Go to The Reverend Kooka Speaks About Religious Bulls#!t
- Add a comment
- Go to BELIEVERS MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT FACTS AND LOGIC
FLIGHT
The information here comes from many, many sources. Is there a specific area you wish for me to tell you where I got the information from?
Also, some of this is openly my own thoughts on the matter.
If there is anything here I claim to be fact and you wish to ask where it came from, I will give you that information.
I know what point you are attempting (And very poorly at that ) to make. But you made a very direct statement and backed it up with nothing at all. You then claimed to have a book to back up said statement and I asked for a name, which I have not seen yet, so that I would be bale to check the information out for myself and see the validity of it.
I am more than willing to direct you to any sources I use for my information if you ask for them. But a post like this has a lot to it and there is no one single source for it all.
An example, the truth about The Satan was first revealed to me in a few pages copied from a book and handed out at a sci-fi convention, which I have been keeping at my desk as a reference ever since. I can not find the name of the book on any of the pages it looks to be from some form of encyclopedia which deals with Biblical ideas though. The person who wrote the piece is named T.H. Gaster though. if you do a source for him you do come across a great deal of article dealing with Biblical ideas. I was unable to find the writing I am using for my reference on-line, since most likely he wrote that for the people that published it and they would be the ones to put in on line and have not yet. I will look into finding out just where it came from if you would like a title to it.
In trying to find some web sites that talk about these ideas, I can not seem to find all of them that I have found in the past. It is hard to remember just what words found the' best sites that were not the Church of Satan or some Christian site. Here is one that deals with all ideas of satan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satan. It does talk about Satan being the 'prosecutor' on behalf of God to test man kind.
Any other areas I can try to provide you a reference for?
posted by
kooka_lives
on June 22, 2005 at 7:41 PM
| link to this | reply
kooka lives...name of book & publisher to be included in blog on this subject.
posted by
reasons
on June 22, 2005 at 4:32 PM
| link to this | reply
wull --
if they bleeve, then they bleeve
and there is nothing you can do about it.
but if more of us can use the scientific method ("prove all things," the Apostle Paul said) then more of us can arrive at new knokwledge.
but this takes time.
too much as far as I am concerned.
oh yes, Cantey -- if we do use Genesis -- it's the first four "days" that are important, because there is no means there of keeping time, so the days can be hundreds of millions of years old.
and people keep asking questions about after A & E left the Garden -- and Cain roamed the earth, and was marked so that other people (living at the same time as A & E & C?) would shun him -- and then he took a wife -- from where? other people that lived at the same time? -- this would make A & E NOT the progenitors of the entire human race.
I believe that our conclusions about the book of Genesis have been reached only in the past few hundred years, from a strictly medieval point of view -- and that they are passed down from generationto generaton as "gospel" and "dogma" and that too many people accept these without question. Aye, there's the rub.
the problem's not in the Bible, but in what people see in it. What people see it as being.
I see it as a continuing and "progressive" attempt at answering life's big questions -- and the big problem is that someone around 400 years afterh Yeshua's ministry decided to cut the whole evolution of religion off right there and add a line to the book of Revelation about "If anyone adds to this book, then . . ." etc., to discourage any further asking of questions.
interesting how contemporary Protestant believers can persist in adhering to a paradigm defined by the Church that they feel teaches much wrong in the first place.
posted by
Xeno-x
on June 22, 2005 at 7:02 AM
| link to this | reply
Kooka, Long time no see! Thanks for the boost in my YHT blogs.
Keep up the great work!
posted by
kingmi
on June 21, 2005 at 4:33 PM
| link to this | reply
Oh I was not claiming to be another Mark Twain
but Im sure he could pull it off.
posted by
calmcantey75
on June 21, 2005 at 4:21 PM
| link to this | reply
cantey 1975
Sorry, but you are not Mark Twain. If he came over and was willing to present it to me, I would do for it. But really doubt there is anyone today with his talent at presenting such things.
posted by
kooka_lives
on June 21, 2005 at 4:10 PM
| link to this | reply
FLIGHT
Could you give me the name of the book? And who published it?
I hope this is not like the time when Unicorn claimed she had an acclaimed (Which it was not actually, there were many proven mistakes in the book itself) science book that proved various things that it did not. I went and found a copy of the book and looked through it, then asked her where the information was and she just stopped talking to me for a time. I found nothing to back up her claim.
posted by
kooka_lives
on June 21, 2005 at 4:08 PM
| link to this | reply
it can be fascinating if it is presented the right way AND WITH REAL PASSIO
N.
posted by
calmcantey75
on June 21, 2005 at 4:05 PM
| link to this | reply
kooka lives - I have a book describing scientist's changing beliefs on this & why. Will post on it soon.
posted by
reasons
on June 21, 2005 at 4:01 PM
| link to this | reply
cantey 1975
I personally feel that Tarantino is over rated. He has some talent, but it is not what many of his fans claim it to be. He just pushes the envelope so much that many find it appealing and mistake that for some kind of genius.
I have a book my wife's Grandparents gave us about where in the Bible it talks of dinosaurs and dragons and such, I tried to read it but found it boring. Besides, I am not about to pause in my readings right now.
posted by
kooka_lives
on June 21, 2005 at 4:01 PM
| link to this | reply
I could prove that to you with scriptures
but I wont bore you with it. Not being sarcastic there.
posted by
calmcantey75
on June 21, 2005 at 3:54 PM
| link to this | reply
there is some facisnating stuff in the Bible
the Bible is kind of like a Quentin Tarantino movie ( are you a fan?) sometimes it skips around in time and eras.
The Bible speaks of races of humanoid type creatures and other life that were on the earth before adam and eve that were destroyed in a catastrophic flood before the Noah flood. This could have happened millions of years before the adam and eve thing.
posted by
calmcantey75
on June 21, 2005 at 3:53 PM
| link to this | reply
cantey 1975
That may be, but many believers ignore that kind of thing.
posted by
kooka_lives
on June 21, 2005 at 3:48 PM
| link to this | reply
FLIGHTPATH
No, if you had any knowledge of science at all you would know that the more we study the universe the more proof we keep on finding that the bib bang happened. it is not ridiculous at all. There is more scientific facts to back up the idea every day. I really am lost as to where you are getting your 'facts' from. I have heard other believers try such tactics and they have yet to provide proof that 'Many scientists today agree' with what they say. Where did you get that really inaccurate piece of knowledge?
The idea you present with your comment on the human eye has been addressed in past posts here, but for you I shall plan on writing up a post in the near future to explain the possibilities that would work to explain such a thing as well as fit into certain religious beliefs as long as one was able to break away from the silly and obviously wrong idea that one must take the Bible literally. I was already planning one and can just add to it now to make sure I address your question.
posted by
kooka_lives
on June 21, 2005 at 3:47 PM
| link to this | reply
The Bible never claims the earth is not
billions of years old. There is an unaccounted time gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.
I believ the earth is far older than 7000 years old.
posted by
calmcantey75
on June 21, 2005 at 3:23 PM
| link to this | reply
Kooka lives,,,The notion that earth was derived from an explosion is as ridiculous as saying the alphabet was derived from an explosion in a printing shop. Many scientists today agree. Aside from, yes, ridiculous religious arguments, there is one truly meaningful basic common guide found in most all religious literature - Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Have you never wondered at the amazing composition of the human eye which enables you to read this? Have you never wondered at the ability of a tiny, tiny seed to turn into a thing of beauty, or food? You are so young. Please do not deny yourself the wonder of all that was created by God.
posted by
reasons
on June 21, 2005 at 3:17 PM
| link to this | reply