cicerone imposter wrote:neo, When some christians claim that some parts of the bible is allegory, we have no choice but to assume they are correct. You can't have it both ways - or can you? LOL HAPPY HOLIDAYS.
Thanks for joining in, CI. But you ought to know by now that I am not one of those 'some christians.'
Hi fresco;
There is little doubt that Moses may have transcribed or rewritten much of the book of Genesis.
So what?
The time of his writing has nothing to do with the authenticity of his account.
I submit that the Sumerian legends are subsequent to the Genesis account.
As for the book of Job, it is not obscure; and the message it contains is clearly unlike any in Greek mythology.
Constantine was a politician, not a Christian.
Biblical researchers and scholars have often diluted the bible's message. Otherwise it would not be possible for the clergy to bless warships.
Before we get too far off topic, I would suggest another thread. Or, I could bring back one of Frank Apisa's old rants.
Echi, this is an interesting topic. One I have some very strong views I'd like to share on. It's gonna take me awhile to catch up to where ya'll are in this discussion! Whew! I just realized what time it is and that my husband is going to be home soon. So I'll read tonight and hopefully be able to post by tomorrow! I'm looking forward to discussing this with you all.
neo wrote:
But you ought to know by now that I am not one of those 'some christians.'
Some know who they are and some don't concerning "some of those christians." It's only meant for those that fits the shoe. The others can completely ignore it.
heph--
Looking forward to tomorrow!
Just like Cinderella and the glass slipper :-)
My thoughts exactly.
I do look becoming in glass.
lol
OK, I've only been able to read through page 9 of this thread so far. At this point I merely want to make a statement.
If you touch a hot burner on the stove you will get burned.
Just something to chew on for the moment. I have to run to work now. I will try to be back round 11pm to continue with this thought.
I'm back now, for a little bit anyway. I don't know if anyone has even read what I posted before this, but now I would like to ask a question. The statement I made:
If you touch a hot burner on the stove you will get burned.
Does this fall into the deterministic framework?
I think that everything does, so yes.
There is a reason you touched the burner and a reason that it burned you.
(I feel like I'm missing something.)
I'm not sure why anybody has to touch any surface that generates that much heat to test it with their hands.
Ahhh well... I never actually said you touched the burner. I said, IF you touch the burner...
But would you?
Would I? Probably not. It would burn. 'Cause of the heat, and all. It's hot.
Will the burner burn you if you don't touch it?
Have you ever heard of broiling or grilling?
No. Although you're the one asking the question.