Van, about the "kook" disciples, in an environment of SEVERE perseccution of what these 12 were selling, a WHOLE lot of folks believed and followed their testimony ... DESPITE the threats of persecution, loss of social standing, or death.
The testimony of these 12 "kooks" was somehow INCREDIBLY powerful, moving, and ... truthful.
"Kook" Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit (God Himself) testified to the truth, and 3,000 people believed and received Christ -- Acts 2:41
The region, VERY UNFRIENDLY to Christians, was overturned.
The Gospel of truth, beginning from these 12, went in powerfully into many nations ... to the ends of the earth, just as Christ Promised it would.
12 kooks.
VAST portions of the Bible are imagery or "non-literal."
Just one of
many examples is the "famous" Psalm 23.
The LORD is my shepherd; I shall not want.
He maketh me to lie down in green pastures: he leadeth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul: he leadeth me in the paths of righteousness for his name's sake.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me.
Thou preparest a table before me in the presence of mine enemies: thou anointest my head with oil; my cup runneth over.
Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life: and I will dwell in the house of the LORD for ever.
I don't lie down in green pastures ... literally.
God doesn't lead me beside still waters ... literally.
I don't walk through a valley of the shadow of death ... literally.
And on and on ...
The Book of Revelation is FULL of imagery.
Many of the 66 Books of the Bible also are.
But when someone asks a Christian if they believe in a "literal" interpretation of the Bible, what they really want to know is, "Do you believe in a literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis?"
I do, because that is the way it is written.
Psalm 23, by contrast, is written as imagery.
It's very clear.
If a person had NO other books in the world to look at, NO source of information, NO background to sway his viewpoint, and he picked up Genesis and read the first few books of it, there is NO doubt he would take it all as a very straight forward account of the early days on earth.
It just says, "This happened, and then this happened, and then that happened ... etc."
Only because people have some
other "background" of information or bias, do they seek to twist Genesis around.
They deviate from what it clearly says so that they can match the events of the Book to an ideology based on the "information" that they have that they think shoots down a literal reading of the text.
I believe God formed Adam from the dirt.
I believe God formed Eve from Adam's rib.
I believe the
serpent (NOT a snake -- big difference -- the serpent is satan, see Revelation 12:9) tempted Eve and deceived her and Adam into leaving God. How satan "communicated" to Eve is not known exactly. It doesn't say.
I believe in Noah's flood.
I believe God.
I believe these things because, as I said, they are written in a very straight forward, matter of fact, way.
It is clearly written to be taken literally.
And also, many of these events were spoken of LATER in Scripture.
Jesus, for just one of many many examples, referenced Noah and the flood.
Now, one can surely be a Christian and NOT believe that some (or perhaps even
most) of the events of Genesis literally happened.
Because the
fundamental issue is, who do you say Jesus is?
Again, John 5:39 -- the Scriptures testify that SALVATION is in Jesus Christ, and that is the reason why the Bible exists.
The Bible's purpose is not as a history text, or a science text, or any other text.
Just to get off on a brief tangent for a moment, WHY is Jesus Christ so important?
Why is he the focal point of the Bible?
The greatest tragedy was not a World War, a plague, or a financial crisis.
The greatet tragedy is that man, who was created to live w/God, became separated from God and put into in spiritual bondage by satan.
Because of this fundamental problem, ALL problems come to man.
Because people don't realize this spiritual reality, which is
only revealed in the Bible, they live in darkness, and suffering comes to them ... inevitably and undoubtedly.
People would
like to live right, do right, and find happiness, and they diligently strive for those things.
But the failure somehow always comes.
Anxiety, family problems, health trouble, money trouble, addictions, etc. ...
They all come crashing in on people.
Education, effort, goodness, diligence, good habits ... don't and
can't stop the failure that comes to man.
And suffering comes.
Because man, who was created to live
with God, instead lives as a slave to satan.
The event that caused this is recorded in Genesis 3, and the problem has passed to all men -- Romans 5:12.
Immediately after man fell into this tragic problem, God promised that He would provide a solution -- Genesis 3:15.
The Savior would NOT, could NOT be a decendant of Adam, because all that comes from Adam is in spiritual ruin.
The core of the Bible is about God's answer for man.
1. Genesis 3:15 - Christ, who is not from Adam, will crush the serpent
2. Isaiah 7:14 - A virgin will bring forth the Christ
3. Galatians 4:3,4 - By God's time schedule, the Christ, who frees man from his bondage, has come
4. Matthew 16:16 - Jesus, you
are the Christ
5. 1John 3:8 - Christ destroyed the work evil that satan brought to man in Genesis 3
The flood of Noah's time.
I say it was a real event.
A couple of things, first.
Before the flood we see the Bible record that people lived to be, like 900 years old (Adam, etc,),
When I initially saw that I said, "WTF??"
But the ages are given matter of factly and unapologetically.
Then after the flood people began having the sort of age spans that we have as of today.
Some DRASTIC change to man's enviornment happened.
The flood was not just rain.
The Bible tells us that there was a "canopy" of water
above the earth which was "broken" and fell to earth.
It also tells us that the "fountains of the deep" broke and huge amounts of water came up that was
inside the earth.
The point here is that the earth changed at that time in a VERY dramatic way.
The "dynamics" of the earth we see now are MUCH different than the dynamics were before the flood, and even shortly
after the flood.
So some of the questions you ask about "How was
this possible?," are, by me (because I believe the Bible), looked at with an understanding that the world was much different than what we see now.
I'll hit a few of your flood questions.
1. How could all the animals of the earth survive a trip to the middle east, in breeding groups no less? How would they know how to find the place? How would they get there?
My answer is this.
Genesis 6:20 records that God
brought them to Noah.
How that was exactly accomplished, and from how far away the animals came, the Bible does not say.
2. How would all these different climate/diet specific animals survive the different climate/diet of the middle east? How would animals with different climate/temperature needs all survive on a non climate controlled boat? How would they all fit on one boat? How would they be housed and fed?
The Bible says that two of every ... sort ... of animal came onto the ark.
Some translations use the word ... kind.
The number of animals that came on the ark is nowhere
near what detractors commonly imagine that the number needed to be.
It is my assumption that the animals must have "hibernated" while on the boat.
But that is my guess, since it is not said in Scripture.
And of course, there are aspects of the event that are miraculous in nature.
3. How would they survive the journey back home? The earth was flooded. How are they to make their way back to Alaska or Australia from the middle east, following a flood that covered the planet?
I won't pretend to have the answer to how it was accomplished, and the Bible does not say.
I will say again, however, that the dynamics of the earth that we see today are, in light of how the Bible describes the flood event, nothing like what they were both before the flood and right
after the flood.
But for some possible answers to your question, look here.
http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c ... ah%27s+ark
Lastly, Bill Maher has been on a crusade against Christians for a long time, and when I see him, I see a very strange man.
Why is it that Christians prick him so much?
What IF Christians are all full of shit and all that they believe is totally wack?
So what is
that to him?
They like it, they enjoy the faith that they have, so be it.
To each his own.
Oh, but we know the reason he crusades against Christians.
He thinks that they are imposing on him, or oppressing him somehow.
The ol' separation of church and state dealie.
I'm here to tell you that the "separation of church and state" is prolly THE most grossly perverted concept in our law over the last 40 years.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof
The very clear intent of the first amendment was for no offical state religon to be imposed on the people.
A nativity scene outside a government building, for exampe, can NEVER
establish a religion.
And you have to be brain-dead to think it does.
Now if you require citizens to bow down and worship that nativity scene, yep, THAT would be the establishment of a religon.
"In God we Trust" on currency establishes no religon.
It's preposterous to imagine that it does.
Say hypothetically that I went to a "muslim" nation that had a pic of Muhammad on it's currency.
When I hold or use that money, am I PARTICIPATING in the muslim religon??
No friggin way, man, I'm just USING MONEY to buy shit.
What if a statue of Mohammed is outside a public building.
I walk by and see it.
OHHH, the HORRAH!! LMAO
Has the religon been ... ESTABLISHED?
It's laffable.
If they make me kneel down toward Mecca 5 times a day, then yep, Islam has been established.
Of course the two hot button issues near to this "separation" debacle are homosexual marriage and abortion.
Some elected REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PEOPLE no doubt use their Christian sensibilities as they consider the issues of abortion or homosexual marriage.
That lights Bill Maher's ass like none other.
In Maher's world, these representatives, elected by ... THE PEOPLE ... to REPRESENT ... THE PEOPLE ... ought not be
allowed to consider their Christian sensibilities when considering morality, which in fact, is the BASIS for all of our laws.
An atheist representative uses
some sensibilities to arrive at a decision on, abortion, for example.
A Christian representative uses
some sensabilities to arrive at a decision on, abortion, for example.
They are equal and both are valid.
Because a Christian has used "Christian" sensibilities, has he ESTABLISHED a relgion?
Has he atheist established atheism?
No, of course not.
They are just FREE people who are making moral evaluations based on sensibilities which they are FREELy granted under our Constitution.
Why does Bill Maher hate freedom?
A very strange and pitiful man.
