You assume a lot.
You would offend someone that thought this was an interesting discussion topic.
I will pass on damning you with faint praise, as discretion is the best part of valor.
What ever the fuck that means! Speaking in parables again too I see! I expected a lot more from you, as you surely are a disappointment nevertheless when it comes to having a conversation on this topic!
One who wishes him to be blessed then insults him at the same time, yeah that is real Christian piece of work right here on display! Can’t make this shit up! I am still laughing at the hypocrisy of it all!
As you wish.
…
A cast of real characters does not make the story true.
If you bother to read what I write, I never said I submit to any theory. The difference between you and I is that I am prepared to listen to all sides and that includes Magog’s. I remember once upon a time, you were quite a “conspiracy theorist” yourself, for example not believing 9/11 was the work of Arabs. What’s happened to you? Who have you sold out to?
Right! You criticize me for violating Magog’s free speech yet you encroached on my free speech at the same time, only to ban me from the Shithole altogether! How is that not being hypocritical?
I shall eventually go into geography, civilizations, events and timelines.
Keep pushing and keep getting stuffed.
It’s the “shithole” now because I banned you? 
You got unbanned. I was in a good mood. 
I’m not encroaching your free speech, just didn’t want you at the party, but now I don’t care.
Good morning…
Whatever Jen! You obviously decided to choose sides. Magog is batshit and lowered the level of conversation there so I can’t be bothered anymore! I have no hard feelings towards you!
I haven’t chosen any side. There are no sides! If you haven’t noticed, I told Magog he had to confine his holocaust talk to his own thread and anyone else who wanted to argue with him on that had to go there.
Lets see how long that lasts!
It will last. I mean it. @asaratis was right, all that holocaust stuff was detracting from the RH. It works well that it is now ringfenced elsewhere.
2 Likes
Yes, many of the people, times and places of the Bible are verified history, but most of it is written in parables (some of which are clearly not physically possible) or involves things that cannot be verified by historical research or by archaeology, or which appear to represent the very limited extent of physical knowledge by the writers. And the Bible itself cannot be used to prove its contents are true. To do that is circular logic.
But what puzzles me, is why are you taking this discussion as a personal attack on your faith? If your faith is strong, my critique of the veracity of the Bible should have no effect either on your faith or on you personally.
I do not speak from a position of ignorance. I was born into the Lutheran Church, baptized, and Confirmed into the Catechism of the Church. It’s actually through that upbringing and instruction in the Bible that ultimately lead to my rejection of the faith. But in no way am I challenging or demeaning your faith.
1 Like
That is the topic of this thread… How much of the bible is real history?
I have already expressed my opinion that “how much” cannot be determined. What is interesting is the conversation regarding what is and what isn’t real history.
Discussing this does not require that one believes a word of it.
Not believing a word of it does not justify self righteous criticism of those that do believe all or parts of it.
I don’t believe the creation happened in six days, but I do believe God made everything that exists…in His own way…on His own timetable…including the use of evolution of life in all its forms.
To everyone here: Criticize the Bible all you want…but do not criticize other users for believing what they do.
1 Like
The getting stuffed was about your reasoning, not you.
If you want to dish it, you will get it back. I know civil discussion, and I think that you are way over the line. I just went there with you a little.
You have said “parable” about 50 times without providing one example. Assertion without proof is just assumption.
I don’t agree with you on evolution, but the rest of that post really hits the nail on the head.
Samm and I are friends, but I do not understand why he does not understand what we are saying here.
Your perception of my argument is interesting. My logic is perfectly sound and I have not been the least bit uncivil or disrespectful. But for some reason, you seem to take everything I say as a personal slight of your faith. Why is that? What have I said to give you that impression? Could it be that you are so disappointed to discover that I, a friend and fellow conservative, does not share your faith, so you take my posts as a betrayal? Help me out here.
And I have only used the word “parable” once, not that it would matter. The Old Testament is full of parables. Do you deny that?
Since evolution is directly related to the historical truth of the Bible, it’s discussion here does not seem off topic to me. I base this on the Genesis description of God’s instant supposed creation of all the life forms and his instruction to man to name them all.
IMHO, there are many issues related to evolution that would conflict with biblical history. One is the Galapagos Islands…uninhabited by man for centuries if not thousands of years and populated by animal forms and vegetation not found anywhere else on earth.
https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/animals/photos/14-unique-animals-of-the-galapagos-islands/distinctive-wildlife
Another is the pairings of birds and flowers that appear to have evolved for each other…the beaks of the birds being compatible with the curvature of the flower blossoms. Though this link does not appear to mention it, I’ve heard of one such pairing where the bird’s beak has a compound curve to match the compound curve of the flower.
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Birds-flowers-found-to-evolve-for-each-other-2652872.php
…and the characteristics of the Giant Anteater seems perfectly designed to eat nothing but ants and termites.
https://www.bing.com/search?FORM=U513DF&PC=U513&q=giant+anteater
I think that all of the above (and a plethora of others) would successful argue against the idea of the essentially instant creation of all things.