[OnyxCougar]

Reality. Name more of god's prophets. Einstein. Newton. Hilbert. Gauss. Franklin. DaVinci. Keppler. Sigmund Freud. These too are god's prophets. They all discovered more of gods laws. They used god's laws from previous prophets to learn more god's laws. They innovated.

Although I'm not sure of your usage of the word "prophet" here, I can agree with the idea here.

Today we hold god's prophets to higher standards because our newest bibles are chock full of more "god's laws" including new tools such as scientific challenge.

Newest bibles? Last I checked there was a group of writings that was agreed upon a couple hundred years or so ago, and that was then termed "the Bible". Full stop. Your statement is based upon the flawed premise that the Bible is a textbook of science, which (for the third time) it's not.

God's prophets must prove their discoveries of what god teaches. As we learn more of god's tools, we even use them to discover which of god's prophets better understood god.

More metaphor based on flawed premise.

Science demonstrates a god that Onyxcougar worships is really nothing more than a pagan. No wonder god must appear in human form. God in that time was the best that man could comprehend.

huh? You lost me here....

Today we know many of those prophets could have easily been Capt Kirk from a starship named Enterprize.

If you're going to use pop culture references, at least spell them correctly. That's Enterprise.

No wonder her god is so pathetically limited as to have will, opinons, and love.

? Please explain how having will, opinions and love is pathetic or limited.

No wonder her god has his chosen people - and president.

I don't believe my God chose George Bush. Bush may think that, some fundies may think that, I don't. So please refrain from linking me to your religio-political overgeneralizations.

All characteristics of gods found in every pagan religion. To worship her pagan god, she needs a science book that says nothing more need be learned. She calls it the bible.

Again (4th time) the bible is not a science book. That's YOUR straw man. Also, the bible doesn't say "nothing more need be learned". So please, stop making these ridiculous statements.

Why do religious extremists deny science such as evolution?

I'm hardly a religious extremist. And evolution as it relates to origion of man is not science. It's guesswork. And it shouldn't be taught in school any more than creationist origins should.

It means their one and only book has been obsoleted.

I disagree. First, the bible (specifically the old testament) is the cornerstone and foundation of Christian, Judaism and Islamic faiths. Within it are timeless concepts that will never be obsolete, as much as you wish they were. Granted, there are some things (like stoning people) that western society considers obsolete now, but the western justice system was based off of Christian laws and punishments within the bible. We don't stone people now, we imprison them. And as we have seen, imprisonment isnt much of a deterrant, is it? But that's another thread entirely....

Parables that were revised as we have learned more of gods laws. We study the bible to better learn our history.

So you agree it's also got history in it. History that has never been DISproven. We may not be able to prove all the history, but what secular history we can verify time and time again agrees with biblical history. So since it hasn't been DISproven, why not believe it all? Again, another thread, but definitely a product of the EvCvID debate.

How things did and did not work. Parables on how man could be so mistaken as to destroy and how man can advance by learning more of gods laws. We learn science to move forward - to better understand god.

Perhaps back in the day that was true. Now, many scientists learn science in an attempt to prove god doesn't exist, and to get other people to doubt god as well. What's the best way to do this? "Prove" that the primary and fundamental statement "In the beginning God created" is wrong, by advancing this UNPROVABLE notion that man evolved from primordial soup. If the Bible is wrong, then you can't trust any of it, and therefore, the foundation of 3 of the world's major religions is GONE. That's why this is such an important issue to Christians, indeed, it should be a major issue to Muslims and Jews. The theory of Evolution as it relates to origin of man is completely opposite of the bible. And you have to take a stand. Do you believe in the word of God or fallible man? Both theories are equally unprovable, and therefore, religious in nature, and should NOT be taught in school.

Notice that this god is truly supreme. Not so limited with human emotions as the bible's god.

Tee, you are the ONLY person who I've ever met (virtually or otherwise) that thinks emotion is a bad thing, or limiting, or pathetic.

Our books are constantly being updated and revised as god's prophets discover more of god's laws.

Again, I'm not so sure of your use of "prophets" here.

Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English prophete, from Old French, from Latin propheta, from Greek prophEtEs, from pro for + phanai to speak -- more at FOR, BAN
1 : one who utters divinely inspired revelations; specifically often capitalized : the writer of one of the prophetic books of the Old Testament
2 : one gifted with more than ordinary spiritual and moral insight; especially : an inspired poet
3 : one who foretells future events : PREDICTOR
4 : an effective or leading spokesman for a cause, doctrine, or group

A scientist could be called a prophet, by def. 4, but I would say that "god's prophets" would be more apt to lift god up, so to speak, as opposed to many scientists, who try to tear him down.

Christianity provided principles on which we have developed the sciences of law, civil rights, chemistry, psychology, physics, and other sciences.

Not just Christianity, but all 3 major OT based belief sets.

Bible was but an early attempt. And like all early sciences, it is chock full of errors, myths, fallacies, and misinterpretations.

Depends on the interpretation. Strictly exegetical, no it's not.

For example, the bible was written by humans who did not yet have one important tool (to exist, a fact must have both underlying theory and experimental evidence).

But just a little while ago you said they had facts... stick with one story Mr. Kerry!

Early prophets did what they could with so many limited tools. They used parables - one of the most powerful tools of learning during that time.

Jesus used parables. And it was obvious when he used them because the style of writing changed and he SAID he was using a parable.

God's prophets today use new tools of science - such as what a fact really is - to teach us all more of gods laws.

You need to define what a fact is and figure out if a fact is a fact all the time, or if a fact is a fact only after a certain time. Please be consistant on when a fact is a fact. Until then, I'm ignoring your Kerry-ish argument about facts.

When was the last time interpreters of the bible told us that 8% of all species are gay?

Those who cannot learn (worship the bible) even promote hate of gays.

Firstly, "worship the bible" is not something that people are supposed to be doing. Those who use the bible as a foundation for their faith are supposed to "worship" God (by whatever name each faith might use).

Secondly, I reject that if one believes in the bible that they cannot learn. And I do NOT promote hate of gays. I don't promote hate of anyone. That was a completely out of hand and inflammatory statement. And made to ilicit an emotional response. Be careful, Tee.

How do they promote hate and yet call themselves god's choosen people?

Last I checked, gods chosen people are the Israelites. And those are Jews. So you're saying Jews promote hate? huh?

Probably for the same reason that god told George Jr to 'Pearl Harbor' Iraq.

Prove that.

He too is god's choosen president - if one blindly worships a pagan god.

A nonsense statement.



EDIT: changed exegisial to exegetical. Yeah. I can spell.