Bill Nye the Science Guy booooooooooed!
- Thread starter 2-0-Sixx
- Start date
You're right if an ignorant Christians passes off that answer, he's a dumbass. Ancient Jews used to believe that the moon was a source of light, but knowing what we know today it's just a reflection of the Sun's Light. Those Waco people are Wacko.
@JLMACN, LOL saying you thought Enserio didn't know, Enserio's a teacher. LOL
@JLMACN, LOL saying you thought Enserio didn't know, Enserio's a teacher. LOL
You dont remember the situation that happend in Waco in the eraly 90's?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Koresh#Raid_and_siege
It was HUUUUGE news...its the only reason I KNOW what or where Waco is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Koresh#Raid_and_siege
It was HUUUUGE news...its the only reason I KNOW what or where Waco is.
so god only spoke a language that could not be fully translated to english, thereby making his revelation inherently biased not only against english speakers but against everyone since the first transcription was not even in the language that god spoke. the english translation is invalid and will never capture the true revelation of the divine creator because at best its just the closest translation that made sense to the given translator at the time? the greeks did not have a word for reflect? in fact, at best, the bible can only be viewed as a metaphor and nothing should be taken literally because it could simply be a translation error? the faith of billions rests not upon the old testament and jesus, but upon their faith in an unknown and unnamed translator with unknown motivation and unknow intentions? theists actually hold the translator as GOD? i can dig it.
BUT
could it maybe be that the bible was written by man without divine intervention and the author explained god creating the lesser light because he thought himself that the moon was an actual source of light? he misappropriates the creation of the moonlight as a distinct light from the sun that ruled the day because he in fact did not know the two were related. further he considers the sun the greater light even though it is an indistinct star because he did not understand that the sun was in fact a star
AND
someone as seemingly educated as myself does not logically believe the bible is divine. i also logically conclude that the authors did not know light reflectd off the moon, i conclude they thought it was self powered, but clearly less powerful than the sun thus calling it the lesser light, i conclude they did not know the sun was a star, i conclude that the religious ultimately place faith not in a higher power, but in a power they can match, in their fellow man for giving an accurate transcript of a supposed meeting with god, i conclude with your condescention that you meant to begin your post by saying "i would have"
BUT
could it maybe be that the bible was written by man without divine intervention and the author explained god creating the lesser light because he thought himself that the moon was an actual source of light? he misappropriates the creation of the moonlight as a distinct light from the sun that ruled the day because he in fact did not know the two were related. further he considers the sun the greater light even though it is an indistinct star because he did not understand that the sun was in fact a star
AND
someone as seemingly educated as myself does not logically believe the bible is divine. i also logically conclude that the authors did not know light reflectd off the moon, i conclude they thought it was self powered, but clearly less powerful than the sun thus calling it the lesser light, i conclude they did not know the sun was a star, i conclude that the religious ultimately place faith not in a higher power, but in a power they can match, in their fellow man for giving an accurate transcript of a supposed meeting with god, i conclude with your condescention that you meant to begin your post by saying "i would have"
