[BrainSmashR]

Originally Posted by rhertz

Yes that is exactly what I am saying. Dr Seuss is literature. The Bible is The Word of God spoken through his devoted servants here on earth. I hope I am being clear enough in stating my belief.

You are being quite clear. Your implication is that one body of writing throughout all of history is NOT considered a work of literature.

Overlooking the obvious due to jealousy on behalf of your savior. The Bible is no different than any other book, it just means something different to Christians.

Wikipedia is riddled with errors and is hardly a definitive resource. Just last week, Wikipedia had Cedric Glovers birthday listed as 1985 until someone fixed it to 1965 the other day. Who is to say this new date is right or wrong? Maybe it is 1955, who knows? The Bible doesn’t change like the wind.

You have failed to make the connection.

I'm not using wikipedia to prove my opinion, I'm using it to prove you haven't researched you side of the story because even wikipedia suggests that Homer was divinely inspired while your contention is he was not.

If I listed 10 other sources, you still wouldn't have debunked the concept that many believe Homer was divinely inspired, which IS the point, not whether or not Wikipedia is a creditable source. BTW, had you bothered to DO the research, you'd have noticed I copied the paragraph from Wikipedia however they are NOT the source of the information that I posted.

Morgan, Llewelyn, 1999. Patterns of Redemption in Virgil's Georgics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), p. 30.

Simply put, you're arguing a moot point that was never even intended to BE a point. You just saw an argument you thought you could win because of the source, damn the information provided, right?

Many gave first-hand accounts. Works are only included after they are canonized, that is, deemed to be the true word of God after much scrutiny (in 180 degree contrast to wikipedia which accepts everything regardless of its nature)

Agreed, who gave the first-hand account of the creation of Earth and all of it's inhabitants?

Once again, you're arguing about wikipedia instead of keeping your eye on the ball. I could list 10 alternate sources and you still wouldn't have proved that some thought Homer was divinely inspired OR which author who witnessed the creation of the Universe, or the Earth, or even one single creature.

Numbers are a true indicator of right and wrong. Eventually numbers freed the slaves. It was numbers that proved the flat-earth theory wrong. Nobody ever said numbers are static. They change. If you are very sick and ask 10 doctors what is wrong, and 9 say you have disease “A” while 1 says you have disease “B”, chances are the truth lies with the opinion of the majority for that point in time. If numbers prove nothing, then what does point at the truth? Rhetoric? Whining? Posting it on the Internet?

There were always more who opposed slavery than those who supported it. Thus, slavery wasn't ended by overwhelming numbers, but rather by intolerance and aggression by our northern brothers. As far as your doctor theory, again, you are dealing with a tangible object UNLIKE your religion, savor, etc.

Now, if the overwhelming number of Christians (2 billion) is one of the reasons your use to prove the existence of your savor and justify your beliefs. What's that say about the other 4 billion Earthlings who do not believe in Christianity, who say YOU are wrong while your measely 1/3 of the population says the entire rest of the plant is wrong....based on the numbers?

Sounds to me that you are practicing a double standard. Jealousy on behalf of your savior....again, that's zealotry.

I do not know how much knowledge the Egyptian workers had regarding the coming of Christ, but clearly the Pyramid’s designers had considerable knowledge of the coming of Christ. Also if you know anything about the Giza pyramid, clearly it was not designed by the same peoples who designed the other more primitive works (built both before and after the Giza pyramid)

The pyramids took hundreds of years to build. Common sense should tell you they weren't designed by the same individuals. Furthermore, they were tombs for the pharaohs, and that's not a "belief" but rather a fact based on written history as well as recovered bodies.

The more likely story is that some Christian, relying on faith rather than fact, incorporated the concept you are talking about into his system of beliefs. Of course, at least the Catholic Church had enough sense to see the guy was full of crap. That's why you don't read about pyramids in the Bible even though they existed long before Jesus roamed the middle east.

No, you asked:
Are you implying that any "miracle" you have witnessed doesn't have a scientifically related cause and affect?

I replied:
Yes, I am not only implying that, but banking on it as part of my faith.

I have witnessed many things that cannot be explained by current science based cause and effect. Doctors have documented sudden cures with no scientific explanation whatsoever. Some individuals have been documented with forms of ESP that cannot be explained by science. Yet Police sometimes use these individuals to located criminals or clues to solving a case. Such as finding a suspected murderer. Some of these things can be explained as “miracles” until such time (if ever) that science can model and explain it. Keep in mind that science and religion aren’t mutually exclusive by any stretch of the imagination. Science is a moving target and updated frequently just like a Wiki.

Right I asked "Are you implying that any "miracle" you have witnessed doesn't have a scientifically related cause and affect?

Medicine is not an exact science. In laymens terms, something man doesn't currently have the knowledge to explain does NOT suggest divine intervention, but rather a lack of understanding on our part. Now what about the miracles you have witnessed?