DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Bible fact or fiction.

Not sure why you keep spinning this back to the transgender bathroom/NC law & debate. We are talking about religion, religious tolerance and education when it comes to understanding the world's religions.

I believe there is another thread debating the NC bathroom law, which is several pages long. Feel free to discuss your concerns over there.

Back to religion and religious education.

Cool?

You do realize that high school is not elementary school where there is one teacher teaching every single subject.

High schools have specialist teachers. English teachers, History teachers, Art teachers, Math teachers, Science teachers, PE/Health etc.. So, there would be a teacher, probably from the History/Social Studies department who would teach this class. So, there would be enough time in the day to teach it.

I think that is much more feasible than mom and dad who may not know much about said religion as they didn't study it at college. Also, mom and dad may have their own biases coming through so no one kid's education would be the same nor equal.

You do understand that most teachers feel they are asked to do too much as it is, right??? You're also aware that there probably isn't a school district in the country that isn't looking for more money to do what they currently do, right?

I'm more of the opinion that schools shouldn't teach religion. They can spend months and months and not get into anything of significance. And with that said, I love how our district handled it. Actually, that might be a blueprint. Here's this region, most of them are (insert religion). This is their god figure, here are a few beliefs they have.

Look, I'm not trying to be a jerk here, even though you're trying to make me out to be one.

I don't need to know, nor do elementary or middle school or high school students need to know all the details of each religion.

And again - ask a school district if they have the funds to hire an additional teacher to teach religion, or ask them if the district has the time and ability to add more to the teachers scheduled classes. Guarantee you, the answer will be "no."

I think you're a little wound up and not reading things clearly. Not one person has used the word mandatory, nor implied that it be so.

PDX clearly stated "schools should offer a class...".

Step back from the ledge

Ah

Well, if you want to get technical, the thread is about the Bible. So, let's follow that, ok? That work for you, since you don't like how the thread has gone, let's get back to to the Bible: fact or fiction.

He also said this:

That certainly doesn't sound like "voluntary", and it certainly doesn't take into account what I have said about our district, and what many school districts do.

Perhaps "reading clearly", or not, goes both ways?

I can't answer for you but, I would argue that high school kids really should know details of, at the very least, the world's main religions. Will they know every single detail at the end of a semester or a year? Of course not. But, they will certainly have a much better and broader understanding than if they didn't take it.

Regarding school budgets...again...I don't see how it will impact a school district. If they already have a person in their department (History/SS) that could teach it. All they have to do is propose the course and then promote it to get kids to forecast for it.

What bothers me is that anytime anyone points out to others that they are religious I think they are trying to use that in attempt to cover a bad motive. You don't brag about being a Christian, you either are or are not. Bragging about your religion pretty much cancels it out IMO.

It doesn't sound involuntary, either. It's completely absent of written connotation.

If you must know ... It was her biology professor, but she was more than that. She was her mentor.

But getting back to my original intent.

That is welcome debate on religion.

I guess I should have been more obvious than simply leaving out the (?) on the tile of the thread.

My motivation is meant to be apologetics.


I have always been interested in history and archyology. I made my seventh grade ohio history report on paleontology of the ohio valley Indians. My teacher was shocked at the level of research and the wealth of information. Needless to say it wasn't what he expected from a seventh grader.

But getting back to the point of the discussion and with that back ground of interest in mind.  I could never understand why in the majority of my life time, why the bible I believe so strongly in wasn't being supported as an  accurate account of history, with all of todays  technology and all.

Well the thought never occurred to me, that those so called expert scholors in the 20th century would not be incorporating the bible in there hypothesis on where to look for archeological sites of the bible.

I was dead wrong. A perfect example of this is the site of Sodom and Gomorrah.

For decades the history channel and discovery channel both have been telling us that the site was south of the Dead Sea. They where just going from what the so called experts told them. Well the rest is now a foot note in history, because they looked/dug around and determined, because there was no evidence of early to mid bronzes age cities  in that area.
Academia declared that the story was a myth. The liberals took that hook line and sinker.

We now have competent professional scholars and technical scientist working on some of the exploration sites in Canaan. Yes there are still many with a liberal agenda out there filling the puplic with miss information, because they are not looking objectively.

Sodom found by Dr. Steven Collins

And

web site

The Bible;
God made us in his image
Science;
Humans evolved from apes
Conclusion;
God is an ape

For those on these forums who believe in God and/or the Bible, and for those who do not believe in God or the Bible. I would like to say

God Believes in and loves you no matter what.

fixed it for you.

For you self-proclaimed atheists out there:

You’re not atheists. Here, I’ll prove it:

You probably believe in the “Big Bang” theory, right? If you don’t you’re pretty much considered out-of-touch.

A singularity. An infinitesimally small point. An infinitesimally small, infinitesimally dense point suddenly exploded into our expanding universe, right? Are you still with me?

What caused this?

This is beyond our realm of understanding. Working backwards you can always say “and what caused that”, "and what caused that" and you never come up with an answer.

So we call it God. God caused it.

The fact that the Christian belief (just to use as an example) embraces this incomprehensible event through the story of Christ is a good way to explain it. No muss, no fuss, no banging our heads needlessly.

Many of the most intelligent people to have ever existed stoutly believed in “God”.

The End.

You may now bow before me. (is that lightning I see?)

You know...if we look at a the creation and holder of all life forms on this planet as one definition of "god" then that would be our very own sun. It is the sun that keeps our planet warm enough to have liquid water, to allow plants and trees to grow, to help give us oxygen and provides us with food and water. It is our sun that allows everything to live on our planet. If the sun were to burn out tomorrow...everything would die. So, it is our sun that creates and holds life for us.

That is why I still worship Ra. I think he is making a comeback.

He's pretty big out east.

Laugh as you may but, it makes a lot more sense to me than "god" in a human form, which you can't see and nobody knows the true answer for not to mention the various atrocities that happen all over the world in god's name.

Also, if there is a god than why would we have so many horrible things on this planet? Why would any god who "loves us" shroud us in such pain, suffering and misery? Yep...if I am to point anywhere to a creator of life I just look towards (but not directly at!) the big yellow fiery ball in our sky.

I totally agree with you, just making a joke .

i think the bible, or any other religious text, is just a tool to control the masses.

So they have found the missing link?

And he loves you too.

Sounds like you have the answers,...So who made the Sun?

Just like a parent wants the best for their children, so too does God. We are his children.

JC... (I haven't read this thread nor do I want to get in a religious debate)

I read a few articles from theoretical physicists regarding our universe being in/controlled by simulation. Neil deGrasse Tyson stated that he wouldn't be surprised if we are in simulation because the whole point of science is that everything can be proven. There are so many unknowns and things that don't add up that Science cannot prove or explain.

A simulation would make sense, especially if GOD is controlling this simulation.

What about the thousands upon thousands of children who are starving or living in pure misery?
Does God believe that is what is best for them?
Crap,I know the answer,God works in mysterious ways.

Perhaps nothing made it. Perhaps it just happened to happen.
Or, perhaps Ra made it.

Okay. So her biology professor was an atheist. Were there homework assignments provided where you had to prove the existence of God (or vice versa?) Or was this just the professors view? The crux for me is a professor saying they are religious/atheist is a far cry from the school supporting/backing said position. I've worked with christians and non-christians alike and to me my coworkers viewpoints have little bearing on the business that employs them. That dynamic might change if the business owner makes it such, for example I've applied to at least one place that had a "Statement of Faith" in their interview process. But there's a clear distinction there.



Absolutely, I just don't think much will come of it. You'll have people on one side who are already believers, and will agree/support what you say, and those who don't who will disagree with you on a minor or major level. It's hard enough to get people to agree when the reason we're all here is because we're rapid fans of a very specific football team.



Could you provide the papers on these studies to find biblical sites that were explicitly ignoring the Bible? It would seem to me that if I'm trying to find something in the bible, I'd use the bible at least as a starting point. Something about this isn't adding up to me. If you mean in the general sense of not using the bible for scientific hypothesis/research support, then the answer to that is fairly simple. If you look into the scientific method, you will see why this is the case.



I'm not sure what the liberal ruse is, when according to pew research (link) , there are a ton of mainline christians that lean democrat. Are you suggesting that Episcopalians and Seventh-Day Adventists are trying to silence biblical research? Why would liberal rags such as HuffPo (link) link to the same websites you did, if they want to silence the truth of God?

Before we worry about ruses anyway, I'm not sure what you're getting at in any case. Geologists have performed digs and studies in an attempt to find S&G, which again, has its basis in the Bible. So if the Bible didn't exist, I'm not sure we'd even have people looking in the first place. And if liberals wanted to silence the "truth", why would they even go to the middle east to look in the first place?

The bottom line is you are showing confirmation bias. Essentially that because the Bible says S&G was destroyed by fire and brimstone, that it exists somewhere, and until we find it, then everyone is lying/covering it up. And then because of this bias, if anyone questions otherwise, they must be wrong and are concocting a ruse. Not everything is rooted in conspiracy, and paranoia isn't necessary. Some of our most intelligent and well known scientists have made mistakes or observations that were later proven wrong. It doesn't mean that Albert Einstein or Isaac Newton were intentionally trying to screw anyone up though...

I do believe you are wrong about trying to tie atheists and liberals into one bubble.

Many Christians believe that giving of oneself and looking out for your fellow man comes first. That protecting the planet that God gave us is very high on our priority list. That abortion is a choice just like any other sin is. And that it's not our place to judge or force our beliefs upon others. That each of us will be judged before God.

To even insinuate that GOP are the believers and everyone that gets the label of liberal are atheists is a very naïve way of looking at things.

There are many people with wealth that look strictly at the own wallets with their votes which causes them to be atheist and vote GOP. See how bad that sounds?

I'm agnostic and I generally vote GOP, especially in local elections. The "hot button" issues I don't agree with on the GOP is less of an issue when it comes to my county assembly for instance. I'm far more concerned with raising taxes.

Matthew 28:16-20 says:

34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”



Thus, we are to love God 1st, with everything that we are. 2nd we are to love our neighbors as ourselves.



We cannot force Christ upon anyone. If someone's heart is unyielding, then they will refuse to open it to Christ, and Christ will not force His way in. As far as judging, you take a particular instance, and assign it to all situations, and that is not accurate. Jesus judged people on the earth. We judge, in a way, because if a person does not know and understand their sins, and the penalties of their sins, they will never see the need for a Savior. Paul wrote extensively on how the church should judge those who continue to live sinful lives after joining the church.

The quote to which you refer is to "judge not, lest ye be judged in turn." As a Christian, I have already been judged when I accepted Christ as my Lord and Savior, and accepted Him into my heart. God judges me as if I were Jesus, because when a person accepts Jesus as Lord and Savior, he is made to appear as Jesus before God. Jesus removed our sins, and took them on ourselves so that we will never face that horrible judgement. We judge behaviors, but Jesus does not want us judging people on a personal level ..... such as "you are (fill in the blank, color, race, appearance, physical trait) so you are no good" .. or "I am not going to share the good news with you because of your appearance, and that I don't like the way you look."

I want to reiterate this point, because it is vitally important. It is perfectly acceptable for a Christian to use the Law to reveal the sinfulness of a non-believer, or the sinful behavior of a believer, for that matter. Jesus not only used the Law, He amplified it. A man who hates is a murderer. A person who lusts is an adulterer. A person who covets is a thief. Jesus amplified our sins, because unless we understand just how serious our sins are, we will never turn away from them, and we will never accept that we need a Savior ..... and we will be condemned.

You are correct in that we will all be judged before God. The Christian, and I mean a true Christian, not the person who says he accepts Christ and then continues living a life that is just as completely sinful as it was before he supposedly accepted Christ, the Christian will be judged as if he were Christ Himself. I cannot do anything to earn salvation, but being saved has outward signs in our behaviors. Anyone who has not accepted Christ, no matter how good they are by the world's standards, will be condemned, because all people sin. In fact, all people sins every day. 1 single sin carries the death penalty. Unless we have a Savior to clean us if our sins, then we are condemned. Jesus came to save us from God's judgement and wrath. It is up to each and every one of us to decide for ourselves whether or not we will accept Jesus, or not. Again, God allows us each to decide our own fate. We can accept Christ and live, or refuse to do so, and be condemned, punished, and die.

I do agree with you that there are people of all political stripes who are Christians, and saved by Jesus Christ, and others who say they are, but who really have no idea what that means. Donald Trump, for example, said he is a Christian, but he then said that he's good with God because he does a lot of good things for people. The person interviewing asked him if he has even humbled himself, taken his sins to the foot of the cross, and asked Jesus to save him. He said he doesn't need to do that because of all of the people he's helped, etc. If this is truly what Donald Trump believes, then he is condemned. This does not mean that he cannot or will not accept Christ at some point in the future, but unless he does so, he will be condemned at judgement. There are people who go to church every Sunday, but who have never accepted Christ as Lord and Savior, and who will be condemned at judgement as a result. I hate to say this, but I would wager that over half of the people who attend church regularly have never been saved. They have never humbled themselves and asked Jesus to be their Lord and Savior, and committed their lives to following Him. It is sad, because they are so close to the answer, but they continue to ignore it. Their human ego says that they are the exception, and that they do enough good to somehow offset a lifetime of revolt against God, and violations of His Holy Law. I believe that there are Liberals who are saved, and Conservatives who are. I believe that there are people on each side who are not, and both sides have people who may think they are, but are not. It's a shame, because if their pastors would only preach on this message, which is th most important message ever, maybe more people would turn away from their sins, and to Jesus.

I will close with one thought. If you believe that Christ is the only way to be saved, and you believe that ecery single person who refuses to accept Him is lost, and will be condemned to suffering and death, then is it a kindness to "not force your beliefs on them"? Suppose that you could have said something to them, and they would have accepted the Lord as their Savior, but you didn't, and they died in a car wreck that evening. You didn't try to "force them into salvation". Are they better for your inaction? I just ask you to please think about that.

Im talking about religion. Sorry if you want to lump politics in with my statement.

You either don't believe (meaning you take a liberal stand on the issue of weather there us a God).

If you take the conservative stand, then your are a beleiver. Rich or poor!

So there's that.

I have no answers...I have only my own thoughts and beliefs.

But, to ask "who made the sun?" reads as if *somebody* (a god in a human form?) made the sun and the planets. That to me is so completely unfathomable and unbelievable that my brain does not even go there. The galaxy and solar system, not to mention space and the many infinite planets, stars, suns etc. that we don't even know about are much bigger than any one person. We are a mere speck on this "pale blue dot", which in itself is a mere speck in the cosmos as Mr. Sagan once brilliantly and profoundly said.

But, this is only my opinion so, take it as a grain of salt.

I'm trying to figure out how people verify the bible...by using the bible.

By that logic, I can say that call of duty is a religion, since I read the manual.

"Thou shall not camp in respawn areas"

Takes faith bud.

~ Something to ponder ~
In a mother’s womb were two babies. One asked the other: “Do you believe in life after delivery?” The other replied, “Why, of course. There has to be something after delivery. Maybe we are here to prepare ourselves for what we will be later.”
“Nonsense” said the first. “There is no life after delivery. What kind of life would that be?”

The second said, “I don’t know, but there will be more light than here. Maybe we will walk with our legs and eat from our mouths. Maybe we will have other senses that we can’t understand now.”

The first replied, “That is absurd. Walking is impossible. And eating with our mouths? Ridiculous! The umbilical cord supplies nutrition and everything we need. But the umbilical cord is so short. Life after delivery is to be logically excluded.”

The second insisted, “Well I think there is something and maybe it’s different than it is here. Maybe we won’t need this physical cord anymore.”

The first replied, “Nonsense. And moreover if there is life, then why has no one has ever come back from there? Delivery is the end of life, and in the after-delivery there is nothing but darkness and silence and oblivion. It takes us nowhere.”

“Well, I don’t know,” said the second, “but certainly we will meet Mother and she will take care of us.”

The first replied “Mother? You actually believe in Mother? That’s laughable. If Mother exists then where is She now?”

The second said, “She is all around us. We are surrounded by her. We are of Her. It is in Her that we live. Without Her this world would not and could not exist.”

Said the first: “Well I don’t see Her, so it is only logical that She doesn’t exist.”

To which the second replied, “Sometimes, when you’re in silence and you focus and you really listen, you can perceive Her presence, and you can hear Her loving voice, calling down from above.” -

Mother can also give you deformities and disabilities because she smoked cigarettes and shot up herion.

I guess mother givith, and mother takith away.

Kathleen Keyton 1906-1978
One of the most influential arcyologist of the later part of the 20th century and an admitted atheist.

Major projects: using "only" modern scientific methods one of which she is credited with co-inventing. The Wheeler-Keyton method.

Jerico; 1952-58
Her blunders are well known here in her publishing's of the excavations of the site.

Due to her miss information nothing of any conciquence  happened with the site other than from 1997-2000.

Since 2009 the Italian-Palestinian archaeological project of excavation and restoration was resumed by Rome "La Sapienza" University and Palestinian MOTA-DACH under the direction of Lorenzo Nigro and Hamdan Taha.

You can find plenty of detaled evidence already discovered that supports the bibles authenticity as a historical account. Namely Deteronomy and Joshua. And debunks that of the all high Kathleen Keyton.

The bible maybe alot of things to some people, but what every story from the bible has in common is geography. Don't take my word for it. Read the tex. These scholars where not to full of liberal ideas of the bible, to deswade them from useing it in there research.

The end result is self evident.

She also killed the site of the "City of David" excavations until recent. That was her next project after Jerico.

She basicly said there is nothing here, don't wast your time looking. Once again refusing to bring the bible in the discussion of her research.

Since 1994 the site excavations have resumed by Dr. Ronny Reich and Eli Shukron.
Many discoveries debunking Keyton have scince been discovered, and by using the bible as a refrence tool.

I don't care to search for their scientific  publishing's, as they are now common knowledge and therefor available to whom ever cares to read them.

David Ussishkin professor of Archyology at the Tel Aviv University Isreal from 1966-2005.

A one time Jewish self  professed atheist.

He has since changed his opinion, at least on the use of the bible as an archeological tool.

Okay there are a couple of examples.

They are examples of Levantine Archeologist. Basically modernest.

Classical Archeologist will use the bible as a tool in their research. The truth is that they are in the minority of academia today, where as they where the majorty pre-WWII.

If you like ferry tales google this kwack... Israel Finklestien.

Acctually he is more appropriately a propagandest.

Again a processor at Tel Aviv University. I think that he should go back to kindergarten.

He was debunking both the Jerico and City of David projects as they where on going. He doesn't have a leg to stand on today, but if you pay someone enough, they can produce any ferry tale you would like.


I have already covered Sodom and Gomorrah.

That was really good.

That cool.

I agree that there was obviously a process.

We just disagree on weather or not the cause was by higher intelligence or happenstance.

I don't want to give the impression that there is no politics envolved, because that most certainly the cause in the split from the classical archyology. IE: they don't want to rock the boat as to Israel's claim to anceint inhabitants and off the palestinians.