Is the Bible Credible?

[Storm]

Dear Auto, I simply responded to say it was not as clear cut as Storm made it out to be. If you want to use that as a pedistal to pound on me, than so be it. Don't put words in my mouth though, as a lawyer you should be better than that.

No, you just called me a fool.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

itwillend, it's the definition of the word. "Cud" is very specific, and does not include excrement.

Now, *I* actually have no problem with this, because *I* don't believe the Bible to be inerrant. You do, and have to resort to exactly what Auto is calling you on.

Well, then you should reconsider your original statement. Instead, maybe you should have said something along the lines of
"I have a hard time understanding why people believe the bible to be inerrant, when there are so many questionable statements within it."
That is respectable.
However you decided to quote something specific, and it turns out it served only to insult a group of people. I have provided you with information that gives more detail about a rabbits digestion and eating habbits, and you completely ignore them.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

No, you just called me a fool.

Where?

 

[DallasApple]

The only parts of the Bible that are credible are the ones I say are.

Love

Dallas

 

[Storm]

Well, then you should reconsider your original statement. Instead, maybe you should have said something along the lines of
"I have a hard time understanding why people believe the bible to be inerrant, when there are so many questionable statements within it."
That is respectable.

No, it isn't. You just would've asked for an example.

However you decided to quote something specific, and it turns out it served only to insult a group of people.

How have I insulted anyone?

I have provided you with information that gives more detail about a rabbits digestion and eating habbits, and you completely ignore them.

Because they're completely irrelevant! Dogs eat excrement, as well, but nobody claims they're chewing cud.

Where?

Ionce again am finding you hold to a position that is on one foot at best.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

No, it isn't. You just would've asked for an example.

Storm, I really would not have. I too, have MANY unanswered questions about the bible. I think that is a respectable position to have questions.

I just had not heard that argument made before, so when I looked into I saw that rabbits, (unlike dogs) purposefully and methodically eat parts and only parts of their excretes. They don't eat other animals excretes like a dog would. So yes, it is a bit curious the behavior of the rabbit.
Instead of engaging in conversation about this I am immediately dismissed as a bible thumper.
As I said it was just something knew I learned, of which you obviously were not interested in, and assumed I am just trying to protect the dear old bible.
How about a little room to breath on this forum, I do know how to talk about other things?


As far as my comment about you on one leg, it was not to say you are a fool, I was merely pointing out that you were holding to a position, when it was clear to me there was something similar to what rabbits do. So your position did not seem as straightforward as I thought it might be.

 

[Storm]

Storm, I really would not have. I too, have MANY unanswered questions about the bible. I think that is a respectable position to have questions.

Well, you should.

I just had not heard that argument made before, so when I looked into I saw that rabbits, (unlike dogs) purposefully and methodically eat parts and only parts of their excretes. They don't eat other animals excretes like a dog would. So yes, it is a bit curious the behavior of the rabbit.

Curious, sure. But it isn't chewing cud.

Instead of engaging in conversation about this I am immediately dismissed as a bible thumper.

I have never treated you like that, and the assumptions got old a long time ago.

As I said it was just something knew I learned, of which you obviously were not interested in, and assumed I am just trying to protect the dear old bible.

I didn't assume. You were arguing a false position in support of inerrancy.

How about a little room to breath on this forum, I do know how to talk about other things?

Then maybe you should start.

As far as my comment about you on one leg, it was not to say you are a fool,

Then you shouldn't have said it.

I was merely pointing out that you were holding to a position, when it was clear to me there was something similar to what rabbits do. So your position did not seem as straightforward as I thought it might be.

Similar is not the same.

 

[DallasApple]

I would like to back Storm up here..I had a Rottweiller that not only ate cat poop..(out of the litter box) but he would follow our other rottie as she pooped and snatch it up as she dropped it like it was candy.

And he got 3 squares a day too.

Love

Dallas

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Similar is not the same.

OK then can we say the world and earth and use them in the same sentence, sometimes?

Can we also say world and earth to mean two different things? Certainly.

So sometimes similar is the same.

---The Earth is round
---The World is round
Similar words meaning the same thing.

---Bag up some of that Earth for our studies.
---Bag up some of the World for our studies.
Similar words do not mean the same thing.

---Cow stores reserve already digested food in stomache B, cow later chews reserved food
---Rabbit stores reserve already digested food in butt, rabit later chews reserved food

This link is from a skeptic of the whole rabbit chewing cud thing but has a lot of cool stuff to say about it. It seems independent of religious view at first glance, if you are intrested.
The Skeptical Review Online - Print Edition - 1990-2002

Anyway, I hope you forgive me if I insulted you. Was not my intenetions.

 

[Storm]

Dude, no amount of dancing is going to make excrement cud. Face it; embrace it. It's an error.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

I would like to back Storm up here..I had a Rottweiller that not only ate cat poop..(out of the litter box) but he would follow our other rottie as she pooped and snatch it up as she dropped it like it was candy.

And he got 3 squares a day too.

Love

Dallas

Rabbits don't do that, they only eat a certain part of their own droppings, which is an undigested cellulose from certain vegetables. I am not disagreeing this is not the modern day definition of chewing cud.
To you, though it is not the same thing as Rover eating misc poop on the ground.

Love you too!

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Dude, no amount of dancing is going to make excrement cud. Face it; embrace it. It's an error.

Ok well you seem not interested in replying to my last post to you.
I will say the error you are pointing out is to me, is just wishful thinking.
I think you would have to know more about what was in view in the Hebrew life and how they observed animals, and what God meant by using such terminology to make such a statement as "the error is plain and simple".

 

[Storm]

Ok well you seem not interested in replying to my last post to you.
I will say the error you are pointing out is to me, is just wishful thinking.
I think you would have to know more about what was in view in the Hebrew life and how they observed animals, and what God meant by using such terminology to make such a statement as "the error is plain and simple".

"What was in view in the Hebrew life" is only a consideration if the Bible is a product of the Hebrews.

 

[DallasApple]

Rabbits don't do that, they only eat a certain part of their own droppings, which is an undigested cellulose from certain vegetables. I am not disagreeing this is not the modern day definition of chewing cud.
To you, though it is not the same thing as Rover eating misc poop on the ground.

Love you too!

Um excuse me its not a "Rover" it is a ROTTWEILLER a HUGE dog that weighed 140 lbs.He just like the taste of crap.(apparently) he woud have litter stuck on his nose from eating the tasty cat excrement and we would joke he was snorting cocaine because his nose was covered in white powder..

And since the word "love" seems to agggrivate you I will sign as ...

Dallas

 

[Vile Atheist]

Ladies! Gents! Put down your Holy Scriptures! They are heresy!

I am inerrant!

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Um excuse me its not a "Rover" it is a ROTTWEILLER a HUGE dog that weighed 140 lbs.He just like the taste of crap.(apparently) he woud have litter stuck on his nose from eating the tasty cat excrement and we would joke he was snorting cocaine because his nose was covered in white powder..

And since the word "love" seems to agggrivate you I will sign as ...

Dallas

OMG, you totally took me the wrong way Dallas. 1st I meant the love part, totally and truly!
2nd the rover part was just referring to dogs in general because rover is a popular name for dogs.

Sighs...

 

[DallasApple]

OMG, you totally took me the wrong way Dallas. 1st I meant the love part, totally and truly!
2nd the rover part was just referring to dogs in general because rover is a popular name for dogs.

Sighs...

Alrighty then..

Roll over !!! LOL!!

Just kidden..

LOVE

Dallas

 

[McBell]

OK then can we say the world and earth and use them in the same sentence, sometimes?

Can we also say world and earth to mean two different things? Certainly.

So sometimes similar is the same.

---The Earth is round
---The World is round
Similar words meaning the same thing.

---Bag up some of that Earth for our studies.
---Bag up some of the World for our studies.
Similar words do not mean the same thing.

---Cow stores reserve already digested food in stomache B, cow later chews reserved food
---Rabbit stores reserve already digested food in butt, rabit later chews reserved food

This link is from a skeptic of the whole rabbit chewing cud thing but has a lot of cool stuff to say about it. It seems independent of religious view at first glance, if you are intrested.
The Skeptical Review Online - Print Edition - 1990-2002

Anyway, I hope you forgive me if I insulted you. Was not my intenetions.

Talk about seriously grasping at straws...
But then, closed minded fanatics are like that.......

I will say the error you are pointing out is to me, is just wishful thinking.

What a load of crap.

I think you would have to know more about what was in view in the Hebrew life and how they observed animals, and what God meant by using such terminology to make such a statement as "the error is plain and simple".

AND THE WINNER OF THE GOLD IN THE MENTAL GYMNASTICS IS......

 

[Just_me_Mike]

But then, closed minded fanatics are like that.......

Whatever gets you up in the morning.

I could have sworn personal attacks were prohibited on here though.

 

[McBell]

Whatever gets you up in the morning.

I could have sworn personal attacks were prohibited on here though.

hitting to close to home is it?

It is not a personal attack.
It is merely an observation.

A personal attack would be: "you are a closed minded fanatic."