What do u think:, is the bible all bullsh!t? Options

[add1cted2f1re]

Ok, we read this story called Gilgamesh if you haven't read it, google it. But basically its about this guy who wants to be immortal, and his dad tells him that one of the gods told him that a giant flood was coming to wipe out humanity.
(sound familiar?)
well... guess what he did? yep, he made a boat, filled it with his family and animals. then, when they grounded, he set out a bird to find land. blah blah blah, he repopulates the earth.

ok... now tell me that doesnt sound familiar.

I think the bible is full of crap. Whoever wrote it (probably a group of ppl) just got ideas from old stories. and dont say that the bible was written before Gilgamesh because Gilgamesh was written in early the BC's (like 2000bc)

anyone care to argue

i dont want to hear all you all calling athesiest and crap... cuz im not .

i believe in... a higher power, but i just think the bible is a bunch of nonsense

[*wind&fire*]

You have made a judgement without any real evidence ... the bible is true ...

check this site if you have the time and consider christianity please...

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/b_proof.shtml

[NoSex]

You have made a judgement without any real evidence ... the bible is true ...

check this site if you have the time and consider christianity please...

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/b_proof.shtml

It's cute how the historical evidence from the time of Jesus they present are things that I discussed and casted a great amount of doubt upon in the "Jesus... gay??" thread.

They use the highly scrutinized and controversial passage in Josephus' Antiquities. Why? If they know as much as they claim to know they shouldn't be presenting such a weak and dubious source. However, they do.

It's apologetics. Apologetics is all about defending a certain position that you have adopted. It isn't about objective logical or scientific investigation; it's about proving what you set out to prove. Instead of starting with observation and moving towards a conclusion, most apologists begin with a conclusion and set out to observe evidence for said conclusion. This creates a rather significant bias and predisposed nature in an apologist's intellectual and investigative process. Because of this, contrary evidence is ignored, thrown out, or distorted to appear noncontradictory. Normal intellectual studies are thrown out for those studies that support the predetermined conclusion.

Because of these practices, "apologetics" tends to carry negative connotations.