Sensational discoveries in the Bible!

Robittybob1 said:
Look for the meaning. There is job at the end of the rainbow, a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. What is at the end of the rainbow?:)
Click to expand...

A rainbow is of course a refraction, so nothing is there.

I was just following the notion of the Bible as sensational.

Sensationalism depends on exaggerations, deception and gullibility.

These all come into play throughout the Bible, as echoed by present day Fundamentalists, in their denial of evidence, whether it's fossil evidence, dating methods, biological evidence of evolution, abiogenesis, or any of dozens of areas that are perceived to block out the rainbow. And the things just mentioned only get you through the first 5 or 10 pages of the Bible.

I see no gold in denying reality and the wealth of evidence available through nature's own form of "revelation".
 
Aqueous Id said:
A rainbow is of course a refraction, so nothing is there.

I was just following the notion of the Bible as sensational.

Sensationalism depends on exaggerations, deception and gullibility.

These all come into play throughout the Bible, as echoed by present day Fundamentalists, in their denial of evidence, whether it's fossil evidence, dating methods, biological evidence of evolution, abiogenesis, or any of dozens of areas that are perceived to block out the rainbow. And the things just mentioned only get you through the first 5 or 10 pages of the Bible.

I see no gold in denying reality and the wealth of evidence available through nature's own form of "revelation".
Click to expand...
You are a clever fellow (assumed male), wise, and I hope you do well in the future.
Now thinking back I did see a picture of Judas hanging in a tree where the branches had impaled his gut. I thought well that might explain the two seemingly conflicting accounts.
I just left it at that. There are many other texts outside of the Bible that help to explain what seemingly is missing. When every date and event fits with history, I accept it. I don't say I understand it, but it fits.
But its so so different than we were told.
I want to rewrite Genesis to match modern science. But then you need to know what happened; we wouldn't want the new version to be a source of argument in years to come. That was one reason I studied the formation of the Earth, and the results were different than the current theory. Which hypothesis for formation of the Earth do I write into the New Genesis? Where did this abiogenesis occur? I pick Mercury but no one has agreed yet.:)
 
yeah well my comments on the Bible were directed at the unsupportable claims many folks unendingly make that the text is literal and infallible. Obviously in the references to Judas, Lazarus and Joseph the Carpenter, those arguments wither and die. Those contradictions come straight from the New Testament, in every language and version available. It's in there staring right back at you, daring you to put your boxing gloves on.

As far as how to rewrite Genesis, I have the opening statement all ready to go:

And I quote (from myself):

"In the beginning there was not beginning because there was no time. There was no space. There was singularity. Consciousness, which has no essence in the realm of spacetime, relates to singularity in this regard. The essence of consciousness is timeless, spaceless, virtual, infinite and eternal. The existence of an infinite past or infinite future is immutable, and whether the universe was created or not has no bearing on the human experience. It is therefore of critical importance that believers and non-believers lay down their superstitions and myths and embrace truth. Nature reveals more truth than any number of humans could ever possibly digest. Nature alone is the proper venue for all inquiry into every mystery of any practical consequence. It is recommended, therefore, that all texts created to persuade gullible readers otherwise, should be appropriately filed in the museums and libraries under the dewey decimal number for "lessons learned", and the surplus of the copies should be mulched to feed the microorganisms which have no use for the words printed therein, but which will thrive and maintain their place in nature as long as there is habitat left from them to do so. When all of these have been accomplished, please proceed to chapter two, dealing with survival in a dying world. Amen."

As far as Mercury is concerned, have it your way. I'm happy with the present teachings on earth origins, so I'm not looking for Mercury to fill any gaps. That's why I didn't throw in any remarks on the Mercury thread.

That subject, Earth origins, will make a good teaching point after we replace Sunday schools with labs and realistic curricula for the young and impressionable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top