A present day Moses (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter Martin
- Start date
Please do enlighten me. Explain to me how something that blatantly contradicts Darwin's theory is actually part os his bigger theory.
No, I do have an idea of what I'm talking about. You don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. And please, spare the world your 'religious people are arrogant' speech because I have not seen anyone as arrogant as you are to be perfectly honest.
So you say religion is something invented by man out of fear because Jesus didn't have white skin?
I don't see why you can't understand Biancon's argument. It is very simple and reasonable. God could have created sheep and made them follow his every command without any objections whatsoever. But he created mankind, a free-thinking mankind that posesses free will. He wants his creatures to willingly accept him, not mindlessly accept him.
No, I do have an idea of what I'm talking about. You don't have an idea of what I'm talking about. And please, spare the world your 'religious people are arrogant' speech because I have not seen anyone as arrogant as you are to be perfectly honest.
i never said i dont beleive in "god"
all im saying is catholicism is very exagerated and i mean look how jesus is depicted skinny and white as milf with blue eyes. i mean honestly do u not think the man had a tan and was slightly more muscular i mean he was walking around all over the joint.
i mean seriously the man turned 3 fish and 2 pieces of bread into 30000000000000 million of each.
all im saying is catholicism is very exagerated and i mean look how jesus is depicted skinny and white as milf with blue eyes. i mean honestly do u not think the man had a tan and was slightly more muscular i mean he was walking around all over the joint.
i mean seriously the man turned 3 fish and 2 pieces of bread into 30000000000000 million of each.
I don't see why you can't understand Biancon's argument. It is very simple and reasonable. God could have created sheep and made them follow his every command without any objections whatsoever. But he created mankind, a free-thinking mankind that posesses free will. He wants his creatures to willingly accept him, not mindlessly accept him.
Last time I read the Bible I saw no specific dates regarding specific events or references. But, if you're talking about historians views that's another matter.
2009 years ago, of course historians will have heated debates on dates. Those historians may include Muslim and Christian historians but the First Testament would be of little help to advances scholars of ancient history seeing as its written by four men who were more worried about spreading the word of God than giving a proper historical recount on such things.
I don't see from your examples how the Bible and Qur'an both contradict historians views.
seven you are too much man, swallowing all that semen has damaged your brain, you do know the prophet died before any major islamic expansion, and 'biggest by force' hahaha oh dear, be honest, did your mum run away with a muslim man when you were a kid or something? 
Andy either just shat himself at Sunday School one time and never looked back, or he's had his private parts touched by the parish priest.
I'm not sure about Martin yet... but good theory on Seven there
.
It doesn't contradict it. It's just that your idea of evolution is that of a 30 second commercial, I'm sorry to say. What you think of evolution is only the most crude caricature. I'd encourage you to read up on it instead of making misleading statements about it, but knowing you I doubt that's gonna happen.
Of course i'm talking about the historians views. The bible doesn't have to specifically say that Daniel was one of the administrators of the satraps in Persia during king Darius the great sometime during 522 BC and 486 BC. But if it says that something happened during king Darius the Great's reign then there is enough historical proof to know that it happened between 522 BC and 486 BC.
This is an example of what i'm talking about :
The Gospel of Luke links the birth of Jesus to the census taken by Quirinius when he was governor of Syria, as part of a census of the "whole world" under Rome.However Luke and the Gospel of Matthew date the birth to the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 BC, nearly ten years before Quirinius became governor.
The contemporary sources, which we do have today, prove that Luke is in error.
But i'm not surprised by this errors in the Bible because i know that men wrote it. I know that it was altered later, by men.
I was asking about the qur'an and if the historical errors there are proven. I was asking about the replies on the accusations that there are historical errors in the qur'an. I didn't claim that there are such errors there.
But if there are such errors, then we all know what it means.
This is an example of what i'm talking about :
The Gospel of Luke links the birth of Jesus to the census taken by Quirinius when he was governor of Syria, as part of a census of the "whole world" under Rome.However Luke and the Gospel of Matthew date the birth to the reign of Herod the Great, who died in 4 BC, nearly ten years before Quirinius became governor.
The contemporary sources, which we do have today, prove that Luke is in error.
But i'm not surprised by this errors in the Bible because i know that men wrote it. I know that it was altered later, by men.
I was asking about the qur'an and if the historical errors there are proven. I was asking about the replies on the accusations that there are historical errors in the qur'an. I didn't claim that there are such errors there.
But if there are such errors, then we all know what it means.
seven you are too much man, swallowing all that semen has damaged your brain, you do know the prophet died before any major islamic expansion, and 'biggest by force' hahaha oh dear, be honest, did your mum run away with a muslim man when you were a kid or something?
See, there you go, religious people persecuting others again.
