+Liquid Gardens Posted February 11, 2018 #676 Share Posted February 11, 2018 15 hours ago, Sherapy said: In Walkers case, he does a great job of outlining how he accepts a belief, in the example I use of his he uses ad populum and bandwagon appeal and anecdotal evidence to weigh the true or false of his beliefs. Thanks as always for your compliment Sheri. I know I've had this conversation before with him, it's probably an annual event by now, I know where it's not going to go, but it can be fun to think through again for myself and to try and explain as clearly as I can. I haven't really logically absorbed his latest decimation of his own brand of epistemology that came out I think during one of the recent corporal punishment conversations, that he doesn't need to look at studies or anything if he already 'knows' something from his experience. An attitude like that is not the beginning of wisdom, it's the decapitation of it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted February 11, 2018 #677 Share Posted February 11, 2018 31 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said: Thanks as always for your compliment Sheri. I know I've had this conversation before with him, it's probably an annual event by now, I know where it's not going to go, but it can be fun to think through again for myself and to try and explain as clearly as I can. I haven't really logically absorbed his latest decimation of his own brand of epistemology that came out I think during one of the recent corporal punishment conversations, that he doesn't need to look at studies or anything if he already 'knows' something from his experience. An attitude like that is not the beginning of wisdom, it's the decapitation of it. Great point, in going over these topics, repeatedly, as you, we do find our way to deeper insights. I honestly could not make sense of the last post of his either. I leave it to you, if anyone can figure it out it is you. There is a lot to be said for education, and a guide to thinking that supersedes our primitive brain. Great point on wisdom. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ogbin Posted February 11, 2018 #678 Share Posted February 11, 2018 (edited) On 2/10/2018 at 7:49 AM, bigjim36 said: Am I being trolled or are you really that dense? Interesting! If I don't agree with you then I am a troll or just a really dense person.. Yet here you are baiting me and throw out insults. On 2/10/2018 at 7:49 AM, bigjim36 said: If you really do believe the rubbish you have just spouted I do. On 2/10/2018 at 7:49 AM, bigjim36 said: then I think you need to read another book other than the bible Why? So I can become like you?.. No thanks On 2/10/2018 at 7:49 AM, bigjim36 said: Evolution proves that we didn't all descend from adam and eve Once again.. There is zero proof of evolution. Now, if you choose to believe that the universe just spontaneously created Itself out of nothing and non-living matter gave life unto itself, then good for you. But I cannot, and will not believe in these impossibilities. I enjoy good conversation. Especially when I am able to learn something. But as soon as name calling, insults and disrespect are thrown into the mix, I'm done. Edited February 11, 2018 by Ogbin 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guyver Posted February 12, 2018 #679 Share Posted February 12, 2018 On 2/6/2018 at 8:32 AM, bigjim36 said: I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things. —Isaiah 45:7 If you believe the bible to be true then your god is claiming responsibility for all the evil in the world. If you claim it's a metaphor, then please explain how a quote from god cannot be taken literally? If this is one of the many bits that is taken out of context when you try to claim god is all loving then why are you disregarding it, give a legitimate reason? Or if god didn't say it and isiah made it up what makes it any different to any other book in the bible? I think I intended to respond to this post earlier Big Jim, but I’ve been traveling. I could give you my perspective on that verse, but I would rather offer you the Evangelical-Christian-Born again-Protestant view on that. So, here it is, are you ready? It gets brushed over and not talked to much, thought about too much, or considered a “translation” issue, in my experience. Interesting that “translation” is accepted as a real thing pertaining to “Gods Word” but I guess that’s a different point. The word evil here is considered by many Christians to mean calamity, which takes them back to their belief that the evils of the OT are God being “Just” - which in their minds means that he easily kills evildoers because they deserve it. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guyver Posted February 12, 2018 #680 Share Posted February 12, 2018 And that’s Ok in their minds. Some things just don’t need to make any sense to be believed. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davros of Skaro Posted February 12, 2018 #681 Share Posted February 12, 2018 8 hours ago, Ogbin said: I enjoy good conversation. Especially when I am able to learn something. Check out the links in my signature, and let's have a conversation. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlitterRose Posted February 12, 2018 #682 Share Posted February 12, 2018 8 hours ago, Ogbin said: Interesting! If I don't agree with you then I am a troll or just a really dense person.. Yet here you are baiting me and throw out insults. I do. Why? So I can become like you?.. No thanks Once again.. There is zero proof of evolution. Now, if you choose to believe that the universe just spontaneously created Itself out of nothing and non-living matter gave life unto itself, then good for you. But I cannot, and will not believe in these impossibilities. I enjoy good conversation. Especially when I am able to learn something. But as soon as name calling, insults and disrespect are thrown into the mix, I'm done. There's plenty of proof of evolution. You just aren't accepting it. You don't have to believe there wasn't a designer if you don't want to. You could have your cake and not have to put fake frosting on it. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted February 12, 2018 #683 Share Posted February 12, 2018 9 hours ago, Ogbin said: Why? So I can become like you?.. No thanks Once again.. There is zero proof of evolution. Now, if you choose to believe that the universe just spontaneously created Itself out of nothing and non-living matter gave life unto itself, then good for you. But I cannot, and will not believe in these impossibilities. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Galactic Goatman Posted February 13, 2018 #684 Share Posted February 13, 2018 People belive it because their parents did, and their parent’s parents did, and their parents’ parents’ parents did... it’s a cycle of indoctrination, each generation recruits more to the faith. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted February 13, 2018 #685 Share Posted February 13, 2018 On 12/02/2018 at 2:12 AM, Liquid Gardens said: What specifically shows a misunderstanding? Quote my specific line you disagree with. Again, the only misunderstanding seems to be that you believe you are in possession of The One English Dictionary to Rule Them All. This simply shows a misunderstanding of how we use the word 'evidence', or is a careless conflation of two different things we have/could have knowledge of. Where we have evidence, we do not necessarily have knowledge of the proposition(s) that evidence supports. Yes, in the most mundane and irrelevant sense we can say that when we evidence we have knowledge; we have knowledge that a film exists of what is claimed to be Bigfoot, we have knowledge of what that film depicts, we know who supposedly shot the footage, etc. Duh. That film is evidence that Bigfoot exists, yet we don't have knowledge that Bigfoot exists. Thus your quote above should read, 'Where we have evidences, sometimes we have knowledge'. I'm not so sure about that, depends on how you use 'logically' and 'rationally'. Is it likewise also logical and rational to believe there are intelligent dragons on other planets in the solar system, because there is no evidence concerning it? How would you like to measure it? I don't think you are aware of how many plaster casts of prints of big feet exist, what for angels do we have that counters that volume? Make sure you don't confuse testimonials with 'objective evidence'. No more than when I drink water I have 'faith' my thirst will disappear. Why should I ignore all the evidence that exists in those two scenarios? The fact that it is not decisive evidence doesn't mean it's not there. The word you are looking for there is 'me', not 'us'. Those are not the only alternatives, you can also act based on evidence and probabilities; there is a spectrum, not just the two points 'certainty' and 'faith' as appears to be your view. I just pulled my car into the garage because the weather people are predicting freezing rain today. I don't have 'faith' that freezing rain will actually occur, I have a bunch of evidence that it will, and it still may not. Why do I need faith when I have evidence, namely concerning the general accuracy of meteorology? I don't need faith to push me from imperfect evidence to a decision, that imperfect information can give me information to make a non-faith-based rational empirical decision. Let's say someone says to me that if I roll a pair of dice and get anything other than 12, they'll pay me a million dollars, and if I roll a 12 it will cost me one dollar. If I obviously decide to take that bet, do you think it's based on faith that I'm not going to roll a 12? What about probability? Even if you want to somehow call any decision made with less than perfect certainty 'faith', it is still in many ways a different animal than religious faith, as that faith seems to provide people much higher certainty than the kind of faith you are appealing to here. A belief is a construct the mind builds for a purpose when it does not posses the knowledge to know. This belief may comfort or it may enable us to act . You CANNOT believe in something you know, any more than you can disbelieve in something you know That is not my definition it is THE definition of belief Evidences provide the basis for knowledge. If you have evidences you have knowledge. So, if you have evidences ENOUGH for knowledge you cannot have belief. If you have insufficient evidences to establish knowledge, then there is still room for belief or disbelief. It is quite logical and rational to chose to believe there are dragons on other planets (and indeed it is highly likely that there are in some form or another as there are on earth given the potential number of habitable planets just in our galaxy and the nature of evolution. ) Of course it is equally logical and rational to not believe That is the nature and beauty of belief constructs. Many millions of humans claim direct contact with angels or god Only a fraction of that number claim an encounter with bigfoot (although my father once encountered a yowie in the bush in Australia) I've met many angels but never a big foot, so I am biased. Also I am afraid plaster casts and photos of bigfoot(s) are no more convincing to me than ones of angels would be to you. No I mean all humans You may deny it, but being human it is an evolved part of your cognitive process. yes there is a spectrum You are putting your car in your garage because you have faith in the weather bureau but also because you can predict consequences. If it doesn't hail, no harm done, but if it does you might have saved yourself a lot of money for very little effort Thus your decison is both faith based and rational. If you had NO faith in your weather forecasters, you wouldn't bother garaging your car. You have nothing to lose with such a bet, but what if you lost a million if you rolled 2 and won it if you rolled 12. with no result for all other numbers? All faith is the same It means taking things in or on faith where you cannot know an outcome based on evidences. .Religious faith is an important subset of a wider cognitive process which all humans employ to function in their lives. if you did not have faith in your own future, it would be impossible to function and to go on living. We do not know what tomorrow will bring, but we go to bed in faith that we will wake up, and the next day will be survived. Sometimes some of us do not wake up, and sometimes some of us do not survive the next day, but we act in faith, day by day, that we will, because this enables us to carry on, without worrying ourselves sick, and becoming dysfunctional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lumpino Posted February 13, 2018 #686 Share Posted February 13, 2018 (edited) Some people believe in the Bible, others of in the Qur'an, others in Atheism. Some cough on the whirlwind and do experiments according to old texts. For example, long meditation on the name of a spiritual being. See for instance hindu Bhaktiyogis, like Ramakrishna and his vision mother Kali, item some christian mystics, hebrew kabbalists .... It was praxis ancient (Greece, Egyptian) mysteries.... Edited February 13, 2018 by Lumpino addition Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigjim36 Posted February 13, 2018 Author #687 Share Posted February 13, 2018 On 12/02/2018 at 6:02 AM, Guyver said: I think I intended to respond to this post earlier Big Jim, but I’ve been traveling. I could give you my perspective on that verse, but I would rather offer you the Evangelical-Christian-Born again-Protestant view on that. So, here it is, are you ready? It gets brushed over and not talked to much, thought about too much, or considered a “translation” issue, in my experience. Interesting that “translation” is accepted as a real thing pertaining to “Gods Word” but I guess that’s a different point. The word evil here is considered by many Christians to mean calamity, which takes them back to their belief that the evils of the OT are God being “Just” - which in their minds means that he easily kills evildoers because they deserve it. It is annoying how people who hold so much stock in the bible dismiss whole segments of it or try to change its meaning because it doesn't suit their ideology. I kept trying to explain this to walker, if this sacred book is that sacred then it should be followed exactly. If it's not that sacred then why hold it such esteem? The amount of people who then try to claim it's more of a guide for living or a collection of metaphors etc also annoy me. It's not. That way of thinking has only come about in the last 30+ years or so. Until then, at least in my experience (catholic church/schools) it was taught as fact, the change all started when science started to prove the bible wrong. So rather than admit that, they changed its meaning. If you can change the meaning of a sacred text then it's not sacred at all. It's just text! Haha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guyver Posted February 13, 2018 #688 Share Posted February 13, 2018 4 hours ago, bigjim36 said: Until then, at least in my experience (catholic church/schools) it was taught as fact, the change all started when science started to prove the bible wrong. So rather than admit that, they changed its meaning. If you can change the meaning of a sacred text then it's not sacred at all. It's just text! Haha. That’s how it was for me, beginning with the Revelation. It can be shown that Bible writers believed the end of the world was upon them in their time. Since that didn’t happen, it’s obvious they were mistaken. Since it’s nonsense to believe that God himself could be so wrong about something so important, or anything really.....it stands to reason that the Bible is not a divine work. Maybe some parts are, or could be, but the more I study it, the more unlikely that seems to be. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Liquid Gardens Posted February 13, 2018 #689 Share Posted February 13, 2018 7 hours ago, Mr Walker said: If you have evidences you have knowledge. So, if you have evidences ENOUGH for knowledge you cannot have belief. Which is it: do you have knowledge if you have evidence, or do you have knowledge only if you have 'enough' evidence? It's not helping your communication when you equivocate on what a word means within two consecutive sentences. 7 hours ago, Mr Walker said: Also I am afraid plaster casts and photos of bigfoot(s) are no more convincing to me than ones of angels would be to you. It doesn't matter what is convincing to you, that is not the standard. If you recall, we were talking about volumes of 'objective evidence'; where's yours? 7 hours ago, Mr Walker said: You are putting your car in your garage because you have faith in the weather bureau False. I'm putting my car in the garage because of the evidence supporting meteorology's general ability to predict the weather semi-accurately. If someone asks me why I put my car in the garage, almost everyone sees the difference between the evidenced answer, 'the weatherpeople are predicting freezing rain, the radar shows a big storm moving this way, there is freezing rain 100 miles west of where I live right now, etc', as opposed to the response, 'on faith'. 7 hours ago, Mr Walker said: if you did not have faith in your own future, it would be impossible to function and to go on living. It would be impossible for you maybe, not me. You spend so much time talking about how special you are and how highly trained your mind is, so why logically are you thinking other people think the way you do when you have abundant evidence they do not by your own admission? 7 hours ago, Mr Walker said: We do not know what tomorrow will bring, but we go to bed in faith that we will wake up, No, I don't go to bed in faith I will wake up, I go to bed noting that in the last 18000+ days I've awoken every single day and I'm not cognizant of anything that will cut that short. I don't need faith when I have evidence and probabilities to work with; people need faith when that doesn't exist, like with religious faith. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmccr8 Posted February 13, 2018 #690 Share Posted February 13, 2018 25 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said: Which is it: do you have knowledge if you have evidence, or do you have knowledge only if you have 'enough' evidence? It's not helping your communication when you equivocate on what a word means within two consecutive sentences. It doesn't matter what is convincing to you, that is not the standard. If you recall, we were talking about volumes of 'objective evidence'; where's yours? False. I'm putting my car in the garage because of the evidence supporting meteorology's general ability to predict the weather semi-accurately. If someone asks me why I put my car in the garage, almost everyone sees the difference between the evidenced answer, 'the weatherpeople are predicting freezing rain, the radar shows a big storm moving this way, there is freezing rain 100 miles west of where I live right now, etc', as opposed to the response, 'on faith'. It would be impossible for you maybe, not me. You spend so much time talking about how special you are and how highly trained your mind is, so why logically are you thinking other people think the way you do when you have abundant evidence they do not by your own admission? No, I don't go to bed in faith I will wake up, I go to bed noting that in the last 18000+ days I've awoken every single day and I'm not cognizant of anything that will cut that short. I don't need faith when I have evidence and probabilities to work with; people need faith when that doesn't exist, like with religious faith. Wondering if one will wake up in the morning is just as pointless as wondering if one will live till the end of the day as there are likely more that die in their waking hours. Same with most people that I know don't park their car in the garage because of the weather, they park their car in the garage because they have one. Walter's argument about faith in a doctor is somewhat weak as well and being informed is what people should do. When I had my back surgery I investigated the success ratio of three doctors before I made a choice. Ignorance is no excuse is not unique to the justice system and one should always seek to be informed before making choices. jmccr8 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podo Posted February 14, 2018 #691 Share Posted February 14, 2018 On 2/11/2018 at 3:09 PM, Ogbin said: Once again.. There is zero proof of evolution. Now, if you choose to believe that the universe just spontaneously created Itself out of nothing and non-living matter gave life unto itself, then good for you. But I cannot, and will not believe in these impossibilities. Zero proof? Only if you can't read. How about this? Or this? This, too. Or even this! Not to mention the tens of thousands of peer-reviewed scientific publications on the topic. But yeah, aside from the overflowing oceans of evidence, there's no proof at all. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Due Posted February 14, 2018 #692 Share Posted February 14, 2018 11 minutes ago, Podo said: Zero proof? Only if you can't read. How about this? Or this? This, too. Or even this! Not to mention the tens of thousands of peer-reviewed scientific publications on the topic. But yeah, aside from the overflowing oceans of evidence, there's no proof at all. You have to open the door. Then you'll find the evidence you need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podo Posted February 14, 2018 #693 Share Posted February 14, 2018 5 minutes ago, Will Due said: You have to open the door. Then you'll find the evidence you need. Reading and educating yourself is more important. Give it a try. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psyche101 Posted February 14, 2018 #694 Share Posted February 14, 2018 24 minutes ago, Will Due said: You have to open the door. Many have opened it for you already, you keep slamming it shut. Quote Then you'll find the evidence you need. Accepting it seems to be the problem it's easier to just run with feelgood scenarios that offer desires. Smells like dopamine. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cormac mac airt Posted February 14, 2018 #695 Share Posted February 14, 2018 On 2/11/2018 at 5:09 PM, Ogbin said: Once again.. There is zero proof of evolution. Now, if you choose to believe that the universe just spontaneously created Itself out of nothing and non-living matter gave life unto itself, then good for you. But I cannot, and will not believe in these impossibilities. So historical fiction is your forte, good to know. cormac 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trihalo42 Posted February 14, 2018 #696 Share Posted February 14, 2018 People are trained to disbelieve in "magic". That it's something that only the "ignorant" or children believe in to explain the unexplainable. But when presented with an extra-dimensional entity in science fiction, a being that operates outside of our laws of physics, that disbelief vanishes. Consider the following. Kaluza Klein Theory shows that we can complete Einstein's Unified Field Theory if we consider more than 3 spatial dimensions. Time is a whole other monster that I won't get into. The concept of multiple layers to our reality is seen in ancient religious texts that speak of a "spirit realm", among others, that far predates modern physics. A footnote in Michio Kaku's book on Hyperspace, which does a great job of explaining multidimensional reality in theoretical physics, reads: "...For uncounted centuries, clergymen had skillfully dodged such perennial questions as Where are heaven and hell? and Where do angels live? Now, they found a convenient resting place for these heavenly bodies: the fourth dimension. The Christian spiritualist A. T. Schofield, in his 1888 book Another World, argued at length that God and the spirits resided in the fourth dimension. Not to be outdone, in 1893 the theologian Arthur Willink wrote The World of the Unseen, in which he claimed that it was unworthy of God to reside in the lowly fourth dimension. Willink claimed that the only domain magnificent enough for God was infinite-dimensional space...". So even in the late 1800s religious scholars were discussing God being an extra-dimensional entity. So here we have an entity that operates outside the dimensional layers we are confined to, as seen in many science fiction novels and movies, that could conceivably have manipulated the dimensions inside a large ship much like the T.A.R.D.I.S. of Doctor Who where the inside could hold far more than it appeared to on the outside, and possibly caused "time dilation" per the Special Theory of Relativity that would account for certain events taking far longer or far less time than one might assume, and could have "folded space" or such to borrow a few trillion gallons of water from a cloud of it around a quasar found by astronomers that the page on space.com describes as a "...12-billion-year-old cloud harboring 140 trillion times more water than all of Earth's oceans combined..." to drown a few problematic test subjects. And that's exactly what that extra-dimensional entity would consider humanity. A grand psychological experiment. We are rats in a maze of the mind. But feel free to believe whatever you like, so long as you bring no harm to others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted February 15, 2018 #697 Share Posted February 15, 2018 On 14/02/2018 at 1:47 AM, Liquid Gardens said: Which is it: do you have knowledge if you have evidence, or do you have knowledge only if you have 'enough' evidence? It's not helping your communication when you equivocate on what a word means within two consecutive sentences. It doesn't matter what is convincing to you, that is not the standard. If you recall, we were talking about volumes of 'objective evidence'; where's yours? False. I'm putting my car in the garage because of the evidence supporting meteorology's general ability to predict the weather semi-accurately. If someone asks me why I put my car in the garage, almost everyone sees the difference between the evidenced answer, 'the weatherpeople are predicting freezing rain, the radar shows a big storm moving this way, there is freezing rain 100 miles west of where I live right now, etc', as opposed to the response, 'on faith'. It would be impossible for you maybe, not me. You spend so much time talking about how special you are and how highly trained your mind is, so why logically are you thinking other people think the way you do when you have abundant evidence they do not by your own admission? No, I don't go to bed in faith I will wake up, I go to bed noting that in the last 18000+ days I've awoken every single day and I'm not cognizant of anything that will cut that short. I don't need faith when I have evidence and probabilities to work with; people need faith when that doesn't exist, like with religious faith. I suspect you are just being argumentative. You have knowldge when you accumulate enough knowledge to know. Until then you have only belief. Do you believe you can drink rain water, or do you know? Do you believe fire burns, or do you know There is no equivocation Either you deliberately don't get it or you honestly don't get it. It is what is important to an individual which is convincing I don't accept plaster casts as objective evidences without other convincing provenance But i would accept one, if I found the footprints, as evidence of something, possibly real , possibly faked. I would not accept footprints of an angels presence, except in the same circumstances, eg i saw it make them. Past evidences are no proof of future occurrences Eg every time you switch on a light you do so in faith. You don't go and check the bulb and the switch box every time, before turning on the light. You switch it on and hope it is working. Past experience is no guarantee of future performance I repeat. You have faith in the weather bureau. This faith may be based on past performance but it is faith none the less. If your bureau is like ours it is often completely wrong' it would be impossible for you also. It is the fact of human cognition Once we become self aware and realise the nature of life and death and the dangers of life, our minds ALL evolve a cognitive facility to allow us to continue functioning This is faith. You would NOT be able to function unless you BEL:IEVED that you would wake up the next day and not be killed during that day. Your mind does work like this Try to imagine what it would be like if you had NO faith that you would wake up the next day, or survive the next day ALL humans have this evolved faith as part of our cognitive process. Again what may happen tonight cannot be predicted by what happened in the last 18000 days One day my wife woke up after a stroke to find she could not use her left side . A more severe stroke and she would not have awoken She had no signs no indicators and had been healthy for 75 years. A car could crash into your house, there might be a fire, or you might have a malfunction of some critical body part There is no evidence pertaining to future probabilities as they have not occurred yet, and statistics aren't very effective either. It is the BELIEF that all will be well, which sustains you . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Walker Posted February 15, 2018 #698 Share Posted February 15, 2018 On 12/02/2018 at 2:19 AM, Liquid Gardens said: Thanks as always for your compliment Sheri. I know I've had this conversation before with him, it's probably an annual event by now, I know where it's not going to go, but it can be fun to think through again for myself and to try and explain as clearly as I can. I haven't really logically absorbed his latest decimation of his own brand of epistemology that came out I think during one of the recent corporal punishment conversations, that he doesn't need to look at studies or anything if he already 'knows' something from his experience. An attitude like that is not the beginning of wisdom, it's the decapitation of it. The only thing one can be sure of is what one knows form personal experience I KNOW that loving corporal punishment can produce loving disciplined and non violent children. So, where studies say it cannot, i know they are wrong. It has its dangers as does failure to discipline and especially failure to love. This debate is not about it being the only way to discipline but about it being an effective and non harmful way to discipline when done properly. This is true for ALL discipline and failure to teach self discipline, and/or the abilty to love, in children leads to disater as adults 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guyver Posted February 15, 2018 #699 Share Posted February 15, 2018 People who handle poisonous snakes in church and drink poison believe the Bible. And good for them if it really works. I think it’s flat out worth a good slap right upside the head....but they do sometimes drink poison and handle snakes without getting harmed....so.... Its just that sometimes they don’t and then they die.....right there in church in front of all the little children, and everybody else. But therein lies the problem if you’re gonna believe the Bible. Where do you draw the line between saying you believe it and then doing what it says? It does in fact say that Christians can handle snakes, drink poison and have power over all the works of the enemy. Not only that, it says they can heal the sick people and Jesus would do whatever they ask. So, what the heck? That’s not happening or there would be no sick children dying of cancer. Oh, just talk that one away too? i mean, I’m sorry.....it sounds like I’m bashing on someone’s religion. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhysinspire Posted February 15, 2018 #700 Share Posted February 15, 2018 On 1/5/2018 at 10:03 PM, bigjim36 said: Why do some people believe the bible is literal? As in everything that is mentioned in the bible literally happened. We know that's not the case, science has proven that the earth is over 6000 years old, that adam and eve never existed, that dinosaurs existed and noahs ark did not, etc etc. Yet when challenged the best they can come up with is it's scripture. It's baffling and annoying, by all means have faith but do not believe the bible is anything other than bronze age fairy tales written by man. Why do some people believe the Bible is literal? Because they chose to. There was a time they hit rock-bottom in their lives and nothing to believe in so Bible came along and they are like "Holy S**t this makes sense!" and they became a Believer. Some are being told the day they were born that everything in the Bible is True - and when they face life challenges and so happens the Bible told them so and, they go "OMG! The Bible explains and understands my situation entirely!" Then they either take it positively OR... Their mind shuts off everything non-bible and they believe in the Bible indefinitely (my close friend is like this sadly). 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts