Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Is The Scripture True Or Not?

Then why is every other post yours? Why are you even wasting your precious time? You could be out solving real problems and showing other poor pilgrims the secular path to follow.

Of course science is revised. That's what the whole scientific methodology is all about. It says that when the facts don't fit the theory it's time to look at another theory. Religion basically say "Here is the Truth". Period. If the facts don't fit the "Truth", the facts are wrong.

I am talking about the rigid for of belief that excludes scientific knowledge that doesn't follow scripture.

Do you for example believe in the literal account of creation? Is the earth 6,000 years old. Does Pi equal three? Is the sky solid? etc?

How about responding to a former request to provide us your set of evidence criteria for evaluating the character of ancient documents as to whether or not they are credible? What is basis from which you have drawn your conclusions that the scriptures are not authentic or inspired?

The Bible is literally true. The evidence is Israel. After seventy generations of being dispersed in the world, they went back into their own land speaking their own language. That is a sociological phenomena unheard of in the history of man. I am surprised that all of you big shot scientists don't already know that.

First: "Religion" is your take on it; not mine... I don't believe in "religion" any more than you do! Religion is man's philosophy of life, of God and the hereafter! Revelation is another matter entirely! Some of use believe that the Bible is progressive revelation from God, NOT man. And we have evidence to support that! But, you don't seem to want evidence that upsets your own "theories" about the Bible that doesn't accord with the proven reality of documented evidence that the Bible contains truth that could only be known and revealed by an Infinite God! As one poster said: prophecy about Israel and the prophetic history of great nations before they existed! Read Daniel... it predicted the demise of the Babylonian empire, the Persian, the Greek and the Roman! It even spells out in detail the political interaction between Greece and Egypt! And, of course, liberal "scholars" assumed it had to be written after those facts of history, because it is so precise! The Dead Sea Scrolls reveal otherwise!

But, I suspect, you don't want evidence as that would upset your version of reality! "Don't confuse me with the facts as my mind is all made up" seems appropriate to your posting!

"Facts", you say... whose? I've shown above that these so-called facts are often fallacies... admittedly so by the science community when "new facts" are "discovered". The old "facts" are now referred to by yourself as bygone "theories" when the "new facts" appear. Will they also have been "theories" when new, contradictory evidence comes to light?

A few years ago, hens eggs were bad for us... too much cholesterol! Now, they are good for us, because that "bad cholesterol" is now good cholesterol! Fact or theory?

Your last four questions are insulting and contemptible. Anyone who can read or add knows that the present...present...physical laws automatically exclude the last 2 ridiculous questions from the "true" column. You just solidify your colors by including questions of creation and the age of the earth in with them. You don't believe in a higher power - all this beauty, all of this orderliness, is just a big cosmic coincidence. I don't proselytize, it's not for me. I do allow myself a smug grin when I run across a know-it-all secular humanist like you though.

Those are two different questions, if I understand you correctly. When you say inspired, do you mean inspired by other works, or inspired by God. If the latter, is is not possible to prove the matter one way or the other.

When you say 'credible' do you mean the documents themselves or the content?

Finally, are you requesting a set of criteria I would use to determine that scriptures was physically, scientifically and literally accurate.

Actually, you have no idea what I believe. You only think you know. It is an nearly universal characteristic of a certain class of believers taht they immediately jump to judgement of their fellow man. Particularly if it appears that others don;t share theur particular subset of beliefs.

You can certainly infer that I don't believe in the idea literal scripture as perfect and unerring. It is perfectly possible to accept that the Bible is an inspired work, and that it deals with maters spiritual, and thus it is not required to be literally accurate. When Christ delivered the parables, was he speaking literally? Or was he trying to pass on universal spiritual truths.

I think it's rather unfortunate that some believers get so caught up in trying to show this or that passage is literally true that they miss the underlying point. In that way, they are very like the Pharisees and Sagisees who were caught up in the 'letter of the law' rather than the spirit.

On the contrary, I welcome such evidence. I am willing to be convinced. But such predictions almost invariably rely heavily on 'interpretation' and are generic enough that it could be good guessing. The Oracle at Delphi was considered very accurate. Just have some basic awareness of the world and keep prediction vague. Nostradamus is also supposed to have accurately predicted historical events. It just requires the right interpretation.

"In the City of God there will be a great thunder, Two brothers torn apart by Chaos, while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb",
The third big war will begin when the big city is burning"
- Nostradamus 1654

Clearly he predicted 9/11 New York, the twin towers, the Pentagon he rest hasn't played out - yet.

This sort of prophesizing works, because you ignore it whenever it's wrong, arguing things like "we just didn't interpret it correctly", and when certain thing seems to fit, the you can make certain assumption to make all the pieces fall into place.

Here's a question that I always wondered about? Were the 10 commandments Summerian or Egyptian in origin? They certainly were not of Christian origin.

They were originated by the God of Abraham, Jacob and Issac.

Christ condensed them, and all the law and admonitions of the prophets into: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and your neighbor as yourself.

As far as I know, this is where Judaism seems to set itself apart. In the past, Gods were seen as either just being there, or were imposing their will on the people through their power. The Jews were the first to negotiate a deal with their God: we worship you as the one true God and follow your commandments; you protect us in return.

This is a revolutionary thought. It implies that God and Man are able and willing to bargain as equals to some extent and that each has something the other needs and that negotiation on that basis is possible.

I say that it goes even beyond just the negotiation aspect. There is a tenderness to the transaction. It's like when a child first negotiates raking the leaves with his father. The father is letting the child learn how to earn a quarter, and how to work. The father wants the child to get the best end of the deal.

You generally don't see this in the other religions of this time. The stories are filled with one side cheating the other, tricks being played, etc. The message in the other stories make Man to be either a trickster or a victim and the God or Gods to be capricious and either jealous or disrespectful.

Abraham negotiates the destruction of Sodom with God. He "bargains" God down from saving the city for fifty righteous men to a mere 10. Of course, God knew there were not 10 righteous in Sodom and destroyed it anyway.

Interesting views fellas.
Book of the Dead: " I have done away sin for thee and not acted fraudulently or deceitfully. I have not belittled God. I have not inflicted pain or caused another to weep. I have not purloined (held back) the offerings to the gods. I have not stolen. I have not uttered lies or curses.

Exodus 20:7-16: Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain... Thou shalt not kill. Thou salt not commit adultery... Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.

One major difference between the two documents is that statues of the Gods were a major part of the ancient Egyptian religion. The religion of the Hebrews forbade images or statues of Yahweh. Another difference was the Decalogue's emphasis on the Sabbath. The day of rest.
The book of the Dead was written circa 1800 BC. The Hebrew exodus from Egypt and the provision of the 10 commandments (Moses)on Mount Sinai in 1491 BC.
But other reference that I have researched speak of the Summerian culture and their influence on the Egyptians-some hundreds of years earlier.
We seem to have aligned our religion with the Ancient Egyptians since our Churches and places of worship are filled with statues.

Your's may be. Mine are not. Exodus 20:4.

I've been in some places of worship that only have the Roman torture device behind the alter(for sacrificing on)without the dead body on it also.

You have no idea what I believe other than I don�t believe you lend any credence to the notion of a higher power. As far as being in a certain class of believers, or sharing a subset of beliefs � you�re guessing. Your arrogance and sanctimony are stunning.


I wasn�t here when Christ delivered the parables. One small part of what I believe is we don�t have the capacity to understand God. He has passed along messages and wisdom that we can understand, but anyone who professes to have the answers is guessing, and as such dilutes and harms the message.


-sigh-
More judgment of your fellow man? Or will you cloak it in terms of �observations� and drawing inferences from those �observations?� It really doesn�t matter. You�ve set it up where everyone fits in a nice little cubby, labeled with their particular flaw, and you�re above it all with the answers if only we would listen.

Mag. If we were created in God's image or resemblance then he must also be confused since we seem to have all that trait.

Its a catchy phrase, but means nothing, there is no evidence thats why its called faith.