|
|
|
|
|
| DA VINCI CODE or BIBLE fictions or facts.
Posted: 4/9/2008 10:19:05 AM | Restleless Native
"What I fail to understand is what made Jesus any different from the others. Was it just that he happened to win the Galilee heat of Messiah Idol and the prize was to have a book written about him?"
It is because His coming was announced by all the previous prophets through what is called "The Old Testament" and because unlike all the others (Bar Ibrahim I believe) he did many miracles.
Nevertheless, the muslim prophet Mohammed did no miracles whatsoever and still got a book ;-) | |
|
| DA VINCI CODE or BIBLE fictions or facts.
Posted: 4/9/2008 10:25:33 AM |
Which would mean you agree with a theory you have no direct knowledge of and are therefore "partial" without an adequate check andbalance no?
Theories are usually written up with balance and reference. They are written so the reader can check back to vaious pages of the Bible or carry out the same repeatable experiment. So therefore you do have the knowledge, it is clear how the author of the theory came to his/her conclusions and opinion.
{quote]Now, if you re-read my posts accurately you will find that I have reacted to pontifications without knowledge.
You have informed yourself before making a judgement and I do not reject that position at all. It is legittimate. It is borne out of reading and thinking, not just repeating. Now, I ask you to go back and read the many posts: how many of the posters do you think have actually read the works in question? I cannot validate or counter the Da Vinci Code for the simple reason I have not read the book, so I would not offer a comment on it. I was merely pointing out that to criticise something, knowledge of it is needed.
And my point was that you don't have to have spent ages reading the Bible to accept anothers opinion on it. I am a physics-numpty, yet I accept the works of Newton.
However I do resonate with your view point that some people liek to criticise things without actually thinking anything through as to *why* they are criticising it, to 'look cool' or to appear knowledgable.
One such example would be that famous scientist (whose name escapes me now) who accepted Islam when visiting the black sea and recognising in it the same theories explained in the Q'ran. (with which I wholehartedly disagree) If you like, I'll make a research for you to tell you his name. (please spare me; I am supposed to be working)
If you do find it that would be great. I am quite intrigued. I am supposed to be writing my essay up..... 
Well, I prefer to believe it did (exist) and the more I read about it, the more I am convinced. I could offer you many sites where it is actually maintained His existance is proven but that would deprive you of your own tools of research. Maybe if you visited some of the sites you could read, research more (to assess reliability of information) and then possibly form your own opinion? As a scientist, I would expect you had no prejudicial positions, so you could apply that principle in that too
I actually believe Jesus may well have existed. Whether is was the son of God, and whether the things that he did or was supposed tohave done did happen, is an entirely different matter.
Earth is not though...so are you not happy Galileo did not accept that?
Ironically I picked up on that typo not realising I had a squillion typo's in my post!
Actually Gallileo didn't set out to disprove it originally, it was a slow discovery over time. However science is often overcome or disproved, eugenics is one notorious one. Science is always about learning. Gallileo was an example of that.
The restrictions here are about how many posts one can post and on your profile I guess is because I am an occasional smoker.
Sorry, what makes you imply I have contacted someone for an encounter (or whatever that was)? "nuff said"? Not really, I thought we were having an intelligent debate not a "nuff said" conversation.
Nooooooooo sorry!! I didnt mean to appear I was insulting you!! What I meant was they were the only two restriction I could see. The smoking one I could comment on and the other I put 'nuff said' as its not my business!!! lol
I have had 'prefer not to say' smokers contact me before so wasnt sure how rigorous the fish restriction was.
I will drop you a quick mail in a minute...just so you can contact me then if you wish. | |
|
| DA VINCI CODE or BIBLE fictions or facts.
Posted: 4/9/2008 10:32:51 AM | and because unlike all the others (Bar Ibrahim I believe) he did many miracles
That's where you lose me I'm afraid. When people start to use anecdotal evidence and quote it as fact that's when I struggle to find what they are saying as being credible. Just because multiple anonymous authors wrote about something in a book it doesn't prove that it actually happened.
The Bible is the word of man. Not the word of god.
By the way.... [ quote ] [ /quote ] around the bits you want to quote will make it a bit easier for everyone to follow your posts. | |
|
| DA VINCI CODE or BIBLE fictions or facts.
Posted: 4/9/2008 10:38:15 AM | The Quran is NOT a book about Mohammed.
Mohammed *received* the revelation of the Holy Quran.
Mohammed performed no miracles, but they why would he have. He was the Last of the Prophets, a man born of human parents who died a natural death. However, he received the revelation and lived his life in such a way that he is the most exalted of all mankind.
Muslims do not believe or claim any "divinity" for Mohammed, but pay creedance to the Hadith (the sayings of the Holy Prophet) and the Sunnah (the way the Holy Prophet led his life). | |
|
| DA VINCI CODE or BIBLE fictions or facts.
Posted: 4/9/2008 11:13:01 AM | Sticking strictly to the OP's question -
i do not want a religious debate, or to see anyone upset by this subject, but i guess what i am asking is what makes one so righteous and the other so much slander? surely it is interpretation and faith that truly makes the difference?
My answer is -
Both the bible and the Da Vinci Code are books. Written by humans.
We have no proof that what happened in either book actually happened.
The conspiracy theorists and the religious believers can go on and on and on but at the end of the day we cannot safely seperate fact from fiction. | |
|
| DA VINCI CODE or BIBLE fictions or facts.
Posted: 4/9/2008 11:17:53 AM |
Both the bible and the Da Vinci Code are books. Written by humans.
We have no proof that what happened in either book actually happened.
Yup thats what i think too.
What interests me is peoples reasoning behind the belief in the Bible.
Before I became a scientist I studied psychology and social science... its a love that has never really left me :o) | |
|
| DA VINCI CODE or BIBLE fictions or facts.
Posted: 4/9/2008 11:32:31 AM | If you are a scientist you will understand that if you show an early error then anything subsequent is irrelevant. Like Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code which is riddles with inaccuracies, so is the Bible.
For example, testosterone and estrogen, the principal male and female sex hormones respectively, they differ only by the presence or absence of two hydrogen atoms and one carbon atom. This small chemical difference between the two steroids effectively determines whether an individual will take on the secondary sexual characteristics of a male or a female. Basically Estrogen came first therefore we are all initially females, however, due to the presence of an extra carbon atom on testosterone this determine if some of us develop into males. This contradicts the teachings of the Old Testament where man was creates first and then woman created because ‘Adam’ was lonely. This is also the reason why males have nipples, if man was created first then we males would not have them.
Other examples of errors in the Old Testament are the absence of creatures in fossil records (I think bar 1…a fish) are alive today. This contradicts bible teachings where all animals were created in the same time period. It can be seen that creatures from many periods of time failed to appear in later periods of time and other creatures then failing to appear in earlier time periods. Although this does not prove evolution per se, it does disprove creation in 1 time period as per the Bible.
There are many more examples like this…the Noah’s flood theory is another good example but like I said you only have to disprove one thing early on and nothing after that matters.
The Bible although cleverly written by intelligent people of its time, they were still primitive by today’s standards. People here have mentioned Galileo, he was placed under house arrest for the rest of his life for what people considered as trying to disprove the Bible, and this is common through out time where if you criticized the church you were killed in an attempt to protect it. Only recently people have been allowed to openly question the bible and now it is failing to stand up to modern criticism.
I find that many people like I will and have see on here, even if you point out the blatantly obvious, they always fall back to ‘well you just have to have faith’…be it all blind. You can never convince the ignorant. People in the church(s) are more and more having to rely on faith to support the Bible and the existence of their ‘God’
I can see why the bible was created…as a mechanism to control the masses, at the time written without an enforcement agency or a judiciary the only way you can instill a sense of right and wrong in people is to ‘create’ the fear of God…if you do good you will go on to an ever lasting happiness…if you do bad you will die in damnation. Clever really.
This of course will fall on many deaf ears…why because they have faith.
Dan Brown is an author of mere fiction…simple as that.
May your god go with you.
VVVVVVVVVVVV
You will always get good men and bad men...but only a religion will make a good man do bad
Fredrick Forsyth wrote the day of the jackal around the true assasination attempt of DeGaulle, however 1 point of fact does not prove that the book is all fact. | |
|
| DA VINCI CODE or BIBLE fictions or facts.
Posted: 4/9/2008 11:49:33 AM | Andy A
The Bible although cleverly written by intelligent people of its time, they were still primitive by today’s standards. People here have mentioned Galileo, he was placed under house arrest for the rest of his life for what people considered as trying to disprove the Bible, and this is common through out time where if you criticized the church you were killed in an attempt to protect it. Only recently people have been allowed to openly question the bible and now it is failing to stand up to modern criticism.
Totally. Its only in this last half century or so that we as a society have become more seluclar. With the advent of more science, people were less reliant on the Bible to explain their world and mroe reliant on science. However that did lead to some of the biggest mistakes and abuse of science ever. Some of which are still going on. People still try and use pseudo-science to back up points that cant be proved otherwise. Particularly whe it comes to faith or evidence in something, not just the Bible specifically but I am meaning in general.
I find that many people like I will and have see on here, even if you point out the blatantly obvious, they always fall back to ‘well you just have to have faith’…be it all blind. You can never convince the ignorant. People in the church(s) are more and more having to rely on faith to support the Bible and the existence of their ‘God’
Indeed. However faith is not a bad thing,. if people are happy believing in God, martians or the tooth fairy Im fine with that. But when it is used as an excuse fo wars, murders, genocide, bigorty then I rather take umbrage. Religion is the biggest excuse of all that is used for all those.
I can see why the bible was created…as a mechanism to control the masses, without an enforcement agency or a judiciary the only way you can instill a sense of right and wrong in people is to ‘create’ the fear of God…if you do good you will go on to an ever lasting happiness…if you do bad you will die in damnation. Clever really.
Yes these days its left up to the Daily Mail to give us the folk devils we need. 
Dan Brown is an author of mere fiction…simple as that.
Yes and no. If the Bible is fiction then yes he is a fictional writer of fiction. However some of what he says is quite true and well researched, not so much about the existence of the bloodline but other references in there.
I still recommend, and will do a few more times if this thread runs, a book called 'In Gods Name' by David Yallop. Its about the murder of Pope John Paul 1 by the Church. It was written years ago but has been brough back into print with all the recent interest. Its really well written.
I also recommend to anyone When Prophecy Fails and Cognitive Dissonance both written by Leon Festinger. When you look at faith, its spot on. | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
