Yan, there was a time when I did question it for a while. I'm fairly open minded despite what you may think.
What would make me question the validity? Right now, nothing.
truthseeker
JoinedPosts by truthseeker
-
-
-
-
-
-
truthseeker
thetrueone,
My views on life after death might seem unorthodox but I believe that when we die, we survive the death of our fleshly vessel and are transformed by Christ.
I recently watched a documenatry on near death experiences. Many of the people interviewed said they felt as if they were floating and could see their own body while they were being operated on.
I believe that what is inside of us, the essence of self, is not necessarily something you could point to on an X-ray or CAT scan, and say look, there's the consciounsess, I think it is a form of energy that cannot yet be discerned.
Yes, I speculate but that's why we're all here for one reason or another, to speculate and ponder and there's nothing wrong with that, I'm not pushing my beliefs onto anyone.
-
-
-
truthseeker
Yan,
In response to your question re: post 658
What would be necessary to convince you that the flood account may not be literal and may not have happened as described in the Bible?
There is no easy answer to this question. The global deluge was not just another event that had no importance. It changed everything about the world at that time. That's why it's not so easy to dismiss.
Consider 2 Peter 3:5,6: "But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed."
What you're asking me to do is dismiss everything Peter said about the flood because you don't agree the flood happened.
If I do this, I might as well dismiss everything that I cannot grasp because I don't understand it. It doesn't work that way.
At that time, the ark was the delivery vessel to the new world. The shedding of the old ways were symbolized by Noah and his family coming into the new world, almost as if they had entered the Millennium, because with just 8 survivors there was no evil in the world.
Because sin is inherent in mankind from their youth up, it eventually appeared in the children born to Noah and his sons. In effect, this typfies what will happen in the Millenium as new offspring are born and grow to maturity. If they practice sin wilfully, even after being given sufficient time to change their ways, there is no place for them.
At the end of the Millennium, everyone will be like Noah and his family, knowing God's laws and living them. God knows that time can dull the senses which is why there will be another test at the end of the Millenium. A 1,000 years can make a person overconfident. -
-
-
truthseeker
thetrueone,
I am talking about the only God in creation. Where's your faith?
You make mockery of the account of the talking serpent, Jonah in the belly of the fish and raising the dead.
God follows his own scientific creation in doing many things and when he veers off from the normal operation of something, that in itself defies the science created and is called a miracle.
An example of God following His own science of creation coupled with a miracle can be found in Luke 8:54-56: "So he took her by the hand and called out, "Child, get up!" Her spirit returned, and she got up at once. Then He gave orders that she be given something to eat. Her parents were astounded, but He instructed them to tell no one what had happened."
The raising of a dead vessel is not normal science that occurs on a regular basis.In the case of anyone dying, their spirit is severed from the vessel which decays back to dust over a period of time, but a miracle was performed by the power of God through Christ.
The account continues: "Then he gave orders that she be given something to eat."
Nourishment is needed to sustain the human body and to motivate the digestive process. Her blood had not been circulating and was now doing so in the oxygenating process as she breathed again.
Now she was in unity with her flesh and blood and her spirit had been seared back to her body. Another reason she had to eat was because of her having been dead, it was to get the bowels moving again.
In these things God manipulated His science to perform a miracle over the dead girl's body.
-
-
-
truthseeker
Thanks for your comments, I will address them soon.
Yan, I've always believed the Bible is the Word of God. Perhaps if the flood account wasn't referenced by Peter and Jesus I might have thought differently, but both referred to the flood as an actual event. Why would they do this if it was just a story?
-
-
-
truthseeker
thetrueone,
You would have to ask why would I seek to be a LieSeeker if I truly believe the Genesis account. How does lying benefit me when I already believe the Biblical story?
We are doing our best to convince each other, however, accusing me of seeking lies is beneath you and serves no purpose.
Seeking doesn't mean found.
-
-
-
truthseeker
I get the feeling here, that even if Jesus himself told you there was a flood, you still would not want to believe it or even consider the possibilty.
To be honest, it doesn't affect me one iota if you believe/don't believe.
I recently watched a doucmentary on the Sphinx which is believed to be older than Egyptian culture and could be a relic of the preflood era.
The difference between EntirelyPossible and myself, is that I am willing to consider possibilities unless I am proved to be wrong by an overwhelming abundance of evidence which I have so far not seen.
None of you, as far as I know, are historians, geologists, archaeologists, astronomers, astrophysicists, mathematicians etc, unless you say so, so what qualifies your opinions as FACT when you denounce everything I have to say.
-
-
-
truthseeker
thetrueone,
For a person who self identifies himself as a Trutheeker, you certainly do not have that labeling attribute.
Learn to spell, then perhaps you will qualify for your labeling attribute
Regardless, I am a truthseeker, it doesn't mean I will find truth on the first or second attempt. If I have to go down alternative paths, beliefs, whatever, it doesn't change my goal. EntirelyPossible , you have little or nothing to add of any value to this thread except to put down persons you disagree with using your limited three word vocabulary, "Fundies are dumb."
-
-
-
truthseeker
Frankie,
Thanks for the link, I shall take a look.
Everyone else, maybe you can chip in here - what gets a "legend" started? I mean, something so profound as a global deluge, let's say for example that thousands of years ago, someone started this story, and at the time nothing like this had happened. Everyone listening to this story either first hand or third hand would know it was baloney. They wouldn't even bother to pass it on. And since writing and literature was limited, the likelihood of a story like this even passing down through five generations would be unlikely. Yet this is what happened, many cultures have their own version of the global flood. So whatever you think, whether you believe it or not, or perhaps a lesser flood, there must be something to the story.
-
-
-
truthseeker
Concerning the Flood, what followed was water being thrust upward from the earth's strata and the rain from above.
Here's some info on the canopy which once existed http://www.thetruthishere.com/canopy.html
What do the non believers think happened to all of the water when it condensed?
Scientists have to keep reviewing their own assumptions about mankind's history because they keep finding earlier remains of civilizations beneath the seas. They know that civilizations existed before their established timeline - they previously believed mankind came forth from caves and began walking upright. Since later belief is a fallacy, how can they accurately piece the puzzle together?