₦airaland Forum

freelance:
Atheism Is An Act Of Ignorance , True Of False

False.

Sometimes i wonder why people will just decide or rather believe there in no God or GOD does not exist. Sometimes i think maybe it is the highest level of ignorance or maybe the highest level of stupidity. What do you think about athesist.

I dont know, why do people decide or rather believe there are no Elves or Elves do not exist? It surely must be ignorance to disregard the existence of the Invisible Pink Unicorn, no? And to hold that Zeus isn't throwing down thunderbolts surely must be stupidity.

Someone once said that everybody should believe in something but when you don't believe in anything ! I simply can't comprehend that one. What is your mind about this. Kindly share it on this thread.

Lacking a belief in Gods doesn't equate to lacking a belief in everything and anything.

bioye:
Yes, there was. From the evidence in the Bible, Genesis occurred between 1850 BCE and 850 BCE.

Are you sure about that?

davidylan:
No sir! You seek to subvert the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

How so?

MIZIEYA:
Kag- so on that premise if there is no gay gene then there is also not a heterosexual gene.

I honestly don't know. Maybe the right question is - "what determines attraction?" I really don't know. What I do know though, is that homosexuality isn't exclusive to just humans, so that suggests to me that it's not a conscious choice. It is, in a sense, natural. My two pence.

Fake, magic act, snopes.

Bleh! I can just feel the love in this thread. Anyway, MIZIEYA, although I do believe that homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is inherent, I have to agree in some sense with TV01. There is no evidence for a gay gene, and while some may argue that doesn't rule out its existence, it still doesn't mean one exists. Just my two cents.

naijacutee:
At this point I'm going to leave it to you. I'm not interested in winning this argument.

Fair enough.

goodguy:
Listen to yourself. How do you expect one to demonstrate conclusively with a picture, on a forum? That's the point I'm trying to make here, and that was why I said you wouldn't believe. Besides, if it is a picture of him and a ghost who appears to be like just any other human, of course, you will not believe. And even if it really was a ghost (the way they are usually portrayed), you'll conclude that it was achieved with a Photoshop effect.

It will, and should be difficult (being quite an extraordinary claim), but it is possible. Since we are still dealing with hypotheticals, here's a possible way of demonstrating to good level. He posts the picture of him with the girl, provides evidence from independent contactable sources that can verify the date the picture was taken and developed, then he provides a death certificate of the deceased that sows she died three years before the picture was taken.

It would be important that he makes all he has provided as evidence available and esily checked.

If she came up here to confirm the story herself; first, you wouldn't believe a ghost would use a computer; secondly, you will accuse the 'ghost' of being a regular human who is just disguising as one on the forum.

That's why I said, "AND can tell me things about relatives and friends that no one except an other-worldly being should know, then I would believe." Why don't people ever read the quantifiers?

Hence, any explanations offered by the ghost wouldn't make any difference to you.
Don't quit your day job also. You'd make an awful mind twister.

Mind twister? Are you sure that's a job?

goodguy:
If he brought a pic of himself and the ghost sitting together, you still wouldn't believe.

If he brought a picture of him sitting with the ghost, and can demonstrate conclusively that the picture was taken three years after her death, then I would believe him.

Even if the ghost came up here to confirm the story herself, that wouldn't change your mindset.

If she came here to confirm the story, [b]AND[/B] can tell me things about relatives and friends that no one except an other-worldly being should know, then I would believe.

I wonder what kind of evidence you want him to put up here on Nairaland for you to believe. Probably a video? I know you still wouldn't believe. So what's the point?

See above for examples. By the way, don't quit your day job, you'd mke an awful mind reader.

leketoye:
Guess i now know why only stubborn foot soldiers get killed in the thick of war. They are usually too thick skulled to notice that their generals have retreated. Wake up KAG , even General Seun has beaten a quiet retreat. If you have folks back here in Nigeria, let them go and investigate the story on your behalf.

Story! I said give the numbers and the names, I'll see what I can do. Remember to make them as realistic as possible (it wouldn't be a worthy hoax otherwise).

And remember feel free to jump into the lagoon if you don't believe.

And remember I said no.

naijacutee:
Its simple. I don't believe those books because their heroes are dead! The hero of the Bible (Jesus the Christ) is still alive and my religion (if i may call it that ) is actually a relationship with Him!

"Every man believes that mistresses are unfaithful, and patrons capricious; but he excepts his own mistress, and his own patron." (Samuel Johnson)

You may very well believe that their heroes are dead, but the proponents of those other religions, like you, believe the main protagonist(s) is/are alive. What's more thet, just like you again, have a relationship with their God(s). Perhaps you can appreciate maybe a little, the differing opinions people have of your religious canon.

P.S. May of the other religions also believe the hero of your book is dead.

The fact that Jesus incarnate doesn't know when he is returning - Is that the only problem?

One of them, an alledged God being ignorant of his return in spite of omniscience? Illogical.

How about all the miracles he performed and is still performing today? Jesus lived on this earth as God in a mans body but the Almighty God chose not to announce his return date for a reason.

He, however, gave a time frame that should have fallen in the life time of his peers.

Do you think he would give you the freewill to do what you want, so that you are not reduced to an animal that has no freewill, and then tell you when he is coming so that you can live all your life as you want and then quickly repent one minute befor showdown? I think man would not even do that, therefore God deserves heaps more credit than that.

Freewill is a concept I find illogical, but this is neither the time nor place to discuss that. Anyway, I don't believe what you believe, so I wouldn't be do any last minute conversion because of an alledged return date.

Jesus has loved us so much and he has given us clues as to when the time is close. Anyone with a bit of common sense will see that the Earth is due to be rounded up : With global warming increasing at the rate it is, do you see life as it is still existing on Earth in the next hundred years?

Yes.

Jesus gave us all the signs to watch out for for the end and they can be found in the Bible in Matthew 24 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=24&version=31&context=chapter

Without reading it again, most fit into the ambiguous frame of prophesying, you know the, there will be wars - but there has always been wars, there will be famine - but famine has always existed, you get the point.

Out of the principles on which their countries were founded and which they owe their success to?

If they start to choke the ability to reason and empathise collectively. Howvere, you aren't suggesting countires in Africa are successful, are you? I can only think of one or two that are "successful".

Donzman:
What is your reason for discrediting the story? We have a reasonto credit the story, we heard it from the horse's mouth or read it from his post whichever you prefer. To discredit it, you need to give us a better reason than I don't believe it.

Actually, "I don't believe it" can be a good enough reason, and should persuade the peddler of an outlandish or seemingly unbelievable story to produce some strong and tangible evidence. Remember, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

leketoye:
@chy92
Thanks for your very sensible post. I actually gave an abridged version of the story for brevity. Now check this out, when we were in the bus from Ikoyi to Obalende, we met a procession of mourners. They were carrying a coffin. It didn't mean anything to me at first.

But then the girl took unusual interest in the procession. Then she asked me if there was a cemetry around there. I didn't know and I didn't want to know. So I told her there was none. She looked at me and said I was wrong. Then she gave the name and description of the closest cemetry. That to me was strange.

And the unabridged version gets darker, in the hopes of convincing the unconvinced. How can I get them to believe she was a ghost? I know, throw in some rather convenient occurences that should point to her other-worldly nature.

Remember she was supposed to pay me a visit. When I tried giving her descriptions to my place, she waved me aside and said she knew everywhere in Lagos and she was serious. That too struck me as strange. You know what?? If my roomate hadn't gone to her street and found out she was dead, she would have visited as promised.

I'm sure she would, because everbody knows ghosts are in the habit of not just paying bus fares (rich ghosts!), but also visiting their beneficiaries for a little hanky-panky.

And about going to find out if her body was really buried, please spare me. I didn't know her when she was alive neither did I kill her. God has been kind enough to me. Why shoud I tempt Him?

Indeed.

But wait if there's anybody here that wants to investigate this whole thing, he can go ahead. I'll supply all the contacts then you can go to work to satisfy your curiosity ( TAKE NOTE GENERAL SEUN).

I'll be glad to give you my roomate's phone number, phone numbers of the 2 people that lived on the same street with her and confirmed she was dead, then I'll give you her family's address (It's in lagos and I hope they still live there).

Then I wish you luck as you go Ghost hunting.

You could give the numbers of your friend, the numbers of the two people which convineiently have, and the address of the family, but it would do little good, because not only do I not have any access to Nigeria, it's not overly difficult to get people in cahoots with you to keep a hoax alive (all you need is two to three people, trust me).

Actually ne'ermind all of that, give the numbers and the names, I'll see what I can do.

NOTE: JUMP INTO THE LAGOON IF YOU DON'T BELIEVE.

Can't do that, sorry.

KDK:
Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. Titus 3:9-10 But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain. A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject

"How vain and without merit" is the man who in order to evade the refutation of his ideas, retorts with inane Biblical passages.

"Reckless and incompetent expounders of holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although “they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.”

- The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, St. Augustine


It is clear, not inspite of, but because of your inability to actually acknowledge the rebuttal of your illogical mantra, that it has indeed been falsified. Thank you for your time.

KAG:
Which in no way explains away the divine truth that was used to cling to the geocentric model, nor does it adequately explain the implications of a literal reading of verses like Joshua 10:12 "and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun stand thou still, and thou moon" 13 And the Sun stood still, and the moon stayed, So the Sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day", or "Isaiah 38:8 ", So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down.".

Furthermore, even if we do accept the non-literal interpretation of those verses, the implications are still far removed from actual reality. If we assume that Joshua was wrong, and it was actually the Earth that stood still, and not the Sun and the moon. We would still be faced with the quite improbable occurence of a event that should have killed Joshua and every person on the planet. The same goes for Hezekiah, except in his case the Earth must have somehow defied the laws of physics, and moved the wrong way, but as this things tend to go, nobody else in the world noticed.

In any case, whichever way you slice it, and to reiterate my earlier point, the facts did falsify the "divinely inspired truth".

Bumpity, bumpity, bump! In case it was missed the second time.

KDK:
KAG,
It is strange that you use terms from astronomy only to say that their astronomical meanings are wrong. Everyone who has been to a basic astronomy class (I very much doubt if you have) will know that the geocentric solar system theory is the one in which the earth was assumed to be stationary while all other objects in the solar system revolve around it while heliocentric solar system is one in which the sun is assumed to be stationary and every other object in the solar system revolves around it so I wonder why you use the word heliocentric in making an astronomical argument against the Bible when you mean something other than what it means astronomically.

No, heliocentric means (let's use the definition you provided): "1. measured or considered as being seen from the center of the sun. 2. having or representing the sun as a center: the heliocentric concept of the universe." Nothing about a stationary Sun, simply, "measuring or considered as being seen from the center of the sun", or "representing the Sun as a center." .

Also, here's the definition of geocentric: 1 having or representing the earth as the centre, as in former astronomical systems. However, you are right the former model did include a stable unmovable Earth, although even if the Earth wasn't stationary (as a few did philosophise) and everything was taken to revolve around the Earth, it would still be a geocentric model.

It also - and you've managed to evade it once again - doesn't detract from the falsified geocentricity and stationary Earth concepts that were held in the past, and which were held as divine truths based on a strict literal reading of the Bible.

So, once again, your red herrings and non-sequitors will only get you so far, because I'll doggedly press the point(s) until you address it/them: A divine truth was clung to desperately, based heavily on a literal exegesis, that truth has been falsified by facts.

I have taken the pain to search NASA website for the meaning of heliocentric (just incase you have your doubts)
: http://search.nasa.gov/search/search?q=heliocentric&output=xml_no_dtd&sort=dateADALAd1&site=nasa_collection&ie=UTF-8&client=nasa_production&oe=UTF-8&proxystylesheet=nasa_production

I also took the pain to search the OXFORD DICTIONARY for the meaning, you can have the link also: http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/heliocentric?view=uk

Yep, now all you have to do is point out where the dictionary definition of heliocentric even implies a stationary Sun.

Like I said earlier, before you choose to use things as facts for arguments, make sure you do your homework properly

Some weird guy once said something about removing the beam from thy eye something something, but what did he know, eh?

and with the foregoing statement, I would like to bring to your knowledge that do not wish to oppose or support your so called facts anylonger however, I will like you to brood over these:

"all of that" .

Interesting. I suppose it's only right that I put some wise words of my own for you to skim through and forget instantly.

Reckless and incompetent expounders of holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although “they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.”

- The Literal Interpretation of Genesis, St. Augustine


Often a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other parts of the world, about the motions and orbits of the stars and even their sizes and distances,, and this knowledge he holds with certainty from reason and experience. It is thus offensive and disgraceful for an unbeliever to hear a Christian talk nonsense about such things, claiming that what he is saying is based in Scripture. We should do all that we can to avoid such an embarrassing situation, lest the unbeliever see only ignorance in the Christian and laugh to scorn.

- St. Augustine, "De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim" (The Literal Meaning of Genesis).

It was a great pleasure having your contribution, thank you and God bless you.

Thank you, I'll return the compliments when you respond to the germane points I raised in previous posts, and the new ones I've been forced to make so as to address your tangents.

ugonna0071:
no need arguing with you, your mind is made up and theres no room for u to change.

the thing is whether u believe it or not, GHOSTS do exist and thats FINAL.

So that would be a, "sorry luv', can't quite answer your questions. They may force me to think critically about fables and anecdotes.

i pray one day you will be visited by GHOSTS, maybe then you will believe because stone hearted people like u need a little experience to come in touch with reality.

Alritey then, and a good evening to you too.

KAG:
Which in no way explains away the divine truth that was used to cling to the geocentric model, nor does it adequately explain the implications of a literal reading of verses like Joshua 10:12 "and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun stand thou still, and thou moon" 13 And the Sun stood still, and the moon stayed, So the Sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day", or "Isaiah 38:8 ", So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down.".

Furthermore, even if we do accept the non-literal interpretation of those verses, the implications are still far removed from actual reality. If we assume that Joshua was wrong, and it was actually the Earth that stood still, and not the Sun and the moon. We would still be faced with the quite improbable occurence of a event that should have killed Joshua and every person on the planet. The same goes for Hezekiah, except in his case the Earth must have somehow defied the laws of physics, and moved the wrong way, but as this things tend to go, nobody else in the world noticed.

In any case, whichever way you slice it, and to reiterate my earlier point, the facts did falsify the "divinely inspired truth".

Bump, in the hopes of getting an actual response.

Babybee:
i feel u KDK,
KAG sweetie, its better to live your life as if there is God and later find out there is no GOd than live it as if there is no God and later find out that is.

It s going to be baaaad

God help u

Okay, just so long as you know Pascal plunged headfirst into the fallacy well.

When red herrings and tangents that avoid the issue don't work…

KDK:
Without being rude and without trying to sound supercilious, I must say that your knowledge of space is a bit shallow. My job involves space and as such you can imagine my knowledge of the subject especially when you begin to realise I was taught by some of the world's best in the field.

Good for you, then you'd have understood the points I made and will have no problem making a definitive response to my post, instead of going on wild tangents.

Firstly, I must establish a fact that mans knowledge of space is still in it's early years as we have a long way to go. Take for instance the issue of the tenth planet in the so called outer solar system. We used to think there were only nine. (http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2005/29jul_planetx.htm)

Eight planets, Pluto has been demoted.

For the benefit of our simple readers, heliocentric means :1. measured or considered as being seen from the center of the sun. 
2. having or representing the sun as a center: the heliocentric concept of the universe.
So to prove that you are not even arguing with your so called facts, I will quote a NASA scientist by name Ron Winther"The sun rotates on its axis; a point on its equator makes one rotation in about 25 Earth days, while near the poles it requires about 31 Earth days. So a point on the sun's equator travels at about 4500 miles/hr. (by contrast, a point on the Earth's equator travels at about 1000 miles/hr). Additionally, the sun (and the solar system) is revolving about the center of the Milky Way at about 150 miles per *second* (that's over a half-million miles/hr!)"

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/ast99/ast99027.htm

Conclusion: Contrary to your heliocentric "facts", the sun is not stationary.

Er, nobody but you has suggested that heliocentricsm means the Sun is stationary. I know the Sun moves, but that in no way detracts from the fact that we do reside in a heliocentric solar system.

So, who were the bests in the field that led you to believe heliocentric meant stationary Sun?

Everyone with little knowledge of space science knows that the sun is not stationary.Moreover all objects in space including all stars and galaxies are accelerating towards a point in space which is why scientists are beginning to ask if space has an end because if it has a centre it means it must have an end. If so what lies beyond this end?

Well technically the Universe doesn't have a center, and by that token space may very well have no end, however we most likely will never know for certain. In any case, what does any of this have to do with the falsification of the "divine truth" of geocentrism?

I don't want to say more 'because of obvious reasons. 

…because you'd be forced to actually address the germane points?

ugonna0071:
i don't get you, if my colleague will lie about such a thing, then the others wont do same

a guy who also lives in that same compd confirmed the story, at least 2 people said the same thing.

so please, kag whats your point?

Sorry I didn't phrase it properly. I was asking which one of the alledged witnesses told you about it, and how you knew who was there?

Also, why wouldn't your colleague lie about it, and did those other two in the compound actually witness the incident Finally, did their stories differ in anyway from the original one told to you?

ugonna0071:
@seun, i got your message, so sorry didnt mean to be rude :-)

secondly, Case one was not really hearsay, my colleague witnessed it life, and it was not like he was the only one there. There were like 8 of them who saw the dead woman. Remember, in the mouth of 2 or 3 witness, every word shall be established

Who, and how many of the people present told you?

KDK:
The point is that the writers described things RELATIVE TO THEM.

Which in no way explains away the divine truth that was used to cling to the geocentric model, nor does it adequately explain the implications of a literal reading of verses like Joshua 10:12 "and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun stand thou still, and thou moon" 13 And the Sun stood still, and the moon stayed, So the Sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day", or "Isaiah 38:8 ", So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down.".

Furthermore, even if we do accept the non-literal interpretation of those verses, the implications are still far removed from actual reality. If we assume that Joshua was wrong, and it was actually the Earth that stood still, and not the Sun and the moon. We would still be faced with the quite improbable occurence of a event that should have killed Joshua and every person on the planet. The same goes for Hezekiah, except in his case the Earth must have somehow defied the laws of physics, and moved the wrong way, but as this things tend to go, nobody else in the world noticed.

In any case, whichever way you slice it, and to reiterate my earlier point, the facts did falsify the "divinely inspired truth".

ugonna0071:
@SEUN AND CO

LET ME GIVE U A TRUE LIFE STORY THAT HAPPENED IN JOS, (ENUGU ROAD TO BE PRECISE)

[snipped for brevity]

ANOTHER INCIDENCE I HEARD HAPPENED AT BAUCHI

Emphasis mine.

I'll wager you heard the first one too.

PLS PLS AND PLS, SEUN AND CO, WHAT DO U HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THESE TWO INCIDENTS

Bovine fecal matter.

ugonna0071:
SEUN,

SINCE U ARE AN ATHEIST, I SUGGEST U BETTER KEEP QUIET, ESPECIALLY ABOUT THINGS PERTAINIG TO CHRIST. U ARE ENTITLED TO YOUR OWN OPINIONS, BUT LETS NOT TAKE THE MERCIES OF CHRIST FOR GRANTED. IF GOD WERE TO BE ACTING JUST THE WAY HE WAS IN THE OLD TESTAMENT PERIOD, I GUESS YOU WOULDNT EVEN BE ALIVE TO PROOF READ UR FIRST POST.

Bizarre, very bizarre.

KDK:
Have you heard the word perspective before?

Have you ever heard of the phrases, Literal reading, history, and red herring? What does perspective have to do with the accepted divine truth of a geocentric system (actually Universe, but no big difference)?

Forget belief,take those scriptures to English experts who are atheist and ask them to please explain those writings to you as per literature.If you need help with locating some, I will gladly forward addresses of some guys in OXFORD and CAMBRIDGE. From your writings, I want to believe you are not just educated but educated to high level, please let these reflect in your expressions.Tanxx

I don't need literarture experts in Oxford or Cambridge, I am as competent as most of them. I can also, if needs be, drive down to Oxford myself. However, I fail to see your point. Perhaps your point is something along the lines of those verses aren't strictly literal? If that is your point, it is not only a moot point, it would also be an opinion held due to the facts of science.

Edit: I would actually catch a bus to Oxford, but you get the idea.

KDK:
Could you please show me where it is written in the bible that "Our planetary system is geocentric" . Then I will begin to accept some of your facts.

It doesn't say "our planetary system is geocentric" (I'm sure you already knew that), nor does it have to state it in that way. However, a literal reading of several verses do lead the reader to conclude that the Bible did indeed support a geocentric idea.

Some verses I've posted before:

The more popular ones: Joshua 10:12 ", and he said in the sight of Israel, Sun stand thou still, and thou moon" 13 And the Sun stood still, and the moon stayed, So the Sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day"

I Chronicles 16:30 Psalm 93:1 Verses that show the Earth does not move

Isaiah 38:8 ", So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down."

(some of the verses gotten from an actual [Christian] geocentrist)

Based on those verses and several others, a geocentric model became divine truth; a divine truth that even resulted in the persecution of scientists who tried to point out the facts.

naijacutee:
I hope I do not sound pious and self-righteous but the truth is I feel nothing but pity for the humanity and the way people have so been conned by the devil in this age. I havent got the strenght to type out all I need to say on this post, nor the strenght to get involved in yet another religious conflict. What I cannot understand however is what makes it so difficult to believe the Bible hook, line and sinker?

When/if you understand what makes it difficult for you to believe the Muslim Koran, the Hindu Vedas, the LDS (Mormon) Bible, and the many other texts of other religions, then you'd probably begin to understand why others of other beliefs and non-beliefs would have difficulty believing the Bible hook line and sinker.

There are passages in the Bible that explain the fact that even Jesus Himself does not know when he is coming back. And other passages (which I have cited in my earlier post) that explain what Jesus meant by saying the people he was talking to at the time would see him. This is a very simple issue and it either is or isn't. There is not need for radical disbelief on this very simple topic, if one reads and understands the Scriptures.

If not radical disbelief, there is a need for radical sceptism at the very least. It also becomes a problem - at least for me - when it seems probable that the alledged God incarnate not only got the time frame wrong, but somehow doesn't know when he'd be returning.

Furthermore, your explanatios in no way negate what the gospels actually have Jesus prophesying - well except if you read them very liberally.

What is most shocking to me now, is that fellow Africans like myself, in society where radical belief in Jesus has been proven again and again to produce astonishing results, In this Society which has always been so fetish and which is unhealthy for one not to have any spiritual standing whatsoever, Africans are now turning away from the God which has brought us hope and which has so evidently saved us from our dark ages. Just because we think that everything our European counterparts do/say/believe is right. We are not looking and learning from the history of the worlds most influential countries and identifying the differences between their histories and ours.

I suppose given enough time, continents and nations do eventually arise out of stifling superstition.

Well, I will not say very much more, let everyman believe what he wants because it is a free world. On the last day, we will all answer for our actions. Or rather lets wait and see whether or not this 'last day' will come. Given that all the checklist of the signs which Jesus has given us are being ticked daily.

Indeed.

KDK:
@ KAG,
when you say "Holy Book" ,what book exactly are you referring to?Please be specific.

In this instance, that would be the Christian Bible.

KDK:
@kAG
What you said is a fact but it is not the truth. The truth is that: not all truths fit the logical mind's eye which seeks logic and substantity of that truth. Most truths are abstract in certain qualities.

What I said is both fact and reality, and based on presented evidence can be accepted as a truth. Also, of course not all truths fit the "logical mind, etc", that's becaue many truths are actually devoid of logic, have little substance, and many do eventually become falsified by facts.

A much overused example: Truth - Our planetary system is geocentric, and our Holy book tells us this istrue and is a divine truth.

Fact - Based on scientific evidence and points of references, our planetary system is more accurately described as a heliocentric system.

KDK:
@KAG,
All facts are not truths but all truths are facts. (Think about it)

Thought about it, and it's still not all "truths" are facts. In fact to introduce a corollary, not all "truth" are grounded in reality and/or sanity.

kodewrita:
@KAG have fun but at the end of the day, you will answer the same question.

I have.