Christian and Athiest in the same house!

[conjur]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: conjur
Uh, Egyptian civilization pre-dates the Jews. Never stop to think that the Biblical characters were based upon Egyptian culture? You know, the flood (the Nile), garden of Eden (lush lands around the Nile). Genesis is almost an exact copy of the Osiris myth (Osiris, Ra, Set, Horus, etc.) Serpents? Anointing rituals? Come on.

Actually, yes I have thought of such a thing. I have also considered the fact that the beginning of life according to the Bible, as well as the beginning of the Egyptian civilization, according to science, are both only estimates. I have also considered the fact that I am not concerned with the civilization period of the Jews, which was actually around 700bc after they returned from Babylon. During their existence prior to that time the group was known as tribes of Israel. I am also aware that the tribes of Israel did not come along until until around 2,000 years, if not more, after Adam and Eve.

Well, Adam and Eve are just a story. Please don't tell me you think the world started with just two people. That would ignore MOUNDS and MOUNDS of archaeological evidence not to mention plain common sense.

Uh, what question? I could say something as ridiculous. For example:

Let's suppose a Flying Spaghetti Monster appears before me and endows me with the power of the Pastafarians. I partake of the body of Pasta and drink the blood of Ragu and I suddenly start curing cancer, AIDS, poverty, etc. Would you doubt me?

If such a thing had actually happened, I would not doubt that you had received said power somehow. Problem is, your experience hasn't happened. Mine has. So more importantly, the question is, would you doubt me?[/quote]I don't doubt what you say happened, I doubt your reasoning as to why and how.

As for the main question I asked, I said that given that we know things happen on this Earth that we can't understand, or at least we don't yet, how is it that people can simply say that the Bible is false simply because some of the events contained within it simply can't happen? If things couldn't happen because we can't understand them, how is it that my friend's tumor simply dissappeared after receiving a blessing?

Because you have to understand the mindset of the cultures at the time. You have to know how they worshipped, how they were ruled, what their economies were like, what were the social conditions, what were the traditions and rituals and oral retellings. When all of that is taken into account, the massive amount of symbolism in the Bible just leaps out at you.

You were referring to your ridiculous supposition. As for the Bible, it's a compendium of stories written by different people that lived in different parts of the world at different times and edited nicely together. Never wondered why there were TWO creation stories and TWO flood stories woven together that contradict each other?

Care to enlighten me on what the second creation story is?

As for the possibility of two stories, as you say, contradicting each other, I would ask you this. If two different people are in two different places in the world, each making a record of a similar event, unless said event had the *exact* same effect on them both, I doubt very much that their stories would coincide exactly, or even closely. Matter of fact, they may even tend to contradict each other.

Then, let's consider this. One group of people keeps a record of their history. At some point in time, a smaller group spawns off and goes to another location, but does not have a copy of the history. They therefore attempt to retell the stories as best they can. What do you think the odds are that the retold story and the written story will coincide with each other exactly? A certain amount of difference is not only understood, but is expected.

It would be much easier to have you read on your own. This is probably the best place to start:
Who Wrote The Bible? - Richard Elliott Friedman. It focuses on the history and construction of the Torah (first five books in the Old Testament)

But, if you want a quicker answer:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_bibl.htm

This whole thread has been off-topic

True, and I'm not too sure we're helping it.

Ah, but it's fun and we're all learning and, hopefully, we can avoid the traditional flame wars that usually erupt in this type of thread.


edit: fixed some typos as my hands are lagging my brain something fierce today (probably from the massive amount of beers from last night )

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: conjur
You're saying the Hebrew culture and stories pre-date Egyptian?

By quite a ways. I'm doing my senior thesis right now, so I don't have unlimited time to type this all up, but I'll hit some highlights from what texts I have available.

Common knowledge that the earliest known large urban societies emerged around Mesopotamia in about 4000BCE. Mesopotamian cultures were very like Egyptian cultures due partially to very similar geographies. However, the less regular flooding and less protected nature of the Tigris Euphrates valleys, as well as the less navigable nature of their waters, led to an overall less optimistic culture there. That extends to religion as well.

So, you're ignoring that organized Egyptian culture began ~5400 BCE or were you just not taught that yet? I'm a bit confused on that.

Also, I do understand that Babylonian/Sumerian culture also affected the early Israelites but the stories in Genesis so closely follow the Egyptian creation myths that it's hard to dispute their influence.

There is also confusion as to how/when/where the Jews were led out of Egypt. The texts actually appear to suggest the first went further south into Egypt before moving back north and into what is now Israel.

Nothing I have studied supports that timeframe. Though scattered people certainly existed in Egypt and Nubia, there's not evidence of them relying heavily on agriculture until around 5000bce, with villages forming around 4000bce. Egyptian unification didn't take place until 3500bce however. This can be supported by looking at the climatic shift in northern Africa which drove the Sudanese out ahead of the expanding Sahara. It was these people that introduced many staples to the Egyptian and Nubian people. This climate shift also set in motion the clockwork flooding of the Nile which allowed for the flourishing of agriculture. All of my texts and history classes seem to agree on these points, so I'm not sure what sources you've compiled your information from. Again, I'm not a Doctor of cradle of civilization history, I just provide what I've been able to compile so far.

The stories are just as similar (or more so according to many scholars) to the Mesopotamian myths. This is very reasonable when you consider the Hebrews who left Mesopotamia for Palestine and never went to Egypt. And lets remember that they were merely nomadic Hebrews during this period, not modern Israelites.

Again, I can only go off the texts I have access to, and the classes I've had. Haven't taken a biblical history course yet (though I'd love to) so my dates and such are limited to what I've got.

Not saying you're wrong by any stretch, I'm a student, not an expert. I just provide compilations of the works suggested to me by my professors.

 

[conjur]

Well, I'm sure you're more well-read than I on this. I'm always one to learn more as I know I'm far from expert on most topics (opionated, though, for sure )

I'll have to look more closely at the Babylonian/Sumerian creation myths and see how they compare. Either way, though, the Jews developed a monotheistic viewpoint that arose out of polytheistic cultures. One could even say that the Bible itself is the result of evolution.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: conjur
Well, I'm sure you're more well-read than I on this. I'm always one to learn more as I know I'm far from expert on most topics (opionated, though, for sure )

I'll have to look more closely at the Babylonian/Sumerian creation myths and see how they compare. Either way, though, the Jews developed a monotheistic viewpoint that arose out of polytheistic cultures. One could even say that the Bible itself is the result of evolution.

Nice. That'll raise few hackles.

 

[conjur]

he he :evil:

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: conjur
Well, Adam and Eve are just a story. Please don't tell me you think the world started with just two people. That would ignore MOUNDS and MOUNDS of archaeological evidence not to mention plain common sense.

Actually, their had to be only two at some point in time. I see no reason Adam and Eve could not have been the first.

As for common sense, it tells me that if we did in fact evolve from ape/monkeys/whatever, that that type of evolution should still be occuring today, and I haven't seen it happen. That doesn't mean it didn't, just means I haven't seen it.

I do not discredit science and what it has determined. Being an engineer, I rather rely on science. However, I understand science to be the way we understand things now, not the way they are unequivicably.

I don't doubt what you say happened, I doubt your reasoning as to why and how.

I am unaware of any other possible reasons why or how, but wouldn't mind hearing your therories.

Because you have to understand the mindset of the cultures at the time. You have to know how they worshipped, how they were ruled, what their economies were like, what were the social conditions, what were the traditions and rituals and oral retellings. When all of that is taken into account, the massive amount of symbolism in the Bible just leaps out at you.

Oh I agree. The amount of symbolism in the Bible is incredible. That doesn't necessarily mean that every story told is simply a symbolism rather than an actual even.

It would be much easier to have you read on your own. This is probably the best place to start:
Who Wrote The Bible? - Richard Elliott Friedman. It focuses on the history and construction of the Torah (first five books in the Old Testament)

But, if you want a quicker answer:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_bibl.htm

Yes, I'm very familiar with those sites. I'm familiar with their point-of-view on the Bible and how it came about. However, if I wanted to know the truth about the New York Yankees, I wouldn't ask someone in Boston. So if I wanted to know the truth about the Bible, I wouldn't go to a place or site with a known bias against it. I would start with reading it. Then I would try it to see if what it says is true. Similar to reading a diet book or any other self-help book (which I'm sure some consider the Bible to be). I would start by reading it, try it out, and see if it is really what it claims to be.

Point is, there is very compelling evidence on both side to say the Bible is true, and the Bible isn't true, so I can't find fault in anyone for not believing it. But if they haven't read it, and tried it, and put forth that effort to determine for themselves, I would wonder about their intentions.

Ah, but it's fun and we're all learning and, hopefully, we can avoid the traditional flame wars that usually erupt in this type of thread.

I most certainly agree. It's always nice to understand where other people are coming from, and to understand why they feel the way they do. And it just makes the whole thing much nicer if you can keep the name calling out of it.

 

[Looney]

LOL that was a great line from your kid.

As for your kid being disrespectful... i don't think so. He's a kid, and a kid that's being pressured into doing something he doesn't want to do, and he was fed up. I've done much worst when i was younger... but i was no doubt direspectful.

And as for you and your wife... i have no idea how you two did it, or are doing it, but that's pretty amazing. Reminds me of James Carville and his wife (don't remember her name atm). James Carville is one of the most effective Democractic political operative, helping Bill Clinton win the presidency, as well as helping other liberal politicians around the world (the Canadian PM called on him for help a couple of times). His wife on the other hand is a Republican, and works for the Republican party. Yet somehow, they have a successful marriage.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: conjur
Well, Adam and Eve are just a story. Please don't tell me you think the world started with just two people. That would ignore MOUNDS and MOUNDS of archaeological evidence not to mention plain common sense.

Actually, their had to be only two at some point in time. I see no reason Adam and Eve could not have been the first.

:Q

As for common sense, it tells me that if we did in fact evolve from ape/monkeys/whatever, that that type of evolution should still be occuring today, and I haven't seen it happen. That doesn't mean it didn't, just means I haven't seen it.

I do not discredit science and what it has determined. Being an engineer, I rather rely on science. However, I understand science to be the way we understand things now, not the way they are unequivicably.

Ok, you have to put things in perspective. You've been alive how many years? 20? 30? Humans (in their current form) have existed for over 30,000 years (that's a very conservative estimate). Your life is less than 1% of 1% of human existence in its current form. Genetic mutations that result in marked differences between one race or another appear about once every 10,000 years or so. You're not going to see evolution happen in your lifetime. At least not of the human species.

Two very good books on the genetic tracing of humans that I really recommend that you read:

Seven Daughters of Eve: The Science That Reveals Our Genetic Ancestry - Bryan Sykes (follows female genetic markers - mitochondrial DNA)

The Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey - Spencer Wells (follows male genetic markers - Y-chromosome)

I don't doubt what you say happened, I doubt your reasoning as to why and how.

I am unaware of any other possible reasons why or how, but wouldn't mind hearing your therories.

Misdiagnosis. MRI/Cat Scan/X-Rays might have been misread as a tumor. Certainly something like that would have been written up in a medical journal or at least mentioned on a local news level. There would be a record of it.

Because you have to understand the mindset of the cultures at the time. You have to know how they worshipped, how they were ruled, what their economies were like, what were the social conditions, what were the traditions and rituals and oral retellings. When all of that is taken into account, the massive amount of symbolism in the Bible just leaps out at you.

Oh I agree. The amount of symbolism in the Bible is incredible. That doesn't necessarily mean that every story told is simply a symbolism rather than an actual even.

I never said that every story is symbolism. But, most of the Old Testament (esp. the Torah) is. A good part of the New Testament is, too. Most of the books in the Bible were written many years after events occurred and the biblical writers created stories to fit the history in order to inject such concepts as prophecies/messiahs/etc.

It would be much easier to have you read on your own. This is probably the best place to start:
Who Wrote The Bible? - Richard Elliott Friedman. It focuses on the history and construction of the Torah (first five books in the Old Testament)

But, if you want a quicker answer:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_bibl.htm

Yes, I'm very familiar with those sites. I'm familiar with their point-of-view on the Bible and how it came about. However, if I wanted to know the truth about the New York Yankees, I wouldn't ask someone in Boston. So if I wanted to know the truth about the Bible, I wouldn't go to a place or site with a known bias against it. I would start with reading it. Then I would try it to see if what it says is true. Similar to reading a diet book or any other self-help book (which I'm sure some consider the Bible to be). I would start by reading it, try it out, and see if it is really what it claims to be.

Richard Elliott Friedman is a biblical scholar. He is not a "site":

Richard Elliott Friedman is professor of Hebrew and Comparative Literature and holds the Katzin Chair at the University of California, San Diego. One of the premier biblical scholars in the country, he received his doctorate at Harvard and was a visiting fellow at Oxford and Cambridge. Author of The Hidden Face of God, The Hidden Book in the Bible, Commentary on the Torah, The Exile and Biblical Narrative, and the bestselling Who Wrote the Bible?, Friedman is also the president of the Biblical Colloquium West. A consultant to universities, journals, encyclopedias, and publishers, he is also the editor of four books on biblical studies and has authored over fifty articles, reviews, and notes in scholarly and popular publications.

You are doing yourself an immense disservice to not try and understand how, why, and when the Bible was written. Friedman even writes in the introduction that he is not out to dissuade anyone of their faith. The Bible, taken as a whole, was never meant to be taken literally. It's meant to convey the human condition and man's search for faith and the strive to live a good and righteous life. Friedman merely goes into the history surrounding the times when the books were written to give the reader an understanding of what life was like and how they "backdated" the stories to fit what they knew of history.

Point is, there is very compelling evidence on both side to say the Bible is true, and the Bible isn't true, so I can't find fault in anyone for not believing it. But if they haven't read it, and tried it, and put forth that effort to determine for themselves, I would wonder about their intentions.

No one is trying to disprove certain things but, like any ancient text, it's not meant to be taken literally. Would you expect a neoconservative historian to write a book on this decade in the same way as an historian who was a pacifist? The Bible should be approached with a similar critical eye. And, deconstructing the Bible does not necessarily deconstruct God.

Ah, but it's fun and we're all learning and, hopefully, we can avoid the traditional flame wars that usually erupt in this type of thread.

I most certainly agree. It's always nice to understand where other people are coming from, and to understand why they feel the way they do. And it just makes the whole thing much nicer if you can keep the name calling out of it.

:beer::beer:

 

[CaptKevMan]

Originally posted by: DurocShark
Kev: You sound like a gnostic. Have you read any of the gnostic writings?

I haven't. Yet. Although I am intrigued by what I have heard.

I'll continue to contend that I am a Christian, however. My litmus test for Christianity is living the "WWJD" way. So many Christians sport that slogan, but do not truly apply it to their lives.

I recently saw a pretty good site that addresses this thing quite well:
Jesus Would Be Ashamed of You.

(OK, so it's not a very well put-together site -- but the message is clear.)

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: conjur
Ok, you have to put things in perspective. You've been alive how many years? 20? 30? Humans (in their current form) have existed for over 30,000 years (that's a very conservative estimate). Your life is less than 1% of 1% of human existence in its current form. Genetic mutations that result in marked differences between one race or another appear about once every 10,000 years or so. You're not going to see evolution happen in your lifetime. At least not of the human species.

Trust me, I don't discredit evolution simply because I don't see it in humans. I very much believe that we all evolve. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Darwin simply stated that we all evolve from one state to another based upon experiences and conditions relating to where and how we live. That I definitely agree with. What I don't agree with is the idea that man evolved from an ape. I don't remember Darwin saying anything about that, though again, correct me if I'm wrong as I very well may be. The first aspect of evolution I can see almost everyday. The other I don't. I'm not saying their wrong, but I have a hard time believing it to be the 100% can't be wrong truth.

Misdiagnosis. MRI/Cat Scan/X-Rays might have been misread as a tumor. Certainly something like that would have been written up in a medical journal or at least mentioned on a local news level. There would be a record of it.

No misdiagnosis. She had several scans before and after, and we evaluated by several doctors, all in agreement of the diagnosis. It was in New York City, so the news didn't really care. As for the medical journals, I'll look into it and see if I can find something. I'll have to first find my journal from my mission and remember her name. When you meet several hundred people a week for 2 years, it's hard to remember all their names.

I never said that every story is symbolism. But, most of the Old Testament (esp. the Torah) is. A good part of the New Testament is, too. Most of the books in the Bible were written many years after events occurred and the biblical writers created stories to fit the history in order to inject such concepts as prophecies/messiahs/etc.

Is it possible they were made up? Sure. But I'll tell you what, if they were, these guys were brilliant beyond our understanding because the prophecies they predicted have come true, letter by letter, even those about today. And that's pretty good, whether you consider them to be written by people at the times depicted in the Bible, or by men in the 1500's-1600's.

You are doing yourself an immense disservice to not try and understand how, why, and when the Bible was written. Friedman even writes in the introduction that he is not out to dissuade anyone of their faith. The Bible, taken as a whole, was never meant to be taken literally. It's meant to convey the human condition and man's search for faith and the strive to live a good and righteous life. Friedman merely goes into the history surrounding the times when the books were written to give the reader an understanding of what life was like and how they "backdated" the stories to fit what they knew of history.

Trust me, I've spent a lot of time reading material such as those you've presented, as well as material verifying the Bible. I've spent a great deal of time listening to people try to interpret the Bible, and others contradiction what the previous person had stated. I felt much like a man named Joseph Smith who said, "..but so great were the confusion and strife among the different denominations, that it was impossible for a person young as I was, and so unacquainted with men and things, to come to any certain conclusion who was right and who was wrong." You can also exchange denominations with scientific communities or whatever, cause the feeling was similar.

I don't proclaim to have a great understand of scientific theory, nor do I proclaim to be a leading expert on the Bible. However, I know that contained within the Bible is a promise that if we don't know the answer, we can ask God. And I did, and he answered. So I let men quarrel all they wish on the matter. I read their writings and try to interpret them as best my small mind can. But the one thing I will never turn on is the belief in God, for reason posted previously.

No one is trying to disprove certain things but, like any ancient text, it's not meant to be taken literally. Would you expect a neoconservative historian to write a book on this decade in the same way as an historian who was a pacifist? The Bible should be approached with a similar critical eye. And, deconstructing the Bible does not necessarily deconstruct God.

Oh, I agree. The Bible was interpretted by regular men, not prophets. Therefore, it is subject to misinterpretation and contradiction due to such. And believe me, it's full of them. Are there portions of the Bible to be taken figuratively? Absolutely. However, I think people agree with that too often and end up taking too much of it figuratively and not literally.

:beer::beer:

I don't drink, and there's no milk icon, so how about a cookie

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
Trust me, I don't discredit evolution simply because I don't see it in humans. I very much believe that we all evolve. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Darwin simply stated that we all evolve from one state to another based upon experiences and conditions relating to where and how we live. That I definitely agree with. What I don't agree with is the idea that man evolved from an ape. I don't remember Darwin saying anything about that, though again, correct me if I'm wrong as I very well may be. The first aspect of evolution I can see almost everyday. The other I don't. I'm not saying their wrong, but I have a hard time believing it to be the 100% can't be wrong truth.

I don't believe Darwin or anyone ever said we evolved *from* apes. Apes and humans most likely, though, evolved from a common ancestor that predated both of our species. I really do recommend those two books. They're relatively short and easy to understand and are just amazing in the information they uncovered.

No misdiagnosis. She had several scans before and after, and we evaluated by several doctors, all in agreement of the diagnosis. It was in New York City, so the news didn't really care. As for the medical journals, I'll look into it and see if I can find something. I'll have to first find my journal from my mission and remember her name. When you meet several hundred people a week for 2 years, it's hard to remember all their names.

I guess I'm just a "doubting Thomas" But, yeah, if you come across something about that case, I'd love to see it. Who knows, maybe something about that could help out my nephew (who suffers from a type of tumor)

Is it possible they were made up? Sure. But I'll tell you what, if they were, these guys were brilliant beyond our understanding because the prophecies they predicted have come true, letter by letter, even those about today. And that's pretty good, whether you consider them to be written by people at the times depicted in the Bible, or by men in the 1500's-1600's.

What prophecies? There's NOTHING in the Bible that predicts anything in the future. All of the "prophecies" were back-filled stories to fill in history to arrive at a conclusion of then-present time. For example, predictions that the Temple would be destroyed and rebuilt were written during the time AFTER the Temple had been destroyed and rebuilt. Easy to bat 1.000 when you're using hindsight.

Trust me, I've spent a lot of time reading material such as those you've presented, as well as material verifying the Bible. I've spent a great deal of time listening to people try to interpret the Bible, and others contradiction what the previous person had stated. I felt much like a man named Joseph Smith who said, "..but so great were the confusion and strife among the different denominations, that it was impossible for a person young as I was, and so unacquainted with men and things, to come to any certain conclusion who was right and who was wrong." You can also exchange denominations with scientific communities or whatever, cause the feeling was similar.

I don't proclaim to have a great understand of scientific theory, nor do I proclaim to be a leading expert on the Bible. However, I know that contained within the Bible is a promise that if we don't know the answer, we can ask God. And I did, and he answered. So I let men quarrel all they wish on the matter. I read their writings and try to interpret them as best my small mind can. But the one thing I will never turn on is the belief in God, for reason posted previously.

For that, I salute you!

Oh, I agree. The Bible was interpretted by regular men, not prophets. Therefore, it is subject to misinterpretation and contradiction due to such. And believe me, it's full of them. Are there portions of the Bible to be taken figuratively? Absolutely. However, I think people agree with that too often and end up taking too much of it figuratively and not literally.

Problem is most people don't know what's what. There is no "History of the Bible" course in public schools. To be honest, I wish there were as long as it included how the Bible was influenced by previous and distant cultures.

I don't drink, and there's no milk icon, so how about a cookie

As long as it's chocolate chip which it appears to be.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: conjur
I guess I'm just a "doubting Thomas" But, yeah, if you come across something about that case, I'd love to see it. Who knows, maybe something about that could help out my nephew (who suffers from a type of tumor).

I'm pretty sure it'll be a while before I can find it (Master's semester from hell). But if I can, I promise I will post it.

What prophecies? There's NOTHING in the Bible that predicts anything in the future. All of the "prophecies" were back-filled stories to fill in history to arrive at a conclusion of then-present time. For example, predictions that the Temple would be destroyed and rebuilt were written during the time AFTER the Temple had been destroyed and rebuilt. Easy to bat 1.000 when you're using hindsight.

Actually, there are several prophecies in the Bible relating to today, as well as event later in the future. New Testament if full of them, as well as the Old Testament. So in that sense, even if what you're saying is correct, there's no hindsight there.

Problem is most people don't know what's what. There is no "History of the Bible" course in public schools. To be honest, I wish there were as long as it included how the Bible was influenced by previous and distant cultures.

I'm still debating that actually. Not quite sure yet how I feel about the Bible being taught in public school. As an elective, I don't think I have a problem with it. Not sure about it as a required course though.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: conjur
I guess I'm just a "doubting Thomas" But, yeah, if you come across something about that case, I'd love to see it. Who knows, maybe something about that could help out my nephew (who suffers from a type of tumor).

I'm pretty sure it'll be a while before I can find it (Master's semester from hell). But if I can, I promise I will post it.

Coolio!

What prophecies? There's NOTHING in the Bible that predicts anything in the future. All of the "prophecies" were back-filled stories to fill in history to arrive at a conclusion of then-present time. For example, predictions that the Temple would be destroyed and rebuilt were written during the time AFTER the Temple had been destroyed and rebuilt. Easy to bat 1.000 when you're using hindsight.

Actually, there are several prophecies in the Bible relating to today, as well as event later in the future. New Testament if full of them, as well as the Old Testament. So in that sense, even if what you're saying is correct, there's no hindsight there.

That's just people looking for reasons to think of the Bible as prophetic. Most abuse the Book of Revelation in such a manner. That whole Left Behind series. What a freakin' joke. NOTHING to do with what Revelation is all about.

Problem is most people don't know what's what. There is no "History of the Bible" course in public schools. To be honest, I wish there were as long as it included how the Bible was influenced by previous and distant cultures.

I'm still debating that actually. Not quite sure yet how I feel about the Bible being taught in public school. As an elective, I don't think I have a problem with it. Not sure about it as a required course though.

Well, an elective would be fine. Didn't mean to imply required. I think Civics should be required well before any biblical study course.

BUT, if one were offered, it would be pointless and pandering to the pseudo-Christians to do so without bringing the whole history of creation stories from related and associated cultures into the mix.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: conjur

That's just people looking for reasons to think of the Bible as prophetic. Most abuse the Book of Revelation in such a manner. That whole Left Behind series. What a freakin' joke. NOTHING to do with what Revelation is all about.

Yeah, never saw that, so I'm not sure what to think of it. I think people struggle with a lot of the revelations about future events due to the way in which their written. The book of Isaiah and the Book of Revelations use so much symbolism that it's very easy for people to misinterpret or misunderstand what's trying to be said. Heck, even the Jews misinterpretted some of the prophecies and confused the second coming of Christ with his mortal life.

Not sure I agree with you on people only looking for reasons to think the Bible is prophetic. I've spent a good amount of time studing such prophecies and I've found them to be amazingly accurate, both in the occurance of such events, as well as the timeline.

On a side not, I'm glad we've been able to cut this conversation down to a few quotes. It has been a pain trying to figure out where all the quote markers need to go.