Adam & Eve

[sandwiches]

Actually, the bible does support a different state in the past and future very well. Which is why you can provide us with no case against it. Wave all you like.

Can you provide ANY verifiable evidence of your claim? No.
Can we make any verifiable predictions from your claim? No.
Does your claim have any verifiable effects? No.

How is this any different from the claim that unicorns exist, except for the fact that you believe one and not the other? Again, all this is indistinguishable from your imagination, regardless of whatever equivocation or semantics game you might want to play.

 

[dad]

Can you provide ANY verifiable evidence of your claim? No.
Can we make any verifiable predictions from your claim? No.
Does your claim have any verifiable effects? No.

How is this any different from the claim that unicorns exist, except for the fact that you believe one and not the other? Again, all this is indistinguishable from your imagination, regardless of whatever equivocation or semantics game you might want to play.

How is a same state future you can't prove different? It isn't. My claim that you clipped was that the bible indicates a very different past. I can verify that.

 

[dad]

Except the Bible gets the "different" state all wrong -- It's The Iliad that gets it right, but Bible-worshippers such as yourself have been enshrining the wrong records for thousands of years. Wave all you like, David.

Ok, Henry. Show us how the bible got the different past and future wrong. Show your stuff. Did they name a chocolate bar after you?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Ok, Henry. Show us how the bible got the different past and future wrong. Show your stuff. Did they name a chocolate bar after you?

It's really quite simple -- the Bible can't be right because it disagrees with The Iliad. Prove me wrong, David.

 

[franklin]

For the Christian evolutionist:

Ok so if we are not to take Adam and Eve literally, then that means we can discredit all their descendants.

Which means Adam/Eve through Noah were all mythical, then Noah to lets say Jesus were all mythical? If this is true, then wouldn't that be like saying the entire Bible is nothing more than a 66 Book fable?

I can only respond with a resounding YES !

So who exactly would of been the first human (i.e. evolved monkey) to have a conversation with God?

If there was a conversation at all it would only have been one sided.

It's refreshing to see there are more people catching on like you are. Keep the good work and critical thinking.

 

[dad]

It's really quite simple -- the Bible can't be right because it disagrees with The Iliad. ....

Your standards are low. No wonder you swallow a mythical past.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Your standards are low. No wonder you swallow a mythical past.

If I were to believe in a spirit zipping around the cosmos on a sapphire throne, would that raise my standards?

 

[dad]

If I were to believe in a spirit zipping around the cosmos on a sapphire throne, would that raise my standards?

That depends on what you base it onn. If it were a work of fiction, no. If it was the observed and recorded wheels of God, you would at least be correct on something.

 

[sandwiches]

That depends on what you base it onn. If it were a work of fiction, no. If it was the observed and recorded wheels of God, you would at least be correct on something.

How would you go about verifying if his belief is based on fiction?

 

[dad]

How would you go about verifying if his belief is based on fiction?

I wouldn't bother. The Iliad is well known for what it is, and the bible for what it is, and cllaims to be. What I would verify is claims of science. That is why a same state past and future require flushing.

 

[sandwiches]

I wouldn't bother. The Iliad is well known for what it is, and the bible for what it is, and cllaims to be. What I would verify is claims of science. That is why a same state past and future require flushing.

So, you don't verify things to make sure they're fiction or fact?

 

[dad]

So, you don't verify things to make sure they're fiction or fact?

All depends what it is. And if there is a need to. With science claims I do want evidence. With fairy tales, I don't care. With the bible, evidence surrounds it, and those that have believed it over the years. I no longer seek proof of it.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I wouldn't bother.

Because you can't do it.

The Iliad is well known for what it is,

Apparantly not by you.

and the bible for what it is, and cllaims to be.

Again, you don't seem to know all that well -- otherwise, you'd have known the difference between what the BIble is and what it claims to be.

Pretending there's no difference doesn't hide the fact that you can't prove there isn't one.

What I would verify is claims of science. That is why a same state past and future require flushing.

Becasue you can't do it? Given your limited grasp of history, literature, and mythology, must all knowledge be dragged down to your level, or only science?

 

[Nathan Poe]

All depends what it is. And if there is a need to.

You mean it depends on what you want it to be.

With science claims I do want evidence. With fairy tales, I don't care. With the bible, evidence surrounds it, and those that have believed it over the years. I no longer seek proof of it.

What evidence? You don't know, because you never wanted to look.

 

[sandwiches]

All depends what it is. And if there is a need to. With science claims I do want evidence. With fairy tales, I don't care. With the bible, evidence surrounds it, and those that have believed it over the years. I no longer seek proof of it.

Now, I ask again then, how did YOU find out the Illiad was fiction?

 

[dad]

Now, I ask again then, how did YOU find out the Illiad was fiction?

I don't know much about the book. Saw the movie. I don't care much about it.

If something is fact, and supported, we would have the records, and observations, etc. The bible is supported, we had witnesses all over the place, and confirmations, supporting evidences (such as that there really was a certain town, and king, etc).

For the premise of so called science we have nothing at all. Just belief. Just assumption. Better concentrate on proving it, rather than tossing out canards.

 

[Nathan Poe]

I don't know much about the book. Saw the movie. I don't care much about it.

I felt the same way about The Passion of the Christ. Guess that makes the Bible fiction as well.

If something is fact, and supported, we would have the records, and observations, etc.

And since you don't know much about The Iliad, you know nothing about the records, and observations, etc., so you're hardly in a position to claim that it's fiction, now do you?

The bible is supported, we had witnesses all over the place, and confirmations,

Actually, the only witnesses and confirmations we really have exist in the Bible itself -- everything outside the Bible flatly contradicts it.

supporting evidences (such as that there really was a certain town, and king, etc).

There really is a place called Kansas, it's prone to tornadoes, and a girl named Dorothy Gale once lived there. You think The Wizard of Oz is real?

For the premise of so called science we have nothing at all. Just belief. Just assumption. Better concentrate on proving it, rather than tossing out canards.

You think The Wizard of Oz is real --What do you have besides canards?

 

[dad]

I felt the same way about The Passion of the Christ. Guess that makes the Bible fiction as well.



And since you don't know much about The Iliad, you know nothing about the records, and observations, etc., so you're hardly in a position to claim that it's fiction, now do you?


Actually, the only witnesses and confirmations we really have exist in the Bible itself -- everything outside the Bible flatly contradicts it.



There really is a place called Kansas, it's prone to tornadoes, and a girl named Dorothy Gale once lived there. You think The Wizard of Oz is real?



You think The Wizard of Oz is real --What do you have besides canards?

Actually, most Christians that experienced God's works and spirit were right here, not in the bible. In fact Jesus was not in the bible. He lived in a town. The fiction or fables you offer as equal to God, and the bible don't warrant a reply.

Learn the difference. I do think the wizard of oz is real, yes. A real movie. Perspective, and balance and reality can be good things.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Actually, most Christians that experienced God's works and spirit were right here, not in the bible.

Fair enough -- the Bible is the last place one should look for those sort of facts.

Too bad you can't prove that what those people experienced was not the works and spirit of Zeus, you're going to get desperate now.

In fact Jesus was not in the bible. He lived in a town. The fiction or fables you offer as equal to God, and the bible don't warrant a reply.

Why must you reply with such canards? Just be honest and admit that you can't disprove The Iliad.

You've already set the bar so low as to accept The Wizard of Oz as fact; why must you pretend that your standards are high?

Learn the difference. I do think the wizard of oz is real, yes.

Nothing further needs be said.

A real movie.

Based on a book which, according to the standards you set, is as real and historical as the Bible.

Perspective, and balance and reality can be good things.

I suggest you practice them some time in the near future.

 

[iremouth]

If something is fact, and supported, we would have the records, and observations, etc. The bible is supported, we had witnesses all over the place, and confirmations, supporting evidences (such as that there really was a certain town, and king, etc).

Charles Dickens and William Shakespeare wrote fiction but their books are full of people who existed and places that still exist, does that mean their books are true? the bible mentions a few places that existed but there is no proof whatsoever that the people mentioned in the bible ever existed, (apart from the odd king, etc) just because you were told they existed or believe that they did means absolutely nothing, there are no records that a man named Robin Hood ever existed but we all like to think that he did, but as it stands just like the people in the bible Robin Hood is just another fictitious character, without corroborating evidence they are just figments of peoples imaginations, it's very sad but it's also very true.