US religious cult at Scottish school | Page 7 | Vital Football

US religious cult at Scottish school

That's a very good summary Revd. Did you see the link to Finkelstein's excellent book on the subject from the other thread? Kiwi posted it, and it is an extremely interesting read. I think the Wiki entry you post is based on it's contents. It also covers many other Bible stories and their historical background.

It is interesting how all these stories coalesced into the OT.
 
Kat - you are a creationist as well..

Creationism = is the belief that all existence was created. The problem is, maybe you are trying to box me in with some nutters that live in America and "preach" on some bible network TV - who are a cult.

There are many people that believe the bible is the true inspired word of God = God breathed.
It dosnt mean they are all fully signed up members to a USA religious cult, that is probably set up in some white chapel where they wave arms in the air and act like idiots.

Its not like you have to join some club and believe and follow in everything they say. Does every Catholic agree with child abuse? Do they agree with the priests that abused their position? Well dont you think this can go on in every organisation? = including churches that follow a young aged Earth etc? - Corruption is rife throughout humanity YES even in science, politics, media etc. Are you that naive to think otherwise?

I remember HUGE % of the population of the UK were told they were going to die of Mad cow disease - the media and science almost had everyone convinced that members of family were going to die from this disease. - Yet it was nothing of the sort.

Is the climate change story another big hoax from science and politics? just to get the world to notice we are running out of oil and to have an excuse to pump up taxes and find other means of energy? Who knows.

I do not belong to a cult, I am not signed up to any church..I do not go to any church either, unless like most of us, when im invited to a wedding or a Christening etc - where I will just respect the family and the church during what ever ceremony is taking place. I do not get sucked into hype, science or politics without 1st questioning it. Did I question Evolution, the bible and co'? YES

Many believers that believe in the true account of God's words are also not signed up to a cult either. If it makes you happy to call them fundamentalists - then go ahead, its just word..I hate the word, it sounds creepy and again its boxing somebody in like some form of addict.

Im not sure what sort of Christian you are - however ive read those type of links before(that you posted) written by Christians that want to change the bible to fit their own views. Me, I dont see the point, its like they are just saying "im a Christian", purely because they are scared that the only way to the father = is through Jesus Christ. And thus concoct an almost new type of bible to fit their modern life agenda.

I take nothing from the bible neither do I add stuff. - I take it for the inspired word of God that it is. Maybe like science, politics, media etc it is corrupt too - but I just see something in it that tops humanity, so im going along with it. = nothing wrong with that(and if makes me a fundamentalist, so be it)!

I laughed on the other thread "Syria" - where Rosetta is going on how we have been duped by Western media- yet he thinks the science in the Western world is sound....lol, I mean how naive can you be!

:6:
 
Not Frankenstien the bible critic again..Blimey - there are loads of archaeologists with view points. He is a Jewish guy looking to get a reaction from the Jewish community. I mean seriously, if you want to write a book and get it recognised then it needs air time. What he writes gets just that because the Jewish community will not agree with him - of course the bible critics(worldwide) will all jump on his back and hail him a hero. - Including Heath!

But others have called him a "great writer" who knows little about archaeology!
 
We have drifted soooo far away from cults and c@@@ s it is untrue.

This is the same as the other thread now isn't it!?

 
Green Tea - 8/9/2013 21:02

Reading the bible from start to finish and then understanding it, would be near on impossible. The books are not in chronological order, the writers have differing personalities and come from various backgrounds. Yes ive read it and questioned it many, many times.

No my kids do not believe in a young Earth, from what im aware anyway. And im lucky enough that they are taught in schools where religion plays a huge role. I think it helps them - the young earth thing is massive to you but its not that massive in my everyday life.. I dont go into schools and say, how dare you tell my kids the Earth is billions of years old. - but then again the school dosnt teach that anyway.

I think its good and healthy to question, search etc - my kids do this and find their own paths.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that GT develops your side abit more...

It just fascinates me that some people believe it and in the other thread when I said it first it was a throw away comment... Its an easy topic to pick on and I keep coming back to it because as I say I just find it interesting that people believe in it... I suppose you might think the same of me not believing it...
I listen to a lot of NdGT stuff and his points make far more sense to me than when I read or listen to creationist things...

 
GT I believe in a 1st cause. I do not believe all this is random so if that makes me a creationist, so be it. I am not in the literal group of creationist who believe the earth is only 10 thousand years old. That is the general meaning of what a creationist is, some one who believes in a young earth.

To the link, I posted it as another person thoughts. Are they trying to make The Bible fit them. Not in their mind they aren't. As I said I don't agree with it all. What is trying to make The Bible fit them? It is how we perceive it.

As for boxing you off as a fundamentalist. I have never said you were like those in a cult like descriptive. They aren't fundamentalists. They are a cult.

Cripes! You can't have fully taken in the type of Christian I am. I have written enough on it in these topics. I am a relational Christian. That's it. That is purely what Christianity is all about. Having a spiritual relationship with the God you understand or don't. I am also an unconventional Christian.

Are you a fundi? I haven't met you. Some of the stuff you say sounds like fundamentalism and some of it is very bizarre I find. I don't claim to totally understand science so I don't really comment on it. I am not a scientist or a specialized type of any of science. So I am not going to go into the nitty gritty of all that. I believe science has a place, like everything does. I believe science & Christianity entwine. I do accept that we can all overlap into different 'types'

Like I have said before. The Bible is about humans. I wouldn't buy a English Lit book if I wanted to learn about maths and vice versa. Hence I am not going to learn about the 'science' of how it was all made in The Bible. Anymore than I am going to learn a great deal about The Bible by reading a science book. If I wanted to digest more of The Bible I would buy a Christian writer book.

Relational & unconventional Christian is what I think sums me up, as to the majority I know too outside virtual. That is what my church fellowship is about and indeed the general way the church is today
 
The Fear - 9/9/2013 10:55

We have drifted soooo far away from cults and c@@@ s it is untrue.

This is the same as the other thread now isn't it!?
Click to expand...

It was always going to JF! :10: Even I think 1 on the go is more than enough. These threads aren't easy, as what you say can be misconstrued so easily has it isn't face to face.

Goes to prove that though people sigh about it there is so much people want to debate on it. I don't think the threads do that bad on it though it gets a little heated at times, it hasn't got worse than that up to now
 
Green Tea - 9/9/2013 10:26

Not Frankenstien the bible critic again..Blimey - there are loads of archaeologists with view points. He is a Jewish guy looking to get a reaction from the Jewish community. I mean seriously, if you want to write a book and get it recognised then it needs air time. What he writes gets just that because the Jewish community will not agree with him - of course the bible critics(worldwide) will all jump on his back and hail him a hero. - Including Heath!

But others have called him a "great writer" who knows little about archaeology!
Click to expand...

Almost every Archaeologist in the field agrees with him. His work is now recognised as the basis for all new research. Only people who started from the viewpoint that the Bible is unchanging and literal have questioned his work. Don't you find that strange?

 
Green Tea - 9/9/2013 10:13


I laughed on the other thread "Syria" - where Rosetta is going on how we have been duped by Western media- yet he thinks the science in the Western world is sound....lol, I mean how naive can you be!

:6:
Click to expand...

How naive.....hmmm, let me consider that, there once was a man with a big giant boat, big enough to hold all of the animals on the planet, and they all boarded the boat, voluntarily.

I wont go on, you haven't answered 4 questions posed in the other thread because they destroyed your argument and you chose to ignore them for a few days and come back only with babbling responses to questions that didn't confuse you.


Im not really sure how you are linking the two, perhaps you read the word western in both sentences and you think they are one and the same?
but then Im not entirely sure how you've managed to get to this age and even breed with the views you have on life - so ill leave that one for everyone else to work out.


 
HeathfieldRoad1874 - 9/9/2013 09:24

That's a very good summary Revd. Did you see the link to Finkelstein's excellent book on the subject from the other thread? Kiwi posted it, and it is an extremely interesting read. I think the Wiki entry you post is based on it's contents. It also covers many other Bible stories and their historical background.

It is interesting how all these stories coalesced into the OT.
Click to expand...

Either that or Finkelstein based his on the Wiki? Lol. Yes read it, it would be remiss of me not to allow other sources to inform my faith and to grow my understanding. I enjoyed Biblical Archeology at Uni, and Old Testament language studies. So keeping up to date hasn't really been a chore.

 
I can't believe I ever doubted it, Revd!!!! Of course you will have read it.

Like you say, it isn't a chore. I don't know why people get upset about the history of the Bible. It's a great story in itself, and certainly has had lots of plot twists over the last few thousand years.

So, it's not the unabridged word of God, but that ignores that it is one of the most fascinating insight into peoples thinking over time. From that point, it really is an amazing book.
 
revdpete - 9/9/2013 15:42

HeathfieldRoad1874 - 9/9/2013 09:24

That's a very good summary Revd. Did you see the link to Finkelstein's excellent book on the subject from the other thread? Kiwi posted it, and it is an extremely interesting read. I think the Wiki entry you post is based on it's contents. It also covers many other Bible stories and their historical background.

It is interesting how all these stories coalesced into the OT.
Click to expand...

Either that or Finkelstein based his on the Wiki? Lol. Yes read it, it would be remiss of me not to allow other sources to inform my faith and to grow my understanding. I enjoyed Biblical Archeology at Uni, and Old Testament language studies. So keeping up to date hasn't really been a chore.
Click to expand...

Good to see you in here Rev :14: :18:
 
Science taught our kids Global warming; "oppppps sorry, we got wrong".

There has been a 60 per cent increase in the amount of ocean covered with ice compared to this time last year, they equivalent of almost a million square miles.
In a rebound from 2012's record low an unbroken ice sheet more than half the size of Europe already stretches from the Canadian islands to Russia's northern shores, days before the annual re-freeze is even set to begin.
The Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific has remained blocked by pack-ice all year, forcing some ships to change their routes.
A leaked report to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seen by the Mail on Sunday, has led some scientists to claim that the world is heading for a period of cooling that will not end until the middle of this century.
If correct, it would contradict computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming. The news comes several years after the BBC predicted that the arctic would be ice-free by 2013.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10294082/Global-warming-No-actually-were-cooling-claim-scientists.html
 
Science teaches about greenhouse gasses and the effect they can have on the climate which is proven. There is a cause and effect there, doesn't matter if you believe nothing man does will affect natural global change, or we've burning our way into oblivion. Grenhouse gasses have an effect one way or another the debate is what's the point in us bothering when China won't and can we find a cure for cow farts.

Global Warming is a tax trick from lobbiests/thinktanks and Gov who adopt whatever hypothesis that suits them at the point to get their own way, make money and so on.

This isn't taught in school.

The simple fact there is provable studies on both sides of the argument for 'man made' climate change shows that neither side it yet correct and testing will continue, and the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle and we'll get to the truth by continually testing, studying and adjusting predictions and the hypothesis until it's provably correct in repeatable studies.

It's contestable, having a lion fart next to it's live lunch apparently isn't, so no it's not quite the same thing again.

Science learns and evolves and results can be at stages taken to suit your viewpoint.

Ergo - the very same 'facts' reported differently http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2013/sep/09/climate-change-arctic-sea-ice-delusions
 
Green Tea - 10/9/2013 20:08

Science taught our kids Global warming; "oppppps sorry, we got wrong".

There has been a 60 per cent increase in the amount of ocean covered with ice compared to this time last year, they equivalent of almost a million square miles.
In a rebound from 2012's record low an unbroken ice sheet more than half the size of Europe already stretches from the Canadian islands to Russia's northern shores, days before the annual re-freeze is even set to begin.
The Northwest Passage from the Atlantic to the Pacific has remained blocked by pack-ice all year, forcing some ships to change their routes.
A leaked report to the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) seen by the Mail on Sunday, has led some scientists to claim that the world is heading for a period of cooling that will not end until the middle of this century.
If correct, it would contradict computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming. The news comes several years after the BBC predicted that the arctic would be ice-free by 2013.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10294082/Global-warming-No-actually-were-cooling-claim-scientists.html
Click to expand...

http://www.postcrescent.com/article/20130909/APC06/309090073/Science-showing-climate-change-man-made?nclick_check=1



From studying air bubbles trapped in Antarctic ice, scientists know that going back 800,000 years, the carbon dioxide level oscillated in a tight band, from about 180 parts per million in the depths of ice ages to about 280 during the warm periods between.

On May 10, 2013, the worldwide level of CO2 reached 400 parts per million. Scientists noted that with the rise, decades of efforts to bring human-produced emissions under control are faltering.

Climate deniers don’t want to hear the reports and predictions. They will throw up diversionary theories that have no scientific basis. They will attempt to smear the IPCC and reputable climate scientists.
 
By the way, thats EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND YEARS. Absolute proof the Earth is older than 10,000 years.

I do love it when non-Scientists try and use Science. They usually cock it up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.