General Music Chat

You guys don't really believe that man existed at the same time as dinosaurs do you? What evidence do you have for this? And please don't try to twist and intepret what is written in the Bible. Behemoths and dragons do not mean dinosaurs. Herbivore dinosaurs did not eat grass, they ate leaves and other plants. Grass did not evolve until after the dinosaurs went extinct.

You left out Unicorns.

LOL

Found in the King James Version of the Bible.

.

Actually Jimmy, I believe God created an aged earth the same way he created an aged man. He did not create male and female infants and I truly believe he created an adult or aged earth. This is only my theory. I do believe the bible when it dates the earth at a few thousand years old.

Where exactly does it state how old the earth is? If this book is perfect it should have the date right there in plain language. Why aren't the bones and other relics of man found among dinosaur fossils? This is my big problem with religion; it purports to have all of the answers but it's flawed on the most basic of things such as the age of the universe, etc. How could anyone take this nonsense seriously?

Where exactly does it state how old the earth is?

It doesn't. It is arrived at by fumdamentalists through the Bible's detailing of lineages, from the time of Adam, and since Adam was created on the 6th day of CREATION. They believe they can date the beginning of the universe, within a certain number of years.

Why aren't the bones and other relics of man found among dinosaur fossils? This is my big problem with religion; it purports to have all of the answers but it's flawed on the most basic of things such as the age of the universe, etc. How could anyone take this nonsense seriously?

Nothing... even science, has ALL the answers. And even though science is flawed, you believe much of what it states and concludes. THAT is "MY" problem with anti-religionists. They accept other FLAWED belief systems into their lives, why not one which is religious based?

In other words, because the Bible includes ancient mythology as part of it's teachings, or makes other mistakes, why cannot the GOOD found there, be accepted as such? Why does the baby have to be thrown out with the bathwater?

Even secular archaelogists search the pages of the Bible for clues of history, and hints as to where ancient cities may have been.

There is MUCH good found in the Bible. It is unlike any other book in history, and has continually been the best selling book of all time, even in this modern, scientifically enlightened age.

.

Precisely Craig. It is flawed because it was written by men. This does not mean that it is worthless; a diamond may have a flaw but still be worth thousands or millions. There is no question that there are a great deal of good things that can be gained from the Bible and other religious texts, and from religion itself. But when it starts to cross over and explain things that are outside its domain I have a problem. The earth is NOT a few thousand years old, it is nearly five billion years old. Yes that's a big number and if you can't wrap your mind around big numbers I totally understand and sympathize. But the universe is full of really big numbers; understanding this is the key to door marked Truth.

Yes, Paul.... THE TRUTH will set us free.

Books are not "THE TRUTH" itself.

They teach ABOUT truth.
*snip*

What's missing from this statement is that Craig is this truth he speaks of.

Let's say you have book with two statements in it on the proper way to build a bridge. You believe that part of this book is true, and the other part is false.

Would you say this book teaches ABOUT the proper way to build a bridge? Rather, would you use this book to build the bridge you take to work every day?

Ultimately, your decision on how to build the bridge is not going to rest on this book since you can't know which part of it is true and which part is false. If you build the bridge, you're going to use another resource - one you believe contains the proper way to build the bridge.

In the same way, if you relegate the bible to the position of having some truths and some falsities, but you cannot know which parts are true and which parts are false, then you cannot say the Bible teaches you about truth. All you can say about the Bible is that you believe it contains some truth, but you have to look elsewhere to determine what that truth is.

You become of the arbiter of what is true or not.

Where exactly does it state how old the earth is? If this book is perfect it should have the date right there in plain language. Why aren't the bones and other relics of man found among dinosaur fossils? This is my big problem with religion; it purports to have all of the answers but it's flawed on the most basic of things such as the age of the universe, etc. How could anyone take this nonsense seriously?

It gives history to a point. According to the bible the earth is about 6,000-10,000 years old. As for the bones of humans and dinosaurs - if he created the earth aged then mountains, gorges, and fossils are part of that aged earth. Or dinosaurs coexisted with men. One or the other is the case according to the bible. Evolution seems like nonsense to me. A design indicates a designer. The universe, it's dance, the human inner ear, the water cycle, the 23 1/2 degree tilt etc etc are all designs indicating a designer. Just as a clock is proof of a clock maker. Those things prove God to me. I don't know about other religions but the bible does not purport to have all the answers. Only the answers we need to obtain heaven and be happy and healthy in this life.

There is no proof that the universe is billions of years old. No one was around even 100 years ago to test the accuracy of radio carbon dating. Much less 1000 years. MUCH MUCH MUCH less 1 million years ago MUCH MUCH.......................... less 1 billion years ago to prove it's accuracy. There is no control. Science requires way more faith than religion.

Are we there yet?

That note he lefty is the ONLY reason you know about him.

Absolutely untrue. For you to suggest this, says more things than you could possibly realize...


1) Illiterate people cannot know God.
2) Primitive peoples in jungles cannot know God.
3) No one knew about God until there was written text. But somehow God INSPIRED others directly, in order for them to write these things down in the first place. So, this is contradictory.

Crazy talk Craig. It does not imply those things at all. Illiterate and primitive people find out about God and his will for us when people read the bible to them. It's still because of the bible that they know him.

People knew God when miracles still happened. In the old testament God spoke directly to people including the writers of the bible. Now miracles have ceased thus there is no contradiction.

Paul did not become saved through scripture. Jesus APPEARED to Him on the Road to Damascas IN PERSON. If Paul can be saved by Jesus DIRECTLY (After Jesus had died and ressurected) then ANYONE can be saved by Jesus directly.

Fallacy. God made a set of rules and put them in place. It's in the new testament. You must hear (John 6:45), believe (James 2:24), repent (Acts 2:38), confess (Romans 10:9), and be baptized (Mark 16:16) to obtain salvation now. If God came and spoke directly then fine. But he doesn't as miracles have ceased. I cor 13:8

The thief on Jesus right did not come to Jesus through scripture. He WITNESSED a man dying on a cross beside him, and yet this man was FORGIVING his murderers... WHILE they were murdering him. He had NEVER seen anything like that, nor had the soldiers who AFTER piercing him and mocking him and casting lots for Jesus' clothes, He STILL forgave them, AS HE WAS DYING... and those guards pronounced "Surely this was the Son of God!" - It was the TESTIMONY OF LOVE that changed their opinions and their hearts, and NOT written words on a page.

He was under the old law and Christ saved him in person. He no longer does that.

LOVE and not WORDS, is what changes hearts Paul.

Hearing, Believing, Faith etc etc changes hearts.

It is a SHAME that you profess to know Christ, and profess to be His follower and DO NOT UNDERSTAND that. The words on a page, are merely a TEACHING, an EXPRESSION, a COMMUNICATION of that Love.

It is a shame that you discredit God's inspired word and undermine his work.

IT IS THE LOVE that saves and makes us a part of God's family.

NOT WORDS.

It is his word that teaches us.

To believe text has magical properties, is to believe in witchcraft.

Where did I say his word has magical powers? yeah I didn't. I said it contains his will for us. It is the only authority

You become of the arbiter of what is true or not.

WE ARE.

We are NOT the arbiter of WHAT truth is, of course not. Truth is truth. But WE ARE the arbiter of what truth is TO US Chris.

How do you know the Bible is inspired of God in the first place? Because it says so, right? Now, if you want to use the Bible as a final judge on what truth is, then you must stop there.

So, let's stop there for a moment...

The Bible says it is inspired of God, and so this must be true.

Why? Because it says so?

If anything says something of itself, must it be true?

If I say that I am King of the universe. Does that make it so?

YOU ACCEPT THE BIBLE'S MESSAGE OF INSPIRATION.... BY FAITH.

If you talk to me about any other proof's other than the Bible's own text, then I am going to put right back in your face, what you put in mine. Namely, that YOU TOO are looking for truths, or proof of truths OUTSIDE of the text itself.

And of course, you ARE doing this, whether you realize it or not.

Paul does this too. Paul speaks of the inner-workings of the human ear as a proof that God created. The bible says NOTHING about the inner workings of the human ear. Paul knows how amazing the inner workings of the human ear are, through SCIENCE, not through the Bible. But this OUTSIDE information CONFIRMS to him, that there is a design, and therfore a designer, and that this designer is God.

The Bible could be a work of fiction for all that you, Paul or anyone else knows, were it not for OUTSIDE CONFIRMATIONS.

How do you know that the Bible was not a complete work of fiction?

How could you possibly know that the Bible is not a really intersting story and about fictional people?

You cannot KNOW this is not the case, without one of two things...

1) God telling you directly.

2) Confirmation through OTHER sources.

Option #1 Paul says is impossible, cause God does not speak to His own children.
Option #2 You claim is uneccessary.

You are both wrong.

.

That note he lefty is the ONLY reason you know about him.

Absolutely untrue. For you to suggest this, says more things than you could possibly realize...


1) Illiterate people cannot know God.
2) Primitive peoples in jungles cannot know God.
3) No one knew about God until there was written text. But somehow God INSPIRED others directly, in order for them to write these things down in the first place. So, this is contradictory.

Crazy talk Craig. It does not imply those things at all. Illiterate and primitive people find out about God and his will for us when people read the bible to them. It's still because of the bible that they know him.

What about deaf people? Who's reading to them?

What about primitive people's in the jungles who have not even been discovered yet, and who have NO CONTACT with civilization as of yet. Not many years ago, a tribe was found like this. This has occurred from time to time.

You actually believe that God is going to sentence these people to BURNING in hellish fires (which don't actually burn them up... just gibe them the pain of burning for eternity)

God is going to sentence all those people to that kind of fate, merely because no one has read to them?

What if it then took months and years for their language to be learned, skillfully enough to print the Bible in their language? How many more thousands go to Hell, because of THAT little technicality?

What kind of God do you worship?

Wow!

.

He was under the old law and Christ saved him in person. He no longer does that.

So, you think the thief on Jesus right side was the LAST person to be saved by Jesus directly?

Paul came along AFTER Jesus' death, crucifixion and ressurection.

How is it then, that the thief was the last person that Jesus saved directly? And if Jesus is no longer saving people directly, then how are people saved?

By reading?

And WHY are you sure Jesus cannot and will not save people directly? Who put that limitation on Him? You?

Show me ANY verse, which says that Jesus cannot save someone RIGHT NOW in the same way that the thief on Jesus' right, and Paul of Tarsus were saved!

.

Now miracles have ceased

Show me ANY verse in the Bible that states that God no longer peforms miracles!

.

wow...this is still current!?! Funny how several people, since I left, have had several different interpretations of the same verse...this means this and that means that...everyone has a different interpretation, but no one takes any of it literally. Probably good, but either way its all a bunch of fiction. The true path to god has NEVER been written, only through direct contact with him can we understand.

Craig, you are not he whom you claimed to be, or you would have stopped those terrible floods sent to your home state.

wow...this is still current!?! Funny how several people, since I left, have had several different interpretations of the same verse...this means this and that means that...everyone has a different interpretation, but no one takes any of it literally. Probably good, but either way its all a bunch of fiction. The true path to god has NEVER been written, only through direct contact with him can we understand.

Mike!!!!

Welcome back!

Craig, you are not he whom you claimed to be, or you would have stopped those terrible floods sent to your home state.

Florida?

Not having any floods in Florida brother.

When I left Georgia though, and moved to Florida, it flooded in Georgia AFTER I left.

I've been living in Florida for a few months now.

.