|
|
|
furshur
SFN Regular
USA
1536 Posts |
 Posted - 03/23/2004 : 09:22:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
This "no god" sure did a lot of unexplainable things for Moses. Either that, or Moses had a whole lot of power for a mere man, or Moses was just the luckiest man ever to hit the plantet. Consider his perfect timing in Eqypt when he decided to get his couple million relatives out of slavery. Just at that time, the ten worst plagues ever to hit man occurred, and Moses walked through a normally wet and deep sea a few miles with a couple million other people and the "unlucky" bunch of soldiers persuing them to bring them back as slaves just happened to drown in the same sea along the same path. Then their was that extremely lucky break when he found water for the 2 million folk by hitting a rock. Then that lucky streak of 40 years when the children of Israel found little seeds on the ground they called "manna" to make food up till the day they crossed the Red sea, normally wet, on dry ground. Then there was that really unlucky day when Korah and his friends had an argument with Moses and found themselves burnt alive and fallen into an instant earthquake. Just plain horrible luck for them. And then their was that really unlucky trip he had up on the mountain when he forgot to bring food for forty days and when he got down he had contracted some form of shining disease where his face glowed. He said he'd been with God, but surely nobody really believed it. It had to be some radioactive rock or something.
The main point that you are missing is that there is no evidence for any of the supposed facts that you are stating.
There is no evidence that there were 'millions' of jews in slavery in Egypt.
There is no evidence that the plagues occurred.
There is no evidence that the Red, Reed, or any other sea was parted.
There is no evidence that Moses hit a rock and water burst forth.
There is not evidence that Moses went up on a mountain and saw God.
There is no evidence that Moses existed.
Most biblical scholars believe that there is plenty of evidence that Moses (i.e. one person) did not write the first books of the old testiment.
To say "The bible tells us", is not evidence. The bible is no more evidence than the writtings that say that Mohamad ascended into heaven. Or that the God Amon created the planets, the moon and the sun by throwing the body parts of other Gods that he killed into the heavens.
This is a skeptic web site. Skeptics need proof or corroboration to accept that something is at least possible.
|
If I knew then what I know now then I would know more now than I know. |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2004 : 11:08:34 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Doomar:
This "no god" sure did a lot of unexplainable things for Moses.
I usually avoid debates with those who choose to accept the bible as a literal account of history. For one thing, it is very hard to change the mind of a person who chooses to ignore mountains of evidence that say certain events the bible relates could not have happened as written. Just a couple of weeks ago we got to see a picture of our universe from around seven hundred million years after its birth. To a biblical literalist, that picture just can't be, or the interpretation of it is wrong, or god just made it look that way. But, why would god throw us so many curve balls? There are literally mountains of evidence that suggest what simply can't be according to biblical literalists. It seems to me that the only way this evidence adds up, if we take the literal view of the bible is that god, in his infinite wisdom, has a sense of humor. He is a practical joker of epic scale. Where do the jokes end? The more we learn, the more unlikely the new earth creationist view becomes. At this time, new earth creationism has no more scientific credibility than those who still cling to the notion that we live on a flat earth, also a literalist view, but not always shared by the "other" literalists who are not quite as literal in their view as the flat earthers. Just almost...
Believe what you want to believe. I really don't care. You will not stop our quest for knowledge. If god made us an inquisitive animal (another one of his jokes?), you only have him to blame for our continuing search for how everything works. The last time we didn't really search for answers was called the Dark Ages. That was when the church really was the final arbiter of "truth." I really don't see how going back to those good ol' days will serve us.
Finally, I find it interesting that biblical literalists pretty much accept all the science that is not in conflict with their archaic views. Since the scientific method works the same way in all areas of scientific research, how is it that only the areas of science that are in conflict with what you believe are necessarily wrong? How can you not question what amounts to a hand picked rejection of just those areas of science that make you uncomfortable? While you are busy being secure in your faith and certain of your destiny, others will be searching for answers. My biggest gripe with creationists is that we still have to take time out from that quest to fight off the literalists constant obsession with bringing their religious dogma into our science classrooms... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2004 : 12:07:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doomar
"And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. From this description the earth is covered with water and has no particular form, or no mountains that can be seen above the water.
I think some confusion with the sequence of the rest of the story can be alleviated if you look closley at this verse. After the formless earth was created the reference point of the story changes from above the Earth to the surface of the Earth. The rest of the story should be viewed from this perspective as if you were over the waters.
quote:
Originally posted by Doomar
"And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day." Gen. 1:3-5 God makes the first physical light.
It is possible that the sun was created in verse one when the "heavens" were created and then God allowed the light to penetrate the atmosphere of the Earth and then light could be seen from the surface of the waters on Earth when God says "Let there be light" |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2004 : 22:58:09 [Permalink]
|
There is no evidence that there were 'millions' of jews in slavery in Egypt.
There is no evidence that the plagues occurred.
There is no evidence that the Red, Reed, or any other sea was parted.
There is no evidence that Moses hit a rock and water burst forth.
There is not evidence that Moses went up on a mountain and saw God.
There is no evidence that Moses existed.
Try telling that to the Jews, if you dare. The Jews are a very meticulous people when it comes to geneology. Dates, names, and ages were recorded for everyone. Moses did indeed exist. Just because someone can't hand you his blood stained tunic, doesn't mean there isn't evidence. There is far more evidence for these events, then for the existence of some other men you place trust in. The very Jewish books of Torah are evidence of Moses. Do you actually think an entire race of people can trample through a desert for 40 years and not leave evidence? If you have some proof for your ludicrous claims, present it. If not, don't just repeat someone's gratuitous assertion. I don't need to prove Moses's existance. Most scholars accept the facts. What if I was to say, there is no evidence of your existance, furshur. Just because I see your name on a web post doesn't mean there really is this fellow named furshur. I need some proof. I need some evidence of what this fellow furshur has done in life, if anything. Show me his children, let them testify of their father, or his grandchildren, or his father or mother. If someone else lays claim to anything furshur has done, why should I believe furshur. This can go on and on. A book written by a man is usually enough evidence of his existance. His life story repeated on the pages with things only he could have known helps solidify the proof. Millions of people of his race testifying of his influence and estolling him as a great prophet adds even more legitimacy. The fact that he wrote down in a book for all to read the ten commandments and they are still heralded by biblical scholars as the legitimate commands of God today, says quite a bit about the man. Moses's legacy is perhaps one of the greatest known legacies existing today outside of Jesus Christ. Yet this unknown fellow who calls himself "furshur" asserts that the guy has no proof! Wow. I bet I could find evidence of Moses influence even in your life, furshur. Most of the laws you abide by today were written by men who revered the words of Moses, calling them the Words of God and making many of them the very laws of our society.
Most biblical scholars believe that there is plenty of evidence that Moses (i.e. one person) did not write the first books of the old testiment.
Not true..just the opposite.
This is a skeptic web site. Skeptics need proof or corroboration to accept that something is at least possible.
I am skeptical that skeptics are really skeptical when I observe how many of them dismiss huge blocks of evidence contrary to their beliefs. I tend to think many who claim to be 'skeptics' are simply fooling themselves and not searching honestly for truth.
[/quote] |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
| Edited by - Doomar on 03/23/2004 23:05:55 |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2004 : 23:34:48 [Permalink]
|
But, why would god throw us so many curve balls?
Did you expect the God who made you to be more simple minded than yourself?
There are literally mountains of evidence that suggest what simply can't be according to biblical literalists.
I've never seen one of these mountains. Every mountain of so called evidence that I have climbed, has just crumbled underneath my feet into dust.
It seems to me that the only way this evidence adds up, if we take the literal view of the bible is that god, in his infinite wisdom, has a sense of humor.
Obviously true, Kil.
The more we learn, the more unlikely the new earth creationist view becomes.
The more I learn, the more foolish Darwinism seems to be.
Believe what you want to believe. I really don't care. You will not stop our quest for knowledge.
Kil, I'm not trying to stop anyone's search for knowledge, only trying to point out sometimes that the so called knowledge they have grasped is all jumbled.
If god made us an inquisitive animal (another one of his jokes?), you only have him to blame for our continuing search for how everything works.
If men weren't so doggone proud of how much they know, maybe they could realize just how little they really do know.
The last time we didn't really search for answers was called the Dark Ages. That was when the church really was the final arbiter of "truth." I really don't see how going back to those good ol' days will serve us.
I'm not going back, are you? Are you really going forward when you deny the possibility of things you just can't understand yet or are you really fighting against knowledge?
Finally, I find it interesting that biblical literalists pretty much accept all the science that is not in conflict with their archaic views. Since the scientific method works the same way in all areas of scientific research, how is it that only the areas of science that are in conflict with what you believe are necessarily wrong?
There are definitely those that fit that description, Kil, but it is also true that many evolutionists deny the realities of other basic sciences when they make their huge leaps of logic. Perhaps the full truth has parts from both sides.
My biggest gripe with creationists is that we still have to take time out from that quest to fight off the literalists constant obsession with bringing their religious dogma into our science classrooms...[/quote]
You mean there are some who still assert their faith in a literal creation in the classroom? Hooray for that. ...If you're so confident in your beliefs, why are you so defensive? If your beliefs are true, what do you have to worry about? Are you really afraid that we are going to go back to the dark ages and live by superstition? Why be afraid of religious viewpoints? If the evidence is overwhelming for what is true, the false ideas will eventually fall away, Kil, so don't fret about it. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
| Edited by - Doomar on 03/23/2004 23:49:58 |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 03/23/2004 : 23:43:29 [Permalink]
|
[size=1][quote]Originally posted by Robb
It is possible that the sun was created in verse one when the "heavens" were created and then God allowed the light to penetrate the atmosphere of the Earth and then light could be seen from the surface of the waters on Earth when God says "Let there be light"[/size=1
Rob, Moses plainly states that the Sun, moon, and stars were made on the fourth day. I am pointing this out, because most aren't aware that Moses described something that many scientists believe today...something equivolent to the Big Bang Theory, perhaps. Only, not exactly. Could it be that this huge first light did, in a sense, explode into millions of other suns, moons, and stars, along with our own Sun and moon? That would not be in conflict with many points of view in the science rhelm, only it would boggle their minds to think that Moses was the first to describe it. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 01:02:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doomar
...Moses plainly states that the Sun, moon, and stars were made on the fourth day...Moses described something that many scientists believe today...something equivolent to the Big Bang Theory, perhaps. Only, not exactly...
Yes, not exactly. The "Big Bang" theory does not address the actual creation of time and the cosmos, but rather what happens just after, so you'll have to think of the "fourth day" as a symbolic representation of the time many millions of years after the initial billionth of a second after creation.
However, I don't recall Moses saying anything equivalent in description to an expanding finite-yet-unbounded four-dimensional space-time manifold, without a center, which is a thumbnail description of the "Big Bang." With regard to the "Sun, Moon and Stars," the Sun is a star, so that's like saying “the Star, Moon and Stars.” Our Sun is a recycled dwarf star (Type G2) and it was formed long after many other stars. The moon and Earth formed from our Sun's leftover stellar material (as did we) i.e. the atoms of calcium in your bones were originally created by nova type explosions of previous stars, so in a sense we are all sons and daughters of the stars. In an actual sense, we are also literally the Earth looking at itself. (Reality is often too much for fundamentalists, so they have to relax with myths. That isn't necessarily a bad thing if they realize the myth is a symbolic representation of a true human condition, rather than fact.) (I recommend Joseph Campbell's book “The Hero With a Thousand Faces” as a supplement to your Bible reading.)
The implications of us being the Earth looking at itself, without authoritarian subjugation or self imposed “sins” are much more profound than the rantings, ravings and misaligned and misinterpreted myths of the Bible, a book that, (in the words of Jacob Bronowski,) is "part fact, fiction and folklore."
|
Diversity, independence, innovation and imagination are progressive concepts ultimately alien to the conservative mind.
"TAX AND SPEND" IS GOOD! (TAX: Wealthy corporations who won't go poor even after taxes. SPEND: On public works programs, education, the environment, improvements.) |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 05:38:14 [Permalink]
|
Doomar wrote:quote:
There is far more evidence for these events, then for the existence of some other men you place trust in. The very Jewish books of Torah are evidence of Moses. Do you actually think an entire race of people can trample through a desert for 40 years and not leave evidence? If you have some proof for your ludicrous claims, present it.
The only evidence is in the Torah (and because of that, the OT). Where is the evidence that people wandered the desert for 40 years? The fact that there is no evidence is not something which can be demonstrated with evidence.quote:
Most of the laws you abide by today were written by men who revered the words of Moses, calling them the Words of God and making many of them the very laws of our society.
The idea that "don't murder people" originated with Moses is ludicrous. Do you really think that no previous society had such laws? Of course, if you think the Bible is the literal truth, you must think so. But that's just a symptom of narrow vision.
Besides which, where in U.S. law does it say "not being a Jew is illegal?" Where in U.S. law are we commanded to honor our parents? Where in U.S. law is adultery prohibited? Where in U.S. law is it mandated that we not covet? There are, if my reading is correct, only three commandments with any corresponding U.S. laws: don't murder, don't steal, and don't lie when it matters (but you're free to lie about your neighbors otherwise). 20-something% isn't much support for your ideas.quote:
You mean there are some who still assert their faith in a literal creation in the classroom? Hooray for that. ...If you're so confident in your beliefs, why are you so defensive? If your beliefs are true, what do you have to worry about?
Because faith doesn't belong in a science classroom, it's a tremendous waste of time and public resources there. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 18:17:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doomar
[size=1][quote]Originally posted by Robb
It is possible that the sun was created in verse one when the "heavens" were created and then God allowed the light to penetrate the atmosphere of the Earth and then light could be seen from the surface of the waters on Earth when God says "Let there be light"[/size=1
Rob, Moses plainly states that the Sun, moon, and stars were made on the fourth day. I am pointing this out, because most aren't aware that Moses described something that many scientists believe today...something equivolent to the Big Bang Theory, perhaps. Only, not exactly. Could it be that this huge first light did, in a sense, explode into millions of other suns, moons, and stars, along with our own Sun and moon? That would not be in conflict with many points of view in the science rhelm, only it would boggle their minds to think that Moses was the first to describe it.
Yeah. Cool, but the Big-Bang-According-To-Moses hypothesis still demands a metaphorical interpretation of the Genesis account rather than a literal. There are so many things allready mentioned in the thread that does not compute with a literal reading. Like the source of light before the sun and the stars were created.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 18:33:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doomar
I don't need to prove Moses's existance.
<snip>
What if I was to say, there is no evidence of your existance, furshur. Just because I see your name on a web post doesn't mean there really is this fellow named furshur.
Furshur does not exist.
However, there exist a person who is writing what Furshur says.
Just like there was a person writing a couple of fictional works about a guy named Moses, then naming the works after him.
Stephen Donaldson wrote a series of books named "The Chronicals of Thomas Covenant" (good books by the way). The main character in the story was named... guess what? Thomas.
There were lots of things in the book that is verifiable, yet it is fiction. Just like the biblical books of Moses are fictional.
quote:
This can go on and on.
Yet you are tireless in your insistance that the world including man was created in 6 days. I do admire your resolve to keep being delusional.
quote:
Millions of people of his race testifying of his influence and estolling him as a great prophet adds even more legitimacy.
Millions of people still believes in Santa Claus, but that does not make him more real.
Regarding evidence: if you have tons of evidence that Genesis is true, why don't you present it? We are still only seeing circular reasoning from your side.
(edit: spelling)
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
| Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 03/24/2004 18:35:17 |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 18:51:13 [Permalink]
|
[quote]Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Yeah. Cool, but the Big-Bang-According-To-Moses hypothesis still demands a metaphorical interpretation of the Genesis account rather than a literal. There are so many things allready mentioned in the thread that does not compute with a literal reading. Like the source of light before the sun and the stars were created.
Dr. and all, figurative language has nothing to do with this discussion, only expounding what the actual language describing the creation event meant. The creation began in darkness. The first things made were the vacumn of space (the heavens) and the globe of the earth covered with water. It is not apparent that any other bodies existed anywhere as yet. Because it states that God had to divide the light from the darkness, it is possible that the light as it first shown lighted everything completely and there were no shadows. When light is placed at all angles to a sphere, there is no darkness, so many points of light around a sphere of the earth would not allow any darkness. By making the source of light a single object at a fixed point in the heavens, the shadow of the earth brought darkness to it again. That is why, by implication (not metaphor), I have stated that God must of placed a single fixed light somewhere in the heavens. When Moses describes the Sun and moon and stars being made on the fourth day, after clearly stating that light was made the first day, it is not far fetched to think that the great light source made the first day was used to create all the lesser light sources as we see them in the sky today. It is by logical study of the text (with the help of a theologian friend years ago)that I arrived at this supposition, not by any metaphorical liberties. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 19:12:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chippewa
[quote]Originally posted by Doomar
...Moses plainly states that the Sun, moon, and stars were made on the fourth day...Moses described something that many scientists believe today...something equivolent to the Big Bang Theory, perhaps. Only, not exactly...
Yes, not exactly. The "Big Bang" theory does not address the actual creation of time and the cosmos, but rather what happens just after, so you'll have to think of the "fourth day" as a symbolic representation of the time many millions of years after the initial billionth of a second after creation.
I'm sorry, chip, but we are discussing this topic through literal interpretation, not metaphoric, so this type of big bang did happen on the fourth day of time, that would be the first Wednesday.
However, I don't recall Moses saying anything equivalent in description to an expanding finite-yet-unbounded four-dimensional space-time manifold, without a center, which is a thumbnail description of the "Big Bang." With regard to the "Sun, Moon and Stars," the Sun is a star, so that's like saying “the Star, Moon and Stars.” Our Sun is a recycled dwarf star (Type G2) and it was formed long after many other stars. The moon and Earth formed from our Sun's leftover stellar material (as did we) i.e. the atoms of calcium in your bones were originally created by nova type explosions of previous stars, so in a sense we are all sons and daughters of the stars. In an actual sense, we are also literally the Earth looking at itself. (Reality is often too much for fundamentalists, so they have to relax with myths. That isn't necessarily a bad thing if they realize the myth is a symbolic representation of a true human condition, rather than fact.) (I recommend Joseph Campbell's book “The Hero With a Thousand Faces” as a supplement to your Bible reading.)
It is clear that the Biblical account is different from some scientific interpretations of what some men think happened when things started. In this thread we are not debating that point, only trying to discover what hidden clues can be seen in the written account given by Moses.
We don't know if Moses understood the Sun to be a star, but, by pointing out that it was made on the same day as the stars and the moon, that has some serious implications indeed.
(in the words of Jacob Bronowski,) {The Bible} is "part fact, fiction and folklore."
Jacob who? Who the heck is that? Now Moses was and is a highly regarded man with great learning and tremendous spiritual insight and a man who had power with God as witnessed by millions in many nations. His laws (God's law that he wrote down) are still used today in many societies. When laws are discussed, his words inevitably come up. Millions of people have lived under his teachings for hundreds of years. So when you quote some unknown like this Bronowski, it really is like holding a piece of sand besides a famous diamond. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 19:26:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doomar
... It is by logical study of the text (with the help of a theologian friend years ago)that I arrived at this supposition, not by any metaphorical liberties.
Doomar, you have been asked a dozen times in this thread for some evidence to support these assertions. And Faith that the bible is true does not constitute evidence. Faith is irrational, it is a firm belief in an assertion without evidence. Often in spite of evidence to the contrary. (Dan Barker)
Provide some evidence, and remember we do not consider the bible evidence of anything more than the recorded stories and superstitions of a middle eastern people from 1900 or so years ago. |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
Doomar
SFN Regular
USA
714 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 19:37:31 [Permalink]
|
[quote]Originally posted by Dave W.
Because faith doesn't belong in a science classroom, it's a tremendous waste of time and public resources there.
"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen," wrote Paul the apostle. This is not to say that faith is evidence of things that will never be seen or don't exist. Faith is not belief in falsehoods or non-existent things. Faith is the means to see beyond the natural eye's ability. We could compare it to a telescope with a camera attached to it (a recent employer has this hobby and showed me how it works). With our natural eye, we can't see the color of distant planets and nebulas. Even with a telescope, one cannot see the color. It's impossible. It doesn't mean the color isn't there, we are just not close enough to see it. By adding a camera and taking a picture over a period of minutes, upon development of that picture, the beautiful colors of these distant phenomena are now visible to us. In like manner, faith can help a scientist to believe in something that he cannot yet explain. He knows its out there, he believes that such and such is true, yet he is unable to prove it. When one believes in God or has faith in God, it by no means clouds their vision. God is a god of truth. God is not afraid of anything, especially some stupid theory. When a scientist does his job right, the truth is revealed. Most all scientists in ancient times were men with belief in God, including Darwin. So how can you say "Faith" has no place in the classroom? Can a scientist separate his faith from his work? Can an atheist separate his faithlessness from his work? I think not. In reality, an atheist has faith, only it is not in God, but probably himself or some other object of his affection. So, if you want to look at this subject on a deeper level, you really cannot separate people's beliefs from their work and study. One can only do that in theory, not in reality. |
Mark 10:27 (NKJV) 27But Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for with God all things are possible.”
www.pastorsb.com.htm |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 03/24/2004 : 19:40:06 [Permalink]
|
Doomar wrote:quote:
So when you quote some unknown like this Bronowski, it really is like holding a piece of sand besides a famous diamond.
Doesn't matter if the diamond is actually a cubic zirconia. And how are we to tell? All we know about the alleged "diamond" is what it tells us, and right now that is, "no, really, I'm a diamond! See, I wrote down in this book that I'm a diamond, therefore it's true!" |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
