English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

they claim the bible is the truth because stories are similar, written by many different people over many different continents over a span of many years.

same thing with the beliefs of mermaids...

the only difference i see is that the stories with mermaids, the mermaids never claim that they exist as does god...

so i have to ask, why do christians deny the possibility of mermaids when they believe in god? what makes one myth hold truth while another doesnt? hmmmm?

2007-06-28 09:51:49 · 6 answers · asked by Chippy v1.0.0.3b 6 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

oh yes, and both myths contain "eye witness accounts".

2007-06-28 09:52:10 · update #1

6 answers

Claiming the bible is exactly historically accurate is one thing. Claiming the bible is "theologically true" is quite another. For example, the Catholic Church does not take a literal interpretation of the Adam and Eve vs. the Snake story in Genesis (or most of Genesis, for that matter). It is the theological message that the writers were trying to explain, not a play-by-play historical record. That's nonsense. Only freak-Christians believe that. The real issue is the theological message. That Free Will exists, that God wants us to be able to choose for ourselves whether we want an intimate relationship with God, and the snake being a bad guy was just a rejection of the contemporary Goddess religions that they disagreed with. Stop listening to conservative Christian fundamentalists as your basis for your rejection of Christianity. The vast majority of Christians are NOT literalists. This doesn't mean you should agree with them. I don't. But stop accusing all Christians of being literalists. But yes, the mermaid argument does do a great job of demonstrating the absurd notion of the bible as historical fact.

2007-06-28 10:10:52 · answer #1 · answered by Not Your Muse 2 · 0 0

Actually, the argument that the Bible must be the word of God is a long one that has many interdependent points, and you just took one or two "out of context" (YES, I said the magic phrase that you atheists hate, but it is SOOO true), and you ridicule these two points in isolation as if that was all there was to it.

You are not being honest, and this is not an honest objection.

--------------------------------------------
...Suppose you were raised knowing nothing about the Bible, Old Testament or New Testament, like some tribe in the jungles of New Guinea or along the Amazon in Brazil. One day, a missionary comes along, and drops on you a copy of the Bible. Suppose it was in your own language and you are literate enough to read it. How could you judge whether its contents are true? Suppose a competing religion's missionary left a Quran (Koran) behind. How could you judge whether that book was reliable? To be rational in our religious beliefs, instead of just blindly following what our parents believe, we need to apply reason and not just emotion to figuring out what our religious beliefs should be.

Later on in this booklet, evidence for the historical reliability of the Bible is presented. But first, fulfilled prophecy is presented as the ultimate proof for the Bible's inspiration. Historical accuracy merely is a necessary condition for inspiration, not a sufficient one. A book could be perfectly accurate historically, such as one on the life of Abraham Lincoln, yet not be inspired by God or hold any authority over our lives. Historical accuracy merely keeps the Bible from being ruled out as the Word of God, but by itself doesn't present much of a positive case for its inspiration. But it's another story to explain how the Bible could predict the future in advance accurately centuries after its prophets died. Rationally, this requires belief that its authors received supernatural guidance. Below prophecies that were fulfilled after some part of the Bible was written but before the twentieth century are examined. Predictions of events yet to happen, such as judgment day, the second coming, the resurrection of the dead, etc. aren't examined here, because they have yet to happen. Hence, although the Quran may predict repeatedly a day of judgment, that does little to prove God inspired it since that event hasn't happened yet!

So let's explore the evidence that the Bible successfully predicted the future, which leads us to infer that its authors received supernatural help. ...

2007-06-28 17:01:11 · answer #2 · answered by Randy G 7 · 0 0

The Bible does have many historical accuracies, so you seem slightly ignorant in that area. However it also has never been proven that mermaids don't exist. Also in your question you say that God says he exists what does that mean exactly.

2007-06-28 16:58:52 · answer #3 · answered by akschafer1 3 · 0 0

Hey, who said we didn't believe in mermaids... I believe in them as much as I do God. They are just good hiders or invincible or live in undiscovered parts of God's realm :)

2007-06-28 16:55:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

I believe because he(Jesus) lives in my heart.

2007-06-28 16:55:39 · answer #5 · answered by Caesar Jeff 4 · 0 0

sssshhhhhhhh.
It's a secret, hun.

2007-06-28 16:55:10 · answer #6 · answered by LabGrrl 7 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers