poll

[mickydaniels]

Originally Posted by Crono

They didn't even have paper or much to write on those days. Why do you think the gospels of Mathew, Luke, Mark, and John were written way after Jesus' death? None of the events in the Bible were recorded on the spot. That is a "Bible fact".

It's different when you're talking about Washington being the first president, because there were people there, at the time, who recorded those events. There weren't people following Jesus and writing down eveyrthing he did.

So what if the gospels were written after Jesus' death? Don't people write biographies of persons after they die? Is everyone's memory really that bad?
No paper to write on in those days? Why am I reading the Peloponnesian War, which was written more than 400 years before Christ?
Why does it say in the Old Testament that the King has to make his own copy of the law that was handed down from Moses?

[Crono]

Originally Posted by mickydaniels

So what if the gospels were written after Jesus' death? Don't people write biographies of persons after they die? Is everyone's memory really that bad?
No paper to write on in those days? Why am I reading the Peloponnesian War, which was written more than 400 years before Christ?
Why does it say in the Old Testament that the King has to make his own copy of the law that was handed down from Moses?

You don't get it. If someone wrote a biography of someone who died in the year 1960, it is completely different than the Bible. Example: we know Einstein encouraged the development of atomic weapons, there is the actual letter that he wrote to Rossevelt. We know he invented the E=mc^2 physics law, because there were people there, on first account, when he did it, and recorded it.

But when there's no way to record such events for a long period of time, the stories get changed. That is a human fact. Don't believe me? Why not listen to some of the gossip at your school, and tell me how close it is to the "real story". I've heard and seen so many situations where stories get completely turned upside down that I cam't even count them. They are perfect examples. Jesus may have healed someone, but some other guy probably said "YEAH! HE DID IT JUST BY TOUCING THEM OMG IT WAS SO AMAZING", but he probably wasnt there,, he just heard the story from someone else and changed it. Eventually, when things were written, the writers wrote from what they thought they knew, and what they heard. They had no real facts to prove that it happened.

They had other ways to write, such as on stone. And it was mostly people of high rank who had success to such things.

But anyway, it is pointless to argue because neither side has the right facts. I don't dislike religion, and I don't dislike those who follow it, I just don't believe it.

[mickydaniels]

Originally Posted by Crono

You don't get it. If someone wrote a biography of someone who died in the year 1960, it is completely different than the Bible. Example: we know Einstein encouraged the development of atomic weapons, there is the actual letter that he wrote to Rossevelt. We know he invented the E=mc^2 physics law, because there were people there, on first account, when he did it, and recorded it.

But when there's no way to record such events for a long period of time, the stories get changed. That is a human fact. Don't believe me? Why not listen to some of the gossip at your school, and tell me how close it is to the "real story". I've heard and seen so many situations where stories get completely turned upside down that I cam't even count them. They are perfect examples. Jesus may have healed someone, but some other guy probably said "YEAH! HE DID IT JUST BY TOUCING THEM OMG IT WAS SO AMAZING", but he probably wasnt there,, he just heard the story from someone else and changed it. Eventually, when things were written, the writers wrote from what they thought they knew, and what they heard. They had no real facts to prove that it happened.

They had other ways to write, such as on stone. And it was mostly people of high rank who had success to such things.

But anyway, it is pointless to argue because neither side has the right facts. I don't dislike religion, and I don't dislike those who follow it, I just don't believe it.

The gospels were written by whoever they're named after. And they did witness the things he did because they were together nearly all of the time.

By the way,
Einstein was a fraud.

[Hero2]

Originally Posted by mickydaniels

Einstein was a fraud.

How dare you Einstein is a god...although you are part true...Einstein is my role model just because he is lasy and does want he wants and became famous for it.

[WiseMan]

Einstein should have never went back in time and made it possible for the Russians to take over.

[Crono]

Originally Posted by WiseMan

Einstein should have never went back in time and made it possible for the Russians to take over.

He "should have never went back in time"? What are you talking about?

[nWoCHRISnWo]

Well that isn't my main argument of why I don't believe there's a god, mickeydaniels, I just threw it out there. And considering you can take anything out of the bible and take it out of context to mean whatever you want, I don't believe ANYTHING that comes out of the bible so don't bother.

The way I see it, there's absolutely NOTHING that provides evidence that there is a god, and until then I won't believe there is.

[Hero2]

lol command and conquer red alert 2