Worldviews

[nof60]

Originally Posted by 30Cal

Evidence for the existence of Jesus would need to be bases on various sources. The authenticity of Josephus is often challenged because it was handed down to us from the early church and therefore is believed to have been altered with fictitious details. However, in 240 AD Origen made reference to Josephus which predated all presently known Joseph manuscript. Roman "historians" were often inclined to show history to an end that suited what they were trying to write and discredit whom they were trying to discrewdit. A prime example is the writings about Caligula ordering his troups to attack neptune and gather cockle shells. Archeological evidence now reveals a streing of forts in modern day holland that allowed later emperors such as Hadrian to launch waves of successful attacks and invasion of southern and eastern Britania In his notes, Origen made reference to Jesus being the brother of James and went on to note that Josephus did not accept Jesus as Christ. This would indicate that there was likely an earlier works by Josephus than the one that is commonly used. Again, writings 250 years after the event about a writer who lived 100 years after the event. All in a time where the average life expectancy was less than 40 years. So by this time we are dealing with the grandchildren of the people who witnessed jesus. Not sure if I could retell many of my grandfathers stories with a great degree of accuracy.

The writings of Tertullian (a Roman citizen 155-160 AD),born 100+ years late in his defence to the senate about his faith states: “At His own free-will, He with a word dismissed from Him His spirit, anticipating the executioner's work. In the same hour, too, the light of day was withdrawn, when the sun at the very time was in his meridian blaze. Those who were not aware that this had been predicted about Christ, no doubt thought it an eclipse. You yourselves have the account of the world-portent still in your archives.refers to the eclipse, not to Jesus But, lo, on the third day there a was a sudden shock of earthquake, and the stone which sealed the sepulchre was rolled away, and the guard fled off in terror: without a single disciple near, the grave was found empty... All these things Pilate did to Christ; and now in fact a Christian in his own convictions, he sent word of Him to the reigning Cæsar, who was at the time Tiberius.”

This is describing the account of the death of Jesus, kept in the Roman’s archives, written and given to the emperor by Pilate. To my knowledge there has not been any Roman document that denies or objected to the Christian claims that Christ was crucified at their hands.If there had / is such documents do you not think the heir to the Roman Empire, namely the RC church would have gotten rid of them or locked them up long ago? Considering the legalistic minds of the Romans, before and during their attempt to purge the earth of Christians, I would think there would be in existence a written objection?

Julian the apostate (331-363 AD), the last Roman Emperor to apposed Christianity, 300 years after and not the last Pagan Emporer, just the last to feed members of the Christ Cult to lionsmade reference to their records of Jesus being put to death. One can only conclude then that these records were genuine and still available during his time.refers again to christian writing wrote long after the time of christ but seized by the romans

[nof60]

Originally Posted by eastcoast

A proof is sufficient evidence or argument for the truth of a proposition.

what you have is an opinion, you do not have proof of any exhistance of a god, and as far as a billion people believing it does that really matter? 99.9% of the population of the world thought the sun rotated around the earth, and 99.9% of the population thought the world was flat, just because people belive something that does not make it true or a fact.

And who tols them it was flat? Oh wait for it



The Church

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by eastcoast

to paraphrase from bill maher's recent new rules.
show me a god and I will believe in him.

That's rich! I would just say if one could show god, I would not believe it was God. I find bill maher a bit entertaining, but I find him all too often offensive to anyone but his own reasoning. I wonder why he spends so much time in argument with those he thinks foolish? I think there is wisdom in not arguing with fools. I know why bill mayer says these things! bill mayer is a comedian! I can not see electricity but I can see the result. I can not see a Creator, however every day I can see things that no creature especially man could create. Till someone like bill maher with all of his so called reason can explain how to make simple things like grass and trees and give them life I will stand in awe of what I choose to call the Creator. I find these discussions interesting, but I do embrace the mystery of the questions I have more than what I often hear claimed as definative answer. I love the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament and I like the Koran and the Gita and a whole bunch of other sacred writings and often it feels like the words speak to me. I do think that these documents need to be rescued from those who use them as weapons and from those who try to use them to expain the unexplanable or define what can not be defined or inflict their opinion on others. I do not wish to inflict this opinion on anyone else. It is just mine.

[nof60]

Originally Posted by wheaty

I have seen alot of questions asked of the Christians in the discussion. Hear are a few for the athesits

How is it possible for everything to come from nothing in the big bang?

How did living systems come from non intelligent non self replicating materials?
Why do so many evolutionary biologist struggle with the origins question?

If there is No God or Afterlife can there be any Transendenant meaning to life?

If there is no God are objective morals possible?

If the material universe is all that exists how can you explain emotions like love.

I am not an atheist so I cant answer this

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by 30Cal

No. Likely because God tells him so. Do you really believe it is impossible to hear the voice?

Originally Posted by avb3

We have kept this thread at a higher level, but do you know how hard it is not to make a comment about hearing voices?

That door was just left too wide open

Tell me about it, my present career involves using medication to sedate people who say they hear voices. For a better selection of terms maybe I should say conscious thought process??? You know those thoughts, one sends the signal to do it, the other one jumps in and sends an amplified signal ... don’t do it.

[wheaty]

So if a person today writes a book about WWII he is disqualified from being a reliable historian because he wasnt there? What if i interviewed vetrans that fought in the war? Are those eye witness accounts of the battles not true because i myself didnt participate? If i am 50 years old and write about the things i saw in my life when i was in my 20's then that book should be brought into question as to its reliability? I think not. Nor should the NT documents validity be brought into question.

Im sorry Nof60 but your burden of proof for historical documents renders alot of human history as suspect or irrellavant. When the same standard is applied to the NT documents as other historical documents it comes out looking pretty impressive.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by wheaty

I have seen alot of questions asked of the Christians in the discussion. Hear are a few for the athesits

How is it possible for everything to come from nothing in the big bang?

Let me quote from that favourite source, Wikipedia:

“*the Big Bang theory*cannot*and*does not*provide any explanation for such an initial condition; rather, it*describes*and*explains*the general evolution of the universe going forward from that point on. The observed abundances of the light elements throughout the cosmos closely match the calculated predictions for the formation of these elements from nuclear processes in the rapidly expanding and cooling first minutes of the universe, as logically and quantitatively detailed according to*Big Bang nucleosynthesis.”

Ask me about biological scientific issues, and I can give you a pretty good answer. Ask me about astrological ones, I can only defer to others more knowledgeable than myself. I would be speculating, as would most on here, no matter what side of the fence one is on.

I will not defer to something that is a philosophical writing from 2000 years ago.

How did living systems come from non intelligent non self replicating materials?*

Science keeps evolving; as example, the chemical soup that exists around black smokers has all sorts of life forms that are above a single cell. Prior supposition was that it was too hot and too sulphric to support live.

Now it seems the particular combination of the chemical soup and heat from the black smokers may in fact have been the catalyst that started life.

Why do so many evolutionary biologist struggle with the origins question?*

Struggle? In what sense? Certainly the preponderance of the evidence supports evolution. Are there gaps? Yup, for now. The science is, pardon the pun, evolving and will continue to.

Certain biblical passages tell us that unicorns exist. No fossil records have ever been found of them. If they existed, would you not want to see that evidence? I mean, we have molluscs, fish, dinosaurs, mammals, birds, dinosaur skin, dinosaur feathers but no unicorns. But no unicorns.

If there is No God or Afterlife can there be any Transendenant meaning to life?

As the normal meaning of transcendental has numerous meanings. Which one are you associating with your question? The answer may vary.

If the material universe is all that exists how can you explain emotions like love.

Emotions are a stimuli that humans have evolved to react to in a neural manner. Learned stimuli of other animals include the fight or flight actions we see so often.

If there is no God are objective morals possible?

Of course. See my post of Penn Jullete's 10 Commandments for Atheists. Those are pretty good rules to follow, whether one is of faith or not.

[avb3]

As the question come up so often, just though I would list these separately rather then having them buried in some other message.

• 1. The highest ideals are human intelligence, creativity and love. Respect these above all.
• 2. Do not put things or even ideas above other human beings. (Let's scream at each other about Kindle versus iPad, solar versus nuclear, Republican versus Libertarian,*Garth Brooks*versus*Sun Ra— but when your house is on fire, I'll be there to help.)
• 3. Say what you mean, even when talking to yourself. (What used to be an oath to (G)od is now quite simply respecting yourself.)
• 4. Put aside some time to rest and think. (If you're religious, that might be the Sabbath; if you're a Vegas magician, that'll be the day with the lowest grosses.)
• 5. Be there for your family. Love your parents, your partner, and your children. (Love is deeper than honor, and parents matter, but so do spouse and children.)
• 6. Respect and protect all human life. (Many believe that "Thou shalt not kill" only refers to people in the same tribe. I say it's all human life.)
• 7. Keep your promises. (If you can't be sexually exclusive to your spouse, don't make that deal.)
• 8. Don't steal. (This includes magic tricks and jokes — you know who you are!)
• 9. Don't lie. (You know, unless you're doing magic tricks and it's part of your job. Does that make it OK for politicians, too?)
• 10. Don't waste too much time wishing, hoping, and being envious; it'll make you bugnutty.

[30Cal]

[QUOTE=nof60;1297106]:Originally Posted by nof60 Roman "historians" were often inclined to show history to an end that suited what they were trying to write and discredit whom they were trying to discrewdit. A prime example is the writings about Caligula ordering his troups to attack neptune and gather cockle shells. Archeological evidence now reveals a streing of forts in modern day holland that allowed later emperors such as Hadrian to launch waves of successful attacks and invasion of southern and eastern Britania In his notes - [I]Nevertheless, Origen reference from an early document of Josephus that did not appeared altered, still provides some creedence to what Josephus reported as possibly being true.[/I]

Again, writings 250 years after the event about a writer who lived 100 years after the event. All in a time where the average life expectancy was less than 40 years. So by this time we are dealing with the grandchildren of the people who witnessed jesus. Not sure if I could retell many of my grandfathers stories with a great degree of accuracy. Agreed, the highest degree of accuracy might be missing, however, the documentation still exist. I can only speak for myself, but any events of significant matters that my forefathers had been involved in where written down by both sides of my parents so that the children would have a record of events. This includes photo albums.


If there had / is such documents do you not think the heir to the Roman Empire, namely the RC church would have gotten rid of them or locked them up long ago?[I] or would it not be in the interst of Rome to destroy the documents to purge themselves of any involvement?[/I]


These arguments have all been fought before, and remain open until the end of time. For many out there the proof will be in the pudding, but by that time it may be too late

I would like to take this time to thank everyone for the intriguing ideas, thoughts, and beliefs that have come to light on this board. As can be seen, there will always be two sides to a debate or argument. And in time we will likely all come to some conclusion from our life’s experience what we chose to believe in. It is only in the end that the finality of confirmation will come, but until then may the debates continue to press on to promote the studies and learning of mankind.

Thanks everyone...And may God Bless

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by nof60

Originally Posted by nof60

And who tols them it was flat? Oh wait for it



The Church

Did you know the scripture refers to a circular earth, before the time of Columbus? - Sorry couldn't help myself

[Mistagin]

Always amazes me in discussions like this when those who don't believe (or don't want to believe) ask for proof, and when proofs are given in abundance, those proofs are discredited because they don't meet some kind of undefined 'super'-standard of proof!

That's often the problem with the Bible - demands are placed on it that are not demanded of any other literature. But when the same criteria are applied to the Bible as other ancient literature the Bible exceeds the 'rules' in every way.

An example of not accepting proofs given in the Bible: there are plenty of eye-witness accounts of Jesus' resurrection, hundreds of people saw him and testified to it, yet their testimony is discounted. Why?

One argument that always comes up in these discussions is why there was / is little record (there is some) of Jesus in Roman records. The same could be asked about tens of thousands if not millions of other people. To the Romans of the time Jesus was a nobody. The Romans saw no need to keep records on him. He was such a nobody that the Romans acceded to the Jewish leaders' demands to have him crucified - even though Pilate himself declared Jesus innocent. So in a way, even the one or two references to Jesus' death in Roman records (which have been pointed out in this thread) is remarkable! But for some reason even that is dismissed as proof of His existence as a real person. And even the movement called "the Way" (Christianity) that exploded very rapidly in a very short time after Jesus was gone from earth - and was recognized by the Romans as a threat - a movement that is still going and growing today all over the world - was and is dismissed as 'foolishness' and nothing more than a human religious construct based on a 'myth' created by a bunch of supposedly illiterate Jewish common folk. Hmmmm, why?

Here's another proof, but it won't be accepted either: I am proof of the validity and reality of the Christian faith. I am proof Jesus is who the Bible says He is! And there are and have been billions more like me. We believe! (But of course, our faith and our existence as followers of Jesus Christ is not considered to be adequate to be counted as a proof - because faith is not considered to be scientifically verifiable ------ or is it?)

Why do I say I am proof?

I am reluctant to share this because I don't want to draw attention to myself. But I am alive today (Praise God !) because many years ago God prevented my death in a work accident in which I should have bled to death in moments. The doctors were astonished that my femoral artery wasn't severed by a circular saw that got away from me one day. There was no logical reason why that artery wasn't shredded. The one in my left leg was fully exposed, flesh ripped from around it, but the artery wasn't even scratched! It should have been ripped apart! I've got a scar running from just above my knee to my hip. All the doctors could say was, "It's a miracle!"
And I could tell lots more personal stories about how God has worked, and is working, through and in my life, making what was impossible possible, and providing when only miracle provision was possible - however, it must be said that there is a 'requirement' - I have to be obedient to His work and call.
I have 'heard' the 'voice' of God speaking to my heart - and 'heard' it in my mind (Okay - here's where someone can make their snide comments about hearing voices ). I followed His instructions and that led me to where I am today. Of course, most generally speaking, only a person who believes in God is enabled by His Holy Spirit to 'hear' God speaking!
I can say out of absolute conviction that I would not be where I am today except for the fact that God Almighty, Creator of the Universe, loves me, has saved me from my sin through the work Jesus did for me at the cross of Calvary some 2000 years ago, and has taken me back as a son. I would gladly die for Him!

Now I don't expect anyone to believe because of my experiences and faith, nevertheless, it is grossly unfair to dismiss faith as proof just because it is faith. And that is because faith is rooted in real, verifiable experiences of real people just like me. To say otherwise is akin to denying my very existence!

[covey ridge]

Originally Posted by wheaty

I have seen alot of questions asked of the Christians in the discussion. Hear are a few for the athesits

How is it possible for everything to come from nothing in the big bang?

How did living systems come from non intelligent non self replicating materials?
Why do so many evolutionary biologist struggle with the origins question?

If there is No God or Afterlife can there be any Transendenant meaning to life?

If there is no God are objective morals possible?

If the material universe is all that exists how can you explain emotions like love.

Very good questions! Questions that I like to ponder on. I do not have the answers, but for now I will not rule out a Creator or God. As far as the after life goes, I am not sure about that as well, but I think that some are so pre occupied with the after life that they neglect the gift of this present life.

[eastcoast]

Originally Posted by wheaty

Sorry to say East Coast your flat out wrong. I have looked at both sides of this argument and there are good points and proofs put forward by both sides in this discussion. If you dont like someones argument it doesnt mean it is not valid. Your critisism of some posts considering the historicity of the evidence of Christs existence shows that you have a poor understand of what makes a document an acceptable piece of evidence. You may not like it but it still is evidence. Evidence accepted by a large number of historians.

Many people with incredible high IQ's and seriouls levels of education who have honestly and sincerly examined the facts have come to different conclusions regarding the question of wether god exists or not. You cannot discount those people who chose the opposite side of the arguement becasue you simply disagree with them. That is not fair and frankly its intellectually small.

there may be proof that jesus christ exhisted, but there is little or no proof he is god, what you have is a fairy tail written 2000 years ago that proves nothing, nothing in the bible is really proveable we have never found an arc that johan made, there is no proof that there was ever a world wide flood,no proof of adam and eve, no proof of any healings of jesus, what you have are stories just like the stories of the native americans with their many gods, or any other number of religions with theirs, proof is fact, actually seeing something or being able to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt something happened, just because you think the blue door is red doesn't make it so.

[30Cal]

Originally Posted by Mistagin

Why do I say I am proof?

I am reluctant to share this because I don't want to draw attention to myself. But I am alive today (Praise God !) because many years ago God prevented my death in a work accident in which I should have bled to death in moments. The doctors were astonished that my femoral artery wasn't severed by a circular saw that got away from me one day. There was no logical reason why that artery wasn't shredded. The one in my left leg was fully exposed, flesh ripped from around it, but the artery wasn't even scratched! It should have been ripped apart! I've got a scar running from just above my knee to my hip. All the doctors could say was, "It's a miracle!"
And I could tell lots more personal stories about how God has worked, and is working, through and in my life, making what was impossible possible, and providing when only miracle provision was possible - however, it must be said that there is a 'requirement' - I have to be obedient to His work and call.
I have 'heard' the 'voice' of God speaking to my heart - and 'heard' it in my mind (Okay - here's where someone can make their snide comments about hearing voices ). I followed His instructions and that led me to where I am today. Of course, most generally speaking, only a person who believes in God is enabled by His Holy Spirit to 'hear' God speaking!
I can say out of absolute conviction that I would not be where I am today except for the fact that God Almighty, Creator of the Universe, loves me, has saved me from my sin through the work Jesus did for me at the cross of Calvary some 2000 years ago, and has taken me back as a son. I would gladly die for Him!

Now I don't expect anyone to believe because of my experiences and faith, nevertheless, it is grossly unfair to dismiss faith as proof just because it is faith. And that is because faith is rooted in real, verifiable experiences of real people just like me. To say otherwise is akin to denying my very existence!

I hear you, and am with you on the manifestation of God,s works through the miracles that He does for us. I still have pictures of a car that I was driving at a high speed when it was pulled into a cement divider, by slush on the road. During the incident a peace came over and a brightness appeared to the right of me, and although it was not in an audible voice, my conscious registered suttle words telling me not to worry that I would be all right. Needles to say the car flipped after having its nose sawed of by the barrier, and began rolling over and over again. When it came to rest about fifty feet from a cement wall, I looked about me to see that the roof was gone along with the front and rear of the car torn off. I didn't have a mark on me. This is one of many accounts where I have witnessed God,s hand at work. What a mighty God we serve.

Thanks for your witness and may God continue to bless you richly with His presence

[eastcoast]

Originally Posted by wheaty

I have seen alot of questions asked of the Christians in the discussion. Hear are a few for the athesits

How is it possible for everything to come from nothing in the big bang?

How did living systems come from non intelligent non self replicating materials?
Why do so many evolutionary biologist struggle with the origins question?

If there is No God or Afterlife can there be any Transendenant meaning to life?

If there is no God are objective morals possible?

If the material universe is all that exists how can you explain emotions like love.

oh the old argument that something can't come from nothing, sure il bite and counter that question with another question, if everything comes from something where does god come from?

there are very few biologists that believe anything, most biologists are athiests, im sure if you look hard enough you can find a few that believe.

is there meaning of life for snails or dogs or cows or amebas? humans are vain arrogant creatures that believe the world revolves around them.

morals weren't around beforew jesus christ exhisted? even if you believe the world is 6000 years old then 4000 of those years were before christ, are you telling me that love/hate/murder/rape etc wasn't there before jesus exhisted and humans walked around in circles wondering what to think?

[eastcoast]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmxAG...eature=related

what is more likely that the laws of nauture have been suspended in your favour, and in a way that you approve, or that you have made a mistake?

[huntinstuff]

Im curious. What does A.D. and B.C. mean when we use dates?

[avb3]

Originally Posted by huntinstuff

Im curious. What does A.D. and B.C. mean when we use dates?

Anno Domini and Before Christ, but you already knew that, right?

Even biblical scholars now agree that in their view Christ was born some time between 4 BCE and 6 CE.

And yes, that is the nomenclature now used. BCE= Before Common Era and CE = Common Era. Meaning things start at the year zero, as biblical scholars just can't nail the date they want.

You know, the thing about that 10 year pregnancy of Mary?

[huntinstuff]

Originally Posted by avb3

Anno Domini and Before Christ, but you already knew that, right?

Even biblical scholars now agree that in their view Christ was born some time between 4 BCE and 6 CE.

And yes, that is the nomenclature now used. BCE= Before Common Era and CE = Common Era. Meaning things start at the year zero, as biblical scholars just can't nail the date they want.

You know, the thing about that 10 year pregnancy of Mary?

Yup. My question was rhetorical, but what of the Mary thing?

[avb3]

Originally Posted by huntinstuff

Yup. My question was rhetorical, but what of the Mary thing?

Luke says Jesus's birth occurred while Quirinius was governor of Syria. That means that it could not have happened before 6 CE, the year we know he came into office. Now Matthew tells us Jesus was conceived while Herod the Great was in power. He died in 4 BCE.

Hence the real miracle would be a 10 year pregnancy.

[huntinstuff]

Originally Posted by avb3

Luke says Jesus's birth occurred while Quirinius was governor of Syria. That means that it could not have happened before 6 CE, the year we know he came into office. Now Matthew tells us Jesus was conceived while Herod the Great was in power. He died in 4 BCE.

Hence the real miracle would be a 10 year pregnancy.

Good find. Interesting

[gunmum]

ok, I don't have more time to develop and summarize, and I hope this is allowed here (wait, it's my thread)
Has to do with the census and the fact that Quirinius probably was involved in 2 separate terms, but looks like this issue is all hashed out for us right here:
http://christianthinktank.com/quirinius.html

[avb3]

Originally Posted by gunmum

ok, I don't have more time to develop and summarize, and I hope this is allowed here (wait, it's my thread)
Has to do with the census and the fact that Quirinius probably was involved in 2 separate terms, but looks like this issue is all hashed out for us right here:
http://christianthinktank.com/quirinius.html

That is about as baffled a gab as a baffegab could get. I mean, lets see how many angels we can get to dance on the head of a pin.

If who ever wrote that were just a wee bit more concise and precise it might have made some sense.

Heck, its easier understanding the book of Judges.

[eastcoast]

can't remember where I heard it but it has to do with the divine birth.

"what's the bigger possibility the rules of nature have suspended themselves, a child was born to a virgin mother, or a jewish woman lied about sex?"

[gunmum]

What about the disciples that died horrible deaths after his Resurrection because they finally admitted that Jesus was who he said he was! If they were crazy, then they wouldn't have denied him before he was crucified!

How about that fossils (fact: millions of dead things covered in rock, buried all over the world) exist because of a worldwide flood that killed everything on earth except what was on Noah's Arc. NOT an ice age! (Yes, God made dinosaurs). I find it interesting that God even gave Noah the plans to build the arc! Don't judge. Just like with evolution, many people were duped into believing that the world was flat. Oh, but you're smarter than that

And the real truth to this is that none of us were there, so no matter what they find in that rock, no one (except God) can PROVE the origin. So it's faith on both accounts! You need faith to believe that we came from nothing (even though you talk about how scientific you are) and science cannot prove that something comes from nothing.

So what? Is it just worldviews - or is it really pride? No one wants to admit that they are weak? dependent? So now man wants to BE God. And will go to any length to prove that there isn't a God. People want something tangible. You want to see miracles to believe in God? Would you know a miracle to see one??

[762Russian]

Originally Posted by gunmum

How about that fossils (fact: millions of dead things covered in rock, buried all over the world) exist because of a worldwide flood that killed everything on earth except what was on Noah's Arc. NOT an ice age! (Yes, God made dinosaurs). I find it interesting that God even gave Noah the plans to build the arc!

It was an asteroid that killed the critters, and the idea of the global flood has been roundly disproved a dozen times over.

Don't judge. Just like with evolution, many people were duped into believing that the world was flat. Oh, but you're smarter than that

Yes, because having mountains of data and evidence and proven theory all supporting evolution is all just so much marsh gas. Nothing at all on a collection of short stories and fairy tales written by shroom addicted madmen two thousand years ago.

And the real truth to this is that none of us were there, so no matter what they find in that rock, no one (except God) can PROVE the origin. So it's faith on both accounts! You need faith to believe that we came from nothing (even though you talk about how scientific you are) and science cannot prove that something comes from nothing.

So were you there to see your god do it? Your arguement means nothing because it applies to the skyman as well. Difference is, science has facts; no belief is needed, no faith either, because those do not apply to facts.

So what? Is it just worldviews - or is it really pride? No one wants to admit that they are weak? dependent? So now man wants to BE God. And will go to any length to prove that there isn't a God. People want something tangible. You want to see miracles to believe in God? Would you know a miracle to see one??

Indeed I would; defy physics for me and I'll happily start believing in something. It certainly wouldn't the child-murdering psychopathic Abrahamic skyman, but it might be something. Zeus, probably. Maybe Odin; I do like the Norse.

I have established a challenge for any mystic beings out there that want me to believe; Levitate my Ford Explorer some 30 feet in the air, make it circle the town three times without touching anything, then set it back down on the roof of my house, all while I am watching.

After that, I'll believing anything. Until then, it's all just mystics and delusion and shamans wanting an easy ride on the backs of gormless, fearful simple folk.

[762Russian]

Let's play Atheist Bingo while we're here.

[Tactical Lever]

[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by 762Russian

It was an asteroid that killed the critters, and the idea of the global flood has been roundly disproved a dozen times over.

So, an asteroid killed everything? And then life started over again? So where would we find this asteroid? You can prove it definitively, can't you?

Yes, because having mountains of data and evidence and proven theory all supporting evolution is all just so much marsh gas. Nothing at all on a collection of short stories and fairy tales written by shroom addicted madmen two thousand years ago.

Actually a lot more evidence for creation. I haven't met the human scientist yet who could replicate life. If it was so easy and natural, we'd see it every day.

Oh, wait...there was those guys who zapped some "soup" and made wait for it.... life? No; wrong! They succeeded in making amino acid; you know the building blocks of life. Except it was just amino acid and that type would not support life.

So were you there to see your god do it? Your arguement means nothing because it applies to the skyman as well. Difference is, science has facts; no belief is needed, no faith either, because those do not apply to facts.

There were enough people to see when it happened, so they wrote about it. It's called the Bible.

Indeed I would; defy physics for me and I'll happily start believing in something. It certainly wouldn't the child-murdering psychopathic Abrahamic skyman, but it might be something. Zeus, probably. Maybe Odin; I do like the Norse.

I have established a challenge for any mystic beings out there that want me to believe; Levitate my Ford Explorer some 30 feet in the air, make it circle the town three times without touching anything, then set it back down on the roof of my house, all while I am watching.

You were born a couple, few thousand years too late!

After that, I'll believing anything. Until then, it's all just mystics and delusion and shamans wanting an easy ride on the backs of gormless, fearful simple folk.

You already believe "anything". Strained at the gnat, and swallowed the camel.

[Tactical Lever]

Originally Posted by avb3

Luke says Jesus's birth occurred while Quirinius was governor of Syria. That means that it could not have happened before 6 CE, the year we know he came into office. Now Matthew tells us Jesus was conceived while Herod the Great was in power. He died in 4 BCE.

Hence the real miracle would be a 10 year pregnancy.

To address your concern about 4 B.C.; the Gregorian calender was formed a number of years, after the Bible was written. There was an error in the starting dates of the calender.

Quirinius was a rector (latin for ruler, or one in position of authority) for Gaius Caesar in 1 A.D. That sounds a little like governor to me.

[eastcoast]

[QUOTE=Tactical Lever;1298358]

So, an asteroid killed everything? And then life started over again? So where would we find this asteroid? You can prove it definitively, can't you?



Actually a lot more evidence for creation. I haven't met the human scientist yet who could replicate life. If it was so easy and natural, we'd see it every day.

Oh, wait...there was those guys who zapped some "soup" and made wait for it.... life? No; wrong! They succeeded in making amino acid; you know the building blocks of life. Except it was just amino acid and that type would not support life.




There were enough people to see when it happened, so they wrote about it. It's called the Bible.



You were born a couple, few thousand years too late!



You already believe "anything". Strained at the gnat, and swallowed the camel.

I guess you missed my post earlier about this point, athiesm is not a religion and if it is then abstenence is a sexual position, athiesm is lack of religion, it's a way for religious folk to square the circle on athiests and say look you believe something too, although it doesn't work good try, the fact of the matter is I am not afraid to say "I don't know" where everything came from, but that doesn't mean I have to believe something that is unbeliveable, there is no sky daddy with a beard who watches you.