Like I said you have to have a revelation of the bible to really understand the scripture, if not then you will just get yourself confused like your doing to yourself.

Homer's stories were changed from what Homer originally intended. Homer never wrote his stories down and there is doubt about whether Homer even wrote those books, so your argument went right down the drain.

The bible disregards many gospels that the church decided weren't going to be included, which is suspicious enough. not to mention, you cannot say that the attitude of the author or the content of the stories means it must be real. Just because you don''t think a woman would have been made to go first, it provides a parrelell between Jesus being born from a woman and first seen by a woman when born again. The authors running from god could also be made up becuase they were proving a point through the bible, that god was all powerful. Their personal strength was not a concern to them. And I know you will say that proves god is real, but it doesn't. It only proves that these authors thought he was real.

What other book besides the Bible do many of the authors call themselves total cowards and admit to running away from God? Also if I was making up some story about a god I wouldn't have had a woman be the first to find God risen from the dead. In that culture and in that time it was pretty much really embarrassing to have a woman be the first at anything. Thankfully we have come along way in our society. Also, does anyone here doubt that the writtings of Plato or that the stories of Homer's Iliad are not accurate to thier original? The New Testament alone has about 25,000 ancient manuscripts and 5,600 of those are in original Greek. How many manuscripts of Plato's were ever found? Only 7. Homer's Iliad does better as being known as the second best preserved piece of ancient literature. The Iliad has 643 manuscripts. This is still nothing compared to even 5,600 manuscripts.

Rugar: There are indeed many contradictions in the Bible. See here.

Creation
First Account (Genesis 1:1-2:3)
Humans were created after animals. (Gen.1:25-27)
Man and woman were created simultaneously. (Gen.1:27)
Second Account (Genesis 2:4-25)
Humans created before other animals. (Gen.2:18-19)
Man came first, then animals, then woman. (Gen.2-18-22)

Heaven and Hell
God wants everyone to go to heaven. (1 Tim.2:3-4; 2 Pet.3:9}
God wants some people to go to hell. (Pr.16:4; Jn.12:40; Rom.9:18; 2 Th.2:11-12)

Baptism
In the name of God. (Mt.28:19)
In the name of Jesus. (Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5)

Believing Everything
You should believe everything. (1 Cor.13:7)
You should believe only what the evidence proves. (Pr.14:15; 1 Th.5:21)

Divorce and the number of gods also show many contradictions.

The contradictions are there. Even the most devout of Christian scholars will admit that.

If one can read, one can see that the bible does indeed contradict itself. All you need is a fairly high IQ to notice it, because it's glaringly obvious. I used to be a devout Methodist, I've read the bible, I used to whole-heartedly believe everything in it, but the contradictions confused me. And that was part of the reason why I lost my faith. They are there, just open your eyes and use your brain.

If you have revelation of the Bible then you would understand the Bible. And you would know that the Bible doesn't contradict itself.

Meaning: "You can't possibly understand the Bible if you look at it objectively."

I don't care if I have no "revelation" of the Bible. I study it to learn, not to be a Christian.

Ya'll should just stop talk about the bible.
Cause ya'll have no revelation of it.

quote:

However, if there are no contradictions in the Bible, explain how Cain, after murdering Abel, runs off to a far away city--if God only created Adam and Eve

Yes this is something else that confuses me, i believe it said he ran off to that city and married...who did he marry, there shouldnt have been anyone to marry....strange.

Paul was just crazy. He differed widely from the rest of the Bible. Why his letters were included is beyond me.