Yes, every single book or documentary ever made is bias to one side or the other, consciously or subconsciously. If a person really wants "The Truth" the will have to sift through mountains of what others call their "Truth" and make up your own mind.

I could start pointing history books that are used in the "Education System" that are full of out-right lies. But history is always written by the victors or those currently in control. Control is the key word, shaping minds is thee most important issue our masters face when keeping the masses in line.

The following is an observation and a question.

BT posts #11  I believe things because I can prove them or am willing to accept the proof of others who can provide their proof.

BT posts:

Lula posts: Since you don't believe God created nature, but believe in nature,  I have to ask....... how did nature come to be on earth and what is the body of empirical scientific evidence that supports that?

BT posts: #64 

Hmmm......can you see that you don't hold yourself up to your own professed standards of believing things because you can prove them?

You've brought up the grave scandal of homosexuality in the church twice and so it bears a response.

The Church has consistently condemned all forms of sexual immorality which includes homosexuality ever since the days of Christ and His Apostles when the Church was first established.  

Christ warned that scandals would come. The human side of the Mystical Body of Christ (the Church) is made up of sinners and Catholics themselves condemn the bad conduct of anyone of her individual members, her priests and religious included. Faithful Catholics are outraged by the immoral behavior of those priests who sin against God's Sixth Commandment and dissent from the constant teachings of the Church.

The sin is being exposed, Our Lord's way of purifying His Church.

At the same time, there are thousands of holy priests who have retained the Faith. 

BT posts:

Praise Almighty God the clerical sex abuse scandal and the coverup has been exposed. Catholics acknowledge the reality of the horrible acts of the abusers and we are absolutely outraged at those who covered it up. We are most compassionate for the victims and work is being done to assure this never happens again. 

I have every reason for hope knowing the vast majority of priests and bishops are honest, faithful servants of Christ and His service as ministers to His people.

Imagine that!  

History itself, archaeology, ancient artifacts, Dead Sea Scrolls, and Herod's palace aren't good enough proof!  Doesn't pass the science test you say! 

Could it be because you've hardened your heart to truly seeking truth and have purposefully put blinders up...and like a fitful child.....don't want to see...and don't want to hear and don't want to really know of Almighty God and His Church and  revealed one, holy, catholic and apostolic  religion?

Just something to think about.

Darwinian Evolution is a pseudo scientific theory that has been masqueraded as fact in all government schools and one that atheistic materialists have placed all their marbles.

My goodness, here you are trying to slam religion and the Bible using the flat earth myth!

 Let's take what you said line by line.

Actually more than a couple thousand years ago, people knew the earth was a globe  thanks to the writings of Isaias, one of God's prophets.  He lived in the time of Hezekiah, King of Judah in 716-687 BC. Isaias was killed (martyred for the faith) by being sawed in half by his son-in-law, King Manasses. God knew the earth was a globe; after all, He created it that way. God inspired Isaias to write His prophecy.

Check out Isaias 40:21-22.

It states, "Do you not know? Hath it not been heard? Hath it not been told you from the beginning? Hath you not understood the foundations of the Earth? It is he that sits upon the globe of the earth....."

So there you have it...sometime between 716 and 687 BC when Isaias penned God's prophecy, they knew the earth was a globe.

And this knowledge that the earth was a globe wasn't lost to the subsequent generations. The medieval scholars and scientists (Jean Buridan and Nicholas Oresme for example) never doubted the earth is a globe or sphere and by the 15th century the fact the earth was a globe was fully grasped. 

Christopher Columbus was a devout Catholic and he knew the earth was not flat becasue he knew the Scriptures.

Who were many of the early scientists?...Catholics….and some were priests.

Turns out "your" science in this case had to catch up with the Bible, didn't it?

LOL, how many books did your "church" ban. How many early scientists and priests did your "church" declare enemy's of the the church and brutally kill? Quote me some of these if you are up with your church history.

 I have 3 different bibles and they all read the same way. I think you need to look up the difference between circle and globe.

I am willing to bet that in the near future your quote will be edited to "Globe" so that you can use it properly in arguments like you just failed at. 

Lula, I really do not like this, it is not how I like to correspond so at least try and stop taking what I say as a personal attack, I just do not believe ... what else am I supposed to do or say?

MyfistO,

Good to have you enter the discussion.

Regarding Isaias 40:21-22, I wrote:

I too own several different Bibles and know that the word "globe" was translated to the word "circle". 

However, since "all Scripture, inspired of God is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, and to instruct in justice..." , I  quoted the Douay Rheims version and for good reason. It's the most accurate translation of St.Jerome's Latin Vulgate Bible (405 AD), which is a word-for-word translation from the original Hebrew and Greek. St. Jerome was a consummate linguistic genius, Greek speaking from birth, knew Hebrew and Latin perfectly and had many manuscripts to work from that are no longer extant. I believe he was raised up by God to translate Scripture into common Latin.

In my comment #70 I gave a little background about the Douay Rheims and the Septuagint.

I'm convinced the word "globe" is the original word in Isaias because the Hebrew text forms part of the Dead Sea Scrolls found in Qumram and the Greek version of Isaias in the Septuagint is the same as the Hebrew text. (Masoretic).

As I see it, the difference in this case isn't that much of a difference at all.

BT said: A couple thousand years ago the world was flat, everyone knew that. Say, wasn’t that back around the times when your bible was being composed?

Even quoting Isaias with the word "circle" refutes BT's "flat earth" comment.

Jerome's Latin Vulgate (405 A.D.)

qui sedet super gyrum terrae et habitatores eius sunt quasi lucustae qui extendit velut nihilum caelos et expandit eos sicut tabernaculum ad inhabitandum

gyrum accusative singular of gȳrus

Latin

Etymology

From Ancient Greek γῦρος (guros)

Pronunciation

• (Classical) IPA: /ˈɡʏː.rus/

Noun

gȳrus (genitive gȳrī); m, second declension

1. circle
2. a circular motion
3. a circuit, course, ring
4. (by extension) place where horses are trained

You really want to go there with me?

CIRCLE

1 a round plane figure whose boundary (the circumference) ...

PLANE

…a flat surface on which a straight line joining any two points on it would wholly...

Oh and thanks for the welcome. Glad to join the convo.

Lula - St. Augustine (354–430) (Augustine of Hippo), took a more cautious approach in arguing against assuming that people inhabited the antipodes: His scientific reasoning went like this - Since these people would have to be descended from Adam, they would have had to travel to the other side of the Earth at some point; Augustine continues: It is too absurd to say, that some men might have taken ship and traversed the whole wide ocean, and crossed from this side of the world to the other, and that thus even the inhabitants of that distant region are descended from that one first man.

Yea, they thought the world flat alright which was my whole point in the first place. People who believe they live on a pancake do not have the ability to understand to even comprehend the universe around them let alone cover it in your book of books, is all. There is a big difference in knowing something and convincing the other Neanderthals is entirely another matter heresy being what it was then. Globe my eye.

MyfistO,

I agree "circle" is the modern translation.

Your #90, I see you've taken it from circle to plane to flat surface and got BT all excited. But that's Ok becasue a globe is in the form of a circle and a circle is the form of a globe.

As I said I'm convinced the original Hebrew was "globe" and that's why the Douay Rheims has it as such and the Dead Sea Scrolls confirm it.

But you know what else confirms globe was the original word?  Context...

The Douay Rheims Isaias 40:21-22 has "globe".

Douay Rheims version states, "Do you not know? Hath it not been heard? Hath it not been told you from the beginning? Hath you not understood the foundations of the Earth? It is he that sits upon the globe of the earth....." [/quote]

"Globe" makes more sense and fits better than "circle" when you put it in context with the previous passage.   

Also Job 26:7 fits better with Isaias 40: 21-22 "globe" more than it would "circle" 

Job 26:7 is about the power of God. "He stretched the north over the empty space and hangeth the earth upon nothing."

Using globe, "He stretched the north over the empty space and hangeth the (globe of the ) earth upon nothing."

Using circle, "He stretched the north over the empty space and hangeth the (circle of the ) earth upon nothing."

.......................

Thank you both, this has been interesting and fun, however, either way you want to read it, Isaias 40:21-22, refutes BT's "flat earth" comment.

Truth is they didn't think the earth was flat. The "flat earth" is a myth that was established in the early 1800s.  

Man oh man there is no talking with some people.

I show you THE ORIGINALS, Hebrew and Latin and all you have is 1 bible translation from some guy who fits what you want to hear. How convenient for you.

Anyone that reads this thread and does a little research will see that every bible (save the DRV translated long after the world was known to be a globe 1749-1752 A.D.- How Handy) states CIRCLE which is NOT a globe.

if your looking through eyes full of pixie dust.

The paradigm of a spherical Earth was developed in Greek astronomy, beginning with Pythagoras (6th century BC), although most Pre-Socratics retained the flat Earth model. Aristotle accepted the spherical shape of the Earth on empirical grounds around 330 BC, and knowledge of the spherical Earth gradually began to spread beyond the Hellenistic world from then on.

I understand your point and it's well taken however, just so you know, when a discussion comes up about Scriputral passages, context, context, context is as important as location, location, location is in real estate.

..............

Sure. Let's do.

......................

Here is a good one for both sides, please read to the end and give it a chance.

Religion vs Science

"Let me explain the problem science has with Jesus Christ." The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand. "You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"

"Yes, sir."

"So you believe in God?"

"Absolutely."

"Is God good?"

"Sure! God's good."

"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"

"Yes."

"Are you good or evil?"

"The Bible says I'm evil."

The professor grins knowingly. "Ahh! THE BIBLE!" He considers for a moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help them? Would you try?"

"Yes sir, I would."

"So you're good...!"

"I wouldn't say that."

"Why not say that? You would help a sick and maimed person if you could... in fact most of us would if we could... God doesn't.

[No answer.]

"He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?"

[No answer]

The elderly man is sympathetic. "No, you can't, can you?" He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax. In philosophy, you have to go easy with the new ones. "Let's start again, young fella."

"Is God good?"

"Er... Yes."

"Is Satan good?"

"No."

"Where does Satan come from?" The student falters.

"From... God..."

"That's right. God made Satan, didn't he?" The elderly man runs his bony fingers through his thinning hair and turns to the smirking, student audience."I think we're going to have a lot of fun this semester, ladies and gentlemen." He turns back to the Christian.

"Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"

"Yes, sir."

"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? Did God make everything?"

"Yes."

"Who created evil?

[No answer]

"Is there sickness in this world? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness. All the terrible things - do they exist in this world? "

The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."

"Who created them? "

[No answer] The professor suddenly shouts at his student. "WHO CREATED THEM? TELL ME, PLEASE!" The professor closes in for the kill and climbs into the Christian's face. In a still small voice: "God created all evil, didn't He, son?"

[No answer]

The student tries to hold the steady, experienced gaze and fails.

Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace the front of the classroom like an aging panther. The class is mesmerized. "Tell me," he continues, "How is it that this God is good if He created all evil throughout all time?" The professor swishes his arms around to encompass the wickedness of the world. "All the hatred, the brutality, all the pain, all the torture, all the death and ugliness and all the suffering created by this good God is all over the world, isn't it, young man?"

[No answer]

"Don't you see it all over the place? Huh?"

Pause.

"Don't you?" The professor leans into the student's face again and whispers, "Is God good?"

[No answer]

"Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"

The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor. I do."

The old man shakes his head sadly. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen him? "

"No, sir. I've never seen Him."

"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"

"No, sir. I have not."

"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus...in fact, do you have any sensory perception of your God whatsoever?"

[No answer]

"Answer me, please."

"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."

"You're AFRAID... you haven't?"

"No, sir."

"Yet you still believe in him?"

"...yes..."

"That takes FAITH!" The professor smiles sagely at the underling."According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Where is your God now?"

[The student doesn't answer]

"Sit down, please."

The Christian sits...Defeated.

Another Christian raises his hand. "Professor, may I address the class?"

The professor turns and smiles. "Ah, another Christian in the vanguard! Come, come, young man. Speak some proper wisdom to the gathering."

The Christian looks around the room. "Some interesting points you are making, sir. Now I've got a question for you. Is there such thing as heat?"

"Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."

"Is there such a thing as cold?"

"Yes, son, there's cold too."

"No, sir, there isn't."

The professor's grin freezes. The room suddenly goes very cold.

The second Christian continues. "You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super- heat, mega-heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold, otherwise we would be able to go colder than -458.

You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. "Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."

Silence. A pin drops somewhere in the classroom.

"Is there such a thing as darkness, professor?"

"That's a dumb question, son. What is night if it isn't darkness? What are you getting at...?"

"So you say there is such a thing as darkness?"

"Yes..."

"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something, it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, Darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker and give me a jar of it. Can you...give me a jar of darker darkness, professor?"

Despite himself, the professor smiles at the young effrontery before him. This will indeed be a good semester. "Would you mind telling us what your point is, young man?"

"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with and so your conclusion must be in error...."

The professor goes toxic. "Flawed...? How dare you...!""

"Sir, may I explain what I mean?"

The class is all ears.

"Explain... oh, explain..." The professor makes an admirable effort to regain control. Suddenly he is affability itself. He waves his hand to silence the class, for the student to continue.

"You are working on the premise of duality," the Christian explains. "That for example there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science cannot even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism but has never seen, much less fully understood them. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, merely the absence of it."

The young man holds up a newspaper he takes from the desk of a neighbor who has been reading it. "Here is one of the most disgusting tabloids this country hosts, professor. Is there such a thing as immorality?"

"Of course there is, now look..."

"Wrong again, sir. You see, immorality is merely the absence of morality.

Is there such thing as injustice? No. Injustice is the absence of justice. Is there such a thing as evil?" The Christian pauses. "Isn't evil the absence of good?"

The professor's face has turned an alarming color. He is so angry he is temporarily speechless.

The Christian continues. "If there is evil in the world, professor, and we all agree there is, then God, if he exists, must be accomplishing a work through the agency of evil. What is that work, God is accomplishing? The Bible tells us it is to see if each one of us will, of our own free will, choose good over evil."

The professor bridles. "As a philosophical scientist, I don't view this matter as having anything to do with any choice; as a realist, I absolutely do not recognize the concept of God or any other theological factor as being part of the world equation because God is not observable."

"I would have thought that the absence of God's moral code in this world is probably one of the most observable phenomena going," the Christian replies.

"Newspapers make billions of dollars reporting it every week! Tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?"

"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do."

"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"

The professor makes a sucking sound with his teeth and gives his student a silent, stony stare.

"Professor. Since no-one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a priest?"

"I'll overlook your impudence in the light of our philosophical discussion. Now, have you quite finished?" the professor hisses.

"So you don't accept God's moral code to do what is righteous?"

"I believe in what is - that's science!"

"Ahh! SCIENCE!" the student's face splits into a grin. "Sir, you rightly state that science is the study of observed phenomena. Science too is a premise which is flawed..."

"SCIENCE IS FLAWED?" the professor splutters.

The class is in uproar.

The Christian remains standing until the commotion has subsided. "To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, may I give you an example of what I mean?" The professor wisely keeps silent.

The Christian looks around the room. "Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?" The class breaks out in laughter.

The Christian points towards his elderly, crumbling tutor. "Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain... felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain?" No one appears to have done so.

The Christian shakes his head sadly. "It appears no-one here has had any sensory perception of the professor's brain whatsoever. Well, according to the rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science, I DECLARE that the professor has no brain."

The class is in chaos.

The Christian sits down.

BTW, I am agnostic. Raised as a catholic.

It could very well be that I have mislabeled myself an atheist ... because I sure cannot prove this one way or the other, humm... I just don't like labels and such and especially general ones that encompass many different individuals with all the differences expected. And yet, because of one aspect of a person's being, we are labeled and treated accordingly. I was wrong to press the issue that God doesn't exist, but that still doesn't mean I have to believe he does ... agnostic does seem to fit better though. Have to think on this a bit more...

Lula, I just happened to have some documents open and this popped out. In the Early Middle Ages, Isidore of Seville's widely read encyclopedia presented the term "antipodes" as referring to antichthones (people who lived on the opposite side of the Earth), as well as to a geographical place; these people came to play a role in medieval discussions about the shape of the Earth. In 748, Pope Zachary declared belief in the antipodes, as apparently held by Vergilius of Salzburg, to be heretical. The antipodes being an attribute of a spherical Earth, some authors used their perceived absurdity as an argument for a flat Earth. However, knowledge of the spherical Earth was widespread during the Middle Ages, only occasionally disputed on theological grounds. OK, just kidding, you still win …

So why so many religions?

I believe the man is fallible.

I believe man created religion therefore religion is inherently flawed.

What one man sees as perfection, another sees as flawed and strives to make it better. Some say that the pursuit of God is the pursuit of perfection. If thats the case no religion will ever be the perfect religion.

I believe no religion has it right or wrong but any religion that puts there faith above the rest of humanity is more flawed and detrimental to the global society. As any mammals with a societal structure we have to establish basic rules or the structure collapses to chaos. Can man live Christ like without believing in the existence of God? Sure we can. Does the pursuit of science mean there is no room for God? Of coarse not. Religion can morally guide humanity while we ask the great questions.

If I had to be the one to write about the existence of God, this God would not close the doors to any living creature that did not follow a curtain set of rules but would open the doors to all who believed that there was more to life than the rights of the just the individual, rather the individual is only a small portion of a global or universal community that includes all living life on this planet and anywhere in the universe. To realize that there actions are a drop in the great pond that ripples through time and life forever. To me this is immortality. Knowing that my actions can have a profound effect on the world that will last forever in the consciousness of humanity and beyond.

To me a man of God does not kill animals, plants or even insects out of the notion that we are greater than or more deserving than other forms of life. My God would hold the life of a human with the same value of the life of an ant as we are all part of the same system and dependent on everything one might call mother nature. Small groups of aboriginals have been living in harmony with themselves and nature for thousands of years and to tell me that these people are not allowed the grace of God because they have not been saved has turned me away from what I know to be religion. We brought more evil and corruption then these peoples could ever comprehend under the guise of salvation. Only after Religion stops trying to control or take over and learns to live with and embrace other cultures and religions will I take part and even then will still look up and ask "are you there?".

Mark Twain, Very moving

Part 2