Da Vinci Code Killers: Real Biblical Secrets, Misinformation And Mistranslations

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Da Vinci Code Killers: Real Biblical Secrets, Misinformation And Mistranslations file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Da Vinci Code Killers: Real Biblical Secrets, Misinformation And Mistranslations book. Happy reading Da Vinci Code Killers: Real Biblical Secrets, Misinformation And Mistranslations Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Da Vinci Code Killers: Real Biblical Secrets, Misinformation And Mistranslations at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Da Vinci Code Killers: Real Biblical Secrets, Misinformation And Mistranslations Pocket Guide.

Jacques Sauniere positioned himself in the shape of a five-pointed star. Fache's eyes followed the five points of Sauniere's arms, legs, and head as he again ran a hand across his slick hair. He'd been wondering the same thing ever since he first saw the Polaroid. His best guess was that a naked human form was yet another endorsement of Venus — the goddess of human sexuality. Fache, I obviously can't tell you why Mr. Sauniere drew that symbol on himself or placed himself in this way, but I can tell you that a man like Jacques Sauniere would consider the pentacle a sign of the female deity.

The correlation between this symbol and the sacred feminine is widely known by art historians and symbologists. And the use of his own blood as ink? Uncertain, he circled the corpse and crouched down, now noting with surprise that the curator was clutching a large, felt-tipped marker. Are you familiar with this kind of pen? He glanced up in surprise. The black-light pen or watermark stylus was a specialized felt-tipped marker originally designed by museums, restorers, and forgery police to place invisible marks on items.

The stylus wrote in a noncorrosive, alcohol-based fluorescent ink that was visible only under black light. Nowadays, museum maintenance staffs carried these markers on their daily rounds to place invisible "tick marks" on the frames of paintings that needed restoration. As Langdon stood up, Fache walked over to the spotlight and turned it off. The gallery plunged into sudden darkness. Momentarily blinded, Langdon felt a rising uncertainty. Fache's silhouette appeared, illuminated in bright purple. He approached carrying a portable light source, which shrouded him in a violet haze.

So you can imagine our surprise Langdon looked down and jumped back in shock. His heart pounded as he took in the bizarre sight now glowing before him on the parquet floor. Scrawled in luminescent handwriting, the curator's final words glowed purple beside his corpse. As Langdon stared at the shimmering text, he felt the fog that had surrounded this entire night growing thicker.

Langdon read the message again and looked up at Fache. With the exception of the eerie, robot-like doll of a medieval knight that seemed to be staring at him from the corner of Sauniere's desk, Collet was comfortable.

The Global Flood

He adjusted his AKG headphones and checked the input levels on the hard-disk recording system. All systems were go. The microphones were functioning flawlessly, and the audio feed was crystal clear. Smiling, he closed his eyes and settled in to enjoy the rest of the conversation now being taped inside the Grand Gallery.

A two-room suite with a stone floor and minimal furnishings, it had been home to Sister Sandrine Bieil for over a decade. The nearby convent was her formal residence, if anyone asked, but she preferred the quiet of the church and had made herself quite comfortable upstairs with a bed, phone, and hot plate. As the church's conservatrice d'affaires, Sister Sandrine was responsible for overseeing all nonreligious aspects of church operations — general maintenance, hiring support staff and guides, securing the building after hours, and ordering supplies like communion wine and wafers.

Tonight, asleep in her small bed, she awoke to the shrill of her telephone. Tiredly, she lifted the receiver. Eglise Saint-Sulpice. Sister Sandrine sat up. What time is it? Although she recognized her boss's voice, in fifteen years she had never been awoken by him. The abbe was a deeply pious man who went home to bed immediately after mass. I just received a call from an influential American bishop. Perhaps you know him? Manuel Aringarosa? Who in the Church doesn't?

Aringarosa's conservative prelature had grown powerful in recent years. Their ascension to grace was jump- started in when Pope John Paul II unexpectedly elevated them to a "personal prelature of the Pope," officially sanctioning all of their practices. Suspiciously, Opus Dei's elevation occurred the same year the wealthy sect allegedly had transferred almost one billion dollars into the Vatican's Institute for Religious Works — commonly known as the Vatican Bank — bailing it out of an embarrassing bankruptcy.

In a second maneuver that raised eyebrows, the Pope placed the founder of Opus Dei on the "fast track" for sainthood, accelerating an often century-long waiting period for canonization to a mere twenty years. Sister Sandrine could not help but feel that Opus Dei's good standing in Rome was suspect, but one did not argue with the Holy See. His plane leaves very early. He has always dreamed of seeing Saint-Sulpice. The sun's rays through the oculus, the graduated shadows on the gnomon, this is what makes Saint-Sulpice unique. He can be there at That's in twenty minutes. It would be my pleasure.

Puzzled, Sister Sandrine remained a moment in the warmth of her bed, trying to shake off the cobwebs of sleep. Her sixty-year-old body did not awake as fast as it used to, although tonight's phone call had certainly roused her senses. Opus Dei had always made her uneasy.

Beyond the prelature's adherence to the arcane ritual of corporal mortification, their views on women were medieval at best. She had been shocked to learn that female numeraries were forced to clean the men's residence halls for no pay while the men were at mass; women slept on hardwood floors, while the men had straw mats; and women were forced to endure additional requirements of corporal mortification It seemed Eve's bite from the apple of knowledge was a debt women were doomed to pay for eternity.

Sadly, while most of the Catholic Church was gradually moving in the right direction with respect to women's rights, Opus Dei threatened to reverse the progress. Even so, Sister Sandrine had her orders. Swinging her legs off the bed, she stood slowly, chilled by the cold stone on the soles of her bare feet. As the chill rose through her flesh, she felt an unexpected apprehension. Women's intuition? A follower of God, Sister Sandrine had learned to find peace in the calming voices of her own soul. Tonight, however, those voices were as silent as the empty church around her.

Jacques Sauniere's final communication seemed as unlikely a departing message as any Langdon could imagine. The message read: O, Draconian devil! Oh, lame saint! Although Langdon had not the slightest idea what it meant, he did understand Fache's instinct that the pentacle had something to do with devil worship. O, Draconian devil! Sauniere had left a literal reference to the devil. Equally as bizarre was the series of numbers. We believe these numbers may be the key to who killed him. Maybe a telephone exchange or some kind of social identification.

Do the numbers have any symbolic meaning to you? If Sauniere had even intended any. To Langdon, the numbers looked totally random. He was accustomed to symbolic progressions that made some semblance of sense, but everything here — the pentacle, the text, the numbers — seemed disparate at the most fundamental level. How does this message fit in? This bizarre communique obviously did not fit Langdon's scenario of goddess worship at all. O, Draconian devil?

Oh, lame saint? Fache said, "This text appears to be an accusation of some sort. Wouldn't you agree? It seemed logical. Let me ask you this, Mr. To your eye, beyond the numbers, what about this message is most strange? A dying man had barricaded himself in the gallery, drawn a pentacle on himself, and scrawled a mysterious accusation on the floor. What about the scenario wasn't strange?

Langdon was fairly certain that a reference to Draco — the ruthless seventh-century B. And yet he chose to write this message Fache nodded. Any idea why? He shrugged. Fache motioned back to the pentacle on Sauniere's abdomen. Are you still certain? I'm sorry I can't be of more help. Sauniere had apparently lay down and swung the pen around himself in several long arcs, essentially inscribing himself inside a circle. In a flash, the meaning became clear. Sauniere had created a life-sized replica of Leonardo da Vinci's most famous sketch.

Considered the most anatomically correct drawing of its day, Da Vinci's The Vitruvian Man had become a modern-day icon of culture, appearing on posters, mouse pads, and T-shirts around the world. The celebrated sketch consisted of a perfect circle in which was inscribed a nude male Da Vinci. Langdon felt a shiver of amazement. The clarity of Sauniere's intentions could not be denied. In his final moments of life, the curator had stripped off his clothing and arranged his body in a clear image of Leonardo da Vinci's Vitruvian Man.

The circle had been the missing critical element. A feminine symbol of protection, the circle around the naked man's body completed Da Vinci's intended message — male and female harmony. The question now, though, was why Sauniere would imitate a famous drawing. Langdon," Fache said, "certainly a man like yourself is aware that Leonardo da Vinci had a tendency toward the darker arts. Da Vinci had always been an awkward subject for historians, especially in the Christian tradition. Despite the visionary's genius, he was a flamboyant homosexual and worshipper of Nature's divine order, both of which placed him in a perpetual state of sin against God.

Moreover, the artist's eerie eccentricities projected an admittedly demonic aura: Da Vinci exhumed corpses to study human anatomy; he kept mysterious journals in illegible reverse handwriting; he believed he possessed the alchemic power to turn lead into gold and even cheat God by creating an elixir to postpone death; and his inventions included horrific, never-before-imagined weapons of war and torture.

Misunderstanding breeds distrust, Langdon thought. Even Da Vinci's enormous output of breathtaking Christian art only furthered the artist's reputation for spiritual hypocrisy. Accepting hundreds of lucrative Vatican commissions, Da Vinci painted Christian themes not as an expression of his own beliefs but rather as a commercial venture — a means of funding a lavish lifestyle.

Unfortunately, Da Vinci was a prankster who often amused himself by quietly gnawing at the hand that fed him. He incorporated in many of his Christian paintings hidden symbolism that was anything but Christian — tributes to his own beliefs and a subtle thumbing of his nose at the Church. He was an exceptionally spiritual man, albeit one in constant conflict with the Church. He glanced down at the message on the floor again. Langdon weighed his words carefully. Maybe, by imitating a famous Da Vinci drawing, Sauniere was simply echoing some of their shared frustrations with the modern Church's demonization of the goddess.

Sauniere dedicated his life to studying the history of the goddess, and nothing has done more to erase that history than the Catholic Church. It seems reasonable that Sauniere might have chosen to express his disappointment in his final good-bye. Langdon, I have seen a lot of death in my work, and let me tell you something. When a man is murdered by another man, I do not believe his final thoughts are to write an obscure spiritual statement that no one will understand. I believe he is thinking of one thing only. I believe Sauniere wrote this note to tell us who killed him. Lame saints? Draconian devils?

Pentacles on his stomach? It's all too cryptic. The agent superieur knew it was moments like these that had lifted the captain to the pinnacle of French law enforcement. Fache will do what no one else dares. The delicate art of cajoler was a lost skill in modern law enforcement, one that required exceptional poise under pressure. Few men possessed the necessary sangfroid for this kind of operation, but Fache seemed born for it.

His restraint and patience bordered on the robotic. Fache's sole emotion this evening seemed to be one of intense resolve, as if this arrest were somehow personal to him. Fache's briefing of his agents an hour ago had been unusually succinct and assured. You know what to do. No mistakes tonight. And so far, no mistakes had been made.

Collet was not yet privy to the evidence that had cemented Fache's certainty of their suspect's guilt, but he knew better than to question the instincts of the Bull. Fache's intuition seemed almost supernatural at times. God whispers in his ear, one agent had insisted after a particularly impressive display of Fache's sixth sense. The captain attended mass and confession with zealous regularity — far more than the requisite holiday attendance fulfilled by other officials in the name of good public relations.

When the Pope visited Paris a few years back, Fache had used all his muscle to obtain the honor of an audience. A photo of Fache with the Pope now hung in his office. The Papal Bull, the agents secretly called it. Collet found it ironic that one of Fache's rare popular public stances in recent years had been his outspoken reaction to the Catholic pedophilia scandal. These priests should be hanged twice! Fache had declared. Once for their crimes against children. And once for shaming the good name of the Catholic Church. Collet had the odd sense it was the latter that angered Fache more.

Turning now to his laptop computer, Collet attended to the other half of his responsibilities here tonight — the GPS tracking system. The image onscreen revealed a detailed floor plan of the Denon Wing, a structural schematic uploaded from the Louvre Security Office. Letting his eyes trace the maze of galleries and hallways, Collet found what he was looking for. Deep in the heart of the Grand Gallery blinked a tiny red dot.

La marque. Fache was keeping his prey on a very tight leash tonight. Wisely so. Robert Langdon had proven himself one cool customer. Langdon would not be interrupted, Bezu Fache had turned off his cellular phone. Unfortunately, it was an expensive model equipped with a two-way radio feature, which, contrary to his orders, was now being used by one of his agents to page him. Fache felt his teeth clench in rage. He could imagine nothing important enough that Collet would interrupt this surveillance cachee — especially at this critical juncture.

He gave Langdon a calm look of apology. A cryptographer? Despite the lousy timing, this was probably good news. Fache, after finding Sauniere's cryptic text on the floor, had uploaded photographs of the entire crime scene to the Cryptography Department in hopes someone there could tell him what the hell Sauniere was trying to say. If a code breaker had now arrived, it most likely meant someone had decrypted Sauniere's message. I'll speak to him when I'm done. A young Parisian dechiffreuse who had studied cryptography in England at the Royal Holloway, Sophie Neveu had been foisted on Fache two years ago as part of the ministry's attempt to incorporate more women into the police force.

The ministry's ongoing foray into political correctness, Fache argued, was weakening the department. Women not only lacked the physicality necessary for police work, but their mere presence posed a dangerous distraction to the men in the field. As Fache had feared, Sophie Neveu was proving far more distracting than most. At thirty-two years old, she had a dogged determination that bordered on obstinate. Her eager espousal of Britain's new cryptologic methodology continually exasperated the veteran French cryptographers above her.

And by far the most troubling to Fache was the inescapable universal truth that in an office of middle-aged men, an attractive young woman always drew eyes away from the work at hand. The man on the radio said, "Agent Neveu insisted on speaking to you immediately, Captain. I tried to stop her, but she's on her way into the gallery. The captain was mid- sentence when his jaw stopped moving and his eyes bulged.

His blistering gaze seemed fixated on something over Langdon's shoulder. Before Langdon could turn to see what it was, he heard a woman's voice chime out behind him. She was moving down the corridor toward them with long, fluid strides Dressed casually in a knee-length, cream-colored Irish sweater over black leggings, she was attractive and looked to be about thirty. Her thick burgundy hair fell unstyled to her shoulders, framing the warmth of her face.

Unlike the waifish, cookie-cutter blondes that adorned Harvard dorm room walls, this woman was healthy with an unembellished beauty and genuineness that radiated a striking personal confidence. To Langdon's surprise, the woman walked directly up to him and extended a polite hand. Her eyes were olive-green — incisive and clear. Fache drew a seething inhalation, clearly preparing to launch into a reprimand. Langdon felt a pulse of excitement. She broke the code? Fache looked uncertain how to respond. Embassy, Mr. They have a message for you from the States.

A message from the States? He tried to imagine who could be trying to reach him. Only a few of his colleagues knew he was in Paris. Fache's broad jaw had tightened with the news. Langdon here? Langdon's hotel, and the concierge told them Mr. Langdon had been collected by a DCPJ agent. Langdon and asked me to pass it along if I got through to you.

He opened his mouth to speak, but Sophie had already turned back to Langdon. Langdon," she declared, pulling a small slip of paper from her pocket, "this is the number for your embassy's messaging service. They asked that you phone in as soon as possible. It had a Paris phone number and extension on it. He now looked like Mount Vesuvius about to erupt.

Without taking his eyes off Sophie, he produced his own cell phone and held it out. You may use it. Feeling uneasy, he accepted the captain's phone. Fache immediately marched Sophie several steps away and began chastising her in hushed tones. Disliking the captain more and more, Langdon turned away from the odd confrontation and switched on the cell phone. Checking the slip of paper Sophie had given him, Langdon dialed the number.

The line began to ring. One ring Finally the call connected. Langdon expected to hear an embassy operator, but he found himself instead listening to an answering machine. Oddly, the voice on the tape was familiar. It was that of Sophie Neveu. I think you may have given me — " "No, that's the right number," Sophie interjected quickly, as if anticipating Langdon's confusion. You have to dial an access code to pick up your messages.

Langdon stared. Her green eyes sent a crystal-clear message. Don 't ask questions. Just do it. Bewildered, Langdon punched in the extension on the slip of paper: Sophie's outgoing message immediately cut off, and Langdon heard an electronic voice announce in French: "You have one new message. I'm picking up this woman's messages? Langdon could hear the tape rewinding now. Finally, it stopped, and the machine engaged. Langdon listened as the message began to play. Again, the voice on the line was Sophie's.

Langdon," the message began in a fearful whisper. Just listen calmly. You are in danger right now. Follow my directions very closely. Lit from beneath by banks of floodlights, the church's two bell towers rose like stalwart sentinels above the building's long body. On either flank, a shadowy row of sleek buttresses jutted out like the ribs of a beautiful beast. The heathens used a house of God to conceal their keystone.

THE AMERICAN UNIVERSITY OF PARIS

Again the brotherhood had confirmed their legendary reputation for illusion and deceit. Silas was looking forward to finding the keystone and giving it to the Teacher so they could recover what the brotherhood had long ago stolen from the faithful. How powerful that will make Opus Dei. Parking the Audi on the deserted Place Saint-Sulpice, Silas exhaled, telling himself to clear his mind for the task at hand. His broad back still ached from the corporal mortification he had endured earlier today, and yet the pain was inconsequential compared with the anguish of his life before Opus Dei had saved him.

Still, the memories haunted his soul. Release your hatred, Silas commanded himself. Forgive those who trespassed against you. Looking up at the stone towers of Saint-Sulpice, Silas fought that familiar undertow The memories of purgatory came as they always did, like a tempest to his senses The cries of hopelessness against the howling wind of the Pyrenees and the soft sobs of forgotten men.

Andorra, he thought, feeling his muscles tighten. Incredibly, it was in that barren and forsaken suzerain between Spain and France, shivering in his stone cell, wanting only to die, that Silas had been saved. He had not realized it at the time. The light came long after the thunder. His name was not Silas then, although he didn't recall the name his parents had given him. He had left home when he was seven. His drunken father, a burly dockworker, enraged by the arrival of an albino son, beat his mother regularly, blaming her for the boy's embarrassing condition.

When the boy tried to defend her, he too was badly beaten. One night, there was a horrific fight, and his mother never got up. The boy stood over his lifeless mother and felt an unbearable up-welling of guilt for permitting it to happen. This is my fault! As if some kind of demon were controlling his body, the boy walked to the kitchen and grasped a butcher knife. Hypnotically, he moved to the bedroom where his father lay on the bed in a drunken stupor.

Without a word, the boy stabbed him in the back. His father cried out in pain and tried to roll over, but his son stabbed him again, over and over until the apartment fell quiet.

Da Vinci Code ~ Dan Brown ~ 9/03 ~ Book Club Onlin Export

The boy fled home but found the streets of Marseilles equally unfriendly. His strange appearance made him an outcast among the other young runaways, and he was forced to live alone in the basement of a dilapidated factory, eating stolen fruit and raw fish from the dock. His only companions were tattered magazines he found in the trash, and he taught himself to read them. Over time, he grew strong. When he was twelve, another drifter — a girl twice his age — mocked him on the streets and attempted to steal his food. The girl found herself pummeled to within inches of her life.

When the authorities pulled the boy off her, they gave him an ultimatum — leave Marseilles or go to juvenile prison. The boy moved down the coast to Toulon. Over time, the looks of pity on the streets turned to looks of fear. The boy had grown to a powerful young man. When people passed by, he could hear them whispering to one another. A ghost, they would say, their eyes wide with fright as they stared at his white skin. A ghost with the eyes of a devil! And he felt like a ghost People seemed to look right through him. At eighteen, in a port town, while attempting to steal a case of cured ham from a cargo ship, he was caught by a pair of crewmen.

The two sailors who began to beat him smelled of beer, just as his father had. The memories of fear and hatred surfaced like a monster from the deep. The young man broke the first sailor's neck with his bare hands, and only the arrival of the police saved the second sailor from a similar fate. Two months later, in shackles, he arrived at a prison in Andorra. You are as white as a ghost, the inmates ridiculed as the guards marched him in, naked and cold.

Mira el espectro! Perhaps the ghost will pass right through these walls! Over the course of twelve years, his flesh and soul withered until he knew he had become transparent. I am weightless. Yo soy un espectro One night the ghost awoke to the screams of other inmates. He didn't know what invisible force was shaking the floor on which he slept, nor what mighty hand was trembling the mortar of his stone cell, but as he jumped to his feet, a large boulder toppled onto the very spot where he had been sleeping.

Looking up to see where the stone had come from, he saw a hole in the trembling wall, and beyond it, a vision he had not seen in over ten years. The moon. Even while the earth still shook, the ghost found himself scrambling through a narrow tunnel, staggering out into an expansive vista, and tumbling down a barren mountainside into the woods. He ran all night, always downward, delirious with hunger and exhaustion. Skirting the edges of consciousness, he found himself at dawn in a clearing where train tracks cut a swath across the forest.

Following the rails, he moved on as if dreaming. Seeing an empty freight car, he crawled in for shelter and rest. When he awoke the train was moving. How long? How far? A pain was growing in his gut. Am I dying? He slept again. This time he awoke to someone yelling, beating him, throwing him out of the freight car. Bloody, he wandered the outskirts of a small village looking in vain for food. Finally, his body too weak to take another step, he lay down by the side of the road and slipped into unconsciousness.

The light came slowly, and the ghost wondered how long he had been dead. A day? Three days? It didn't matter. His bed was soft like a cloud, and the air around him smelled sweet with candles. Jesus was there, staring down at him. The stone has been rolled aside, and you are born again. He slept and awoke.

Fog shrouded his thoughts. He had never believed in heaven, and yet Jesus was watching over him. Food appeared beside his bed, and the ghost ate it, almost able to feel the flesh materializing on his bones. When he awoke, Jesus was still smiling down, speaking. You are saved, my son.

Blessed are those who follow my path. Again, he slept. It was a scream of anguish that startled the ghost from his slumber. His body leapt out of bed, staggered down a hallway toward the sounds of shouting. He entered into a kitchen and saw a large man beating a smaller man. Not even all the biologists of all time working full time have even begun to collect them all. Noah was years old. How did he capture and wrangle two ornery hippopotamuses all the way to his ark?

Consider some of the more difficult animals:. He had no technology to anaesthetise them and ship them back by plane. He had to do it all on foot. There is simply no time in the biblical account to collect all these animals, even with modern technology and a huge team. Just imagine Noah trying to catch a pair of even one of these species and transport it back alive to his ark, along with sufficient food for it. Refuting Dawkins on Evolution , argues that kinds are much broader than species, so that for example lions and tigers are the same kind. This means Noah had a much smaller load to carry than if he tried to carry every species.

I think argument is bogus for two reasons:. How did Noah or his agents get to North American and South America, scour the continents to collect animals, sufficient food for them and get back, all when no one even knew the continents existed? After ark landed on Mount Ararat, how did all the plants and animals cross the oceans to get back to their native habitats? What did Noah feed the carnivores on his Ark? Creationists claim that dinosaurs and man walked the earth simultaneously and the folk at the Kentucky creationist theme park assure us dinosaurs were on the ark too. Just how did Noah wrangle a pair of T-Rex and feed pairs of such beasts as the ton, foot Argentinosaurus sauropod, the slightly smaller Futalognkosaurus, the even bigger Bruhathkayosaurus at tons and feet and Amphicoelias and tons and feet long and… There are species with assigned Latin names, requiring accommodation for largish animals.

To it mildly, it would be quite a tight fit and it would difficult to keep the ark afloat with all that weight. It requires hundreds of acres of plants to feed even a pair of relatively small triceratops. Even a pair of ordinary elephants require Even a pair of elephants require a small team of humans to care for them. Where was all the manpower required to run this biggest floating zoo in history? This story is just too silly to even consider. Even if we assume God magically transported all the animals to the ark site, complete with a living supply of whatever food they needed, plumbing more advanced than any existing zoo to deal with the immense volumes of waste and the electricity and advanced technology to keep them at the right temperature, pH, salinity etc.

Just how much space would there be for each animal? A modern cubit is The largest wooden ship ever was the Great Republic built in It was It would fit in a box of only 29, cubic metres 38, The Wyoming was another contender to be the largest wooden ship. It was built by skilled shipbuilders. It twisted apart in heavy seas. Any larger ships had to be made of steel. Noah supposedly funded and built by far the biggest wooden ship of all time supposedly all on his own, with primitive hand tools, all after the advanced age of years.

Uh huh. On average, how much room then does each animal get for itself and its food and water for the for the year long voyage? That would be rather cramped. Perhaps God miniaturised all the animals and put them in suspended animation for a year so they would not need any food or water. How come Genesis does not explain this? Consider the problem of dealing simply with the koala. Somebody had to sail all the way to Australia to collect a pair. Koalas only eat live eucalyptus leaves. Because eucalyptus are such a low grade food source, koalas need a lot of them.

So Noah also had to bring back a small forest of eucalyptus trees and find room for them on the ark in that 0. He had to go to North America, South America and Antarctica, even though no one at the time even knew of these places. Genesis says these animals all embarked in one day. That meant they had to get up that ramp 88 of them per second.

I guess yet another ad hoc, undocumented miracle is needed to explain that. Then there is the problem of ventilation. Where did all the water come from. To cover Everest would need at least three times as much water as there is on earth. I have recently learned the creationists believed in the firmament, a bowl in the sky that holds up an infinite celestial ocean.

There is no firmament so this is bullshit like the rest of the fable. How could the dove have brought back an olive branch? A olive tree would die being submerged in sea water. It would not emerge from the waves and immediately break into leaf. According to Mark Twain, the supply of fresh water needed for all those closely packed animals for a year would take two additional arks.

Fundamentalist Christians, including thankfully former Republican house leader Tom Delay, want this Biblical fairy story taught to all school children, not in anthropology class studying the creation myths of various cultures, but as a scientific theory on par with evolution. The story is so obviously false it has no standing as a scientific theory. So much for separation of church and state. Some Noah apologists claim that Noah actually only took a few thousand species with him. However, that does not explain how the 30,, other species somehow survived this global flood.

The creationist are an odd lot. For example, Creationists constantly complain that every intermediate fossil form has not been found, deliberately blinding themselves to three obvious truths. If they find even one thing that does not make sense to them, they feel justified in rejection evolution. They get their objections from fellow creationists who are charlatans or fools who have not the first inkling of what the theory of evolution is or the overwhelming body of facts supporting it.

These charlatans create straw men, poking holes in their own imagined theory of evolution, especially the explosion in a junkyard argument. Natural selection is anything but random, only mutation is. Natural selection is what selects the new designs. Mutation is just the drawing board of millions of possible incremental changes. Yet for their own pet theory, creationism, they ignore all the obvious evidence against it and total lack of evidence for it.

They believe all they have to do is question evolution in some tiny way and their goofball theory wins by default. British scientist J. Haldane, when asked what would constitute evidence against evolution, famously said, Fossil rabbits in the Precambrian. Nothing like that has ever been found. Evolution could be disproved by such facts. But all the fossils that have been found are in the right place. To be a scientific theory, it must be in principle disprovable and testable.

This was sufficient rain to cover the highest mountains. Mount Everest is 8, meters tall. How much rain would have to fall per hour to cover it 40 days and 40 nights? Rain is usually measured in cm or inches. This would be the same as 9. It would be like a fire hose squirting down on every inch of earth. It would flatten the ark. We must presume God somehow redirected the rain away from the ark. I know it does not bother fundamentalist Christians, but where did all that water come from and where did it go?

Why did it not leave a trace in the geological record? That huge weight should have buckled rocks. It should have left a fine silt layer all over the earth. Yet there is no trace of it. You might think Noah would have had trouble breathing at the elevation of the top of mount Everest.

However, the miraculously created water would displace the air higher, so he should have had no problem. Yahweh gave Noah instructions how to handle various animals depending on whether they were clean or unclean. However, Yahweh did not give the explanation of what these terms meant and the law until much later. Perhaps he gave Noah a short coming-attractions preview. What happened to everyone else who owned a ship? How come only the ark survived the flood?

When the flood was over, how did Noah get the animals back to where they came from — kangaroos to Australia, pandas to China, penguins to Antarctica etc. The ark had no sails and all other ships were supposedly destroyed. A study of DNA mitochondria and the fossil record shows no sudden collapse of every species at the time of the reputed flood.

How did this collapse of the entire species down to two animals manage to preserve full genetic diversity? Normally if you inbreed a population from only two animals it rapidly goes extinct. A population of even individuals is considered critically endangered. It will go extinct. There were not nearly enough animals on the ark to repopulate each species. A lion needs 4. There were no animals on the ark for the predators to eat. When they disembarked, the predators would have eaten all the prey animals on the first day. Supposedly Noah collected animals from every continent.

How would he even know to try to get to these continents? Further, there is no sign whatsoever in the geological record of the global flood. If this indeed happened, god went to extraordinary lengths to make it look as if it never did happen. If that had happened, there would be no genetic variability.

All animals would be even worse off than cheetahs, inbred and weak and able to transplant skin from any animal to any other. All kinds of extra undocumented miracles must have occurred for it to have actually happened. Much as I agree with the conclusion, I think the reasoning is flawed. The water would not accumulate on the arc. It would slide off. Further, the bigger the boat, the greater the extra weight it could bear. However, this water is falling from a great height and would thus hit with the force of thousands of firehoses which would tear the boat apart.

I think most people have experienced rainfall of 2. It is quite impressive. Where I grew up, it was enough to wash out the bridge I had to cross to get to school. Noah is claiming rain times stronger. For comparison, the most rain ever recorded in a day was 1. The creationist explanation also fails to account for the various layers of shellfish, each with their own unique species.

First, the global flood supposedly scripturally covered the planet and Mount Everest is 8, meters tall. The diameter of the earth at the equator, on the other hand, is 12, This is one helluva lot of water. Some interesting physical effects of all that water, too. How much weight do you think that is? Now, remember earlier that we noted that it would take 4.

Well, looking at the Wisconsinian glaciation, all that ice which is frozen water, remember? Due to these late Pleistocene glaciations some 21, years preceding the supposed flood , the mass of the ice has actually depressed the crust of the Earth. Now, glacial rebound can only be measured, obviously, in glaciated terranes, i. This lack of rebound is noted by laser ranged interferometry and satellite geodesy, as well as by geomorphology.

Needless to say, these geomorphological expressions are not found everywhere on Earth for instance, like Saudi Arabia. Therefore, although extensive, the glaciers were a local not global is scale. Yet, at only 0. Yet, we still have a quite thick and nicely breathable atmosphere. In fact, ice cores from Antarctica as well as deep-sea sediment cores which can be geochemically tested for paleoatmospheric constituents and relative gas ratios; and these records extend well back into the Pleistocene, far more than the supposed 4, YBP flood event.

Strange that this major loss of atmosphere, atmospheric fractionation lighter gases oxygen, nitrogen, fluorine, neon, etc. Even further, let us take a realistic and dispassionate look at the other claims relating to global flooding and other such biblical nonsense. Particularly, in order to flood the Earth to the Genesis requisite depth of 10 cubits 4. Ararat 5. In order to accomplish this little task, it would require the previously noted additional 4. Where would this additional 4.

It cannot come from water vapour i. Someone, who shall properly remain anonymous, suggested that all the water needed to flood the Earth existed as liquid water surrounding the globe i. This, of course, is blisteringly, staggeringly stupid. What is keeping that much water from falling to the Earth? There is a little property called gravity that would cause it to fall. Those Christians had a false faith to begin with and could not withstand the apple offered by these serpents.

Certainly there have been many translations but the core doctrine remains intact. You are confusing with the continual revelation of God to His chosen people over time. Early man could not grasp the spiritual truth revealed by Christ thus God was seen in the light of the pillar of smoke and carried in an ark. As mans intellectual comprehension grew God revealed deeper attributes. Since that time we have the Holy Spirit indwell in the hearts of believers that reveals all truth.

Same God, same story same beginning and the same ending. Even Abraham ran across cultures with different man made gods. To the unbiased mind you find that at a minimum you cannot prove which thought came first that myths drew their material from. Truth does not change it is always true. Scientific laws and lies change over time but the truth does not. Well given you relesh the few verses in the Bible where death and hell raise the hair on your neck I would think that anything short of Satan himself would be boring.

My assumption since you went on the defensive is that you realize you do not have a better plan to remove the knowledge of good and evil from man without removing his free will. Given your current world view, that man like a dog or a fish simply exists without purpose other than to survive and reproduce, there is no need for God. Common sense would then say those who need God have a purpose greater than themselves which is more than simply survival and reproduction.

Yet, you choose a godless existence knowing full well it limits purpose and expression to that of an animal. God put His image in man which is higher than animals. When your remove God from the equation all that is left is the animal in man. This is what you reject when you reject God. You reject a higher calling, you reject a holy life and you reject that which is greater than self.

Oh, quit your whining; I'll let you know when you say something remotely interesting or relevant. Here, I'll throw you a bone: Maybe you could get some hints from "Believer" on how to add something that furthers the conversation instead of just personal, stupid dogma that only makes your position look ridiculous. He's incorrect, but at least he knows how to argue with topics germane to the discussion underway.

The standards and principles found in the Bible are everlasting. It is consistent and reliable. For example at a time when most people thought the earth was on a turtles back swimming through the cosmic sea the Bible said the earth was hanging on nothing. Accurate and true scientifically.

How about showing some maturity and listen to what others say. You only make yourself look a fool. You raise some good questions and if you listen you may actually hear the answers. I agree that I am interesting, but I don't know what you are expecting me to "answer. Believers like you and fred claim to know the answers, but all you have is your unprovable belief and dogma. It's not my job to come up with "answers" why I should believe like you do; it's your job to come up with such "answers" that I can think about and figure out if there is any reason why I should believe that they are the RIGHT answers and not just unprovable statements of faith.

Since you are the believer, it is up to you to answer the questions of the critics, like me, if you care too. I'm not going to respond to the dogma that you and fred post because I've believed and considered that dogma for almost half a century. I already have a library half filled with books that do that.

Noah and Biblical Inerrancy

I feel no need to respond to it, here. Finally, I have not "resorted to name calling. If I have "resorted" to anything, I have resorted to lengthier posts that cover a broad range of issues implied by those who worship a being who is going to torture me forever, so I'm actually being pretty nice.

If you just post dogma, it's too boring to respond to. Got it? Momoya you want proof? Heres some, Jsus' tomb was empty! The message spread without war, it went from home to home. Christianity would have been squashed if the religious leaders at the time could have provided a body, but they could not. Also the disciples could not have stolen it because there were guards! Also Paul was an elitist as someone said, he was killing christians then he radically became one. His whole belief system was against the idea of a resurection, his conversion was one of the biggest of the time.

All other religions spread initially through war, the believe or die approach. Christians did not take this approach, they used reason and the evidence of the missing body. They used the believe, and you are probably going to be killed for doing so approach. If you'd like to prove the resurrection, go ahead. It's a story much older than jesus and shared by dozens of other deities.

Why do you believe one fairy tale over others that are very similar? Might it be because of the dominant religion of your society? We know that Jesus existed and died, the thing we do not know is the resurrection. When the message went out that he resurrected it would have been so easy to squash the new movement, which went directly against the authority at the time. Most religions spread by the authorities, christianity spread against the Roman and Jewish authorities, against all odds.

About what I expected. In the world we observe a wide spectrum of people that range from materialist to spiritualist. Jesus would be on one end and none can reach that point though we should do our best as try. Materialists tend to be hard atheists at the extreme. I know there is far more to this existence than your limited fixed reality yet you on the other hand cannot move past your position. As one approaches Christ likeness freedom of thought and vision increases while the reverse is true as one begins to erect boundaries that are based upon unfounded scientific theory.

I understand most of what the materialist understands because that simple knowledge is built up based upon what mankind can prove by scientific method. Knowledge that reveals what Christ clearly stated requires the power of the Holy Spirit. You have quenched the power of the Holy Spirit at some point in your life now demand that the things of God be proven using mans scientific method. This is not possible. Here is the tool. First you need to really want to know if God exists.

If you do then meditate upon asking Jesus to show you the way. The issue of sin will come up and if you say there is no sin or no sin in your life the conversation will quickly end. On the other hand if you are open to the possibility of sin in your life that is a good beginning. Without sin there is no need for Jesus. Stick with it until you sense there is something more and ask Jesus to lead you towards the next step. Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of GOD: because many fasle prophets are gone out into the world.

They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world hearth them. For many decades I wasn't open to other possibilities, and you and I would be arguing together. When I finally did open myself to the possibility that I was wrong, it slowly began to fall into place. I understand very well why most christians could not do what I did; I'm just telling you the result. All religions are the same way. You likely see the faults of other religions, and were you honest and courageous enough, you'd be able to see the faults of your own holy book.

You can force yourself to gloss over them with more and more faith—that's what it's for; It's your call. Yes, the bible has much correct history mixed in with inaccurate historical accounts. That's what happens when you perpetuate myths—you time them in with the current happenings and the future expectations. Also, remember who is writing this stuff down and why. It's the elite who want to record in a manner that shows the correctness of their motives and worship.

As I said, most intelligent christians can rationalize away scriptural error and contradiction. The problem is that you MUST do it, and that you must do it after the facts point out the error—not before. Of course they use other scripture within their rationalizations, that's how they are assuming the authority to make the "correction" by "interpretation.

But who knows that god isn't tricking us with perceiving a round earth just like some christians claim god is tricking us with evidence for evolution? God shows love and goodness in various manners and in various passages, yes. However, once a person is sentenced by him to hell, that new horrifying reality outweighs any other experience. Who cares about having lived on earth once they are in your god's hell? Which one of those suffering could possibly care about how good or loving he is to others not in his predicament. The mere idea of hell shows unimaginable horror in his being.

God could have forgiven everyone just because he wanted to. God could have refrained from unending unimaginable horror. God could have made the bible a book of complete harmony that physicists and philosophers kept referring to for deeper and deeper understanding of the natural world and consciousness.

They don't because they can't. Your god is indeed too evil and way, way too small for a thinking individual to honestly consider. And when you said "Also, remember who is writing this stuff down and why. Then you have the jealous and angry God of the Kings that sends the Israelites into slavery because they have stopped paying him enough attention. And all that juxtaposed against the "turn the other cheek", humble, servant like Christ that was supposedly God incarnate who had to "die" for our sins, but by definition, could not have so Christians faith today can only be based on a lie.

Christians cannot explain how if we do indeed have a debt of sin that only giving a perfect life can pay, why we wouldn't still owe that debt because Jesus never really "died". I submit that on the premise that if their God has always existed, and according to Christians has never stopped existing, then there was no "life" given to pay the ransom for Adams sin.

This would be like attaching a string to a quarter to use on a vending machine, they put the ransom sacrafice in and grabbed their salvation then 'Ziiiiiing' they yank on the string and pull their sacrafice back out. And why again did the universe not fall apart when the "God Glue" that holds it all together was apparently dead for 3 days? And I have heard all the Christian defenses of "It was one part of God, they are a trinity and only the son had to suffer and die" They know it's BS as it's coming out of their mouths but they have no other recourse since they have based their entire lives on it's veracity.

I too am open to the fact that I am wrong, I have done research and I have found no evidence to show me that Christianity is wrong. As for Christianity being the same as all religions, I disagree. I have spoken to many converts to christianity from other religions, such as Islam and they all say that the Bible is the most loving religious book. Christianity is the only religion that is not action oriented. It is the only religion to say I cant save myself, so God saved me. You blame Christians for fixing things after the fault is found, I dont understand that complaint. If you see something wrong you try and fix it, isnt that what science does all the time?

Why cant religion do that? As for the elite writing them down, it wasnt them it was the poor apostles. You say he could have written a book to help us understand the natural world, but that was not the purpose of the Bible. The purpose of the Bible is to show the means of grace. If he told us everything, where would the fun be in discovering it?

December 14, 2009

Also see Freds post on hell, hell is for the people who wanted God out of there lives and wanted nothing to do with him. That is what hell is, the absence of God. He is giving you exactly what you want, life without him. The Old Testament was rife with occasions when God not only sanctioned the murder, pillage and ra pe of the enemies of his chosen people, but, often God itself joined in, directly smiting people itself. A curse on him who keeps his sword from bloodshed! It is clear that violence has a divine Biblical endorsement.

But for what ends? Luke says "Compel people to come in! Jesus himself declared "think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword" Matthew And henceforth, Christian history contains many unfortunate chapters where Christian groups anathematized one another as heretics, and proceded to burn, torture and murder those who disagreed. Victims have been anyone who disagreed even on confusing technical points of Christian doctrine, members of other religions such as Muslims and Je ws, and it seems, many other innocent victims ranging from outcasts who were accused of witchcraft "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" — Exodus , ho mose xuals and finally, a small number who have genuinely plotted against the Church.

Godpot excellent questions, however you are taking Matthew out of context, read the entire verse and you will find that Jesus is not telling his disciples to go kill and plunder, but that the disciples will be killed by the authorities. He did not bring peace for his believers, they were persecuted. If you look at the churchs history you will find that the witch trials and Crusades were in fact power struggles and go directly against Biblical teachings.

Now as to your old testament r. The cultures that the Israelites wiped out were wicked. For instance there are graves with thousands of kids killed for child sacrifices. It was judgement and also a way to protect Israel from falling into these practices. Now for the r. When an Israelite ra. She had no family, no culture absolutly nothing. Then an Israelite male came in and married her and brought her into their culture. She was then saved because she recieved the messianic promise. You will never find God say go r. God can make a bad situation, and turn it into something good and his mercy is shown.

Also as for the slavery you will find that it is not like the slavery of the south, it is more like indentured servitude. Sorry that last post was directed at yo, Godpot if you could show me this evidence that would be great, because I looked for evidence against the bible and could not find anything.

If by evidence you mean irrefutable proof then you are correct, other than the obvious 6 day creation lie which most Christians poo poo away as "allegory", there is not much solid evidence against biblical history, though none of the miracles or supernatural events in the bible show up anywhere else in history, even the star that supposedly led the wise men to Jesus which should have been visible to many other nations who were writing their own histories have no record of it.

At the time of Jesus, various scribes in Palestine, Egypt, Greece, Persia and as far away as China, recorded every unusual celestial they saw, but never one that could have been the "Star of Bethlehem". Ian Wilson Jesus: The Evidence says the hard reality is that Matthew offers insufficient historicity and the story of the wise men and the star appears only in Matthew for anyone to be confident that there was a star at all. Some scholars believe that the star which appeared that appeared in 66 CE, and was described by Josephus in The Jewish War 6.

Both talk of a star that 'stood' over a place Jerusalem for Josephus; Bethlehem for Matthew and both read the stars as telling of the coming of the Messiah in Josephus' case, he told the victorious general, Vespasian, that he was the Messiah the Jews had waited for. You make some big claims about inaccuracy, how about naming one as a for instance?

You say the Bible books rely on other Bible books to understand it! It has one authur and as such you need to cross reference some scriptures to get the correct understanding as would be true of any book. Momoya, The problem with your analysis is that you are blaming YHWH, the Strong One of the sufferings and pains of son of man, when in fact its the fault of his own iniquities of wrong doings. In Deut. There is no profit nor goodness in them or living unrighteously, there will be much suffering as a result of not obeying the law of YHWH. For it is our life as was told to us in Deut.

As for the historical proof, the book of Daniel 7,11 has prophesied the reign of the beast representing the 10 horns of rulers over time. From Antioch killing Julius Caesar and son to Agutus. From Antioch killing Julius Caesar and son to Agustus Caesar ruling to Constantine legalizing Christianity in ce, its all been done and is still with us today, the idolatry of religions that take us all away from righteousness and the peace.

The punishment is of our own wrong doings. And until we all do the law, the people of the world will have the problems of in difference, greed, hate, poverty, and so on. Many has truly forgotten Him, from us doing whatever we want to in this life that He gave to us, and this is so unfortunate for the son of man. We must do the law in Exodus 20, Deuteronomy. Momoya, original text were written in languages one would have word for to translate. Multiple Rulers and Kingdoms upon suppressing those with the word through death and burning of their facts committed the no-no of adding or taking away from scripture to fit their way of life.

So the 66 books written by over 40 authors that was decided upon by the council of Nicea is the work that no one else should add to or take away from, except of course during that time it was being written and then later when all the different letters and gospels were being sorted through to see which fit the new Roman Church years after Christ died, this is the version that should not be changed, no more, done with changes, thats the inspired version, if it weren't I wouldn't be telling you this so you can believe it, no more adding to it or taking away Lets take a look at the books chosen in Nicea, The old testament books selected were considered scripture in Jesu.

The new testament books were selected based on the time they were written. If they were written in the lifespan of the apostles they were accepted, if they werent then they did not make the cut. In closing, go away. But when others are mentioned beside Him, they become satisfied. They follow only conjecture; they only guess. Nothing shall abrogate His words. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient. He never was an idolater. In which Hadith other than God and His revelations do they believe? He never was an idol worshiper. They have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve. We make no distinction among any of them.

To Him alone we are submitters. I see you have alot of free time in light of the fact that your girlfriends parents honor-killed her for letting you see part of her shin. You can cherry-pick quotes all day long, but the bottom line is that there are untold counts of sheer barbarism enacted in the name of and with the consent of that book And before you scream "Crusades", I put that tome in the same category as 'that book'. The world would be a safer place without the myriad of fairy tales and myths that cloud the judgement of otherwise reasonable people.

The essay was entirely too long. I can summarize the 3 biggest biblical misconceptions much more succinctly. The beginning, the middle, and the end. Momoya is writing long posts again! And Godpot, Yo! I love u guys as myself. Enjoy ur Val's Day. On the debate you posted below Craig v Hitch.

Similar authors to follow

Listen to Hitchens in that debate with an open mind. Also, why is the existence of god even debatable at all? Nobody debates whether or not math exists, or cause and effect, or gravity. If people want to believe in a deist sort of god for slapping the universe together and spinning it out, that's cool, but there's absolutely ZERO proof for a personal god or any one of the thousands of gods that have been believed throughout the ages. Jesus was a common name of the time—like "Bob" today. The bible makes soooooo much sense when studied for what it is—a bunch of myths extremely similar to the myths of the surrounding cultures—bundled together in one book by people who had an objective.

The gospels, epistles, and myths that didn't seem favorable to the new cult weren't included. It's a lot more simple than believers and atheists make it out to be. So sayeth granny momoya!! This debate on Hitchens was so bad that even atheists. The reason why it is debated, and math is not is that math has been proven. God has never been proven or disproven.

The deleted books were written centuries after christ, not decades like the books we have. If you watched the debate I showed you you will find that while Jesus was a common name, there was one who was crucified and then his tomb was inexclipably empty. Watch the debate and you will find that Hitchens does not argue that point. As for those contradictions, show me some Im interested, I have heard of various "misconceptions" However they can be shown to not be misconceptions at all.

Show me some contradictory evidence of any historical fact that the Bible claims happened. There is none, archealogy has proven the Bible right every time. Archeology confirms ancient Egyptian writings as history too - does that mean that their gods are real? Your ancient Hebrew writings the Bible are quite interesting on a cultural level.

There is no evidence that their god and their superst'itions are real. Egyptian gods can be a start for your exploration of this world other than that which the Skeptic philosophy has boxed u into. I think there are now translations of Egyptian Holy Books too aand lots of cattle, sheep and goats. I heard Amun-Ra is the best too. Happy worshipping.

Granny Momoya?! Oh, the old evangelist who lost his faith while watching Discovery Channel!


  1. Copyright:;
  2. Daydreams of Seppuku.
  3. Da Vinci Code Killers: Real Biblical Secrets, Misinformation And Mistranslations.
  4. Read book online.
  5. This e-book is published on the web with BiB/i;
  6. Exchange Discount Summary?

Momoya how can you say that Bob is a common name so every Bob is a Bob? Bob Dole will sue you for calling him Bob Marley for sure! Is that a common name. If as u say, u r nearing de grave n now u r simplifying things good for u! Rem'ber that an English synonym 4 simple is foolish. So watch out 4 foolishness as u simplify de Gospels, Epistles, etc n cast them aside as myths. I saw my mum moving on nothing more than faith n love 2wks b4 her death. Whether Hitch supposedly won or lost is irrelevant; what is important are the separate points he made. Since the god of the bible is not proved or disproved it's stupid to consider the existence of his heaven or hell.

Neither that debate nor any other evidence shows that a man was crucified and resurrected; it's dishonest of you to say so. You have your beliefs, but you don't have the facts that you claim to have. Hitch and others have addressed the supposed evidence of Christ's resurrection in other debates and books. I'm not interested in showing you any contradictions because you will simply do what ever other christian does—explain them away according to your own private methods of correcting such inconsistencies.

Of course you have the ability to do this; every christian does; that's the point. Had the bible some standard method of settling disputes about its consistency, all you fellas would agree on ONE interpretation. You don't, and it is clear that every christian uses his own private method which gives rise to the various denominational differences. You should really stop lying about the archeology thing.

Archeology has agreed with the bible in a few areas, but mostly it has disagreed with it. When archeology disagrees, christians do the little "side-step boogie-oogie" in order to change their interpretations to match up with the new archeological data that you did not have before. It's incredibly dishonest, but it's the only way to keep up, so you do it. Assuming that christianity is accurate, it was very stupid and misleading of god to provide a book that appears to go against science and archeology so much.

And it's stupid AND evil for that god to punish people who don't believe what the bible says when, in order to believe it, you've got to change your interpretations every time a part of it is shown to be stupid in relation to science and history. Because so much of the bible's claims can be shown to be false, it's stupid to take it at face value on the things that are beyond proof sin, redemption, heaven, hell. If the book is demonstrably wrong in so many practical ways, then it's stupid to believe that its perfect god made a plan destined to fail and so to fix it he had to exploit a loophole by sacrificing himself to himself to appease himself to stop himself from sending people to a torture pit that he made himself.

The whole thing is just amazingly stupid, yet because you have blinded yourself with the myth, you can't see that it is a myth. Archealogy has proven the bible wrong? Thats all you say without providing a single source or piece of evidence to justify your claims, however archealogy has shown that where the Bible says there is a city there is a city, it has found evidence for David.

I could go on but until you show me any evidence that directly disproves the Bible, I will say that archealogy shows the Bible is right. I'm not your evidence gatherer, and you're smart enough that you could find dozens of examples of archeological evidence that disproves some portion or other of the bible. You're also smart enough to wriggle out of any discrepancy with special pleading. Something like "Oh, that part isn't to be taken literally, that part is figurative," while you turn away from the reality that if archeology had supported the bible's passage, you'd be listing it as archeological proof that supports the bible.

You've heard that song before, and you know it. Believer, I think you know, deep down, that if you wanted to take my position, you'd have a very easy time finding all sorts of ways that archeology and science do NOT support your book. Certainly you have some ready, personal method of interpreting away the flood account as explained in Genesis and reaffirmed by Jesus. That's the point! You can always find a way to explain why the archeology doesn't need to match the scripture in this case, and that case, and that one over there.

Or, you can always fall back into the comfortable pillows of "faith," whereby you don't have to do any explaining at all—and just let science and the bible disagree while you claim the bible to be consistent and worthy of belief. You can weasel out of any "discrepancy" that you meet because you've had plenty of practice, and you MUST do it in order to maintain your beliefs. Of course you can explain how the flood didn't happen as the bible says so that you agree with the facts. The problem is that the bible doesn't have a method whereby you could know the truth about "the flood" WITHOUT the benefit of science explaining that it could not have happened.

That's the real problem, not whether certain cities existed with certain names. Just because you're throwing out red herrings doesn't mean that you don't know the real issue. A belief in the flood is wrong, but correct according to the bible in both old and new testaments. There's no way to know the truth about the flood from the bible alone; you can only specially plead for it being non-literal after science does its thing—not before.

Your bible is silly and it requires you and other believers to be silly in order to maintain belief in it. Even the Smithsonian stated that the bible is a religious doc ument and NOT a historical book. You keep telling me to be open to all possibilities, however you have been far from doing that. You dont think I have done research on this? You dont think I have asked questions and checked to see which religion, if any was right? I have looked, and while the Bible is not a history book there is plenty of history in it and that history has not been proven wrong, And why do you say that the christian explanations for these so called contradictions arent good enough?

Is it because that it is christians giving the answers? What christians do when they see what could be a contradiction they look deeper into the text, and also look at other parts of the bible to see if they have answers, they do. And again I must stress that if you read the Bible in its entirety, not just pick out random pieces, you get a God of Love and of Justice. The pieces that you are picking out indeed show an evil God, if all you are focused on is the hell.

But you are missing the Gospel part of the bible which is what Christianity is all about. Every other word out of his mouth is a fallacy. So does the bookDa Vinci Codec but it doesn't mean that book is true either. There are plenty of factious books that have historical facts in them but they are still fiction. The problem is it can be shown with historical data of how the bible is taken from pagan religions of that time too, but of course you'll have excuses for that too.

You are comparing a piece of historical fiction, da vinci code which was written to be an entertaining story about history, against something that claims it is history? The da vinci code story never claims to be history, whereas the Bible says that what it said happened, is what happened and nothing in the bible has been proven wrong. He is as powerful as I claim, he could have made predestination but he diddnt. He chose not too, he chose to give us free will.

Choice is different than power. A parent who gives their child a choice between chocolate pie and a fork in the eye is a horrible parent. Hell-creating gods are disgusting because that god didn't have to make eternal torture an option at all. Worshipers of hell-creating gods are disgusting because they think uberterrorism is a "holy and good" tactic. Momya and Godpot Nonsense for an atheist to complain about hell or anything else God would choose to create.

You are like the Greeks that want to fashion a God after their own thoughts and desires. This is why you hate God, your thoughts and desires are godless and you know it. Now, as to shoving hell down a childs throat that is something wacked out parents do just as you shove atheism down a childs throat as Stalin did. Both of you and those types of parents need counseling and love in your life.

No place in the Bible does Jesus say shove hell down their throats. If you understood God you would understand what hell is.


  1. The Chameleon in the Closet: A Conservative Jewish Mother Reaches Out to Her Orthodox Sons;
  2. 500 Grab n Go Words for the Remedial Reader and Catch-Up Kid ~~ A Word-building Reading Program Featuring High-Frequency Sight Vocabulary?
  3. Zeitgeist Refuted!
  4. Basics - A Beginners Guide to Special Effects.
  5. A Tale of Two Cities (Oxford Worlds Classics)!
  6. Reviewer's Choice.

Until then you will continue with your warped sense of God and life. I'm not complaining about the god of the bible; I'm explaining that he's the most horrific terrorist ever considered by humanity. I'm explaining that those who think god is good and just are warped individuals for thinking everlasting torment is a good and just act. It's not my problem. It's yours. I believe that the word you are looking for is authoritarian, not terrorist. Terrorists strike randomly to spread fear. Authoritarians control everything. In fact God is neither of these, he gave us a free will, we get to choose weather or not we get to obey him.

Once again it is not his fault that you choose not to listen. And as for terrorism, sure some preachers use scare tactics to bring people to Christ however if you read the Bible you will find that Jesus did not use fear, he used love. In a just society there are consequences for our actions, God is our government, he must judge we all sin and fail the judgement there must be consequences.

He has made it realitivly easy to avoid such consequences, all you need to do is accept he is the way to salvation. You are so hung up on the existence of hell that you forget that he has made it easy to avoid it. You are just too funny. If you don't choose to love it then your other choice is to burn in hell for eternity. So if a parent told you that if their child didn't choose to obey them they were going to stick their hands in scalding hot water, what would you say. DUH- That is a cruel parent!

Wow the stupidity of people is just appalling. You're quibbling over the word "terrorism" when you're talking about a being who tortures for eternity—you know, where even a trillion, trillion, trillion years of utmost horrible pain is not even. Call it what you will; I call it uber-uber terrorism and the most evil action anyone can ever imagine. And yes, it is god's fault. God didn't have to build the lake of fire and he doesn't have to sustain it.

Again, a parent or grandparent, in my case is an evil person if she gives her kids a choice between apple pie and a stick in the eye—especially when her instructions aren't perfectly clear and testable. Whether or not hell is easy to avoid is irrelevant. God built hell; he makes people go there instead of some other option; he sustains it. People don't have a way to ponder eternity or eternal suffering. The bible seems wrong in thousands of ways, despite all the mind tricks that the faithful use to maintain their faith, and for that reason god is stupid. Your argument about avoiding hell would ONLY work if the bible was absolutely correct in every statement.

If the bible had its stuff together and actually gave an accurate depiction of scientific and mathematical principles, it would be hard to disbelieve it. God would still be an uber-uber terrorist for creating and maintaining hell as even an option, but at least people could trust that it was an actual possibility and "be saved.

For that reason alone it should not be believed, but it's god is evil beyond comparison because of the options he presents.