Dude the fish story I am talking about is ones that get over embellished by everyday people nothing to do with the book and yes it is just a book called the bible. You can quote what every you like from it but the fact remains it is a story that was written down several HUNDRED years after the fact. The point I am making is in that length of time after a situation happens it gets bigger and better every time it is told people will add htere own personal touch to it every time it get retold.
what if God could be proven?
- Thread starter NMSquirrel
- Start date
Dude the fish story I am talking about is ones that get over embellished by everyday people nothing to do with the book and yes it is just a book called the bible. You can quote what every you like from it but the fact remains it is a story that was written down several HUNDRED years after the fact. The point I am making is in that length of time after a situation happens it gets bigger and better every time it is told people will add htere own personal touch to it every time it get retold.
Prove that it was god with out using your bible as it is suspect to say the least you said you are a botanist so you should have some under standing of science prove GOD is there using science.not conjecture.
Its not clear what evidence you are alluding to in order to support your claim of embellishment.
Well I cannot recall the study but last year I was in an effective communication course and they mentioned a study that showed when one person witnessed a indecent that when retelling the story to make it a better more engaging story for the listener they would add a few elements to make it sound better. This is what I am saying is that for example Jesus walking on water went from wading in chest high water to being able to walk on top of it. that is what I am saying is that every time this gets retold by someone that has listened to the original it changes the story. The premise of the story remains but the facts are far different from what actually happened.
so what's your argument?
That any re-telling of an event is misleading?
I mean, can we even trust your recounting of a study, since that is also another type of retelling?
OVER Time it can become misleading yes it is done so to engage the listener to keep them there while the story is told. It would not be a very good story if it did not engage the reader.
so IOW the more enthralling the account, the more likely it is a fabrication?
Yes that is the point.
As well as it is more likely to make the listener/reader to want to here more or think about a subject if it is of interest. Lets face it if the story was on genesis for example was one day god made everything you see. Period no more information then that how likely is it going to be that anyone would care and or repeat the story. Not very likely.
I see.
So truth cannot be stranger than fiction, eh?
yes it can by the people handing one story for one person to the other.
And, it can also be that they are recounting an incident that was indeed astounding.
(BTW just in case you can't see the pattern here, calling upon a tentative argument always give rise for another opportunity to introduce a completely opposing tentative argument)
I should say the following
WHatever you are talking about you have not a factual background, but your opinion. Oh well... you have the right to have and to keep your opinion. There is not story about a fish like that in the bible so is not factual. You have to learn to discuss any subject to disprove the valid of it with facts not opinions. You can repeat yourself many times, but this do not disprove anything.
WHatever you are talking about you have not a factual background, but your opinion. Oh well... you have the right to have and to keep your opinion. There is not story about a fish like that in the bible so is not factual. You have to learn to discuss any subject to disprove the valid of it with facts not opinions. You can repeat yourself many times, but this do not disprove anything.
what
No more information? we have 66 books of information the base of Christianity the fastest growing religion in the world, where only in China is growing millions per day, no more information? the evolutionist are all the time using the bible as reference to disprove the validity of it. No more information? this book is about 2000 years old and is talking about earth is round! read Isaiha 40:22 first description of a dinosaur is in the bible a long before todays people knew about these animals, Job 40: 15-24 no more information? I dont think so Mister. Once again talk with facts.
No more information? we have 66 books of information the base of Christianity the fastest growing religion in the world, where only in China is growing millions per day, no more information? the evolutionist are all the time using the bible as reference to disprove the validity of it. No more information? this book is about 2000 years old and is talking about earth is round! read Isaiha 40:22 first description of a dinosaur is in the bible a long before todays people knew about these animals, Job 40: 15-24 no more information? I dont think so Mister. Once again talk with facts.
I see.
So truth cannot be stranger than fiction, eh?
You want examples there we go. (one more time)
cow bird is a bird in the natural world he lay it eggs in another bird nest, when the baby cowbird (Molothrus ater) comes to this world is raised by different bird specie like sparrows, robins or wren, the cowbird not only never see his real mother or its real specie during the first part of its life (cowbirds do no make next or take care of their babies), it mimic the sound of the host specie's baby birds, so the parasited bird specie will feed the baby cowbird, but when the baby cowbird, becomes adult fly from the host nest and looks for it own specie and start living with and like a cowbird, matting it own specie, and having a cowbird diet, this behavior can not be explained by evolutionists. Neither they found a gene to explain this. The cowbirds are so successful doing this, that some species of bird are in the "threatened list" just because the cowbirds. How about that?
cow bird is a bird in the natural world he lay it eggs in another bird nest, when the baby cowbird (Molothrus ater) comes to this world is raised by different bird specie like sparrows, robins or wren, the cowbird not only never see his real mother or its real specie during the first part of its life (cowbirds do no make next or take care of their babies), it mimic the sound of the host specie's baby birds, so the parasited bird specie will feed the baby cowbird, but when the baby cowbird, becomes adult fly from the host nest and looks for it own specie and start living with and like a cowbird, matting it own specie, and having a cowbird diet, this behavior can not be explained by evolutionists. Neither they found a gene to explain this. The cowbirds are so successful doing this, that some species of bird are in the "threatened list" just because the cowbirds. How about that?
Greenboy;
I have heard of other species that do the same..
but..
i like your arguments..
for the original post,the intent was to try and show that god gives us the ability to choose and even if he were an obvious/uncontestable presence, that we would still have that ability to choose,making alot of arguments against god irrelevant..
don't wanna say quit argueing about whether he exists or not as i like your arguments, but i will say try and tie it into the Original post..
I have heard of other species that do the same..
but..
i like your arguments..
for the original post,the intent was to try and show that god gives us the ability to choose and even if he were an obvious/uncontestable presence, that we would still have that ability to choose,making alot of arguments against god irrelevant..
don't wanna say quit argueing about whether he exists or not as i like your arguments, but i will say try and tie it into the Original post..
But flat.
It also happens to mention "corbers" a lot.
Facts?
There is no dinosaur mentioned in the bible, keep trying.
Surely the point here is clear for anyone wanting to see it.
It has been well established that witness testimony is not completely reliable. Then consider that every time a story is re-told there will be innacuracies and embellishments introduced. If we are talking about several generations or even several hundred years it is reasonable to expect the final story will not be an accurate re-telling of the original event.
dinosaurs in the bible
IT was called Behemoth the word Dinosaur is a modern term has the following attributes according to Job 40:15-24
* It “eats grass like an ox.”
* It “moves his tail like a cedar.”
* Its “bones are like beams of bronze,
His ribs like bars of iron.”
* “He is the first of the ways of God.”
* “He lies under the lotus trees,
In a covert of reeds and marsh.”
what animal you know looks like this, but if you see the dinosaurs you are going to find a good match among then. Now how a person 2,000 years ago was able to describe something that looks like a Brachiosaurus how about that?
IT was called Behemoth the word Dinosaur is a modern term has the following attributes according to Job 40:15-24
* It “eats grass like an ox.”
* It “moves his tail like a cedar.”
* Its “bones are like beams of bronze,
His ribs like bars of iron.”
* “He is the first of the ways of God.”
* “He lies under the lotus trees,
In a covert of reeds and marsh.”
what animal you know looks like this, but if you see the dinosaurs you are going to find a good match among then. Now how a person 2,000 years ago was able to describe something that looks like a Brachiosaurus how about that?
Last edited: