People who constantly quote bible verses

My family members are baptists. They believe the Old Testament is factual.

 

Most conservative Baptists believe that. There are many that do not.

 

I disagree. Adam and Eve's situation is what plunged Mankind into sin. The new testament covers this. Romans 5 15:21. I think its lines up perfectly and is true, of course I am a believer. Until they listened to the serpent they were perfect in the sight of the Lord. After they had partaken of what Satan said to do and not God, they were plunged into sin, thus dooming all of mankind. Its what made us the sinful creatures that we are today, and the reason that we needed a perfect sacrifice from Heaven to come down and be the atonement for our sins. (Jesus) God is dead to sin. So once they sinned, they were not perfect in his sight anymore. It makes perfect sense to me. He even turned his back to Jesus when he took all of our sins on at Calvary. (some people will disagree, but its what I believe happened), because Jesus said "my father why hast thou forsaken me?"

I also believe that Noah' Ark was a shadow or prophesy of Jesus. You ask why, well think about this. Jesus is our savior, and in the time of the flood, the ark was the savior for Noah's family and all those animals from the flood.

In my opinion, the Old testament talks about Jesus just as much as the new Testament. matter of fact, I believe the 3rd verse of Genesis speaks of Jesus. Some people will say he is talking about the Sun right there, but the bible says later on that God divided light and darkness, (day and night). When it speaks of light there in the 3rd verse, I believe it speaks of Jesus.

This is all just my opinion of course and Im not going to sit here and say that I am right and everybody else is wrong because that is not the way we are supposed to act, but I will say that I do not think we can just discount the stories in the Old Testament as fables. I believe they actually happened.

 

I think that, in order to believe that, you have to ignore logic. I refuse to do that in my religious beliefs.

 

I dont think im being illogical. I believe in that, and you don't. Thats fine with me. Im not gonna set here and tell you your wrong because we are not supposed to do that. I just wanted to voice my opinion on the topic.

 

Are you a member of the 8th's Atheist Alliance, as well, Law?

 

Did not mean to be an ass hole, Macon. It's logic in my eyes. It's obviously not in your eyes, and you have every right to believe as you wish and voice your opinion. I was simply doing the same, not insulting you.

 

No, sir.

 

Perhaps a larger and broader sampling size would produce different results. Depending upon the seminary, this figure would have a disparately volatile result.

From 2007, but I can't imagine it's changed much since then.

Link: http://www.gallup.com/poll/27682/onethird-americans-believe-bible-literally-true.aspx

 

So, if the biblical text fails to appear fully logical, or meet the highest intellectual challenge - you refuse it?

What then do you make of the resurrection, both in light of modern medical knowledge and the well-established bounds of intellectual reason, and in comparison to your own statement as being a Christian, Law?

Without a risen Savior, I'm not sure what we are then worshipping. Are you?

 

And, not only for Law but anyone, what portion - exactly - are we disbelieving about the myth of Adam and Eve?

If I'm going to disavow a core tenant of my faith, I'd like to be certain as to what all that would entail, and then require to occur.

No smart ass, just asking.

 

In your belief, how does the inheritence of that original sin work, and how is it justified?

 

I don't believe any of it. Man arose in East Africa some thousands of years ago.

 

I was wondering this, but didn't feel me asking would get the self-reflective response one would be hoping for. Where does one draw the line between metaphor and literal truth in the Bible, once they have been inserted there? It seems like one could quickly end up with Jefferson's tattered copy.

 

Perhaps this can say it better than I can about Adam and Eve.

Adam and Eve: Real or Imaginary

 

First, I'm not refusing anything. I refuse to take an interpretation of the Bible that is illogical. Do you think Methodists "refuse" the Bible. Of course they don't. That's ridiculous. They, like I, simply don't believe that Noah built a ship large enough to house millions of species of animals. I think one has to be objective when looking at the Bible, and that means recognizing the fact that, in many ways, it's a marketing document. Those problems don't stem from God, rather from the men who constructed it. I also believe that Jesus died, but I don't feel that there had to be a physical resurrection from the dead to believe that Jesus is the Savior. There are many historical accounts that have Jesus' body being eaten by dogs rather than disappearing from the tomb. I don't feel the need to make my religious beliefs supernatural or have my view of Christianity be like a Harry Potter movie to believe. Jesus died for our sins, in my opinion. The supernatural resurrection from the dead is not essential in my eyes for me to believe.

 

Oldvol, this article lost me when it listed as fact that the Bible is the "only reliable source for facts." I think that's pure fantasy.

 

So as a practicing Christian, are you saying that The Bible shouldn't be used as a reliable source of facts? Where does one get his theology then? What book should be used for a Christian then?

 

The Epic of Gilgamesh.

 

Oh the stories we could tell.