Do you believe in God ?

[villadude]

"There you go, that'll teach you to disobey me."

"Oh yeah? Watch this. Come here son."

[TrentVilla]

Julie I have a question if I may in relation to several topics raised in this debate, namely creationism, Adam & Eve, Science and the burden of proof.

My understanding is that the bible claims that God made mankind first and foremost before all other beings but this can actually be scientifically proven to be untrue. There is an abundance of fossil evidence that proves the existance of dinosaurs millions of years before mankind walked the earth.

Yet the bible and every other religious text make not one single reference to their existance, not one, not even a hint. This in my opinion is evidence that the bible is the work of man rather than God as their is no knowledge of dinosaurs existance and thus the teachings circumspect since the most basic fact, the time line itself is proven false.

In addition the existance of dinosaurs also proves the theory of evolution as there is clear fossil evidence of their evolution over the course of millions of years. I'm yet to hear any sort of religious explaination for the existance of dinosaurs and their evolution.

Also while on the subject of timescales you make claims earlier in this thread about the bibles accuracy in relation to the stars yet in Genesis it clearly gets the order wrong.

I'm not poking fun Julie, I'm honestly interested in your response on the above post.

[Pelle]

Adam and Eve had many children not just Cain and Abel.....the Bible attests to this.

Where did they all get their wives from...well they married their sisters or their neices.

Thought it may have been the case that they had more kids. But it's still incest which ever way it's viewed.

Tbf, AFAIK, the bible doesn't say anything about other people not being created after them. I know, the ancestors of all people but we all know such inbread would be impossible as they would most likely be sterile sooner rather than later.

Seriously, I'm on the same side as most of you on this, but IMO some of you are a bit rude and to ridicule someones opinions and beliefs by laughing at them don't do anyone any credits. Argue and all that, but I think you're a bit harsh here. Julie's a good person and a good contributer to this site and should be treated by more respect, I think. At least she tries to put out some good arguments. As said, argue but don't ridicule. Maybe I'm calling a kettle black, I don't know, but still.

[JulieB]

My understanding is that the bible claims that God made mankind first and foremost before all other beings but this can actually be scientifically proven to be untrue.

No that's not what the Bible claims...not sure where that comes from Trent because Genesis in Chapter 1 clearly states that Man actually came after everything else had been created. Each Creative" Day" did not have to be a 24hour period at all. eg. My Mum could say "in our day"...it's not necessarily a 24hour day, but a period of time which could be many millenia. The Bible simply seperates the different periods of Creation into 7 distinct time periods.The Hebrew word for "Day" literally means a period of time. Indeed to compare if you look at (Genesis 2:4) the whole creative time period is there described as one day . . .This is a history of the heavens and the earth in the time of their being created, in the day that Jehovah God made earth and heaven.

here is an abundance of fossil evidence that proves the existance of dinosaurs millions of years before mankind walked the earth.

Yet the bible and every other religious text make not one single reference to their existance, not one, not even a hint. This in my opinion is evidence that the bible is the work of man rather than God as their is no knowledge of dinosaurs existance and thus the teachings circumspect since the most basic fact, the time line itself is proven false.

Actually Trent the Bible may well make mention of these giants... ...

the Bible account in the first chapter of Genesis simply states the general order of creation. It allows for possibly thousands of millions of years for the formation of the earth and many millenniums in six creative eras, or “days,” to prepare the earth for human habitation.

Some dinosaurs (and pterosaurs) may indeed have been created in the fifth era listed in Genesis, when the Bible says that God made “flying creatures” and “great sea monsters.” Perhaps other types of dinosaurs were created in the sixth epoch. The vast array of dinosaurs with their huge appetites would have been appropriate considering the abundant vegetation that evidently existed in their time.

[JulieB]

On the subject of brother's marrying their sisters.. The Ptolemaic Pharaohs were actually Greek, when the vast Empire of Alexander the Great was split between his four Generals. As on his death their was no heir.

General Ptolemy was given Egypt. This line of Pharaoh's were thereby Greek and entirely separate from the subjects they ruled. They all had to marry their sisters.

[TrentVilla]

I find this so frustrating. The bible basically is so vague and so contradictionary that basically those who believe in it can basically always find some section to support any arguement. While its so vague its easy to just "ah but if doesn't mean this, it could mean this...."

[heystally!]

Adam and Eve had many children not just Cain and Abel.....the Bible attests to this.

Where did they all get their wives from...well they married their sisters or their neices.

Thought it may have been the case that they had more kids. But it's still incest which ever way it's viewed.

Tbf, AFAIK, the bible doesn't say anything about other people not being created after them. I know, the ancestors of all people but we all know such inbread would be impossible as they would most likely be sterile sooner rather than later.

Seriously, I'm on the same side as most of you on this, but IMO some of you are a bit rude and to ridicule someones opinions and beliefs by laughing at them don't do anyone any credits. Argue and all that, but I think you're a bit harsh here. Julie's a good person and a good contributer to this site and should be treated by more respect, I think. At least she tries to put out some good arguments. As said, argue but don't ridicule. Maybe I'm calling a kettle black, I don't know, but still.

I didn't feel like I was being rude to anyone. I was making a serious point about the line of human existence.

The other comment was my attempt at humour. I didn't feel it was ridiculing anyone's belief, just an off-the-cuff remark. I'm exceedingly tolerent of what people want to believe, it's up to them if they want to believe in it.

[JulieB]

I find this so frustrating. The bible basically is so vague and so contradictionary that basically those who believe in it can basically always find some section to support any arguement. While its so vague its easy to just "ah but if doesn't mean this, it could mean this...."

Trent you specifically said that the Bible does not make mention of any Dinosaurs...I was pointing out that it may well do.... (Genesis 1:20-21) . . .And God went on to say: “Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls and let flying creatures fly over the earth upon the face of the expanse of the heavens.” 21 And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind. . . .

You also attested that the first creation of God's was Mankind...the Bible doesn't agree with this statement.

With regard to the Stars of the Heavens being in the wrong order i'm not sure I get your point..could you explain a bit more please.

[kurtsimonw]

I find this so frustrating. The bible basically is so vague and so contradictionary that basically those who believe in it can basically always find some section to support any arguement. While its so vague its easy to just "ah but if doesn't mean this, it could mean this...."

I know what you mean.

But even so. Science and evolution is based on facts, something religion is not.

I'm not big in religion so I don't know an awful lot past the basics. God did apparently create everything? As in the whole universe.. what is there in the bible that talks about other planets, life outside of earth? Generally everything I see/hear about the bible is based here and it would seem somewhat unusually if God as to create a whole universe, but do naff all on anything except earth?

[snowychap]

They all had to marry their sisters.

What has that to do with the interbreeding of the offspring of Adam and Eve? :?

[heystally!]

They all had to marry their sisters.

What has that to do with the interbreeding of the offspring of Adam and Eve? :?

I think it was a point about how it happened in that situation so it is not far-fetched that it happened with Adam and Eve's children.

[JulieB]

What has that to do with the interbreeding of the offspring of Adam and Eve? Confused

It was common practice in Ancient times for men to marry their sisters or neices. Some fellow VTs were ridiculing the fact that

Adam & Eve's offspring would have had to have married their siblings or their descendents for the human race to continue.

I was merely pointing out that Ptolemaic Pharaoh's ALWAYS married their sisters and had offspring succesfully to continue

the "royal" line.

[heystally!]

What has that to do with the interbreeding of the offspring of Adam and Eve? Confused

It was common practice in Ancient times for men to marry their sisters or neices. Some fellow VTs were ridiculing the fact that

Adam & Eve's offspring would have had to have married their siblings or their descendents for the human race to continue.

I was merely pointing out that Ptolemaic Pharaoh's ALWAYS married their sisters and had offspring succesfully to continue

the "royal" line.

Personally, despite the fact it was common practice, that doesn't really make it right. But I guess i'm speaking from a position of not having to do so.

[LondonLax]

I find this so frustrating. The bible basically is so vague and so contradictionary that basically those who believe in it can basically always find some section to support any arguement. While its so vague its easy to just "ah but if doesn't mean this, it could mean this...."

Well that is the secret of the success of horoscopes and the fame of Nostrodamus types.

Just keep every thing quite vague and general, don't put in any hard dates or facts. The believers will be convinced and the sceptics will have a difficult time pinning down the inaccuracies.

[kidlewis]

Just got back in and there's a few more questions to be responded to...

Firstly...Sorry guys my mistake...Moses didn't write about the Earth being a Circle it was Isaiah written in about 732BCE...in Jerusalem that Scripture is found in Isaiah Chapter 40 V 22.

Moses in Job did write about the earth hanging upon nothing, which is precisely correct as I said before...

Adam and Eve had many children not just Cain and Abel.....the Bible attests to this.

Where did they all get their wives from...well they married their sisters or their neices.

Listen guys...I ain't gonna carry on researching points and trying to give answers that just get scoffed at and ridiculed. I'm not going to be bullied sorry.

I have to admit you have done very well considering the barrage of hard line stances people have taken. I think people rather than debate it openly, the allow their personal views to get the better of them.

I do have to admit though, the dinosaur point someone made earlier is a very good one. Hence why so many christian groups in america fail to recognize evolution and darwinism, because that point alone puts sections of the bible into question.

Also the bible has caused key differences between people previously together in their faith in the past? That has without down to someone's interpretation of what they believe to be God's will.

The clear one is some people believe Jesus was the son of God and others saw him as a prophet. The very fact that they argued over this point means that Jesus' position in the world was not clear. If it was, then why the division in the first place? why could God want his son to divide his people?

[JulieB]

I do have to admit though, the dinosaur point someone made earlier is a very good one. Hence why so many christian groups in america fail to recognize evolution and darwinism, because that point alone puts sections of the bible into question.

I did respond to that point about Dinosaurs a couple of pages back......excuse quoting myself ...

The Bible may well make mention of these giants... ...

(Genesis 1:20-21) . . .And God went on to say: “Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls and let flying creatures fly over the earth upon the face of the expanse of the heavens.” 21 And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind. . . .

the Bible account in the first chapter of Genesis simply states the general order of creation. It allows for possibly thousands of millions of years for the formation of the earth and many millenniums in six creative eras, or “days,” to prepare the earth for human habitation.

Some dinosaurs (and pterosaurs) may indeed have been created in the fifth era listed in Genesis, when the Bible says that God made “flying creatures” and “great sea monsters.” Perhaps other types of dinosaurs were created in the sixth epoch. The vast array of dinosaurs with their huge appetites would have been appropriate considering the abundant vegetation that evidently existed in their time.

Also the bible has caused key differences between people previously together in their faith in the past? That has without down to someone's interpretation of what they believe to be God's will.

The clear one is some people believe Jesus was the son of God and others saw him as a prophet. The very fact that they argued over this point means that Jesus' position in the world was not clear. If it was, then why the division in the first place? why could God want his son to divide his people?

Jesus himself said there would be divisions and false teachings amongst his followers within preceding generations, I think it's up to everyone to examine the evidence and decide for themselves. Religion has caused huge divisions and indeed been used as an excuse for wars and disputes. However how can Christianity ever be used as an excuse to fight. Jesus said specifically that we should be peaceable and love our enemies...and if we lived by the sword we would die by the sword.

[kidlewis]

I do have to admit though, the dinosaur point someone made earlier is a very good one. Hence why so many christian groups in america fail to recognize evolution and darwinism, because that point alone puts sections of the bible into question.

I did respond to that point about Dinosaurs a couple of pages back......excuse quoting myself ...

The Bible may well make mention of these giants... ...

(Genesis 1:20-21) . . .And God went on to say: “Let the waters swarm forth a swarm of living souls and let flying creatures fly over the earth upon the face of the expanse of the heavens.” 21 And God proceeded to create the great sea monsters and every living soul that moves about, which the waters swarmed forth according to their kinds, and every winged flying creature according to its kind. . . .

the Bible account in the first chapter of Genesis simply states the general order of creation. It allows for possibly thousands of millions of years for the formation of the earth and many millenniums in six creative eras, or “days,” to prepare the earth for human habitation.

Some dinosaurs (and pterosaurs) may indeed have been created in the fifth era listed in Genesis, when the Bible says that God made “flying creatures” and “great sea monsters.” Perhaps other types of dinosaurs were created in the sixth epoch. The vast array of dinosaurs with their huge appetites would have been appropriate considering the abundant vegetation that evidently existed in their time.

Also the bible has caused key differences between people previously together in their faith in the past? That has without down to someone's interpretation of what they believe to be God's will.

The clear one is some people believe Jesus was the son of God and others saw him as a prophet. The very fact that they argued over this point means that Jesus' position in the world was not clear. If it was, then why the division in the first place? why could God want his son to divide his people?

Jesus himself said there would be divisions and false teachings amongst his followers within preceding generations, I think it's up to everyone to examine the evidence and decide for themselves. Religion has caused huge divisions and indeed been used as an excuse for wars and disputes. However how can Christianity ever be used as an excuse to fight. Jesus said specifically that we should be peaceable and love our enemies...and if we lived by the sword we would die by the sword.

Now I am note religious at all, but I can perfectly except the morals in your last paragraph. It's not often you will get an atheist/agnostic agreeing with you. Whilst I don't believe in God, I do believe that last paragraph could have happened and probably did to be honest.

[JulieB]

Well that is the secret of the success of horoscopes and the fame of Nostrodamus types.

Which incidentally entirely find their origins from Babylonian and Egyptian astronomy and astrology.Whose cultures and beliefs were entirely in contradiction to the Bible, as I've tried to show.

I also wanted to repond to someone attesting that Belshazzar must have been a head of a Babylonian tribe or something...

The point I was making was that the Bible clearly identified the King of Babylon the night the Medes and the Persians dried up the waters of the river Euphrates and overthrew the City and the then mighty Kingdom of Babylon. History until the 19th Century recorded the last King of Babylon as Nabonidus. Critics pounced as further

evidence that the Bible account written by Daniel was flawed. Daniel 5 verse 2 clearly states that King was celebrating with his court on the very night Babylon was attacked....Bel·shaz′zar, under the influence of the wine,said to bring in the vessels of gold and of silver that Neb·u·chad·nez′zar his (grand) father had taken away from the temple that was in Jerusalem, that from them the king and his grandees,his concubines and his secondary wives might drink...

In 1924 publication was made of the decipherment of an ancient cuneiform text described as the “Verse Account of Nabonidus,” and through it valuable information was brought to light clearly corroborating Belshazzar’s kingly position at Babylon and explaining the manner of his becoming coregent with Nabonidus. Concerning Nabonidus’ conquest of Tema in his third year of rule, a portion of the text says: “He entrusted the ‘Camp’ to his oldest (son), the firstborn [belshazzar], the troops everywhere in the country he ordered under his (command). He let (everything) go, entrusted the kingship to him and, himself, he [Nabonidus] started out for a long journey, the (military) forces of Akkad marching with him; he turned towards Tema (deep) in the west.” (Ancient Near Eastern Texts, edited by J. Pritchard, 1974, p. 313)

There are many other instances whereby the Bible has proved historical before other evidence was un-earthed eg Ninevah. Risso's point was...so what if the Biblle is historical...however my viewpoint is that ...if the Bible is correct historically in the parts that can be proved...then how can other parts simply be dismissed as tosh?

[bickster]

if the Bible is correct historically in the parts that can be proved...then how can other parts simply be dismissed as tosh?

There are plenty of works of fiction based on real events

[TheDon]

I'm not interested in the Vatican or it's beleifs...only my own... Studies of the Human DNA bring scientist's to conclude that their

would have been an or an original male and female human.

I believe you're refering to the Mitochrondrial Eve, and the Y-chromosomal Adam. These are not an "original male and female", but simple the earliest male and female that we are all related to, as in we all have a common line of descendancy from those two subjects, and no other members of our species of that generation has living descendants.

Also, the whole idea of an original couple is absurd. You just have to look at the concept of population bottlenecks to see why it won't work. Genetic drift has some ability to cope with small population sizes, but a starting population of just 2 is pretty much impossible at the complexity levels of humans.

The story of Adam and Eve is either an analogy, or untrue. It is in no way the truth to how we came around, anyone that thinks it is needs to spend an hour or two reading into genetics.