How many contradictions in your belief system before you'd leave it?

Martin's special lady friend wasn't speaking in the name of the LORD, mister. That means we can freely dissect anything she says and reject what doesn't appear true. But when people speak or write according to divine inspiration, and we know they did when guys in special robes and funny hats tell us they did, then we need to give them full benefit of the doubt, AND THEN SOME! In those cases, my friend, the greater virtue is in believing what was said or written in spite of its apparent flaws.

Besides, do you really want to wager that it's all made up? Come on, we're talking about eternal torment here. You'd better just torture your intellect and believe those claims and embrace the ideas and policies they advocate, because the alternative is simply awful. You know it's true because they said so and the guys in robes and funny hats endorsed it, remember?

Q.E.D.

 

Clearly, some concept of your own about good and evil is what you have assumed the Bible is trying to say.

Since that seems to be a Fail, even by your own account here, a wise person would do hat a scientist does when his theory is contradicted.
He examines himself, and his own ideas.



Mark 10:18
And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

 

The Bible clearly tells us that the morals of the world have been divided between the Gentiles who are sexually promiscuous, homosexual tolerant, pro-abortion people and the religious people who are not.

We see this clearly expressed today as the Muslim World opposes the Big Satan West in an Armageddon that is destroying the world economy and will bring down the seven headed economic beast again.
Little has changed in this Sociology which the Bible hopes will save us.

 

So if everyone is only responsible for his own sins no one has to bear the burden of Adam's & Eve's. Their sins is their own and no one else's.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you claiming that muslims are better than non-muslims?

 

Are you claiming that all of your actions are evil?

 

Belateldly, here is the source:

"According to a universal principle, also operative throughout physical nature, the seeds of all livings things are preserved from one period of activity or creative epoch to its successor. The fruits of each human rebirth are, for example, preserved between successive lives, the ark being the symbol of the conserving vehicle - cosmic or human." Hidden Wisdom in The Holy Bible, vol.I, by Geoffrey Hodson, p. 67 item (c).

[Quoted in regard to limited allowance of copyright]]

 

If he would say 'no' you would call him "racist" - if he would say 'yes' you would call him "terrorist". But there's a world outside of your head. We call it "life". I'm sure in this life are existing lots of Musims who are better than you and better than I.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhfUseqsk3w

 

Putting on a jacket doesn't break the 2nd law of thermodynamics. The energy in your body heat is still dispersing to the colder environment surrounding you, it's just doing it at a slower rate than your body is producing heat, so you get warm. The jacket is an insulator: it slows down the dispersion of heat, it doesn't reverse it.

 

Muslims aren't a race.

 

Human beings are all together always the same race: "homo sapiens [sapiens]". The last human race of several different human races which died out was the homo neanderthaliensis. It's by the way interesting for me that you did not negate my words with the argument "Muslims are not terrorists".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_e7QbWc5mI

 

This doesn't answer my question.

 

Yes.
Common sense would make even a fool think twice before dismissing a story written in 1360BC about the Facts of the Creation of the entire world as we would recognize it today, and then stamp it as not only true, but coming directly from an all knowing source people call God.

The fact that writing is used suggests that the Language Arts are trying o communicate these Facts to people who could have and would have had no background in their education to even grasp the almost unbelievable Truth which we now know is fact.

The use of every technique of literary communication would have to have been employed to say things that were/are true, but way over the head of all readers until now:


4 But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand.

 

The "correctness" of an interpretation is judged on the merits of it, consistency of concepts, probability of relevance, etc. As there can be more than one interpretation, evaluation is a judgement call. Preference may reflect personal perspective. A suggestion of suitability may be supportable, but correctness may be hard to claim or prove, especially when dealing with metaphors and abstract ideas.

Maybe just stack it up against other interpretations, and see which one has the least objectionable features.

 

One good way to check is with outside sources.
Bible says there is a place called Egypt; check, there is an Egypt.

Bible refers to Sodom and Gomorrah; no trace to be found. hmm

Bible says there was a world wide flood. Facts say otherwise.
hmm. maybe it wasnt world wide? maybe its just a cautionary tale?

 

Judging the merits of the Bible is not the same as judging the merits of an interpretation. You gave yourself a broader, easier target where sorting for the least objectionable explanation might also be useful.

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed, but various pundits think they know the whereabouts and point to unusual amounts of residual radioactivity there.

 

That is a more honest approach.
Kudos.

 

Pundits, not scientists? Why would that matter?
Any credible citations for this?