Actually that is partially true since its atmospheric water refracting sunlight that causes the sky to appear blue. If there wasn't water vapor our skies might be the same color as the sky on Mars.
Yes, I realilze that, but water vapor was not what was described, it was like an ocean beyond the sky. Just using the science of the day.... DD
Wow, I missed that and you are right - shocking. For those playing at home, the general scholarly consensus is: 1 CE - 22-25 years 1500 - 35 years 1900 - 50 years Now - 78-80
For those playing at home, the general scholarly consensus is: 1 CE - 22-25 years 1500 - 35 years 1900 - 50 years Now - 78-80 Thus is no big deal before 1900 when in your 40s your back, knees, teeth and eyes go since you are just lucky to be alive.
Jesus said it happened. I'll go with Jesus on this one. YES (I usually give extra weight to Jesus' answer on a subject) Jesus could have been wrong, but I'm on the side of the fence that is believing Him.
my problem with religion is that it tends to divide. i don't think meowgi jumps in to religious threads to offend, i think, in his own way, he is showing that he gives a damn. i've been accused more than once of arrogance in religious threads. i'm not trying to come off that way, maybe it's a character flaw. i don't want to offend but i do want to challenge certain ideas that i don't believe benefit all of mankind. i can think of nothing more arrogant than for someone to believe that because i do not profess my love for jesus and jesus alone, i am condemned to hell. also, not being a christian does not mean one has no faith, there are other definitions: faith n. 1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing. 2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief, trust. 3. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's supporters. 4. often Faith Christianity The theological virtue defined as secure belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will. 5. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith. 6. A set of principles or beliefs.
He said this- Matthew 24:37-39 "as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and knew not until the flood came and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." There are other quotes Jesus made about the flood, similar... As I said Jesus clearly referenced historically as an event.
Would you take the Apostle Peter's word on it? 1 Peter 3:20 "God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water," 2 Peter 2:4-5 "For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,[a] putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment; 5if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others" Then here is another reference from Jesus- Luke 17: 26-33 "26"Just as it was in the days of Noah, so also will it be in the days of the Son of Man. 27People were eating, drinking, marrying and being given in marriage up to the day Noah entered the ark. Then the flood came and destroyed them all. 28"It was the same in the days of Lot. People were eating and drinking, buying and selling, planting and building. 29But the day Lot left Sodom, fire and sulfur rained down from heaven and destroyed them all. 30It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed. 31On that day no one who is on the roof of his house, with his goods inside, should go down to get them. Likewise, no one in the field should go back for anything. 32Remember Lot's wife! 33Whoever tries to keep his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life will preserve it. " If Jesus believed it was a mythical story then He's certainly to be blamed for not clarifying that.
Peter is doing the same thing, referring to a mythical story where the meaning is of importance. Edit: And Peter might of thought it literally happened. It doesn't make it so. Did Jesus clarify that the parables he told were stories and not actual events?
Yes he made it very clear they were stories not actual events, in fact he said he used parables so the people hearing them would not 'hear' or understand their meaning. It is OK to acknowledge that Peter and Jesus were speaking of actual events and to believe they were wrong. Since they did not even imply such though we would have to assume anything they said was mythical or not actual or even factual to hold that critique to one reference and not to many other references to the Old Testament scripture. For instance Jesus spoke of Moses giving the people the miracle Manna bread in the wilderness, that was the bread that appeared like dew on the ground each morning to feed the entire nation of Israel. Jesus spoke of Moses at the burning bush, Jesus spoke about King David predicting that he would be betrayed, he spoke of how David and his soldiers ate the priests bread etc. Jesus referenced large portions of Old Testament history without giving any indication it was mythical.
Why would he? He was speaking in their language. If the Jews at that time thought it all to be completely historical, he would really freak them out by saying differently (if he even totally knew that, I dont know). He would probably say things differently he was here today, to a different audience.
I understand what you are saying, the case is that he didn't have to state this is mythical if they also understood it that way. I would add that the religious Jewish leaders took the events he referenced literally even to the point of accusing him of using historical facts as proof that he was their Messiah. The leaders were angry that he referenced Moses actions and then claimed those actions were a vindication of his own words. This is further strong evidence that Jesus was referencing their literal history. One could view that all the Jews listening to Jesus were all of the mindset that the events of the flood, manna, burning bush were all mythical, but that would be a stretch and very offensive to the Jewish leaders. Not that Jews don't question the events being real, but that the Jews of that time would hold those things sacred historically to them as a nation. They took national pride because they held them to be real events important to their nation. No one gets bent out of shape if you tell them George Washington really didn't chop down a cherry tree, but try telling them that George Washington really didn't take troops through the Valley Forge ordeal- Same reasoning.
