Re: a code behind the bible
Assault, and that is the very problem with faith. In order to have faith one must have faith in faith and assume something to be true without supporting evidence. Sometimes someone's faith may be justified but in many cases faith is used to maintain a belief in something that can not be true in spite of proof otherwise. That's what really bothers me about faith being used to prop up a belief in something's reality.
For instance, back in post 13 above you pointed out that not all Christians believe in a literal six day creation or that the earth is only 6,000 years old. As I was raised a Christian but not taught to believe those things myself I know that to be true. However, the problem is there is a fairly sizable group of evangelicals, fundamentalists, etc who believe exactly that the earth was created in six days and is only 6,000 years old. Whenever anyone tries to reason with them that their beliefs are in error, can't possibly be true according to th e scientific evidence we currently have on the subject, they inevitably fall back on the faith argument. That their faith justifies their position rather than any empirical evidence to the contrary. As a result the concept of faith can be used to justify any position, any idea, no matter how reasonable or far fetched the case might be.
I'm not saying everyone's faith is completely unjustified or absurd, but merely that as a tool for determining truth it is a poor substitute for actual evidence supporting a belief. Many people who rely on faith are not very skeptical of the world around them and that is why there is a gullible segment of the human population that believe in almost anything they hear or see on TV. People believe in Big Foot, the Lock Ness Monster, UFOs, ghosts, psychics, and so on. Weather any of these things have a shred of truth or not I really do not know for certain, but there are people that swear up and down they are true even though their belief s are based on hear say and roomers.
When I became a skeptic I realized I needed to have what I view to be higher standards than just believe in something I read about or heard about on TV. As the late great Carl Sagan use to say, "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." The problem with what a lot of religious people claim don't even have basic evidence supporting their claims let alone extraordinary evidence. Sure the bible can claim angels exist, but until someone can show me one or I can talk to one I don't have any evidence that they exist. I have no way to know if Jesus was crucified, was raised from the dead in three days, since he has never appeared before me and talked to me in person. therefore I personally have no rational reason to accept what I read in the bible as gospel truth. One might as well be claiming they saw leprechauns or elves since they have about the same amount of believability as many things in the bible.
< p>Bryan, as far as flood stories goes they are really a dime a dozen. I think every culture and just about every major religion has a flood story of some kind or another. Of course, floods have been common throughout history, and have often become a part of folklore and myth.The problem with the biblical flood story, Noah's flood, is that it has some pretty serious problems from a historical point of view.. For one thing the biblical account says it rained for 40 days and 40 nights and covered the entire earth. Well, there isn't any proof of a global flood any time in human history that wiped out all the people, plants, animals, etc therefore the flood, if it ever happened at all, would have been a local event. Making it far less than the mass extinction event claimed by the author of Genesis. Another thing is that the bible says Noah took two of every kind of animal aboard the Ark, but we know that could not be possible. For one thing the bible never mentions vario us species of animals that would not have been known to the people of central Asia such as Kangaroos, and therefore one has to wonder how they would have come from Australia to Asia to board the Ark in the first place. We certainly know they could not have left the Ark and hopped their way all the way to Australia because kangaroo fossils have never been found anywhere else but Australia. So it is exceedingly unlikely they left the Ark and hopped their way on mass to Australia. Finally, such an event would have left its mark on the DNA record of every species on earth, and of course there is no narrowing of DNA down to a point were only two of each species remained. Therefore the scientific evidence pretty much indicates the biblical story is a myth and nothing more. I am sure Christians will go on believing the story as true, taking it on faith that their bible can't be wrong, but as flood stories goes Noah's flood has very little credibility from a scientific point of vi ew.
URL: http://forum.audiogames.net/viewtopic.php?pid=177121#p177121
_______________________________________________ Audiogames-reflector mailing list Audiogames-reflector@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com https://sabahattin-gucukoglu.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/audiogames-reflector
