LinkBack URL
About LinkBackshow was it confirmed exactly? apart from it says in the bible that is.Originally Posted by Factorem
how was it confirmed exactly? apart from it says in the bible that is.
the catholic church wasn't around either 2000 years ago. the catholic church also taught that the earth was flat for 1500 or so years.
Confirmed how? Because they said so? Or they have evidence which you are either unwilling or unable to cite? I think you will go a lot further in this life son if you get rid of this notion that things are true because people SAY they are true.
Best of luck to you too, and if you do find any such evidence, something that is not "It is true because X said so" then come back to me as I am truly AGOG to hear it. I really am.
Until then, you have literally offered no reason to think the bible is anything other than a rather well written (in parts) work of Fiction with attempts at Ethical messages. As you said there is no reason to think the Old Testament should be taken literally. I merely invite you to realise the same is true of the New, until you can provide evidence of any sort to back it up.
I look forward to your next attempt, and I also look forward to an increase in your honestly, with a reduction of your breaking copyright laws, putting words in peoples mouth, and passing other peoples works off as your own in an exercise in blatant plagiarism.
You are a lone atheist (well, you might have the intellectual lightweights of Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens to look up to...). I on the other hand, am a humble Christian with the Church of 2000 years to look up to: philosophers, theologians, scientists, historians, archaeologists, etc.
As I said already: you know better than the Church and her conclusions. Best of luck.
Yes, and science showed that it wasn't. Should the Church insist that the earth is still flat, contrary to scientific evidence? The Church isn't as immovable as one might think, is it?
Galileo is held in high esteem within the Church (the Vatican Observatory is named after him), despite the fact that the information that he provided shook right to the heart of the Church at the time. One has to remember that religion, law, science, art, history, philosophy, government were all tied up as one under the Church at the time and for some scientist to come along and declare that the earth was spherical was quite revolutionary.
In isn't polite to stick one's fingers in one's ears and go "la la la la la" in polite company, you know?
Maybe you should look up "argument ad populum fallacy" it applied perfectly to what you just said. It also does not change one iota the fact that you are not presenting any evidence. You are merely saying "I am right because these people say so". Not helpful.
"no reason to think the bible is anything other than a rather well written (in parts) work of Fiction with attempts at Ethical messages"
That's the most succinct and apt description of the bible I've come across to date. I'll be borrowing that one.
Do you claim the Koran was just "made up"?
when was the excommunication of galileo reversed do you know? only recently I believe.
So if science shows that a virgin can't get pregnant would you accept that the church is wrong. or if science shows that no-one rises from the dead and physically ascends skyward how about that? you can't use science when it suits you and reject what doesn't.
And giving galileo credit for being right with hindsight after destroying him for his scientific discovery doesn't deserve much kudos imo. it is merely an organisation that was proven to be completely wrong about the universe admitting it.
I agree that everything was once viewed through the prism of religion because people genuinely knew no better (often as a result of the churches oppression of those who did know) but why now keep up the pursuit of a tradition that hasn't changed in its core claims since the middle ages at least if not further in antiquity.
Reply With Quote