?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
April 16 2014 @ 12:39 pm
Stephen Colbert defends his beliefs  
I hope this doesn't offend but I loved it and I agree with Stephen Colbert except on the elephant part. This Erhman guy doesn't seem to realize that the Gospels cover different points of time leading up to the crucifixion of Jesus.
 
 
 
girlspell: judge judygirlspell on April 16th, 2014 10:40 pm (UTC)
Since it's Christian belief, I don't get any of it anyway. But I do like Steven fine. This other guy is pretty good too. I was not that thrilled that he'll be David Letterman's old chair (I had hoped Ellen would have won) but the guy is funny.
Jill aka Josireesanwar on April 18th, 2014 12:39 am (UTC)
I do love Steven.

I am so happy he's taking over for David Letterman. I like Ellen. She's so funny it hurts to watch her... you just can't laugh that hard.... but I'm just more excited for Steven.

Of course, it would be nice to see a woman in late night. Oh well.
daxcat79: Stock:  Window Girldaxcat79 on April 17th, 2014 10:33 pm (UTC)
I do not believe the bible contradicts itself, but I do believe people interpret the bible incorrectly which causes confusion. Look at creationists, it's great that they have belief, but they completely disregard scientific proof when the bible itself talks about a day to God is like a thousand years. So then these guys write books based on human confusion and OF COURSE it doesn't make sense when you go at it from that perspective. *shrug*
Jill aka Jo: Stock: eyelashessireesanwar on April 18th, 2014 12:31 am (UTC)
I think the Bible states things pretty clearly and does go back and clarify things and of course, some laws changed with Jesus's sacrifice. The things is that people don't consider the actual history of the text or the meaning of it. People say one part is a "story" and then when the writer is actually telling stories rather than historical accounts they point to it as some fanciful thing that indicates the Bible isn't true.

I believe in Creation and I don't disregard science. Sometimes science goes along really well with the Bible and other times you actually have to listen to these scientists. A lot of what they are basing things on are assumptions.

When they talk about fossils is a great example. They talk about them being quickly compressed under weight and fossilized and yet they won't even consider that it could be a flood like the Bible states. Instead they tells us about a timeline they created and made up rules for so that when they date things they date it according to those rules so then it always suggests something other than Creation.

The Bible actually mentions creatures that meet the description of a dinosaur. I don't believe for a second that it was millions of years. Especially since human and dinosaur fossils have been found together.

And the mention of a day being a thousand years to God is totally out of context because it is saying time is finite to an infinite God. It isn't saying when He says a day he means a thousand years.

It is like saying someone is so insignificant to you they are like an ant. They aren't actually an ant they just don't mean anything to you.

Time means nothing to God who is eternal.

What this Erhman guy is saying just annoys me because he's taking different tellings of Jesus's life and saying... see he's not as important as you think. It's sad really because if he was actually reading the Gospels with an opened mind he was see that these men were describing different points of the whole situation. Instead he's nitpicking at something he doesn't seem to know a lot about.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic or anything... just my beliefs and I like to clarify my perspective and often like-minded people's perspective on it.
daxcat79: Stock:  Woman's Best Frienddaxcat79 on April 23rd, 2014 01:21 am (UTC)

I think the Bible states things pretty clearly and does go back and clarify things and of course, some laws changed with Jesus's sacrifice. The things is that people don't consider the actual history of the text or the meaning of it. People say one part is a "story" and then when the writer is actually telling stories rather than historical accounts they point to it as some fanciful thing that indicates the Bible isn't true.

I do agree that it's an accurate history. God was very detailed, and none of it was told as if a story.

I believe in Creation and I don't disregard science. Sometimes science goes along really well with the Bible and other times you actually have to listen to these scientists. A lot of what they are basing things on are assumptions.

Creation has been proved by science. The universe came about suddenly. There's proof we all descended from the genetic code of two humans, things like this. A lot is guess work, though, yes.

When they talk about fossils is a great example. They talk about them being quickly compressed under weight and fossilized and yet they won't even consider that it could be a flood like the Bible states. Instead they tells us about a timeline they created and made up rules for so that when they date things they date it according to those rules so then it always suggests something other than Creation.

The Bible actually mentions creatures that meet the description of a dinosaur. I don't believe for a second that it was millions of years. Especially since human and dinosaur fossils have been found together.

And the mention of a day being a thousand years to God is totally out of context because it is saying time is finite to an infinite God. It isn't saying when He says a day he means a thousand years.


Its clear their ice age was really the flood, but they will never accept that. Dinosaurs were probably killed in the flood. I don't think they are entirely accurate about the timeline, but I do believe creation of the earth took longer than a single day. Although the context was indeed that time is different for him than us, there are other times that this phrase of days has been used during times that were not literally 24 hour periods. Or the opposite. In Genesis 2:4 it references all the creative days as being one day. Plus the Earth was already created when the creation days started as stated in Genesis 1:1.

What this Erhman guy is saying just annoys me because he's taking different tellings of Jesus's life and saying... see he's not as important as you think. It's sad really because if he was actually reading the Gospels with an opened mind he was see that these men were describing different points of the whole situation. Instead he's nitpicking at something he doesn't seem to know a lot about.

The problem is not all religions agree over the scriptures. Some say he's God or God's son. Some say he was just a human man. It's all over the place, and unless you've studied the bible you're foundation for research is unreasonable and inaccurate. I started my study with a clear mind and built up my beliefs through study because doctrine is different and not always founded on scripture.

I'm not trying to be antagonistic or anything... just my beliefs and I like to clarify my perspective and often like-minded people's perspective on it.

I respect that. I don't mind these kinds of conversations.
Jill aka Jo: Chuck: Sarah and Chuck in waiting roomsireesanwar on May 2nd, 2014 05:48 am (UTC)
Its clear their ice age was really the flood, but they will never accept that. Dinosaurs were probably killed in the flood. I don't think they are entirely accurate about the timeline, but I do believe creation of the earth took longer than a single day. Although the context was indeed that time is different for him than us, there are other times that this phrase of days has been used during times that were not literally 24 hour periods. Or the opposite. In Genesis 2:4 it references all the creative days as being one day. Plus the Earth was already created when the creation days started as stated in Genesis 1:1.

This is the history[a] of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,

See and I think what Genesis is telling us isn't just that God created the earth but that he created everything in these 6 days including time and the week we have come to know.

I've always believed Genesis 2:4 was telling us... This is the history of the day as in 24 hour days that he made but it is the history of those days.