Should we accept history? If it is harmony and does not contradict the Bible and the evidence is reliable of course we do. If we have to make a choice between history or the Bible (when I say Bible I mean the KJV) of course we choose the Bible.
35 comments
It makes me appreciate the rabbi who asked "do you want the Bible to be history, or do you want it to be truth?" In other words, who cares if the events never happened, it's the universal truths behind the stories that is important. So what if there was no Adam & Eve? What matters is that the story teaches that it is wrong to deny personal responsibility when you screw up ('Eve made me do it', 'the serpent made me do it'). Something the fundies really need to learn instead of blaming 'satan' for everything.
Well, the Bible is more fun to read than most school history textbooks, but, well, this guy's IQ has to be at most double his shoe size if he actually believes it's more true.
I have a friend that is a christian, a good guy really, but he REALLY hates it when people get really dumb (stupid, not mute [if only they were mute]) over a god damned book that doesn't apply to our time
Sigh. My brother spouts this kind of religious attitude all the time. He really is quite intelligent, and a thousand miles from what you'd call a raving fundy, but if reality and the bible clash?
Evolution: "Sorry, but Genesis got here first." *shrug*
Homosexaulity: "Sorry mate, i'd love to accept and respect your lifestyle, but this book I was raised on commands me to think of it as a sin. It's out of my hands i'm afaid." *shrug*
This quote saddens me more than anything else.
This deserves either a "Fundamentalism in a Nutshell" Award or perhaps something new, like a "Reality Is For Other People" Award.
(I tried to think of a way to tie it in with that comment in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy , which includes a comment to the effect that "the Guide is definitive, whereas reality is frequently inaccurate" -- but I couldn't see a good way to do so.)
@484
What we know of history is also just what people have written about it, other than recent history of course.
As far as the Fundie's quote goes -- blatant stupidity. Should we accept history? Perhaps not, we were not there after all, and accepting the facts are a matter of trust. However, I'd much sooner accept facts that at least parallel reality than those taken from a book (see also: BOOK) laiden with naught but fantasies/improbabilities that has somehow found a way to govern lives (Scientology now comes to mind).
Sir Donsky, you are confusing Fact and Faith.
So effectively all history stopped in about 120 CE/AD,
Heavens. What has humankind been doing since then? Are we in a kind of timewarp?
Naw. Just the Fundies are.
So, if insects have more than three legs, whales are not fishes and snakes don't speak, what do you do?, to invent your Bible fantasy land?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
