The Logical VS The Faithful

quote:

---

at instinctually or "intellectually" deciding what is enough or too much of any necessities or desires.

---

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."

i have asked a few and got only faithful, i need some logical one's.

it says in verse 3, let there be light. then he separated the two.

Genesis 1:01 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

1:02 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

1:03 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

1:04 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

1:05 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

but then it says-

Genesis 1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for
signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:

1:15 And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to
give light upon the earth: and it was so.

1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the
day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he also made the stars.

1:17 And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

1:18 And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.

1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

so what was separated on that first day?
light, in space, without stars? what would/could be a scientifically viable source of such a light?

any thoughts?

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."

quote:

---

1:03 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

---

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."
[  Edited by cturtle at   ]

did you read that link over a/p i sent your inbox?

i saw something that scripture says about light

Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path. [Psalm 119.105]

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. [John 1.1-4]

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."
[  Edited by iSOUGHT|THOUGHT at   ]

Light & enlightenment are used to precieve knowledge but is it knowledge or wisdom that we seek? Does the shining of the light filling the darkened sight, making clear that which is obscure . . . does it go beyond noting the existence to understanding, wisdom to use?

"Terrorist or tyrant, few may come to the Truth that both are poor choice."

i would think.

something else over light refrences in the bible/
http://www.biblewheel.com/GR/GR_FOL.asp

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."

Does not the light obscure the darkness? Is there not always something unseen but ever presenst? Is this darkness bad because we associate darkness with evil and sinister notions, because it can obscure all the things we think we know? Or is it simply the balancing necessity needed to know and see all, even though we fight it and deny it?

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

something interesting about light and darkness-
Amos 5:18-23

"as i see it the only "variable" in the equation is THOUGHT. you are capable of changing this and this alone."

Just a question, if its so easy to be reasonably skeptical about seemingly everything, even the existance of reality, then how is it so easy for so many to here about a book of some pretty crazy shit and go, hmmm, not only does this sound reasonable and make perfect sense, but I also think this is the key to the meaning of life.

And if it is what it seems to be, a gathering or "near" like minded ideals, with similar strong base ideas, then why is there still such resistance to questioning at least some aspects of these beliefs, ideas, and claims?

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

Read this;

Not only are these points brought out by Christian authors in the New Testament, but they are manifested in Old Testament prophecy as well:

1.

"‘Behold, days are coming,’ declares the Lord, ‘when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah; not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them,’ declares the Lord" (Jeremiah 31:31,32).

Jeremiah makes two points here: a) The people would not keep the Law - they broke the covenant which God made with them through Moses; b) God was going to make a new covenant with them which would be different from the one given on Mt. Sinai. It would also be a superior covenant. "I will put My law within them, and on their heart I will write it’’ (Jeremiah 31:33).
2.

"And He [Messiah the Prince] will make a firm covenant with many for one week but in the middle of the week He will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering" (Daniel 9:27).

Daniel points out that in the middle of a week (a week of years is seven years - a Jewish week could be seven days or seven years - and the middle of a week is three and one-half years), the Messiah would put a stop to Old Testament service, with its grain offerings and sacrifices. If the Messiah were the perfect sacrifice Himself - offered as a guilt offering for the transgressions of all men, His death would certainly put a stop to the other offerings and sacrifices - there would be no more need for them. And it is interesting that the Messiah was cut off after ministering three and one-half years on earth, exactly in accordance with Daniel’s prophecy.
3. "The Lord has sworn and will not change His mind, ‘Thou art a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek’"(Psalm 110:4).

Priests of the Mosaic covenant were of the order of Aaron (descended from Moses’ brother Aaron) and were of the tribe of Levi. The new priest would be of the order of Melchizedek (Genesis 14:17-24), and He would be a priest forever! Just as the Old Testament pointed to the cessation of sacrifices and offerings, so it also pointed to a change in the priesthood, a priesthood of One who would be a priest forever!

Here’s the point: from its very foundation the Israelite religion was designed to be set aside and replaced by a new religion with superior law, superior service and worship, and a superior priesthood. Ask yourself a question: What man, if he were to design a religion, would design it to self-destruct (especially the priesthood)? Ask yourself another question: What man, if he did design a religion to self-destruct,COULD GUARANTEE the destruction of that religion, and the formation of the superior religion out of it 1400 years later?

Of course, in history, we find that the real core of the Israelite religion is gone. There is no temple, no priesthood, no sacrifices. In 70 AD, all these were swept aside, as Jesus predicted, by the hands of the Romans. All that is left is the written record of the teaching ordinances which no Jew today can follow.

All this points to the existence of a transcendent Designer carrying out His plan through the ages, and revealing it to man through His written word.

"Life is full of lemons, and the lemonade is sweet."

Long time no see Pat

There is plenty of proof that the bible has been revised, there is also no good reason to believe any writers of the bible, none that I'm aware of, at least not without serious need of further investigation (which poses a problem), and there is definitely no reason to think that anyone ever involved in the making of any version of the bible was unbiased in doing so.

Thus is the problem of the bible, without complete bias, "belief", it is no more than a fable.

You play with dates and predictions, well there are plenty of predictions out there, many argued to have come true, but we all know that even a broken clock is right twice a day.

There is nothing but speculation to almost every aspect of the bible, apparently there are some historical accounts that have been corroborated by other writings, but that's about it, any and all phenomena accounted for is still lacking viable evidence.

Let me just clarify a little, confirming a time when something happened is one thing, and isn't the problem that most people have with the bible anyway, its the events themselves and the light they are shown in, let alone the accuracy and more importantly the actual IMPLICATIONS of such events, as so easily percieved differently even to this day.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

Ok, then consider this;

Archeology cannot prove that the Bible is the word of God. But it certainly could provide evidence that either supports the contention that it is, or it can provide evidence that it is not. The fact is that archeology provides evidence that does to point to the authorship of the Bible as being Divine. There are thousands of examples that could be used to illustrate how the Bible is corroborated by archeology, but we wish to select just two as representative, the cities of Jericho and Nineveh.



Jericho

The story of Joshua and the battle of Jericho is recorded in Joshua 6 in the Old Testament. Following the 40 years of wandering in the wilderness, the people of Israel crossed the Jordan River under the leadership of Joshua, who replaced Moses as the earthly captain of God’s people. Israel prepared to conquer the walled city of Jericho by marching around the city walls once a day for six days. On the seventh day, they marched around the city seven times, and at the blast of a trumpet, the people shouted. According to the Bible account, the walls of the city fell down flat; and the fighting men of Israel, who had the city surrounded, went straight to the center of the city, killing everyone (with the exception of a woman named Rahab, and her family). Then they burned the city with fire.

Here is a strange story. To the so called thinking man of the 2Oth century, such stories belong to the realm of mythology. But what is the evidence from archeology?

"Dr. John Garstang, director of the British School of Archeology in Jerusalem and of the Department of Antiquities of the Palestine Government, excavated the ruins of Jericho, 1929-1936. He found pottery and scarab evidence that the city had been destroyed about 1400 BC, coinciding with Joshua’s date; and in a number of details, dug up evidence confirming the Biblical account in a most remarkable way."

"‘The wall fell down flat.’ Dr. Garstang found that the wall did actually ‘fall down flat.’ The wall was double, the two walls being 15 ft apart; the outer wall, 6 ft thick; the inner wall, 12 ft thick; both being about 30 ft high. They were built, not very substantially, on faulty uneven foundations, of brick 4 inches thick and 1 to 2 ft long, laid in mud mortar. The two walls were linked together by houses built across the top, as Rahab’s ‘house on the wall.’ Dr. Garstang found that the outer wall fell outwards and down the hillside, dragging the inner wall and houses with it, the streak of bricks gradually getting thinner down the slope. The foundation walls of the palace, 4 courses of stone high, remain, in situ, tilted downward. Dr. Garstang thinks there are indications that the wall was shaken down by an earthquake (of which traces may be seen), a method which God could have used as easily as any other.

"‘They burnt the city with fire.’ ... Signs of the conflagration and destruction were very marked. Garstang found great layers of charcoal and ashes and the wall ruins reddened by fire. The outer wall suffered most. Houses alongside the wall were burned to the ground. The stratum generally was covered with a deep layer of black burnt debris, under which there were pockets of white ash, overlaid with a layer of fallen reddish brick" (Halley’s Bible Handbook, Zondervan Press; comments on Joshua 6).

This is solid archeological evidence which verifies the Biblical account. The record, written in the earth 3400 years ago, tells the same story, as nearly as it is possible to determine, as is recorded in the Bible.



Nineveh

We come now to the second of our cities, Nineveh. Nineveh is famous chiefly as being the city to which Jonah was sent after being swallowed and then vomited up by the great fish. Nineveh is described in the Bible as "an exceedingly great city, a three days walk" (Jonah 3:3), and containing "more than 120,000 persons who do not know the difference between their right and left hands" (Jonah 4:11). A city with 120,000 babies or very small children is a large city even by today’s standards.

"So completely had all traces of the glory of the Assyrian Empire [of which Nineveh was the capital] disappeared that many scholars had come to think that the references to it in the Bible and other ancient histories were mythical; and that in reality such a city and such an Empire never existed."

"In 1820 an Englishman, Claude James Rich, spent 4 months sketching the mounds across the Tigris from Mosul, which he suspected were the ruins of Nineveh. In 1845 Layard definitely identified the site; and he and his successors uncovered the ruins of the magnificent palaces of the Assyrian kings, whose names have now become household words, and hundreds of thousands of inscriptions in which we read the history of Assyria as the Assyrians themselves wrote it, and which to a remarkable degree confirm the Bible" (Halley’s Bible Handbook, Zondervan Press, comments on Nahum).

The scoffers and doubters of the early 1800’s were using the lack of secular evidence about Nineveh to try to convince many that the Bible was in error, and that it therefore could not be the word of God. And, as has happened time after time, after further examination, the Bible has been shown to be completely accurate.

Even the story of Jonah is somewhat verified by archeological finds in Nineveh. According to the Bible, Jonah had preached, "Yet forty days, and Nineveh will be overthrown" (Jonah 3:4). As a result of his preaching, the whole city changed its attitude and behavior, and in consequence God did not destroy the city. If this really happened - if Jonah really had such an impact on such a large city - we would expect to find some evidence of that man’s existence. Because of the Bible’s accuracy in such matters, we are not surprised when we read, "The second largest mound in Nineveh is called ‘Yunas.’ ‘Yunas’ is the native word for ‘Jonah.’ The mound covers 40 acres and is 100 ft. high. It contains the reputed tomb of Jonah. This was one of the indications to Rich that these were the ruins of Nineveh, and led to their identification" (Halley’s Bible Handbook, Zondervan Press, comments on Jonah).

Another major find in the ruins of Nineveh was the library of Assurbanipal. "Perhaps the most epochal discovery ever made." Uncovered by Layard, Rassam, and Rawlison, 1852-1854, in the palace of Sennacherib. Originally contained 100,000 volumes. About a third of it has been recovered and is in the British Museum. Assurbanipal was something of an archeologist; had his scribes search and copy the libraries of ancient Babylon, of an age 2000 years before his day. Thus to him we are indebted for preserving knowledge of primitive Babylonian literature"(Halley’s Bible Handbook, Zondervan Press, comments on Nahum). This library is the source of thousands of details which may be used to verify the Bible account of history for more than 2000 years of ages past.



Summary

We have for our section entitled Archeology selected just two cities, Jericho and Nineveh. In both of these we have seen how archeology confirms the Bible record. And this is typical of a long list - Memphis, Babylon, Sidon, and Megiddo, just to name a few of the cities which the Bible accurately describes. The Bible’s accuracy makes it a continuing guide to major archeological finds in the Middle East. If the Bible were merely a collection of legends handed down through the years, there would be numerous errors in it. The absence of such errors warrants the conclusion that the Bible is more than such a collection.

Hello Leftwood.

"Life is full of lemons, and the lemonade is sweet."

Ya, I read that, it does no such thing as to corroborate a divine source of any of these events. There is certainly some wild speculation, but we still have people, just as scholarly swearing that aliens are the source of all this.

As these arguments exist so do logical counter-arguments, the point being that we don't know anything for sure yet, and to say otherwise is either pure speculation, denial of reality, or "belief", regardless of validity.

I cannot as a realist of any sense say that these events are in no way possible, I even feel it highly likely that events fitting some biblical descriptions took place, just not the way they tend to say it. Because I can say that the likelyhood, given the bibles record of being tampered and molded, of the accuracy of the accounts are going to be highly biast and imbelished.

If this was a history book its contents would be highly criticized, so lets not try to call it one, if it weren't a self serving tool of propaganda, even for possibly good base causes, it still promotes discrimination and disdain for our fellow man. It is books like these that when trying make literal translations of metaphors wars are fought in the name of god.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"

Alas the points have gone past you.

See, the significance of the Bible, is the Prophetic proof

Ex; God says, THIS is what will happen to this land and this ppl at this time.

Of course the time passes, and the exact time mentioned say...O 500 years later, all come to unfold in exactly the way they are supposed to.

Now do you understand how the BIBLE prooves itself? And even more so, the archeologists are prooving the events unfolded as spoken in detail, in the bible....

Otherwise, your desire to disbelieve befuddles you, and confounds you. You have no idea just HOW free enlightenment will make you. .

From the TOP...once more...The Bible is about the prophecies to the fulfilment of when Christ was to arrive, and the steps it took and the heirs it took to make the process occur.

Jesus came and died. He opened the gates that closed from our first parenting.

Geneisis...3; 15
"I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed; he shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for his heal."

Did Ya know this very verse is about Mary the Mother of God, and Jesus Himself...?
Who's seeds...?
Her seed, Jesus, and those who do evil, demons, and nasty and vile creatures who delight in evil...and revel in sin are satan''s seeds.
And his will lie in wait for his heel.
IN other words, attack by way of sneakiness.

Who knows scripture? Satan does....Who is the father of all lies, and confusions..? Satan is...

Christ attacks evil straight forward...crushing his head.

Now, again, seeing that Genesis was the first forecast to Christ....
and thru the entire bible are forecasts to Him...

What exactly do you think the bible is about?

The occurences that led up to Christ show how very difficult men are, and how chasetisements are a natural way for God to 'tear down, and rebuild'.

But when Christ came, He stood in the way of evil for us. He took our yolk upon Himself.
Because man is so repugnantly full of vile sins and secret hatred within their darkened hearts...we would surely all burn with a desire of God since He is pure, but we will NOT have Him.... because sin and impurity cannot be among Him Who is..

And that m'dear, (Aside from the laws we must know & keep to do as God desires) is the whole purpose of the Bible.

"Life is full of lemons, and the lemonade is sweet."

What you say has not passed me, I don't have all of your information, and I definitely don't have your perceptions of this information. If all your proof was so self evident, then there wouldn't been such room for questioning to begin with.

You have obviously spent much time confirming the bible within your own mind, please don't forget that not everyone knows every inch of the bible. Which I'm willing to bet money not even you do, even if only in referrence to perceptions of given texts, because no matter who has believed and claimed anything in the bible, a countering perspective has ensued.

The prophecy aspect seems so certain to you, just as might the prophecies of Nostradamus to a "believer", just as evolution been blindly believed at times by individuals.

Do any of these people have the full story on anything, no. God might, but god doesn't jump into the conversation to clarify as he is perfectly capable of doing. As he has supposedly done before, though seemingly clearing up nothing.

So what prophecies still lie in wait of fulfillment? What are their dates, wasn't Christ supposed to come back or something? I've heard it over and over again of the 2nd coming, but no one knows when. Do prophetic dates only make sense after the events take place? That doesn't say much for the prophecy. And how often have I heard "mistaken" declarations of a prophecy taking place? Every day if you are in the right place.

And on your previous prophecies, I saw how you "worked" out a "possibility" playing with jewish weaks as years and what not, this isn't very sound from what I've heard thus far.

It sounds about the same as someone taking the jaw of an arangutan and placing on a human skull and calling it an ancestor.

So what other proven prophicies have taken place, or even that one more clarified. How much room is left for interpretation, especially in respect to terms and language, metaphors, things of this nature?

With all of this playing with scientific information in an attempt to prove the bible, and don't forget the implication of attempting to prove something rather than finding something, I find it almost humerous the degree of speculation and flat out assumption that the god searching scientist will grab onto to support an already derived conclusion, that god made everything.

The thing is, even if some evolutionists were trying to discount the bible's explanation to humans and life, this argument is irrelevant.

The reason I say this is because what a true scientist is looking for is an answer, not just to prove a theory. You see, there should be no clash between science and religion, if religious claims are true, in terms of physical facts. Ideologies are irrelevant in the search for physical truth, and thats a whole other aspect of the bible, one with just as much for debate unfortunately.

"I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed; he shall crush your head, and you shall lie in wait for his heal."

Did Ya know this very verse is about Mary the Mother of God, and Jesus Himself...?
Who's seeds...?

Nope, and it would take a team of people or one good imagination to figure it out, especially out of context as with a cut and paste.

Did you not hear about the revisings of the bible, the editing, the tons of other scriptures not chosen to be included, where do you get the word of god out of that?

As things stand now, I know of no proven prophecies of the bible, but I have heard a lot of claims both ways. And given the fact that revisions have taken place, before during and or after a time of religious "cleansing" of the works of man. This leaves great room and NEED for unbiast questioning of the bible.

What it also even gives rise to, is the possibility of playing with dates on prophecies supposed to have taken place before any revisions.

"The Greatest Enemy of Knowledge is Not Ignorance, It is the ILLUSION of Knowledge. Stephen Hawking"
[  Edited by Ironwood at   ]