God Himself wrote it by fireing laser beams from His eyes, on to some big sheets of paper.
Which is how we have paper, and laser printers today.
jan.
Which is how we have paper, and laser printers today.
jan.
Bible poll V2.0
- Thread starter YoYoPapaya
- Start date
So that would go in the "other" category.
I picked the option: "I believe the Bible was written by man alone. I am an atheist," but I'm really an agnostic atheist
What Dawkins refer to as a "teapot agnostic"?
The two are the same sir.
While an atheist might use the teapot analogy to characterize their position, it's certainly not the same thing as a more comprehensive description. The former is, after all, just an analogy.
wud???
There's even the example of Russels Teapot in your link about agnostic atheism.
Anyway maybe it's better to let Enmos answer the question.
There's even the example of Russels Teapot in your link about agnostic atheism.
Anyway maybe it's better to let Enmos answer the question.
Which would be relevant if I'd said the two weren't compatible, which I didn't. I am simply suggesting that there is a difference between a proper term and an analogy used to characterize that term.
True.
:roflmao:
well i definitly like the post ban jan.
not that i concur with the opressing ban.
welcome back jan.
Last edited:
There's nothing funny about the post. If that's what he believes, who are you to make fun of him?
:roflmao:
well i definitly like the post ban jan.
not that i concur with the opressing ban.
welcome back jan.
Thanks scifes.
jan.
Every single option in the poll assumes that the Bible was written by man, so you're not just missing something, you're missing everything.
The question at hand is about where the ideas/information ultimately came from.
I took your comment at face value. If there was something additional that I wasn't supposed to "miss" then maybe you should have included it.
My guess is: no
Right but dont let me feel like a second grader with these questions you are asking.
You're not any sort of scientist.
In fact your (so far displayed) "knowledge" of science is phenomenally low.
Why? Are they too advanced?