godsbutterfly
Free to Fly
In the Natural History Museum?
I believe so. The only other one I went to was Air & Space and I don't think it was there! It was right there near the Mummy and the Rome Civilization displays.
In the Natural History Museum?
Have you researched Islam?
No have you researched Islam? your the one espousing a Pascal's Wager
Since you only believe in hedging your bets you should be the one researching other beliefs.... Just in case
#286 (permalink)
Nucklesack
Registered User
Member Since: Sep 2006
Location: Southern Maryland
Posts: 3,429 I did ask some very direct questions, that were ignored, maybe you can answer them :
Quote:
Are Bats really birds? (Leviticus 11:13)
Rabbits chew a Cud? (Deuteronomy 14:7-8)
Is the Mustard seed the smallest seed? (Mathew 13:32)
Does the Mustard seed grow into a tree? (Mathew 13:32)
Does the Earth Move ? (Hebrews 1:10)
Baydoll (and others) sidestep this, because to answer them would mean they had to admit Jesus was wrong, by claiming either :
The Bible was written for those at the Time
Which then leads to the question, was the bible written for you me and everyone throughout time, or was it written for a 2000 year-old audience that was confined to a geographical area the size of Vermont? Does it matter that I can not understand or believe the bible, as long as a first century Palestinian could?
And what about the problem with a reverse analysis of the situation? How many first century palestinians believed in the gospels? And how many people believe in it today?
If the bible made more sense to people in first century palestine than it makes to people today, then why didn't virtually all first century palestinians believe in it? They had all the tools to understand it. It should have made perfect sense to them.
They had no reason to doubt it, compared to the reasons we have today. So what gives?(Still nothing with this, and its been asked 3 times in this thread)
It was an error in the translation
Which should make you logically ask, "how can you emphatically trust the accuracy of a document when you KNOW it is replete with errors" or "what makes allows you to trust the trustworthiness of a book when even you can admit there are mistranslations in it. Should make you wonder about the infallabity of a document you KNOW is rife with errors". (we really dont expect anyone to touch this one)
/Bump
Am I on ignore?
Are Bats really birds? (Leviticus 11:13)
Rabbits chew a Cud? (Deuteronomy 14:7-8)
…”The Hebrew word which has been translated "hare" is 'arnebeth'. Strong's comments, "...probably an extinct animal because no known hare chews its cud, exact meaning is unknown..." Rather than providing a transliteration of the Hebrew, and admitting that we do not know for certain what this creature is/was, translators have rendered it "hare" or "rabbit."
Having said this, even if we accept the translation of "hare", there is not a problem. Interestingly, Moses was not the only ancient writer to include a "hare" as being common with those that chew the cud. Aristotle did the same. “
Is the Mustard seed the smallest seed? (Mathew 13:32)
The mustard seed is not the smallest of all seeds. Jesus was speaking proverbially. That is, he wasn't making a statement of absolute fact but using a proverbial style of communication.
There are different kinds of mustard trees in Israel and the mustard seed was the smallest of all the seeds known there and used by those in Israel. Also, notice that Jesus says that when it is full grown it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree so that the birds nest in it. There were many gardens in Israel with many types of plants, many of which were larger than the mustard plant. The olive tree for example, can grow to 20 feet or more. The mustard tree known as Salvadora persica has extremely small seeds and grows into a small bush. Brassica nigra is a mustard plant that grows to about 8 to 10 feet when mature and is probably the one Jesus was using for his illustration. Jesus would have known that it wasn't the largest of garden plants because of the prevalence of larger plants. Therefore, he was not making a botanical statement of fact. Instead, he was drawing attention to the comparison of the "smallest" to the "largest" and using it to illustrate how the Kingdom of heaven will expand in the world from a very small beginning to a huge presence.
Also, Jesus used the mustard seed elsewhere in a proverbial sense.
"And He *said to them, “Because of the littleness of your faith; for truly I say to you, if you have faith as a mustard seed, you shall say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it shall move; and nothing shall be impossible to you," (Matt. 17:20; see also Luke 17:5).
So, we see that Jesus used the mustard seed in illustrations in the style of proverbs to illustrate a point and that he was not speaking in a scientifically accurate sense."
Does the Mustard seed grow into a tree? (Mathew 13:32)
Does the Earth Move ? (Hebrews 1:10)
In the beginning, Lord, You established the earth, and the heavens are the works of Your hands; they will perish, but You remain. They will all wear out like clothing; You will roll them up like a cloak, and they will be changed like a robe. But You are the same, and Your years will never end.
Which then leads to the question, was the bible written for you me and everyone throughout time, or was it written for a 2000 year-old audience that was confined to a geographical area the size of Vermont? Does it matter that I can not understand or believe the bible, as long as a first century Palestinian could?
And what about the problem with a reverse analysis of the situation? How many first century palestinians believed in the gospels?
And how many people believe in it today?
If the bible made more sense to people in first century palestine than it makes to people today, then why didn't virtually all first century palestinians believe in it? They had all the tools to understand it. It should have made perfect sense to them.
Which should make you logically ask, "how can you emphatically trust the accuracy of a document when you KNOW it is replete with errors" or "what makes allows you to trust the trustworthiness of a book when even you can admit there are mistranslations in it. Should make you wonder about the infallabity of a document you KNOW is rife with errors". (we really dont expect anyone to touch this one)
i can scientifically demonstrate it with repeatable and reproducable results, so i would say yes.
Originally Posted by baydoll
And they are?
this is a good one
it's been covered in countless threads on this board alone however and is extremely easy to research by yourself.
http://www.genetics.org/cgi/reprint/169/2/523.pdf
How do you explain all the millions of people throughout history on up to now who DO understands the Bible?
Are you showing me the 'effects' of gravity or actual gravity?
Also, if really want evidence as to a lack of a god, look around. You’ll notice (realisticly) that he isn’t here.
… For God's wrath is revealed from heaven against all godlessness and unrighteousness of people who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth, since what can be known about God is evident among them, because God has shown it to them. From the creation of the world His invisible attributes, that is, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what He has made. As a result, people are without excuse.
Romans 1:18-32
No, gravity is a force, what you see is the effect of the force.um
they are the same. Gravity is the name given to the effect.
And they will. That’s the beauty of it.
what? i mean please explain.
Jews DO NOT BELIEVE JESUS WAS GODS SON
If they did they would be Christians.
well, seeing how everyone understands it differently, I'd explain that it's silly to base your life off of something no one truly understands.
Babydoll:
Have you ever been to the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History? They have a ring on display that is inscribed as belonging to Joab and they have authenticated it dates back to Biblical days! I thought that was awesome!