• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What do you believe in the Bible to be true, if anything?

As long as you get the point he was making, it doesn't matter.

Exactly...the perfect example of gagging at a gnat and swallowing a camel...:2razz:...the principle of the matter is what counts...
 
Needless to say, I believe everything is the Bible to be true but I am curious as to what parts of the Bible you believe to be true?

Jeruselum. Israel. I believe they are true.

Maybe a couple other things.
 
It means to accept something as true without evidence. To take it on faith.

That's likely why there are 3 major religions stemming from the same god.
Several Jewish types.
Several Muslim types.
Thousand of Christian types.

Each get to make up, er believe, their own version of true.

Perception is reality.
 
Ramses II was real. He's on display at the Cairo Museum.

He's not in the bible. Name anyway.


Moses, supposed author of Exodus, couldn't remember his step grandfather's name. So only called him Pharaoh.
 
Last edited:
Well the whole discussion seemed to start from someone saying it is impossible and another saying it is difficult but possible.

Sent from my FIG-LX1 using Tapatalk

With god, all things are possible.
 
He's not in the bible. Name anyway.


Moses, supposed author of Exodus, couldn't remember his step grandfather's name. So only called him Pharaoh.

Four verses contain Rameses.

Genesis 47:11
And Joseph placed his father and his brethren, and gave them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh had commanded.

Exodus 12:37
And the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand on foot that were men, beside children.

Numbers 33:3
And they departed from Rameses in the first month, on the fifteenth day of the first month; on the morrow after the passover the children of Israel went out with an high hand in the sight of all the Egyptians.

Numbers 33:5
And the children of Israel removed from Rameses, and pitched in Succoth.
 
What I believe to be true of the Bible: God's overall Message of forgiveness, compassion, peace, and brotherly love.

Basically goodwill toward man and the Golden Rule.

And most of the 'stories' in the Bible illustrate those things. But the flaws of men of the time...some of which, like homophobia which is still seen today...did end up coloring His Word and ending up as misinterpretations. Some IMO are even well-intended, like those on 'fornication,' which were to protect women from the depredations of men demanding sex and then leaving single mothers behind, 'ruined' and with little or no means of support.


This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa
 
Last edited:
How do you know the point if you interpret it wrong?
"Wrong" being anything less than perfect accuracy, all of my interpretations are wrong. I rely on translations and translations are rarely 100% accurate. This is one reason why I never joined the church despite being raised in a Catholic family. The Church requires that you agree that the bible is without error. The bible has several errors. We can prove it.

Once you accept that all versions of a given document contain errors, you can begin to account for those errors and refine your understanding. You can compare all the different versions, you can look up what scholars have said about it, you can attempt your own direct translation from original documents. My understanding, my interpretation, is wrong because it's not 100%. It's somewhere in the high 80s to low 90s, and that's good enough for me.
 
But if God said to man, "X is impossible for you"

Sent from my FIG-LX1 using Tapatalk

AFAIK, god has not stated any impossibility. For if something was impossible, then there'd be not much point to that thing or the story.
 
Needless to say, I believe everything is the Bible to be true but I am curious as to what parts of the Bible you believe to be true?
The essence, that is to say, it's written with honesty, wisdom and care - so all true, in that context. Except, Revelations - complete hogwash, fantasies. Paul is also, pretty questionable. Literally, not really, although maybe if I spoke it's original language and knew the cultural references.
 
Back
Top Bottom