Comment on 1.1 History

• FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Well yes, people who believe things that aren’t true won’t admit that they don’t know anything. I’m not sure why that’s relevant though.

  source

  • MxM111@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    You stated “this has been always true” to the statement that we have understanding that things are really complex and difficult to figure out. The answer to you was an example that there were times where we did not have such understanding.

    source

    • FlyingSquid@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      …

      Not the exact same things throughout human history.

      source
  • ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I think their actual point was that incomplete explanations are nonetheless explanations.

    source
  • flatearth@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Material things are way below what God planned for man.
    Man was meant to be like God (in a good way).
    The Bible is not meant to be a physics textbook.
    Nevertheless, God owns everything. So things were talked about here and there...

    source

    • SatansInteriorDsgnr@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The Bible also isn’t meant to be real. It’s a compendium of stories all put into one book, with tons of different writers. It’s akin to The Odyssey and shouldn’t be taken literally. Zeus didn’t come to Earth as a golden shower to impregnate Danae, and Jesus didn’t come back from the dead. They’re just fables.

      source

      • ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        Oh the Bible is definitely meant to explain things. It explains things through a different world view from a different time.

        source
      • flatearth@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        The Bible is historical too:
        When Moyses drowned the Egyptians (Old Testament which Jews held and kept sacred)
        When Jesus, Mary & Joseph took refuge in Egypt (New Testament which Christians hold and keep sacred)
        In the first example, we learn that Egyptians used chariots (even far back in the time of Moyses).

        'Satan' is part of your name, so I guess you know who he was, and who he is now.
        'Satan' is opposed to the coming of Christ (the reason for all those genealogies).
        'Satan' would do everything to make people forget why Christ came.
        'Satan' would make Christmas (we all have our birthdays) to seize.
        'Satan' wants people to believe that Christ is like Zeus and Mary like Diana (profligate).

        But you should know that Satan is a fallen angel.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • flatearth@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        In the Old Testament, you'll always see genealogies of key person being discussed to Adam (the first man).
        In the New Testament, the genealogy is from Jesus Christ to Adam (in Matthew, Mark, Luke, Acts and by Paul I think).
        Zeus and Diana (profligate) were humans. But pagans deify their rulers.
        Let me make a second post...

        source