Cape teen beheaded in ‘satanic ritual’
- Thread starter Edelweiss
- Start date
- Status
B1nary
New member
Not true there are huge amounts of historical evidence that backs christianity and the historicity of the bible, so there is proof outside of the bible that what's inside the bible is historically accurate.(works of Tacitus and Josephus for instance)
mmm can you give me a link about this whole God telling anyone to sacrifice a person other than the whole isaac thing, Because as far as i'm concerned this does not exist and i'm willing to be wrong, a quick google machine does not give me these results you speak of.
Last edited:
Tsar
The thing that should not be
The bible is more of a dairy. Just the way it was written was the way they understood what was going on during the time.
Ike_009
Assassin of Accountants
Tsar
The thing that should not be
So you were there when the wrote it and can testify that those stories are just opinions
I actually was didn't I tell you I am a vampire
No but it makes sense. People didn't understand things like they do today. so what we might see as something mundane they saw something totally different. But that is just my opinion.
Ike_009
Assassin of Accountants
I actually was didn't I tell you I am a vampire
Not really, it could just as easily be an accurate account of the events at the time. However neither of us were there at the time so we can't say for sure who is right and who is wrong.
Clive Woofer
New member
As I said in my earlier post, there are lots of names and events that correspond with historical evidence that we've found over the years, but none that we've found so far supports the biblical narrative. Tacitus' texts prove that a man named Jesus existed, but it does not prove that he was the son of god or even divine. Similarly, Josephus also merely makes mention of the existence of a man named Jesus, but does not offer any evidence to support the biblical narrative.
I like how William Dever put it;
There's also some discrepancies between that which the Bible puts forth as fact and that which we've actually learned from archaeological excavations. I'm not going to go as far as to say anyone who believes what is written in the Bible is wrong, because I fully accept that I may be wrong, but I believe that the majority of the stories in the bible are nothing more than folk tales, superstitions and legends which here and there make reference to historical events, locations or people.
- - - Updated - - -
Just to put in a little disclaimer; I hope nobody takes my posts as attacks on their religious beliefs. I think everyone is entitled to believe whatever they want, but I just wanted to give my view on religion. Even though I'm not religious, I actually find religion a very fascinating subject and I like to broaden my knowledge on the different religions that do exist and have existed.
Last edited:
Tsar
The thing that should not be
Clive Woofer
New member
Why do people keep mentioning that? Are we not allowed to have discussions regarding religion on MyGaming? I see no problem as long as everyone remains civil about it.
The Joker
Thread Killer MKII
Please don't post anything threads/posts on religion.
Its not a subject that belongs on My Gaming, there are other dumps for it like my broad band.
Clive Woofer
New member
How about this? Don't read threads about religion if you don't like them and the rest of us won't post about religion in threads not clearly marked as religious discussion threads. That way you don't have to read something you don't like and those of us who are interested in religious discussions can keep discussing them.
I think that's a fairly reasonable compromise.
I think that's a fairly reasonable compromise.
Hagan
Check my new Avatar
How about this? Don't read threads about religion if you don't like them and the rest of us won't post about religion in threads not clearly marked as religious discussion threads. That way you don't have to read something you don't like and those of us who are interested in religious discussions can keep discussing them.
I think that's a fairly reasonable compromise.
Some take offence when their religion is seemingly bad-mouthed.
Once a topic of religion is discuss, there are many different view points that will be aired and spoken of (e.g someone has a deep understanding and belief in their religion, and someone else - perhaps seemingly insensitively - says something another finds offensive or disrespectful.
Some treat the topic lightly, whereas others prefer a deeper and more sensitive approach.
*I realise I sound repetitive -- just trying to bring my point across.
Clive Woofer
New member
Yeah, I get where you're coming from, but the problem with that is we can't employ censorship on certain subjects every time someone takes offence at something. I think if you know you're sensitive about a certain subject, the responsibility lies with you to either learn not to take offence at it or failing that, to learn to ignore those subjects whenever they come up. We can't really expect people to avoid certain topics simply because we don't like when they're being discussed. Especially not when participation in that discussion is optional.
- Status