E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
One of the designs etched on a bone box found within a 1st-century Jerusalem tomb suggests the biblical story of Jonah and the fish, which held significant symbolism for early Christians.
Using a remote-controlled camera on the end of a robotic arm, investigators have found what could be the earliest evidence of a Christian iconography in Jerusalem, engraved on a set of "bone boxes" inside a nearly intact 1st-century tomb.
One of the limestone boxes, known more formally as an ossuary, carries a Greek inscription calling on God to "rise up" or "raise up" someone. Another box appears to show the carved image of a fish, perhaps with the prophet Jonah in its mouth. Allusions to fish and the "sign of Jonah" came to be widely used among early Christians, but not among Jerusalem's Jews.
Update: Doubts raised about the 'Jesus Discovery'
Those discoveries alone would be enough to get biblical scholars excited. But the investigators in this case are the same people who claimed five years ago that ossuaries from a nearby tomb were engraved with the names of the biblical Jesus and his family. They're putting forth this new find as supporting evidence for their earlier claims, and resurrecting the topic in a newly published book ("The Jesus Discovery") as well as a Discovery Channel documentary that's due to air this spring.
"This does reopen the whole question about the 'Jesus Tomb,'" James Tabor, a scriptural scholar at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, told me.
That almost guarantees that the link to Jesus will take center stage once again in the discussion of the discovery, with most archaeologists discounting the connection. There's even a chance that the renewed controversy would push this most recent find out of the spotlight. That would be a terrible shame, said John Dominic Crossan, an expert on 1st-century Christianity and former Catholic priest who is a professor emeritus at DePaul University.
"It's a stunning discovery," he said. "It's a stunning piece of technology. As a scholar, I really don't want to get lost in saying, 'Oh, come on, it's off the wall.' Yeah, it's off the wall. But look at the wall!"
James Tabor / UNCC
Engineer Walter Klassen and filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici hold the camera-equipped robotic arm in its folded-up configuration.
Or in this case, look at the box.
How the boxes were found
Tabor and documentary filmmaker Simcha Jacobovici located both of the 1st-century tombs — the so-called Jesus Family Tomb as well as the one with the newly revealed inscriptions — in a Jerusalem neighborhood known as Talpiot years ago. They looked into previous claims that the bone boxes in the Jesus Family Tomb were marked with names that meshed with the names of Jesus' brothers and sisters, as mentioned in the Gospels. The investigators went on to cite a statistical analysis of name frequency as evidence that the family interred in the caskets was that of Jesus.
Most provocatively, they pointed to one box that was said to contain the remains of Jesus, and another containing the remains of "Judah, son of Jesus." These claims ran counter to the mainstream Christian view that Jesus made a bodily resurrection after his crucifixion and death, and that he did not marry or have children. To explain the seeming discrepancy with the Gospels, Tabor and his colleagues suggested that early Christians did not necessarily believe in a bodily resurrection, but rather a spiritual resurrection in which Jesus left behind the "old clothes" of the flesh.
The first book ("The Jesus Family Tomb") and TV documentary ("The Lost Tomb of Jesus") set off a wave of protests, with skeptics saying that Tabor and Jacobovici were sensationalizing an unprovable assertion. Despite the criticism, the team continued their work, focusing on the other tomb. This tomb was only briefly examined in 1981 before protests by Orthodox Jews, concerned about the disturbance of a gravesite, forced an end to the archaeological study. The tomb was sealed back up, and a condominium was built over it. Tabor and his colleagues refer to this tomb as the "Patio Tomb," because a patio sits almost directly above the tomb.
Israel's civil and religious authorities were resistant to efforts to reopen the Patio Tomb, so Tabor, Jacobovici and their colleagues came up with an unorthodox alternative: They suggested building a robotic arm that could be extended down vent holes and drill holes into the tomb, to a maximum length of more than 15 feet. The authorities gave their permission, and the documentary team proceeded with their remote-controlled video exploration in June 2010.
James Tabor / UNCC
Investigators shot imagery of the 1st-century Jerusalem tomb and the bone boxes inside the tomb using a robotic arm, as shown in this video frame.
The filmmakers peered into niches cut into the tomb and found several inscribed bone boxes, including one that was left ajar to reveal the bones still within. In one of the niches, two boxes were jammed close together. As the robotic arm maneuvered to look at the side of one of the boxes, one of the investigators cried out, "Wait, wait, stop there!" A design had been etched into the limestone — a design that could be interpreted as a fish with a stick figure hanging out of its mouth.
The meaning of the inscriptions
After consulting with other scriptural experts, the investigators concluded that the etching showed a representation of Jonah and the fish. The biblical tale of the prophet who was swallowed by a giant fish, only to be vomited up alive three days later, had a special resonance for early Christians, who believed in Jesus' resurrection after three days in a tomb. The image of the fish, which would not typically be carved on a Jewish ossuary, suggested to Tabor and his colleagues that this might be the earliest surviving example of a Christian marking on an artifact in Jerusalem.
The team's excitement grew when they saw the inscription on the box sitting next to the one with the fish: A four-line inscription in Greek appeared to refer to a belief in the resurrection. The inscription could be read as "Divine Jehovah, raise up, raise up," or "The Divine Jehovah raises up to the Holy Place," or "Divine Jehovah, raise up [abbreviated name]."
"This inscription has something to do with resurrection of the dead, either of the deceased in the ossuary, or perhaps, given the Jonah image nearby, an expression of faith in Jesus' resurrection," Tabor said in a news release.
The Jesus connection
Tabor and his colleagues tie this latest discovery to their earlier claims by suggesting that the two tombs were part of one complex, which might have been chiseled out by a wealthy supporter of Jesus and his disciples. They even name their prime suspect: Joseph of Arimathea, a high-ranking religious official who was said in the Gospels to have arranged Jesus' burial. In the investigators' view, the fact that they found such a strong connection to early Christianity in the Patio Tomb strengthens their original claims for the Jesus Family Tomb, which is 200 feet away.
"We now have the new archaeological evidence, literally written in stone, that can guide us in properly understanding what Jesus' earliest followers meant by their faith in Jesus' resurrection from the dead — with his earthly remains, and those of his family, peacefully interred just yards away," Tabor and Jacobovici wrote.
Crossan said that was too much of a leap. "There's nothing that associates [the Patio Tomb] with Joseph of Arimathea," he said.
He said the two tombs may well have no relationship to each other: "This whole area is riddled with tombs, as far as we can tell."
Ben Witherington, a New Testament scholar at Asbury Theological Seminary, voiced a similar view. "The attempt to connect [the Patio Tomb] to the other tombs is sheer conjecture, unless the tombs were connected," he told me.
Witherington said the connections made in the newly published book were similar to those put forth in Tabor's earlier work. "Most of us who have evaluated his work would say, OK, all very interesting, but it's building one speculation on another speculation," he said.
However, Witherington was intrigued by the fish carving. "We have early Christian ossuaries with the fish symbol ... in the 2nd century, if not back into the 1st century," he said. "That is the early Christian symbol for I-Ch-Th-Y-S ... 'Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior.' What we don't have any evidence for is that symbol on Jewish ossuaries."
The words of the inscription also caught Witherington's interest. "They imply a belief about the resurrection," he said.
It is thought that the use of such bone boxes in Jerusalem ceased in the year 70, due to the Roman destruction of the city. Thus, there's a chance that the residents buried in the Patio Tomb actually lived during the time of Jesus and his first disciples. However, Crossan noted that Christians weren't the only ones in 1st-century Jerusalem who held a religious belief in resurrection. The Pharisees and the Essenes also looked forward to the resurrection of the righteous, he said.
"What I would say is ... this is a rich Pharisee, a rich person in the 1st century who believes in the resurrection," Crossan told me. "We always thought that [the image of] Jonah coming out of the fish was peculiarly Christian. Maybe that's one more thing that the early Christians took from Jewish tradition, and this would be the first evidence."
More about biblical archaeology:
- Messianic message stirs debate
- Return to King Solomon's mines
- Help scientists decipher 'lost' gospel
- Gallery: The archaeology of Christianity
- Experts stumped by markings in Jerusalem
- Claims about Jesus' 'lost tomb' stir up tempest
An academic paper on the Patio Tomb project is being posted to The Bible and Interpretation on Tuesday, and Tabor says the paper will be submitted for print publication as well. A press event about the project and the Discovery Channel documentary has been scheduled for 11 a.m. ET Tuesday at Discovery Times Square in New York City. Funding for the project was provided by Discovery Channel / Vision Television / Associated Producers. Tabor's colleague in obtaining the excavation license from the Israel Antiquities Authority was Rami Arav, professor of archaeology at the University of Nebraska at Omaha.
Alan Boyle is msnbc.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter or adding Cosmic Log's Google+ page to your circle. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for other worlds.
Leave a Comment:
It is all interesting, but none of this matters anyhow. If you have faith, you will believe. If you don't, then you won't. God has given free will so you can decide where you want to spend eternity.
Right. Or there is no god and he hasn't.
and?
I wish more Christians would remember that part about free will and stop trying to shove their ideology down everyone else's throats.
obama is a christian. is he trying to shove his ideology down everybodys throat ?
...sorry, i guess he is.
if god exists is because I feel like letting him exist, if not, than, it's back to the trunk with the other toys.
And I wish more Atheists would stop being offended by what others believe and stop trying to shove their anti-religious agenda down Christians' throats.
When was the last time an atheist came to knock on your door? do you know how many times a month I have to tell your scumbags christians to stop waking me up on a beautiful sunday morning just to tell them to go to hell?
That's odd, they never wake me up on a Sunday morning or any morning for that matter. Maybe God is trying to tell you something. ;)
Yes, thanks for listening....Faith is 100% Free Will. And either way one believes, it's the choice that one makes, not an others will over them . That's not Free and the opposite of Free is Costly (this is to try and produce or force a counterfit Soul-Spririt?) Why do that?
You believe or you don't. If you do then you know that all men are immortal. You go that way or that other way when you shed the prison (body) but your conscience (Spirit-Soul) lives forever. That's the choice one makes. Have it your way!
no kimb54, but it's does mean you're an idiot. congratulations.
Us atheists don't try to push any agenda on anyone, more like we try to persuade your kind to use rationale and common sense to see things in terms of fairness for everyone, and not just for those who claim to belong to a certain group.
God, faith, eternity. I heard the hell insinuation, but is Jesus anywhere in there? See christians worship this guy named Jesus, said love thy neighbor, love the poor, love the least of these. You should totally read up on him, I heard this book called the bible talks about him a lot. Should give it a read sometime!
Eh, I don't try and force my views on people. I may say something, and some are so disrespectful as to tell me I'm an idiot for my belief. Thanks, it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy that anyone else can voice their faith and not fear, yet if I utter one word of praise I'm attacked verbally. Hmm ... so shall it be!
To each their own in the end. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. But I don't believe I am and what I feel and have experienced in my mildly young life has left me with a stronger faith. If you are wrong then I feel sorry for you. It is as stated free choice. I'll even sit here and admit I have listened to those who don't believe speak of their views and reasoning. It is enlightening. If people didn't have different views this would be such a boring world. Unfortunately the different opinions can cause quite a hostile environment at times. But that's just the nature of human beings, isn't it?
Yes, HN-1558401, amadeo122, we understand that if you had a good message for the world….say like a cure for cancer you would keep it to yourselves instead of sharing it.
"And when he had said these things, as they were looking, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they were looking stedfastly into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; who also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking into heaven? this Jesus, who was received up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven." (Acts 1:9-11)
People this is the truth. Believe it.
What is happening in the world is that Satan is doing everything he can to get you to believe lies. Believe this people. This is the truth. You are a soul inside your body right now, and were created by God. God loves you so much.
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life." (John 3:16)
Remember, whatever he can do to get you to stop believing, Satan will do. He only wants you to stop believing, because he hates you. He knows his fate already, because he hates God, and he wants you to have the same fate as him. No matter what it takes, he only wants you to stop believing in God, and that Jesus Christ was sent here to save your soul forever.
Can't you feel this people? Right now you are walking on the earth. Below your feet are people's souls in hell, and above you there are people in heaven. You just cannot see them right now because you are not permitted.
Jesus, please remember me and help me.
"If you do well, you can hold up your head; but if not, sin is a demon lurking at the door: his urge is toward you, yet you can be his master." (Genesis 4:7)
Sinester,
Your reasoning sounds like a lot of Christians I hear on this site, the difference is a true believer would never force their faith on you, they may share it and let you do as you will. Sadly the atheist (which have been ruled by the supreme court as a religion of anti-religion) so you and your follower that are a great minority have taken the ten commandments out of courtrooms, attacked voluntary school prayer, have forced our children to listen to a theory of evolution (because contrary to what you hear there is no scientific proof that we evolved anymore then there is that we were created) so why aren't both theories taught side by side and let the student with the help of their parents decide. Do you know why there has been only two debates between creationist and evolutionist (Leaky was part of the last one), is because they have never been able to prove their point or theory, in fact it has more holes in it then Swiss cheese. But rather then admit this truth they force this on our children. So have the atheist attracted Christianity, everyday, but sadly I do not hear Christians telling you how stupid and uneducated we are (and there are millions of top accadamians that support creationism and believe in Christ, but like any good socialist you will not be happy until you destroy the faith of the people. Look at what happened to these countries when communism fell, Christianity and other faiths took a giant leap because we were created to worship not condemn. So I will give you the respect not to believe, and no I will not try to force your children to believe as I do, so why are you and the state doing it to mine?
@Kumar "God has given free will so you can decide where you want to spend eternity" yah god gives people free will... except when he doesn't, vis-a-vis the Pharaoh's hardened heart during the Moses events; exodus 11:10 "and moses and arron did all these wonders before pharaoh: and the lord hardened pharoah's heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go out of his land."
New find revives 'Jesus Tomb' flap
Jesus' tomb had a flap? I didn't realize his tomb was tent.
I thought it had a big stone...
There are more discoveries than this, this one surfaced because of the opportunity for controversy and an opportunity for skeptics to poke holes in some way.
So Keck, is obama pushing true christianity, or some pseudo Christianity, or just his own meandering beliefs altogether?
Either way, he is promoting government as a ultimate sovereign being - seems to me that violates Christ's teachings.
He also said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the father but by me," and "go into all the world and spread the gospel, baptizing others in my name," and "Take up your cross and follow me". Perhaps you should read up on him and his teachings as well. A lot more there than just the social gospels of feeding the poor and hungry and being nice to others.
In 378 (A.D.) Emperor Gratian granted Damasus, bishop of Rome, to bear the title Pontifex Maximus. During his rule of the church much was done to embellish the tombs of the martyrs. The formerly healthy Christian respect for the example of integrity set by those who were martyred was now contaminated with the corrupt hero worship of Rome and turned into the saint worship of the following century.With the catacombs cleaned up and adorned with more extensive inscriptions and artwork, they became shrines to which the people flocked, and the martyrs became the objects of worship.
When Diocletian’s reign of terror was replaced by an era of toleration toward the Christians and things moved on to approval of the state toward the new fusion religion, the now-apostate Christians embraced both pagan thoughts and symbols. The simple clay lamps used in the catacombs no longer were unadorned, but bore the pagan symbol of the fish (the letters of the word for which in Greek were found to correspond with the initial letters of “Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Savior”), the Constantine monogram, etc.
TLDR; This is not the tomb of Jesus but the paganized post-Christian tomb of someone else.
But Thomas, the doubting apostle, believed only after seeing the palms of Jesus' hands; therefore Jesus' resurrection could not have been only spiritual; it had to have been bodily as well.
Not to Mention: Jesus ressurected people as bodies, not spirits and so do his apostles...
1) Our laws are largely based off English Commonlaw - which predates Christianity, and is more closely related to Roman Law that Judeo-Christian Law.
2) Our government bodies are secular, as mandated by the 1st amendment.
3) Nobody attacks voluntary school prayer - it's school prayer endorsed by the government (which violates the 1st amendment) which is under attack.
4) Evolution Theory is science
Why ask such a silly question? Since you seem to be so confident in your knowledge on the subject, I figure you should know the answer. Because creationism is not science. It's not based on the scientific method, it has no evidence, no data, no proof. It does not qualify as science, so it cannot and should not be taught as science. Creationism is religion - not science.
Evolution theory has mountains of evidence - you must have your eyes closed these days to miss it. There are thousands of books and documentaries detailing the scientific theory; so please invest some of your brainpower and learn something.
And these are? Please do tell. Because I already know what 'holes' you will come up with - since creationists have been reading from the same pamphlet of strawman arguments for the last 50 years; and I will debunk each one. Hell, save me some time, and youtube some Thunderfoot videos - he debunks them all with a fancy english accent.
Faith is fine and dandy with me. Belief in God is a good thing, and Jesus had some great teachings.
But no faith requires delusion. No faith exists that requires you to maim your children's intellect and future prospects by denying reality. You do these things outside of the teachings of Jesus, for some sick dependence on self-affirmation. It's man's doctrine of maintaining power through ignorance that you follow, not God's.
Your God gave you the capability to be rational - I think he wants you to use it rather than squander it in order to convince yourself of your faith.
Anyone who thinks god gave man free will just isn't thinking. Jesus warns us to belive in him or be cut off and thrown, "like sticks," into eternal flames.
How can any rational person consider believe or burn a reasonable, realistic or fair set of options?? If you gave your children the options to eat their veggies or have you burn their fingers off on the stove, the authorities would take them away from you... and rightly so.
To make this scenario even more sickening, god knows IN ADVANCE what the outcome of every 'choice' will be. He knew from the beginning of the world I would write this. He surely knew Adam and Eve would disobey him... so that means he set the whole thing up.
Here it is in a nut shell; God creates these creatures and he makes them imperfect; he gives them total happiness and freedom with one rule in exception; he already knows knows in advance they will break the rule; still, he punishes them and all their descendants forever for breaking it.
All this intervening nonsense about a redeemer amounts to nothing. It should never have been necessary in the first place, and the whole concept of atonement is nothing but cryptic gobbledegook; it still adds up to human sacrifice... primitive bloodthirsty nonsense.
No child ever asked to be born. No child had any choice in the matter. If this god exists he would be the only one responsible for anything any child ever did... and if he exists he is a monster because he creates people he knows full well are going to suffer agonizing torture for all eternity.
Thank goodness he's just a poorly thought out figment of primitive imaginations.
Boxes of bones?
No, this is where they kept the ancient, government issued, ultrasonic vaginal probe...
...the bones were reminders of what happens to the ladies who wouldn't submit.
Kevin, do you think people should have free will but not be judged for their actions and not have to suffer the consequences?
Burning does not equal torture (The "stick" ceases to exist the moment it's burned) but yes, if you have free will, and you use it to disobey God, he reserves the right to judge you as unfit to exist any longer.
Another error you make is this idea that God "Made" people imperfect. This is a fallacy. If God is perfect, how can something he made be imperfect? People inherited imperfection from Adam when he decided to well... disobey God. And now he's dead and his children are imperfect and dying. He doesn't "Know in advance" whether or not they'll break a rule. though he has the ability to see into the future, he has given all mankind a period of time to demonstrate where their hearts lie WITHOUT pre-judging or pre-determining what they'll do.
You can blame God all you want, but if someone acts wrongly and pays for it, they have no one to blame but themselves. We don't ask to be born, but we're here now and we have a role to play as human beings. If we decide to do what is right, we can pray on the basis of Jesus sacrifice for when we make an error out of ignorance or weakness. We'll demonstrate further that we have faith when we make a sincere and earnest effort not to continue to do things that are wrong.
After that, God will apply the sacrifice of Jesus to us, and it will be as though we weren't sinners at all in God's eyes. We'll be declared righteous and free from the penalty of death and can continue to exist eternally.
TLDR: God is merciful and all his ways are justice.
the Obama in your fantasy bears no resemblance at all to the real-world Obama. you are engaged in an epic struggle with a creation of your own imagination.
seek medical help
I have to agree completely with your statement KevinMC. Besides Christianity what other religions do the same? Muslims have a pretty much exact description of their religion and their followers. Also Christianity says that only those who accept him into their heart and soul will make it to heaven, well the question I have to that is what about the Buddhist Monks who never harm another life no matter how big or small? Will they go to hell because they don't believe in Christ?
Yes, according to a mini-comic I found in the bathroom stall at my work the other day. Seems rather arbitrary and unbelievable for a just God to do that, but it need not be said that the core of every organized religion is seperating the 'chosen' from the 'other'; each one making the same claim that their version of truth is absolute, and other people's absolute truths aren't absolute. I'm pretty sure this is an indication that they are ALL wrong.
The president is doing no such thing and you KNOW that. Do you honestly think that telling baldfaced lies furthers political discourse?
1) Our laws are largely based off English Commonlaw - which predates Christianity, and is more closely related to Roman Law that Judeo-Christian Law.
Yes, but you are forgetting that in Roman Law( especially those based off the 12 tables) they took family and other institutions for granted. Meaning that it was assumed that you would keep yourself and your family in line. The 12 tables only gave precedence for a list of procedures. It was assumed that you would keep the morality aspect yourself, not to be used to exclude it from your life.
The 1 st amendment states that you don't have the right to imepede the free excercise of religion, which is what most atheists are trying to do.
Really, that comes as big surprise to me, since even when students ( not the govt.) choose to lead the school in prayer, they are refrained.
That may be your opinion, but there are just as many holes in evolutionary science as you atheists think there are in creationism. Most evolutionists can only speculate on their theory based upon billions of years, yet cannot solve even the simplest of matters. For instance, you say that change came about gradually, how did it come about? Where did the very first things come from? Things don't just appear out of thin air. Second, in order for evolution to involve a change, certain systems in the body have to run independently. Otherwise we know what can occur( cancer). The fact that there is a balance set proves, that organisms can't just change metamorphically without doing damage to other systems.
It's obvious that no matter how much anybody tells you, you will continue to believe that there is no God. And that's okay, if you want it to be. God did give you that freedom of choice. Deuteronomy 30:19 states:
I find it odd that the first books of the new testament were written decades after the supposed christ was to have existed, the miracles, written in hundreds of years afterwards, been translated, rewritten, etc and is taken as literal fact. Then we have people here fear mongering, god gave you free will, but you'll burn in hell. Are religious people inflicted with stockholm syndrome? Has anyone looked up the psychological mentality of god? Kind of sociopathic. I also find it odd they hold love and terrorism as one and the same. The bible, quran, etc, nothing more than "terrorism for dummies".
DB Akron,
To tell lies to justify getting Obama out of office does nothing but give the liberal and the liberal press something to feed on. The truth about Obama, what he has done his first term, the blatant lies from his campaign promises and then the sad blame game he has played has made him the worst president we ever had. Sadly, we have gone from bad to worse, and started with Truman that the 'Buck stops here", to Obama even when he had the super majority did nothing but take no responsibility and blame everything on everyone else. He has borrowed more money then every president from Truman on, our unemployment is the worst since the great depression (and do not believe the numbers you hear because they do not count the people that have given up or have had their checks run out). He says he is a christian but went to a church that was anti-white and blamed everything on everyone, and to say that he did not like the church then why was he member so long. His civil rights records has reversed and sent civil rights back by forty years by calling everyone that does not believe or follow his beliefs as racist (and he may not have said so himself but his silence speaks in volumes). He has thrown his allies, our countries allies under the bus to try and win another election and quite frankly I do not know if this country can handle another four years of him. Two years ago the voters got out and got rid of half of his followers, hopefully the majority of Americans will continue to do the same and show up at the polls and vote in record numbers putting a end to his shameful administration.
But as you can see the truth does not need embellishment, he has caused enough problems that the truth is all that is needed to get him and the ultra liberal socialist out of power.
And as far as MSMBC giving anything but anti Christianity as a basis of their reporting and their shameless lies on reporting paliwood tells me to take anything they say with a grain of salt because that is all their word is worth. They have gone from a great news reporting agency to a mouthpiece for the ultra liberal press. They are the opposite of Fox and both should be research before you believe them but Fox I have found is less apt to embellish the truth the ABC, NBC, and CBS.
It also states that the gov't shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion. It's a wall of seperation that is supposed to keep both sides in their proper place, not just the gov't out of religion - but religion out of gov't as well.
It's not an opinion - it's fact. Evolution Theory is science - rather strong science. In fact, it is one of the most robust scientific theories, on par with Gravitational Theory and Heliocentric Theory.
These two questions only serve to portray your lack of knowledge about the subject at hand, which makes me wonder why you are arguing and not researching further. You clearly need to research further.
-- Gradual changes come about through a variety of factors and over time these gradual changes amount to significant changes between one time and another: but to make it simple there are 3 intrinsic properties of life:
1) Life reproduces with variation (the offspring is different than the parents).
2) Everything dies
3) Organisms better adapted to their environment are more likely to survive
These 3 properties of life result in evolution over a number of generations. The better adapted an organism is, the less change will occur. Organisms with more environmental pressure (lower rate of survival of certain traits) will see more change. There is a nice little video you can watch which illustrates this clearly: "Evolution for IDiots"... youtube it.
That's abiogenesis - not evolution theory. Evolution is how life develops over time, not how it came to be. If you knew anything about evolution, you would know this.
Lol, what is this gobbledygook? Did you copy and paste this 'try to sound scientific' paragraph from another site? Sounds a lot like the irreducible complexity argument in a new package; which you know is nonsense. "Metamorphically" lol... "systems run independently" lol lol. Strawmen.
You assume I'm an atheist because I accept reality and don't delude myself into denialism? Let me tell you something; God would prefer you have faith in him and accept reality, then delude yourself in order to PROVE TO YOURSELF that you have faith. That's not faith, and you aren't fooling God that it's faith either - you are only fooling yourself.
Clubs who's end is money and power will forever try to recruit you... it's just good business.
So plan on getting that door knock.
There are no atheist "clubs" that I'm aware of... they won't be knocking.
And if these clubs are founded on something that has no material being and is solely based on beliefs and old books, they are tax exempt.
But if they're founded instead on real world common goals or ideas or even games, they are not.
Tell me how any of this makes any sense whatsoever.
When MSN writes an article on solar expansion, evolution and the science there are never any believers of GOD on the vine condemning their principles or beliefs and trying to cram it down their throats..I happen to like science but believe in GOD and think both are one in the same, the problem is Christianity gets tagged because they broke off into too many denominations and belief systems..Science on the other hand has very little history to hold on to we know less about our oceans..
For the same reason evolution isn't taught in churches.
Religious beliefs have no place in a tax funded environment unless the church wants to start paying taxes. Just as the church enjoys its tax free status to remain (fail as they may) out of the government and its institutions.
If you want to learn about Jesus, go to church. If you want to learn about evolution, go to a non religious school.
God and Free Will of Human beings don't gel together - unless we look at it as Hindus do. Hindus believe we are the God that we are looking for. The exact phrase is - "Tat Tvam Asi" - meaning "That You Are".
1) The first amendment protects the exercise of religion from the interference of the state.
2) The issue is not voluntary prayer. You can pray all you want but not organized for a "captive audience". By law children must be in school, therefore must be in class, therefore must be subject to what is publicly prayed. I do not want my children subject to some of the outlandish prayers of some traditions in Christianity which are more sermons than prayers anyway. As Jesus said, if you pray go into the closet and shut the door and don't blow your trumpets and horns and announce "here I am praying guys - look at how pious I am".
3) The Genesis account is proclamation and tells us why God created the earth and all that exists, why there is brokenness in the world. Stop using it as a means to battle the theory of evolution. You degrade the biblical account by your erroneous understanding and interpretation and belief as what the scriptures are.
4) It is no wonder people do not believe when you beat them over the head and shout at them to believe. Faith comes by hearing not by brainwashing, positive thinking or choosing to believe. There is no free will when it comes to faith - "You did not choose me, I chose you to go forth and bear fruit". You are either in bondage to God or to the world in matters of faith. To say you choose to believe is a work and is dependent on human initiative. Faith is a gift.
So before you go trumpeting the fundamentalist agenda of righteous Christianity, first go and learn what this means: Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind and with all strength - AND - your neighbor as yourself.
You do a disservice to Christianity proclaiming trash and using politics rather than scripture to talk about matters of faith.
@hungry mongoose And when he had said these things, as they were looking, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they were looking stedfastly into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; who also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye looking into heaven? this Jesus, who was received up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye beheld him going into heaven." (Acts 1:9-11)
The cloud was a Cloaked space ship and the two men in white apparel were his bretheren from the stars, I can't wait until They come back, Jesus wasn't the only one who came from the stars there were many more.
That's why in this country, you are allowed to practice your atheism and others are allowed to practice their islam, judaism, hinduism, etc. The only problem is you think its okay to restrain christians from their freedom of speech.
1) What kind of crap is that? Humans don't give birth to apes. You produce after your own kind. Just like apes don't produce humans.
2) No dispute there!
3) That doesn't mean that they change their genetic makeup in order to adapt. If that were the case, there would be NO extinct species.
You are thinking you can intimidate me by your theories. If you can't answer the question, then just say so. Don't try to make yourself sound important, when you can't explain even the simplest of things. How do you expect me to follow your reasoning then?
Lusitania - did you miss THE VERY FIRST POST? A 'believer of God' made a clear implication that non-believers are damned to hell. I'm pretty sure the proper word for that implication is "condemning".
This is not a topic about star gazing Shuklack now then is it ..
@Shuklack - Betty Bowers sums it up that when they attack, they call it love, when someone returns the favor, they call it persecution.
Shuklack,
To be a true follower of Christ we are told to judge not, and not pass condemnation, but that peoples works speaks for themselves. I can call one out for not walking their talk, but as a christian I apologize for the first post because there is not a christian that pretends to know the mind of God and to condemn anyone to hell is not their right but Gods. So to use hatred in the name of God, is shameful and counterproductive to everything that Christ taught us. But as you have Atheist telling Christians how stupid we are, maybe you can use the same restraint on them that I am willing to do. You have a right to your beliefs because in the end you will be judged for them not I. My duty is to share and then step back and let you make your own decisions.
Humans are apes. Your implication, although wrong, is a silly strawman because change does not occur that quickly.
What do you think variation is if not genetic change? Variation is genetic. Over time, variation adds up. The more environmental pressure there is, the less change will occur because there is less selective pressure on the population. Have you watched the vid yet? Because this is getting redundant.
Humans for instance are very well adapted to our environment, and natural selection puts very little pressure on our species. People with disabilities and diseases that may have otherwise resulted in a certain trait 'dying out' can still breed thanks to modern medicine and our supportive societal structure. There are also recessive genetic traits that continue to get passed on because they are recessive and are not subject to strong natural selection pressures.
What have I not explained to you in the simplest terms? You say things like 'metamorphically' - which isn't even a word... how am I supposed to take you seriously? I assume you meant 'metamorphosis' which is so far off what we're talking about it just makes you sound silly and uninformed. Metamorphosis is what some insects do, from larvae to adult. Like a butterfly. Then you make up some nonsense assertion that 'systems must run independently' which is just ridiculous and you provide no reasoning to back this up or even WHAT THAT MEANS....... I mean really, who buys this stuff?
The supposed Jesus ossuary was debunked years ago. They are simply using a completely unrelated find to try and resurrect their debunked assertions from years ago. It is also a reach to say that the words "rise up" or "raise up" refer to resurrection. The words could simply be an appeal to god to take their souls up into heaven. These people are simply reading into this phrase what they want it to say with nothing to back it up. As for the engraving of the fish, looking at the picture I see no clear indication of any stick figure to represent a man coming out of the fish's mouth. What I see is some scratchings that they are interpreting to be what they want it to be. The problem with "researchers" like these is that they are going into this with an idea in their head about what they are going to find and then are interpreting what is their to fit their predetermined views. This is the worst kind of junk research and is very difficult to take seriously, particularly since their previous claims regarding the "Jesus ossuary" have been widely debunked by many reputable scholars and researchers. The faithful will believe what they want to believe regardless of the evidence or lack there of.
Geeeminy Christmas, look at all the ignorance and intolerence posted above.
Get a grip folks (Alan you have been a naughty boy) the story is about an amazing find in Jerusalem. It may be the first evidence of a Christian enclave in Jewish Jerusalem. It is an amazing find. Accept it for what it is and forget about the hype. Regardless of your beliefs this tomb dates from a time when the interred would have walked the same streets as the Rabbi from Nazareth called Jesus. What an amazing story. And, it may reflect some of his teachings about the after-life. Fascinating.
Let's look at a couple of facts.
1. The New Testament was created in the fourth (fifth?) century out of all the various gospels and documents promoted as gospels of the Christian Church. MEN wrote those gospels and MEN chose which ones to include in the New Testament and which ones to EXCLUDE.
2. Jesus, himself, never claimed to be divine. He refers to his "father" in heaven and to the people to whom he is preaching as having a "father" in heaven. All the same, no difference.
3. The gospels contained in the New Testament were written a hundred and more years AFTER Jesus lived. They are second hand information at best, who knows what changes were made?
4. The entire Bible has been translated and "re-interpretted" so many times as to have lost much of it's original meaning. My favorite being the ten commandments which originally told the faithful not to covet "thy neighbors wives and chattels". Wives plural and lumps the ladies in with the neighbors other belongings.
Ok, truth in advertising time, a disclaimer. I, myself, am an aetheist. But I believe there was a Rabbi, named Jesus, who lived in the part of the middle east then called Judea, whose teachings are worth emulating. I believe he was a human being, just like you and me. I believe he was crucified and died and was buried, period. But his teachings were extraordinary for the time and place and they lived on after his death.
It is totally feasible to think that the "resurrection" referred to was spiritual, not physical, and therefore something that all his followers could look forward to and go to that home in "heaven" where the "father" has prepared rooms, or mansions, for his faithful.
To me, the teachings are much more meaningful when you believe they came from the mind of man, inspired by the divine, if you like, but from "one of us". And whether God or Man, those teachings are worth following.
So don't get caught up in the dogma. None of you know what you are talking about. The so-called Bible has been translated so many times from it's original language, to greek, to latin, to english to god knows what and it has lost much of it's original meaning. Don't get hung up on that. Read the words of the Rabbi from Nazareth and live by them.
And above all, respect this finding for what it is, an amazing piece of archeology and leave the debate to the biblical scholars and theologians.
Politics, by the way, has no place in this discussion, get a life, or go over to the political blogs where you'll find other like minded individuals to have an argument with.
Wow Shuklack some very nice posts. Thanks!
Unhappy-1583758
Actually, I thought Shuklack's explanation was pretty clear.
What was meant in number 1 was that we pass on slight variations... like have you noticed that our generations have gotten taller over time? Ever walk through a 2 century old doorway (duck). That's what they mean by variation... not apes... where's your head at anyway? LOL
You said:
Yes it does. Genes change over time. They register all changes... good ones AND bad ones. The "survival of the fittest" gives the "good" changes a better chance to survival in our gene pool. Species become extinct because either they didn't adapt and evolve fast enough or the change in environment or conditions was too abrupt.
Never mind. Forget I typed anything.
Correct.
Incorrect.
Correct.
Depending on how you define 'creationism' that one is probably incorrect. To an atheist, there is no evidence that God exists. To a believer, all creation is testimony to the existence of God. One does not have to be an atheist to believe that evolution is real. For many believers, evolution is just one more indication of God's greatness.
That an 'imbalanced set' does not survive on an evolutionary scale, but a balanced set might?
I'll make mine short and sweet.
I'm a firm believer that religion was "created" because people are afraid of dying. If there were no religion, what would happen to you if you died? You'd be gone, forgotten about. No one likes that idea, therefore people started spouting "religions".
So, before all of these religions were created, what happened to the people then? Oh wait, I forgot, religions folk don't believe in those people. Apparently everyone has adam and eve as their great great great..... great (you get the point) grandparents (can anyone say inbred?).
Exactly.
@TBenton, the problem is, we don't want you to share your religious beliefs with us, most atheists could care less about your faith, we're also really sick of the fear mongering of "you're going to burn if you don't believe what I believe". Sorry, christians, like many other religions have shown their true colors and evil with their actions over the milenia. As an atheist, I'd rather burn in some mythical hell than spend eternity with a hateful deity and its followers.
Oh I see what you meant by 1)... lol... life reproduces with variation... or are all your children clones?
"The common law of England was largely created in the period after the Norman Conquest of 1066. The Anglo-Saxons, especially after the accession of Alfred the Great (871), had developed a body of rules resembling those being used by the Germanic peoples of northern Europe. Local customs governed most matters, while the church played a large part in government. Crimes were treated as wrongs for which compensation was made to the victim."
From the good ol' Encyclopedia
It's common sense when you are researching something to read past the first line.....
I visited a cemetery last week and saw a grave marked John, and another marked Robert. Both graves were dated in the 1960s.
It must have been the Kennedy brothers, which proves that neither one was buried in Arlington National Cemetery.
There are many of you who have posted verses from the bible, and I appreciate that you all have taken the time to study it so much to be as knowledgeable as you appear to be. Further, I thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's law. I have learned a great deal from all of you and try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind them that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. That is sometimes even the end of the debate.
I do need some advice from you all, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them:
1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not to Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? Are they not from a neighboring nation?
2. I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? How should I go about advertising her for sale?
3. I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Leviticus 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. I don't want to get slapped any more. There must be some secret. Do you know what it is?
4. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Leviticus 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? If so, what should I use to smite them with?
5. I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. (Exodus 35:2) clearly states that he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the police to do it?
6. A friend of mine feels that, even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Leviticus 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there "degrees" of abomination?
7. Leviticus. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle-room here? I'm really nervous about it. Can even I go into a church anymore?
8. Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Leviticus 19:27. How should they die? This is another one of those 'should I get the police to do it, or can I do it myself' questions.
9. I know from Leviticus 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? How about basketball? Do I have to give up my leather golf glove and wear one of those synthetic ones?
10. My uncle has a farm. He violates Leviticus 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does my aunt violate it by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them (Leviticus 24:10-16)?
Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair, like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws (Leviticus 20:14)? It is somewhat embarrassing to think that we would have to get the whole town together to witness our family shame, you know...
It is clear to me that you Christians have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us constantly that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
I don't mean to get snappy on ya commonsense, dealing with creationists tends to get me in an argumentative dizz.
Common law has both pre-Christian (Saxon) and canonical roots. I'd make the argument that Roman law and pre-Christian common law had more of an impact on US law, because the role of the Church in US judiciary (unlike English Common Law) was basically removed from the get-go.
And yet at the same time the first Christians were admonished to to not associate themselves (or even to sit down and eat with) those who call themselves Christians but openly flaunt their sins. They were to set themselves apart and be different. So there is a fine line between "judging" and recognizing those who are openly living in conflict with the teachings of the bible.
There are 72 sects and denominations in Christianity; 72 in Judaism; and 72 in Islam. Some you mightn't have heard of, but they are out there.
Shuklack: I'm sorry if you think my words are a little off( metamorphically). English is not my first language. But if making fun of someone's language skills is how you think you are going to win this argument, you are in fact mistaken.
I am well aware that there are variations in humans. But the variations you speak of are not apt to produce large changes. So for me to believe that apes can change to humans would be a huge step for me. For one, because if apes were to change, then why do we still have apes around? Wouldn't it make more sense, that if evolutionary change were to occur, then all the apes would have changed? Afterall, wouldn't they still be subjected to the same environmental changes that produced the mutations (humans) ?
As for your video, I still have not seen it yet. I plan to later today. Unfortunately, I have get ready for work, now.
Unhappy - Try to use some reason and logic in your arguments instead of opinions. And like Shuklack said, don't assume people are atheist just because they don't believe in creationism. There are plenty of Christians (myself included) that believe in evolution. If you really think the Bible is meant to be taken literally, that is your belief. But it isn't everyone else's.
Good Job Tessmacher (you are Evil you know), my point exactly!
That's a fish? I'm not seeing it.
I disagree. Religion was created, not because people are afraid of dying, but because people are spiritual beings having human experiences, and not the other way around. Even the atheist calls upon a god when he or she is confronted with circumstances that are beyond his control.
Okay. All debating aside, why in the world was a condominium allowed to be built over the tomb if the Orthodox Jews were in such an uproar about it being disturbed? Where is the logic in that?
Kumar is correct, "the just shall live by faith". Though any ancient burial is interesting and filled with intrigue those who trust in Christ Jesus know they won't find His bones, if they do the whole of Christianity is a bust. He rose again, this is what makes him unique to all the other great religious leaders who lie in the cold, cold, ground. Again my belief is based on God's words and is rooted totally in faith alone...my opinion, my choice! (Like the old song; I'd rather have Jesus!)
I do find it interesting that if a non-believer states his faith it's considered his opinion which he has a right to have, however, if a believer (Christian) makes a similar statement of faith he's guilty of "cramming it down everyone's throat". It would seem to many having an opinion is alright "as long as it goes along with mine"!
It's obvious who has something gnawing at their insides....know Jesus, know peace; No Jesus, no peace. If you don't agree with my comment look at all the intolerance and hatred spewed forth by the very people who demand tolerance from others, it happens every time there is a story remotely connected to a living God.
"Even the atheist calls upon a god when he or she is confronted with circumstances that are beyond his control."
Bullypucky TomTom72. Ever hear of "Thou shalt not lie"? I find it funny religitards like you use that and the "even atheists call out for god" when they are being killed. How do you know this? Are you the sick serial killer torturing them before you kill them? Ya, I'm sure many atheists and non believers called out god just to save themselves from the nut jobs that take religion to its most evil level. Tell us TomTom, whens the last time god healed an amputee? Why does he hate the amputees so much? If he is so powerful, how come he cannot grow back a simple limb?
Israel should let them take some bone samples from each ossuary so they can test for DNA...maybe they are the bones of Jesus. If they are then we could clone him and then we'd have the Second Coming and he could put an end to all this craziness going in the world. After all, Jesus was all knowing and he must have known science would reach the point where they'd have the technology to bring him back...
You're all missing the point here. It is clear that the Earth is only 6000 years old. Woman were made from the rib of a man and snakes used to have legs and speak human languages. Don't forget that a 450ft boat carried two of every terrestrial animal on Earth. Oh yeah, God also loves everybody, in fact, he loves everybody so much he's sending every human on Earth to hell just to prove it.
I could go on, but I don't want to amuse myself too much. This is a wonderful historical discovery, don't get me wrong, and could prove to be interesting for the history of Christianity, that's about it.
Skip - best post by an athiest I've seen. As a Christian I pray you look just a bit further. Know that the Bible gospels were copied letter by letter. It was the scribes job to maintain that integrity. If you decide to study the Bible firther, stick with the King James version. Most acurate translation to the english language out there. Yes, there are Bible versions out there that have verses, sections and words changed or removed. asking people to live by the words of JESUS is extremely admirable...many christians forget to do that.
Evil - you quoted quite a bit from Leviticus...Christians believe that Jesus came and FREED us from the laws you quoted. He is above the Laws and the Prophets. We can never be "good" enough for Gods standards...we see that every day. Man can not save himself, Jesus took that burden. Take a peek at the New Testament rather than getting hung up in the Old.
Journal Journal,
You are Wrong, Wrong. Burning is not torture? What is it then, God's loving instruction? Who did you study under, Torquemada??
You use fallacious apologetics, twisting and turning around the issue of god's alleged omnipotence. Too bad that concept paints you into many corners and blind alleys.
God does indeed know every outcome. Do you expect us to believe he obscures his own prescience just to fit into your formula? Ridiculous! Atonement is a ridiculous notion too. How does it work? How would the torture and death of a third party in any way mitigate a crime committed by you?
Are you saying humans were once perfect? Or were they almost perfect, just short of god? That's like being a little pregnant. If they were perfect, they would not have sinned. If they were imperfect, they were just as I said... imperfect.
The major crime of revealed religion is that it requires humans to wallow in self denigration; it relegates humans to the level of beasts of burden, sheep; we are not god's children, we are his chattels... no rational being would ever throw his children into a fire for simple disobedience.
Religion requires humans to abandon their faculties of reason...e.g., anyone who could assert that "Burning is not torture," has left reason behind. Revealed religion hides behind the language of love, when in fact it is actually a form of extortion. It is the same love Torquemanda had for his victims.
Believe or burn is pure extortion. Shepherds don't love their flocks, they eat them and wear their skins.
Man does indeed have free will... he just didn't get it from an imaginary magical creature. He has it because he is a sentient being... sadly when he gets snared by revealed religion, he gives it away.
Anyone else catch this?
But thats religion in a nutshell, an unprovavble assertion!
Ya know, at the end of the day, things aren't dependent on whether we believe in them or not. In other words, God either does exist or he doesn't. His existence isn't dependent on my believing in it or not believing in it. The same is true of gravity, bigfoot, or monsters under the bed. They either exist or they don't. The existence of these things isn't dependent on public opinion, either. If the vast majority of people believe that bigfoots don't exist, it doesn't make any difference as to whether they really do or not. Again, they either do or don't exist.
If the overwhelming majority of the people on this list believe that religion is a man-made thing created out of a desire for man to connect with something bigger, then that's fine. But the fact that most believe this doesn't change whether or not they are actually right. Again, they are either right or wrong and the "vote count" doesn't influence this. In fact, if EVERYONE believed God was a sham, that fact wouldn't make it so.
Bottom line, we can argue on here until we are all tired of arguing. And at the end of the day, even if you convince everyone on here that God does or does not exist, it won't really impact whether or not, in fact, he really does.....
falconer
That road runs both ways, but yes in a nutshell it all boils down to faith and where you place it.
Explain that Reality.
Yet its still a theory. It does have evidence. We all have evidence, but its how the evidence is interpreted. So much science in evolution is based off of assumptions , which can and does affect outcomes. When you say creation is not science, let me break that down farther. Creation is not Evolution. A creationist ( someone who believe in God and he created everything ) is also a scientist. They go to the same colleges, have the same degrees, and have the same credibility.
Even Richard Dawkins is starting to crack a little and at least admits there is a possibility for God. Would you call him a fool now for believing that ? Or perhaps like him and so many others, cant explain how we came into existence, from nothing. How nothing turning into something, non organic stuff, which then turned into organic stuff, which then became cells, and then they mutated , gained information and turning into more complex things, animals, then humans. Not one person has shown me step one to step now of how it all happened. You all have nothing, and its nothing more then its own religion.
Crossfit,
First, look up the difference between a run of the mill "theory" and a scientific theory.
Second,
Yes they go to the same colleges, but no they do not have the same credibility. One PHd student comes to mind (I'll find his name and get back) who researched and wrote a fantastic doctoral thesis on evolution which he did not believe. So, basically, he lied to get the degree. The only reason so called creationists get degrees is to provide their belief with some measure of credibility. This so called "credibility" extends only to those who already believe. I said belief for a reason, they do no research.
Third, any atheist will tell you we do not know if there is a god. The evidence isn't there so we do not believe. If evidence comes available, real evidence not a book, we will reevaluate. Christians, religious people in general really, have the hubris to say "THERE IS A GOD" when they don't really know.
Fourth, evolution deals with life as it exists and changes. It does not deal with where it came from.
Fifth,
So, I take it you have seen a talking snake? How about a burning bush that also talks? No, you argument is invalid. But try picking up a science journal, you may be surprised what it will show you.
Cheers!
As was mentioned in previous posts, the bible was written decades after the death of Jesus, translated, re-interpreted, changed to suit english kings and popes who just wanted a way of controlling their subjects. It is just a book. Who knows what is left from the original and of that, what was actually accurate? I went to Catholic school and even our priest told us that many of the stories in the bible were just that - stories. He specifically mentioned that they do not believe in creation, as is told in the bible. He said that it was a way of explaining how the earth was created by those who, in those times, had no other way of explaining it. How could someone have actually written an account of creation? Did God give Adam and Eve pens and paper so they could document it as it was happening? Weren't they created at the end of the 7 days? How would they know how it happened? Did God dictate the story to someone?
My personal opinion is that there is a god and there was some sort of "intelligent design" involved in creating the earth, millions (or billions) of years ago. Maybe he laid the groundwork for evolution. I am not a scientist, nor am I religious, but I know that I do not have enough information to rule out a creation (but not the biblical version) or straight evolution. I do have enough proven information to know that the biblical version of creation is just a story. That people use the bible to hate or discriminate against others is to go against any sort of moral values that religion is suppose to teach.
His name is Marcus Ross. He says he is a young earther, but the only research he does has nothing to do with YEC. THe below is a good example:
http://scienceantiscience.blogspot.com/2010/11/marcus-ross-two-faced-again.html
Most athiests don't seem like people I would want to have to spend any time with so the good thing about them is that I won't have to put up with them in the next life. Maybe that will be one thing that makes it heaven, no bitter people looking for thier 15 minutes of fame, not caring what the after effects are to thier children, society or the country in general.
Shaking, I can pretty much guarantee you know and like at least one atheist.
Yet another person arguing against evolution that does NOT EVEN KNOW THE DEFINITION OF A SCIENTIFIC THEORY. Seriously, how in all things holy and righteous does a person for a moment think they have a legitimate voice in a discussion about a scientific theory when they DONT KNOW WHAT ONE IS?!? That would be like me hopping into a meeting about, oooo let's see here.... Applied Radiological Measuring Devices and start arguing with them when I have no friggin idea what an Applied Radiological Measuring Device is - the only thing I do know is what a person who knew even less than me told me about them.
A theory is a fact and reason based explanation that can be tested and is capable of being proven false if the evidence demonstrates it is false.
Let me explain how theories work, a theory explains a phenomena - with facts, evidence, and experiments.
Fact : Things fall because of a force known as 'gravity' - HOW AND WHY things fall = Theory of Gravity
Fact: The earth revolves around the sun - HOW and WHY the earth revolves around the sun? = Heliocentric Theory
Fact: Life evolves - HOW and WHY life evolves? = Evoltuionary Theory
Life evolves, it's a fact - it's observable - it's demonstrable - it's an applied science in everything from immunizations to food production... life evolves. Denying that is like denying the earth is round. The Theory of Evolution explains the drivers for how life evolves.
Yea, I explain just about everything I can't explain at the moment as either God's creation or God's will.... works every time! I win the debate because who can possibly argue against faith... it's based on nothing, has no foundation in fact, BUT (a big but) I believe it... it is inarguable. And nothing you will say or do or show me or tell me to read will change my mind. I win.
You can show me 10 scientific steps with 10,000 pages of facts behind each step and I can show you that, at some point in your dissertation, you relied on "theory"... and besides, who's to say God wasn't behind it all? Ha. Gotcha. No one can.
Checkmate Atheists!
The sad thing Shuk is he won't realize what he did.
Which is a perfectly reasonable belief to have.
The only people that annoy me are those that deny the facts and evidence that slap them in the face for the sake of.. what?
Denying reality and being delusional are not prerequisites for being faithful, one can remain faithful and make room for reality. It's when a person's faith refuses to give way to reality that they enter the land of willfull ignorance and psychological distortion.
Without getting into the discussion of what a true scientific theory actually is, the fact that you say right here that there is evidence for it makes the case against your overarching argument. There is no evidence for the biblical account of creation as described, nor is there evidence of a "creator" as described. You say "we all have evidence," in a dismissive way, but I really doubt you are even aware of all of the evidence that is actually known for evolution. "Evidence" for creation, according to a creationist, is simply pointing at creation and saying "look, it's there, which means my god did it."
I'm sorry, but the burden of proof is necessarily much greater than that on those who make seemingly outrageous claims. If Einstein hadn't put the thought and effort into fully extracting and describing relativity and instead had thrown an apple at your head and said, "see, matter and energy are equivalent," he wouldn't have been taken seriously, even if his claims were correct. This is your burden now. The claim is that creation is attributed to a divine creator god, as described by any religious system, yet if you can't explain how that conclusion is reached by any method other than throwing apples at people's heads, you have no basis for being taken seriously.
If you dismiss the evidence for evolution then you are denying the ability of the 5 senses to distill any kind of objective truth from the universe. If one can deny that the knowledge of something, even if it is something they don't like or wish weren't actually true, can be gleaned by observation, as denying evolution would be akin to, then one is denying that knowledge of one's god can be gleaned by observation, including reading the bible, being told what the bible says by any priest or believer, or even Jesus revealing himself to you, because these sorts of religious learnings are accomplished in the same way through the 5 senses. If that ability to discern truth through the 5 senses is not denied, then religion has a LOT of work to do to prove it should be taken seriously as an alternative explanation of the universe.
This is false. A creationist MAY also be a scientist, if he/she is a scientist and also happens to believe in creation. Creationism, however, in the sense that you mean, is not objective science because it hinges on theology and specific religious beliefs, which are very much subjective. I am not aware of a degree in "creationism" though, so your argument would seem to be that: if a non-creationist and a creationist both get degrees in geology, then that implies that since geology is credible then creationist arguments from a geologist are credible scientific arguments. Do you really believe that that represents sound logic? I really hope not.
That's all I have time to address right now. I think you need to separate opinion from objective fact and rethink or rephrase your position.
Do I smell an ecclesiastic cover up? :trollface:
Also, people, Obama has NOTHING to do with this! Why bring him up? How is he a part of this archaeological dig? More importantly why is it that you think everything in existence ties back into politics? It doesn't. This is an archaeological dig for biblicaly related artifacts. Obama didn't do it, get over it.
Next up is evolution. Another non-sequitur to the story. "It's just a theory" is the oldest, most tired, most invalid, most illegitimate argument ever brought against evolution. It has never, nor will it ever, negate centuries of observation and testing. People, to say that there is no evidence to back up evolution is to deliberately ignore the evidence that has been brought to the table for the past 150 years. The fossil record, C-14 dating, genetic mutation, the Galapagos islands....I could go on. Has it ever struck you as odd that only the evangelical Christians are speaking out against and fighting the theory of evolution? What about Jews? They believe in the book of Genesis too, they study it and understand its original meanings better than evangelicals do, and yet we have never heard them rail against the theory of evolution. Do you think they understand something about it that you don't? Nah, who cares, they're just Jews! We have the correct interpretation of the Bible and we're PROUD of it! Nevermind that pride is a sin and humility is a virtue, we're proud of our interpretation of the Bible. Right? Let alone the fact that evolution has a mountain of evidence to back it up and creationsim has nothing.
falconer33
What I mean is it takes faith to believe either way, the arguments for either side are not conclusive.
For instance the Bible says "In the beginning God...." whereas evolution teaches that in the beginning there was nothing, it blew up and we are here as the result of water running over a stone. (Never mind where the rocks and water came from!) The mathematical odds of the latter are beyond comprehension and most improbable unless one denies the existence of a creator. I can not remember his name at present, but one of the foremost experts in the world of anthropology, a renown professor who taght a the greatest schools in the world, admitted Darwin's theory was full of holes and a false theology, however, he also stated that since he did not believe in God that he would stick with the theory of evolution until something better comes down the pike. As for an answer he too was at a loss to explain things.
So............once again it boils down to what a person believes in his heart. It's no big deal to me if someone chooses to disagree with my convictions. If I'm wrong then I was foolish in the eyes of my peers and will die like a dog with no hope of eternal life through Jesus Christ, however, if I'm right I'll avoid an eternity in a lake of fire because I'm trusting in the incorrupt blood that was shed for my sins.....the choice seems obvious to me.....I'll take the Lord Jesus! Best regards, rc
Wrong, evolution has nothing to do with the origin of the universe or the origin of life. Evolution does NOT teach that because that is not a part of evolution theory. Those are entirely different subjects all together, and are actually not relevant in any way to the validity of evolution theory.
Evolution Theory deals ONLY with how life develops/changes over time.
Again, the origin of life IS NOT INCLUDED in Evolution Theory. The origin of the universe is NOT INCLUDED in Evolution Theory.
You are saying that evolution theory is questionable based off things that aren't even a party of evolution theory. Which makes no sense at all.
Well if its fact, then show the empirical evidence. Show the proof of how every thing came to be from the moment in time until now. You state fact, and I have yet seen anyone on any forum in any debate that can tell it from step one until now.
What are you referring to when your talking about radiological devices ? Please dont say their accuracy. I would love to show how inaccurate they can be. Im not dismissing their worthiness, but pointing out once again that there are issues with dating.
Creationists who are well informed and scientists, will agree that Micro evolution is observed and supported , small changes with in the same species to adapt to environment. What an awesome God to make us like that. But what isnt supported is Macro evolution , Goo soup to you theory that has no support, and not one person can explain it from the beginning until present. Please enlighten us.
Actually part of what you say is true and part of it is just stuff you think is true. It's true that certain portions of scripture were changed at different times to suit certain kings and/or popes, etc., but many of the more modern translations have been painstakingly done from the earliest Greek manuscripts. And what's interesting is that these early manuscripts typically agree with each other almost word for word. So while many are under the impression the bible we have today is the equivalent of a 100th generation xerox copy, the fact is that today's modern translations are very good translations of the earliest known manuscripts.
Read the above post 1.99.
That went way over your head, didn't it? It was an example of how ludicrous it would be for me to talk about something when I don't even know what that something is.
Lol, it would take volumes and volumes of 'blog posts' to even begin to detail the evidence for the evolution of one species, much less them all. What you are asking for is clearly unrealistic, and declaring victory after demanding an unrealistic requirement is childish at best.
I suggest you start with: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/ and Intro to Evolution
If you want a specific lab experiment, here's Lenski's : http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/
Please, I implore you to begin learning about the actual science - and from religious sources that only serve to misinform and distort. In fact, I have an example of the typical mentality of the denialist with none other than Richard Lenski (from above experiment) Lenski Dialogues
The Evil Tessmacher
Ref: #1.62
You are going to have to check with our muslim friends or possibly our Jewish friends for the answers to your questions. Christians believe that when Christ sacrificed himself on the Cross that the Old Law was fulfilled and ceased to be relevant. To get your answers according to Christians you could try reading the New Testament.
The inscription could be read as "Divine Jehovah, raise up, raise up," or "The Divine Jehovah raises up to the Holy Place," or "Divine Jehovah, raise up [abbreviated name]." NOTE: From the 1st Century.
Ezekiel 11:12:"and YOU will have to know that I am Jehovah, because in my regulations YOU did not walk and my judgments YOU did not do, but according to the judgments of the nations that are round about YOU, YOU have done.’”
You are missing the point. Evolution is the process by which organisms change over time in response to environmental pressures. It does not, nor does it need to, provide a full lineage of how organisms evolved from day 1 (although other scientists are mapping these lineages).
Secondly, we have substantial empirical evidence for evolution, including fossil records, genetic data, and even concrete evidence of organisms altering over time. This is empirical evidence and it consistently supports evolution.
Shuklack:
Would you not agree there had to first be life in order for it to develop and change, To separate the two in your words "makes no sense at all".
You have your religion, I have mine. (religion is a belief) I do not need to argue the point any longer because I'm satisfied with my belief, and as Granddad used to say: "convince a man against his will, he's of the same opinion still" Lord willing you will find peace in the future, it's a nice place to dwell! rc
I believe that would depend which Bible you get - the most common Bibles used in homes and churches are not based off modern translations.
Yes, i would agree. But the origin of life and the process how how that life develops are two different things entirely - and Evolution Theory does not address nor deal with in any way how life originated. It's not really relevant.
For example of how it's not relevant: A newborn infant grows up to an adult, gets a job, gets married, has kids, dies... etc. That process can be observed and documented without having to know where the baby came from or even how the baby came into being. It's not needed to see the process of that child's life.
Evolution Theory is the process - it's not the origin.
No, seperation of two discrete issues is the basis of logical thought. These issues are interrelated, but are functionally distinct. The process of evolution is not the same process as abiogenisis. The theories do not overlap, and lumping them together is foolhardy.
DamonWV -
Are you an adult? What you're asking for is beyond the scope of forum posts. It's not Shuklack responsibility to educate you. It's all out there. Please don't play dumb. Yes it will take some time to learn, but if you have the desire you will find all of of the answers you're requesting from Shuklack.
it is like all we can do is argue among ourselves.
Genesis CHAPTER 1 VERSE 1:"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."
Let God tell us the Truth, for he is the alpha and the omega. never had a beginning,will never have an end. He wasnt only there when the earth itself was created, he created it.
evolution is theory, God is truth.
Shuklack
I'm "throughly" convinced the KJV is the only way to go.
*sigh*
I will always be a big proponent of religious freedom, and unfettered ability to believe what you wish.
That stated, I am continually amazed at how f#cking stupid religious people are. Seriously, if you have half a brain you cannot believe this crap. Anyone being intellectually honest can be at most spiritual, but not dogmatic.
I have no idea if god(s) exist, but if so, it/they do not resemble anything that is talked about in church.
EngEsq
"interrelated" and "lumped together" the same but different?
Life.......the evolution of life........seems like it would be hard to have one without the other.
Yes, things may be connected and yet functionally distinct. The manufacture of a computer chip is related to running a computer program, but the means of the program functioning as it does is unrelated to the manufacturing process for the CPU.
A computer chip... and a program running on the computer... hard to have one without the other, but understanding one is not a prerequisit for understanding the other.
Not restoring many comments. Let's not turn this thread into a discussion about whether or not G-d exists. It's off-topic. Thanks, folks.
Lots of political derails, as well.
clebro, You are suspended for a day for violating rule # 1 of the Code of Honor.
ckon
Thank you very much for your kind words. They are appreciated. If I ever decided to adopt an organized religion it would probably be Buddhism. Pretty much the same philosophy, but without all the dogma.
Have great day and wonderful life.
Skip
I think it has been pretty clearly explained why the two are distinct. This isn't a matter of opinion, either. They are in fact functionally distinct and in fact the theory of evolution contains nothing about the origin of life, it only discusses the process of existing life.
Do you need to know where something came from in order to describe it?
One does not need to know the process of evolution to know the process of abiogenesis, or vice versa. Do you need to know how a child gestates in the womb to describe the child once it is born? Do you need to know how a sperm fertilizes an egg to describe the life of that child?
I even used an example about a baby above to explain this to you, in the most plain, simplistic, and logical way possible. The example makes it abundantly clear. .
Wow, did this advertisement work!
Elvis...is that you?
Shuklack/EngEsq
Got to go back to work; Thanks it's been fun!
Fare thee well!
rc
Skip, I always enjoy your posts! Sean, Shuck, Constitutionthumper, and all the rest fighting for people to use logic and reason: Thanks! It's so nice to know there are rational and logical homo sapiens walking around!
Background: I used to be Catholic and went to Catholic school my whole life where I was taught about the theory of evolution beside other Catholic teachings. We had religion class every day all 13 years of schooling. I went to school to be a neuroscientist and after about 4 years of college and a year of research I decided to be a philosopher instead. I blame taking logic courses as electives for that. Although I always knew that I really liked philosophy it wasn't lucrative. I digress. Now, I am agnostic. Being agnostic (for those that don't know) means that I am fukky aware that "God's existence has not nor may it ever be proven but I have also seen little evidence for and therefore have a hard time believing in the classical verson of "God" (Judeo-Christian "God" and eastern versions of "God"). In short. I don't know but I would love to and am currently researching and questioning either theory.
I definitely believe in evolution and I don't know anyone who has seen the physical evidence could possibly think any differently unless they were in denial to support their presuppostions. I don't believe in blind faith. Everything, especially the decisions we make about our core belief system should revolve around logic (something that this supposed "God" gave humans). I've heard people call that the work of satan and at that point I stop talking because there is nothing I can say to these people without becoming so angry I end up shooting myself in the foot because I'm no longer educating but screaming at a brick wall of blind (reasonless) faith.
Crossfit,
Richard Dawkins has not "Cracked." He is simply being intellectually honest... as true scientists are. They admit science does not "know everything." They admit the realm of possibilty is infinite.
However, science must operate in the relam of probability and there is where belief loses this argument. The probability the universe began with a bang 13-14 billion years ago is quite high. Testable, observable, measurable and predictable evidence points to it.
The probability the earth is 4 billion years old is quite high and there are literally mountains of evidence that point to it. The probability the earth was created only 6000 years ago by Yahweh and Jesus rose from the dead after sacrificing his life to placate his father, (himself) is infinitely low... there is ZERO evidence for it.
The Bible is not evidence; it is the testimony of believers. The Virgin Mary has never appeared to anyone who didn't already believe in her. If she were to appear to a person who had absolutely no foreknowledge of her we might have a witness with some credibility, otherwise the eyewitness testimony of believers is not reliable... as any Judge will tell you.
The fact you can dig up Civil War cannon balls outside of Atlanta Ga., right now is not scientific evidence for Scarlet O'Hara and Rhett Butler.
RealityCheck,
Who is the narrator of Genesis? Who witnessed all those events? No one knows. No one knows who wrote ANY of the bible; the authors names were applied hundreds, even thousands of years after the fact.
So you would rather place your faith in the hands of obscure, unknown, primitve people who believed in all sorts of magic and lacked even a rudimentary knowledge of simple facts of nature you and I take for granted, simply because there is a remote possibility you could spend eternity suffering agonizing punishment.
According to you, it's better to abandon reason; to ignore what mountains of evidence tells us and instead, accept unverifiable, convoluted, cryptic nonsense because there is some risk. That is called hedging your bets and it is the coward's way out.
If humanity simply avoided all risk we'd still be living in trees.
Ditto. Doesn't look like a fish to me at all, unless fish back then had scales that ran in opposite directions. Methinks these 'researchers' are finding what they WANT to find, not finding something, and then figuring out what it is.
OK, there seems to be to specific trains of thought here. One creationism and the other is the big bang theory.
Now I have a choice thankfully. I can believe that an ordered universe of known laws exist due to the intervention of an omniscient and omnipotent being or
I can believe that the reality that we are experiencing at this instant is a result of when nothing exploded.
Sally -
Honestly? You didn't see this one coming?
Seriously, though, Shuklack is putting out some good information. Though, I have to say (as a non-biologist) that it's a little individual-heavy and less coherent due to the lack of population genetics. Of course, I suppose that's all these guys could wrap their heads around. Math is not their strong point (1 is 3, 3 is 1).
Like I said atheist always come on the vine when the topic involves Christianity only to condemn religion as a whole, very minimal do you see it vise versa..Why? They simply don't know or have proof, they are desperate for answers alone in their hearts where as a Christian has the Father Son and Holy Spirit.
Lusitania -
So there wasn't an overload of morons cluttering up the thread on the overlaid pictures of the Eagle Nebula (Pillars of Creation)? There aren't idiots running around throwing out stupidity in the abortion threads, or the evolution threads, or the astronomy threads? And I should discount any that I saw because you did not approve of it/know it was happening?
See, this is what we atheists mean when we talk about the PRIVILEGE of religion: you (and society in general) approve of going out, "spreading the faith," "baptizing and witnessing," etc. When atheists fight back, you keep on keeping on, because you don't know better. When an atheist dares to do something like, I dunno, write a book? He's "strident," "militant," and "corrupting our youth." It's bull@!$%# propaganda, that's what it is.
Some people (some claiming to be atheists, or agnostics, though they seem less than savvy about the actual meanings of those words when pressed) claim outspoken atheists are just as bad as fundagelicals. Right. Because the outspoken atheists are trying to force mandatory prayer on public meetings and schools (wait, nope), and trying to force women to give up 9 months of their lives for the crime of enjoying sex (wait, nope), and trying to force women to give up their jobs (wait, nope), and trying to force our military to become a warrior caste for god (wait, nope), and disrespecting the Muslim population and holding rallies calling them murderers and scum (wait, nope), and arguing against the inherent decency and dignity with which people should be treated (wait, nope), and on and on and on.
Oh yes, there are some idiot atheists out there. Belief or non-belief do not a good person make. It's just that actual, skeptical non-belief seems to have a lower proportion of @!$%#s. Not only that, but it's also got a lot less political pull than the religiotard base.
TLDR: Get your damn, dirty religious hands off my science! "God did it" will be marked as 0 points, and you will be sent home with a letter for your parents!
Self-delusion is not much of an 'answer.'
mgates- Thank you so very much for the nice comment. I can't tell you how much I appreciate it. Wow, two compliments and 25 approval votes. It's likely to turn my pretty little head.
My very best to you all, have a great life.
skip
Wait, you mean I get to CHERRY PICK what part of God's Law I'm going to have to follow? Are you SERIOUS?
You mean that half of God's Law is obsolete, useless, irrelevant, and completely does not apply? Wow! Who would have known that half of the entire Bible does not mean a single thing! That's fantastic! I get to ignore totally half of everything God said. What a relief.
You Christians really slay me. I mean, wow... You get to pick and choose what rules you're going to follow. Sign me up!
LOL @ all the haters collapsing the comments
Kevin:
I believe we've talked before?
First to answer you question: 2Ti 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
(KJV) And.... 2Pe 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
Your religion seems as foolish to me as mine to yours, there are two religions in my book; man's and God's. You can't imagine how I would be foolish enough to place my faith in the Bible, I can't imagine you would be foolish enough not to. I've know too many people to put my faith in man.
As for your views on "remote possibilities" and an eternity and suffering agonizing punishment I pity anyone who winds up in a lake of fire.
Lastly a note on cowardice. The root of the word is "cower" and those who reject the blood of Jesus to save them will find out just what it's like to cower......cringing and trembling before God Almighty at the white throne of judgment (Revelation 20:11) is not some place you'll want to wind up. With every fiber of my being I'm trusting in Christ Jesus alone to save me. This is not "lord of the rings' my friend but the real deal....... (2Pe 1:16 ¶ For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. KJV) I believe the person who wrote this -Peter- means what he says, he spent time with the Lord you did not. If you read my previous posts you know where I stand, I make no apologies and can deal with the possibility of looking foolish in your eyes based on my respect of your opinion. You are not alone in what you think.....neither am I. Time will tell my friend, I hope the doubt that dwells in your heart will someday lead you to to seek the truth. I have peace in my heart through the Lord Jesus Christ, it was not always that way and I would never want to go back to the hopeless empty life I once led even though I had the world by the tail! I wish you well and would suggest you spend a little time in the Pauline epistles (Romans-Philemon) in the New Testament of the Authorized King James Bible accompanied by prayer in seeking God's face before you throw in the towel on Salvation. I do not know your age but what will it hurt to do a little soul searching, a few weeks of your time in God's word is worth it if it keeps you from a lake of fire in the end. As for me, I know He is mine and I'll live forever with the Lord in Heaven, hope to see you there!
It really doesn't matter what you say. You are a human, not a god.
"God" has NEVER told me to do anything. Never.
Nor has he ever forbid me from doing anything. Not once.
A person would have to be a complete fool to believe that doing what another person tells them to is going to somehow get them into "God's" good graces.
So you see, Kumar, that even if there was a 'god' that was in control of it all, we have absolutely NOTHING to fear!
:D
No one can prove that there really is a god, and no one can prove there is no god. A lady once told me that everything had to come from somewhere, so I asked her where god came from and she told me that he had always been there which is the typical answer from the religious community as they don't have an answer. As far as religion goes, its just a way for a few people to control the masses.
Well the Pope's on Twitter now, so I guess the masses are controlling him.. wonder if he'll get addicted to tweeting
David Nelson: That question you ask relies upon false assumptions. Asking when, where, and how God came into being implies a couple of facts. One is that there could possibly be a time before God existed, which implies that time itself exists independent of our universe. Time is a product of the created universe. Before the universe existed, time (or space) did not exist, and therefore any God that happened to exist at one point, existed at all points. Thus He is of necessity eternal and infinite.
stoopid,
Were you by any chance smoking grass when you came up with that bit of twisted illogic? The last two lines gave me a real giggle. If there is no space, there are no points and thus, by your "reasoning", no Gods because there's nowhere for them to exist. Which, of course, leads to the inescapable conclusion that no god is eternal and infinite because no god exists.
God doesn't need a place to exist. He is outside of space and time. He is infinite and ETERNAL. BY HIMSELF.
Amen
If you speak of the Father and Spirit Mother and of the Christ yes! They are the infinite. But the creator to this universe and world, well not so much. But he is however on his own.
Ok, let's drop the bible, pretend it has a few bits of good advice and a lot of craziness. Let's forget "God" a second, the name Jesus. Also, let's forget Hawking, Asimov. Let's forget science here a second, too.
Now, weren't you born with the knowledge of right from wrong? Don't you, or at least a long time ago didn't you, want to help wounded kittens or crying children? Don't you feel something when someone lost a family member to cancer? Go with that. If you feel connected to spirituality, great, follow God or the Gods or whatever faith you want, to my knowledge there wasn't a world-wide vote which said which religion was right (and even if there was, there's no proof.) The SAME goes for science. Think it's great? Become a scientist, not your thing? Don't.
BOTH sides of the argument have lost the plot. It's not about what you believe in, it's about what you do with your life. If you're a scientist you should be against animal testing and if you're a christian you should be against persecuting people because they're different than you. You do NOT need a book to tell you what God or Science made you BORN with. That's your bible...your feelings and your sense of right from wrong.
Also, piggy backing this debate here.
God can either be perfect within a limitation, because perfection is only perfect within a limitation. Or, God is imperfect yet forever becoming a greater being in a limitless amount of existence, hence, evolving. There is no magical way perfection can be perfect without something to be perfect within. You can't be perfect at things that don't even exist. There has to be a confined area for perfection to exist in, and that would denote there is a limitation.
It isn't that God is perfect in ways people can't fathom, but people really need to lower their expectations of what perfect means. You guys can't even figure out the definition of the word. For instance, God, or the Gods, cannot help people with direct intervention in order for free will to exist. That is a perfect limitation. Finding ways to do it anyway while maintaining free will is evolution and change.
Sorry, but that is a learned behavior. Otherwise we wouldn't have touched that hot stove as a child or showed no fear when walking into the street.
We had to be taught right from wrong. As a child, we are the most dependant species on this planet.
Psychologists say babies know right from wrong even at six months
RandomFox said:
Well, Jesus disagrees with you. He said that He is the only door that leads to God. So I have to ask myself this: do I trust RandomFox, or Jesus?
Jeff said:
Then please tell me how much minimum space is required to hold God? What is His dimension, mass, volume, etc? The truth is this is a silly comment. God, who created spacetime, does not require spacetime to exist. He exists in a different realm completely, that neither you nor I could possibly imagine.
Stoopid your comments speak as though they are fact. You cannot prove them so you need to start by saying "I think" (which of course I don't think you do).
Can God make a rock so heavy, even God can't lift it?
Seriously? It's 2012. Why does ANYONE still believe in any mythology?
stoopid #2.12
(God) exists in a different realm completely, that neither you nor I could possibly imagine.
Then why do you and other "religious" people do just that?
What you just claimed is a fantastic juxtaposition of sciences. I presume you have the 5 PhD's it would require to make such an informed pronouncement? Or are you just talking out of an alternate orifice?
I see, it's the orifice.
I have actually read RandomFox's words...sooo....the only one I see any physical proof of existence of, is RF.
Saying that that carving looks like Jonah and the whale is a huge stretch. Does anyone realize that the names Jesus, Joseph and Maryam (mary) were the most common names in ancient Israel. Or that Maryam in Hebrew/Aramaic means :bitterly wants a child. Joseph means : God shall add and Jesus means: the savior or God is salvation.
I just have one question, so god created man in his image, does that mean that there are hot alien chics out there in the universe? Now that be a descovery worth looking for.
Nothing mythical about it. Got a better explanation from step 1 to now ?
Only about a hundred thousand. An all-powerful, all-knowing, all-encompassing deity is about the farthest thing from likelihood possible.
Damon, you keep saying the same thing over and over again - let me give you some sort of sense of the scale of what you're asking - what you're asking for is a chronological history of everything that has happened in the past 13 billion (that's 13,000,000,000,000) years (13 * 10 ^ 12 for my fellow super nerds).
Let me say this - I am not an atheist. To claim to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is or is not a creator is pure, distilled ignorance - the deadliest poison ever concocted, and likely the reason we will blow ourselves up before we become a truly space-faring race.
IF there is/was a creator, and the creation of everything we know was a deliberate circumstance, then does it not intrigue you, at the very least, to know the mechanics behind creation - the "how" to the "why?" For the first time in recorded history, we have the means and the money to answer these questions!
Are you so afraid of the answers that you would willingly partake of the vial of distilled ignorance, and shun any who do not? Are your beliefs so fragile, that to learn that organic matter can be created from inert materials (it can, FYI) would shatter it completely?
Not a valid answer. Even Richard dawkins, renown scientist, finally admits there is a small chance of a god. Go figure
Sp ,
From a view that God already exists, there is no desire to know how God created the universe. From a neutral standpoint ( if there is ever such a thing ) If God does exist, then the event would be super natural, because there is no way something can come from nothing. Ex Nihilo nihil fit ( from nothing, nothing comes ) Now back to a Biblical View, If God does exist, and I do believe in him, and He is not capable of lying, or being infallible, he inspires his people to write about the events of history. Now yes men are fallible, so the argument is that men could write anything.. yes yes, I heard this argument before too. Its also a weak argument from world view ahtiests , because once again from a biblical perspective , if God does exist, he will make sure that men dont make stuff up and make sure that the word of God is written down.
These debates always come down to one thing. People dont want to know any truth, because they want to reject the notion of a God, they dont want to be held accountable for their life. Its that simple. The answers are there to any question asked, but regardless of how good an answer is given, people just try to find another to ask, and scoff at any given. Never ending cycle.
Damon
They use this circular logic that is actually very illogical. You are very right that they don't want to face the fact that there is a God. It is painful to find out that you are a dirt bag and need the saving grace of Christ until you realize that it is so freeing
I agree. Christians despise the truth. Take, for example
This is impossible, and completely untrue. Nothing can exist outside of time, because all that time is is a measure (length) of existence.
We don't 'want' to, we do. Because "God" doesn't make any sense.
Here it comes. That threat of hell again. LOL
This is why people hate Christians. It's that simple.
After 250,000 years of Australian Aborigines living on this planet is anyone having THIS conversation with the "experienced culture"? Just wondering, cause the rest of this has only done justice to killing each other and finding better and more horrific ways to do it....
We have evidence of African tribal elders "knowing" star configurations and mappings that are not available to the Naked Eye, but the Hubblescope and others are "finding the same information" out in the same locations. IF you've never been exposed to your OWN Spirit which is always a part of you and you are part of it (before, during and after this Life), it may be time for all of you to realize that "time/space" is inconsequential to either the Multiverse suppositions OR the Spirit led knowledge that allows early Medicine People (even without plant medicines) to do things like "know what to do next" (or we'll all be killed).
Aside from the idea that I have NOT seen anything in here that puts God inside Each and Every one of us (which is the common denominator of earliest cultures in known prehistory) I would like to have any of you (aside from myself) who has survived a "coma" (mine was only 5 days) or had an NDE (near death experience) to show us a reason we should believe something about nothing (which I see described here, almost verbatim of the Existentialist Conversations).
The Mystery is that we have a joining of "mysteries" here that people are still not seeing the Connection of all of us, one to the other, we focused on the Disconnections. In this culture that I have been able to see as my own, but not participating in fully, there are many stories of "knowledge, wisdom, truth, etc." that would show not only that there is a MORE Supreme Being than any of us are, but also that Creation is continual, nonstopping and leads to subsequent changes, etc.
Before anyone decides to declare the absolute and infidelic truths here, learn what it is that would be considered "profound truth" and you'll find that YES babies "come equipped", but once they are IN our realm from 4 to 6 years they have forgotten where they came from and what that part of them is (not was).
This "yearning to go home" is that we ARE all this Spirit stuff of the Universe that is WHAT we came from before we were conceived in the womb of our mothers. And in this culture that I am showing here it is our mother, elohini, that we go back to whether we are in ashes, full body or maimed and aptly destroyed by an H-bomb or A-bomb, Laser guided missiles, etc.
Are we "awake" to our Spirit, our God, our Truth or are we really just going along sleeping because someone else said, Believe this? ALL of US came from the "same place", so why are we now different... because of the History on this planet that is only a few 1000 years old... how does that compare to the age of our Spirit selves which were likely born of some Cosmic event Billions of years old?
Just curious what the rhetoric is about here?
C_P
Don't have to figure, I readily admit myself it is possible. Re-read my words again, I said "about the farthest thing from likelihood possible." My interpretation of that is that it is incredibly unlikely. Very remote, infinitessimal chance. A chance exists, but it is so slim as to be virtually non-existent. Did you not read my statement to mean that?
You'll find most atheists will admit the possibility of a god's existence. We see little evidence in the world around us to support the theory, but as it can't be disproven, one must admit the possibility.
Patently ridiculous. Why would I NOT want to be held accountable for my life? I'm a good person, I'll happily stack mine against anyone elses, or even against a ridiculous ideal (though I certainly may be found wanting). I don't reject the notion of god (why do you keep suggesting we do?) I just disagree that thee is anywhere near enough evidence that any exist. I'd LOVE to live forever with my family and daughters in heaven, who wouldn't want that?! I simply think it is a farce. I DO wish it wasn't, but I see nothing that convinces me it isn't.
Guys, try defining 'right and wrong.' some might seem obvious requirements for a stable society that the faithful and the secular can all agree on (though perhaps not the punishment for breaking them).
Other things...well there's plenty of examples of actions that religion X says nothing about (or even encourages), that religion Y utterly condemns...
Yes but the word itself is nothing more than just a word that we use to say how we measure time. But is time really something that is tangible ? I would say that time doesnt affect God, its not even something we can imagine , infinite..
No one is threatneing any one with hell. Funny you bring that up though , hell that is. Perhaps your thinking about it yourself. If someone is stating being held accountable, then its showing that there is a role model in life to try to live your life like. Something of absolute truth and morally correct. If we just state were a good person, then that is an invalid statement, because there is no way to define Good. Good can mean anything to different people. What we think of Good , maybe someone elses evil.
stonedog34 don't you just hate that God is so far above your comprehension that he will not fit into your little human box that you want to put him in....
Yet, oddly enough, you comprehend her well enough to know you can't comprehend her?!
You make my brain hurt.
That is the most sense I've seen made by the faithful here yet. I agree with it too! If there is a God, it wouldn't be some omnipotent male being sitting on a heavenly throne. It would be even greater than anything religion has ever come up with. It would be outside and inside the universe and time. It would encompass everything seen and unseen, known and unknown.
Despite some people thinking they know all there is to know about God, they could never do it. A finite being could never get complete information about something that is infinite.
Religion needs a major overhaul.
Stonedog quoted me saying:
And then he responded:
So I say thus: Dude! Don't know much about time? Don't you know that time is relative? Five minutes elapsing for a man traveling at the speed of light, will be centuries to a man going relatively slower. There is no such thing as absolute time. In the beginning of the universe, when the universe was the size of a baseball, time was far different than it is now. Time is the result of the physicality of the universe. Outside the universe, there is no time. Put another way, time is a term used to define the motion of energy and matter. The way things were a moment ago, the way things are now, and the way things are going to be is what time is. If there was nothing in the universe, time would not exist.
Oh, never mind. I give up. It's now 4:30 pm, throughout the universe. Time for Gilligan's Island.
Time was invented so that everything doesn't happen all at once. :P
you believe this ? or you was just making some off the wall statement ? i never know with people now a days.
Damon:
Yes, of course. In the early life of the universe, time was much faster. It was like a watch wound up. Time has, since then, continuously slowed down. That's why the outer edge of the universe seems to be expanding at an increasing rate. It actually is only increasing relative to us, because time in our part of the universe is actually slowing down, making it look like the other parts are speeding up. Like when you drive on a highway, and take your foot off the accelerator. The other cars pass you, i.e. look like they are going faster than they were before, when in reality it is your car that is slowing. In the early stages of the universe, the four forces were all unified--electro-magnetism, gravity, weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force were all a single force.
So my point is this: time is relative. When the universe was tiny, a billion years would be like a single day now. That is why the Biblical account of creation taking only 7 days is not that far off. 7 days in the beginning, would be closer to 12 billion years. Anyways, no big deal.
Quite a theory to be sure. Couple questions though, How did this cosmic Baseball get there, what was there before it existed ? How did it come into existence ? What caused it to explode ? Last but not least, where you there to witness all of this, or do you have any recorded data from some one who seen this event happen ? If not its nothing more than just a guess, one that contradicts itself, but still interesting to hear what some people think
@DamonWV I, of course, have no idea about what books (except one) you have read. That being the case, I will give you some links that have information on the questions you've asked. I'm giving you links because you asked some woppers. I am not going to write it all over again when someone else already wrote it.
Standard Model of particle physics
Big Bang
Introduction to M-theory
String theory
Unified field theory
Virtual particle
Gravitational singularity
Cosmic microwave background radiation
That should get you started. Sorry there is so much. Way to much to be covered by a few paragraphs. The knowledge and understanding gained so far is awesome, but far from complete. Hopefully we will have more understanding of the universe soon, now that the Large Hadron Collider is in operation.
@stoopid Saying "outer edge of the universe" isn't really correct. Current understanding says that the universe is infinite, and there is no edge. What there is, is a limit to what we can observe in the universe. That limit is dictated by the speed of light.
It is believed that the universe is 13.5 billion years old. So any object, that emits detectable radiation, and is further away from us than 13.5 billion light-years, we will not be able to see. There hasn't been enough time since the beginning of the universe for the radiation to travel that far.
Also, if you looked through your telescope at the furthest object we can see, you would be seeing it as it was 13.5 billion years ago. During that light's 13.5 billion year journey, the object that emitted it has continued to travel away from us at an ever increasing rate, due to the expansion of the universe. So now that object we observed as it was when it 13.5 billion light years away, is much further away.
I hope I explained it well. I understand what I'm talking about, but am not so good at explaining. I'm sure glad there are other people who are more adapt.
Im well aware of the Bing bang model ( and it is just that) , and all the others you mentioned.. But none of them explain how existence came into being. The universe can not come from nothing. Your still basing your ideas off of assumptions, which have no scientific emperical data to go by. I wish i had time to pick that all apart but I have to get to a doctors appointment. I will be back to finish up later on.
On a side note, even richard dawkins is starting to come around stating he said there could be a possibility of a God.
Also about your virtual particles
The primordial fireball, referred to as ylem, is the theoretical radiation-dominated phase of the universe. Such speculations as this indicate the extremely tenuous nature of much modern hypothesizing about early cosmology.
Although this cosmic egg is speculation based on current scientific empirical research, it has been a fruitful area for creative imagination, as evinced by theorists ranging from Weinberg’s The First Three Minutes (1977) to Gribbin’s In the Beginning (1993). The cosmic egg problem was penned by Hoyle as a “persistent weakness in the theory” that is “becoming ever harder to overlook” and can be understood by picturing what happens when a bomb explodes. Fragments are thrown into the air, moving in essentially uniform motion. Uniform motion is inert, incapable of doing anything constructive. It is only when the bomb fragments strike a target—a building, for example—that anything happens. Bombs exploding indoors and those exploding in a remote place in the open produce very different results. Hoyle adds, in the Big Bang no targets exist because the entire universe takes part
Criticism such as this has motivated the modification of the theory, modification that still continues. Another concern is that, according to general relativity theory, the original explosion supposedly came from a singularity, a mathematical point where the existing laws of nature no longer apply. Negating known laws of physics solves many problems, but is actually a metaphysical solution—literally one that is “beyond physics.” For example, the primordial egg is hypothesized to have had an “infinite” temperature and density, or at least a temperature level and density far beyond that now known to be possible—a level beyond physics.
Burbidge (1992, p. 120) notes that we still lack a reasonable theory as to how galaxies and larger structures could have formed out of, or by, an expanding universe. This situation renders doubtful, or at least argues against, the formation of galaxies by the gravitational collapse process. Ideas proposed to solve this problem include cosmic strings or fluctuations (the theory that the universe consists of thin, smaller-than-atomic-sized string-shaped particles) that occurred at a very early stage of Big Bang evolution (Davies and Brown 1988; Green, Schwarz, and Witten 1988). Both of these theories cannot be directly empirically tested at the present time—thus is beyond physics.
The Big Crunch
Some cosmologists also speculate that the original cosmic explosion will eventually slow down and produce what is called the Big Crunch (also called the closed universe theory). This theory assumes that the level of matter in the universe (and thus the amount of gravity) is great enough to allow the universe to expand only so far, and then it will start to collapse on itself (Saslaw, 1991; Saunders et al., 1991; Silk, 1989). These scientists estimated that the cosmos will begin contracting about fifty billion years from now.
The Big Crunch is largely a reverse of the Big Bang: at the end of the universe all galaxies, stars, atoms, etc., will eventually collapse; then the enormous pressure will break down all matter back into its original constituents. Stars and planets will fuse into hot plasma, producing another primordial egg and the universe will die. Most astronomers, however, currently believe the opposite view—viz, that the evidence derived from research in the 1990s that the universe’s expansion is accelerating indicates that the universe will expand forever. As the heat is dissipated across greater and greater areas, the universe will grow increasingly cold. As a result, it will eventually die by freezing (a view called the open universe).
Why is Criticism of the Big Bang Suppressed?
Big Bang cosmology is typically presented as established fact; instead of the data and observations that do not fit serving to motivate scientists to more carefully evaluate the Big Bang, the observations are sometimes arbitrarily dismissed because true believers conclude they must be wrong. This situation illustrates the Kuhnian hypothesis: although the opinion of some astronomers is that as evidence against the Big Bang accumulates, this evidence is often explained away or dismissed, sometimes by ostracizing the astronomers who are uncovering the evidence. Unfortunately, though, the tenacity with which this worldview is held prevents an objective evaluation of the evidence, both that in favor, and that against this belief (Spetner 1997). Hoyle explained that, as a result of the concerns reviewed above, the major “efforts of investigators have been in papering over holes in the big-bang theory, to build up an idea that has become ever more complex and cumbersome” (Hoyle 1984, p. 84). He compares this to the idea of epicycles developed by Ptolemy in the second century A.D. To account for the fact that the planets moved in complicated paths across the sky with respect to the nearly fixed background of stars, Ptolemy suggested that planets “revolved around the earth in a sequence of embedded circles, epicycles, circles on top of circles.” This complex system eventually failed in spite of the fact that Ptolemy’s model was remarkably successful at predicting the position of planets and was used for centuries. Unfortunately, “it may well be that proponents of the big-bang are making a similar misjudgment” (Hoyle 1984, p. 84). The fact is, a model that is fundamentally wrong can make successful predictions, as was true of Ptolemy’s model, may prove to be true of the Big Bang model as well.
In answer to the question, “Why has the Big Bang cosmology become so deeply entrenched in modern thought,” Narlikar concludes the theory has become orthodoxy as a result of the “intellectual pall created by the hypothesis-enshrined-as-fact” problem (Narlikar 1991 p. 48). Burbidge, in answering the same question, stated that
This observation is true in spite of Hoyle’s conclusion that a “sickly pall now hangs over the big-bang theory. When a pattern of facts becomes set against a theory, experience shows that the theory rarely recovers” (Hoyle 1984, p. 84). Jayant Narlikar added that “Astrophysicists of today who hold that the ultimate cosmological problem has been more or less solved may well be in for a few surprises” in the future (Hoyle 1984, p. 84). The last few decades have had more then a few surprises in cosmology. A major concern with modern dogmatic Big Bang cosmology is that it is
A History of Big Bang Cosmology
The term “Big Bang” was first coined by Fred Hoyle in the 1940s, in an attempt to disparage the theory. In the 1940s there existed almost no evidence in support of Big Bang cosmology—the supposed evidence came much later. By the end of the 1960s, “virtually all astrophysicists were convinced that the cosmos was born in a single massive explosion, and doubters were left out on the fringe” (Lemonick 1991b, p. 62). Major evidence used today to support the Big Bang include data that support the universe’s expansion, such as the red shift of light, but also the dominance of light elements (primarily hydrogen and helium) in the universe, the discovery of the 3K background radiation, and the conclusion that expansion of sufficient magnitude is necessary in order to prevent gravitational collapse of the universe (Ellis 1991; Hogan 1989, 1991; Peterson 1990a, 1990b, 1991). This (and other) evidence caused physicists to abandon the previously dominant cosmological theory, the steady state view.
The idea that the universe sprang from a cosmic egg of infinitesimal size that is, the Big Bang, was originally proposed by astronomer-priest Abbe Georges Lemaitre in 1931. Lemaitre, a Belgian scholar, evidently had the biblical account in Genesis in mind when he developed his view. His theory went largely unnoticed until his work was taken up by Sir Arthur Eddington and George Gamow. Maddox notes that the “doctrine of the Big Bang” has a strong appeal for some creationists “seeking support for their opinions” (Maddox 1989, p. 425).
Lerner (1991) even concludes one reason the Big Bang was accepted was due to the influence of Christian doctrine of creationism on science. A common explanation used to harmonize the Big Bang with theology is the claim that Genesis gives
The motivations of one scientist who verified the background radiation, Arno A. Penzias, were also partly religious. He describes himself as a creationist who is “deeply religious,” and believes that the characteristics of the universe are “precisely what organized religion predicts.” He told the New York Times: “The best data we have are exactly what I would have predicted, had I nothing to go on but the five books of Moses, the Psalms, [and] the Bible as a whole” (Browne 1978, p. 54). Penzias also acknowledged that “very few winners of Nobel prizes in science, and for that matter, very few scientists generally, have been strong religious believers” (Browne 1979, p. 282).
A major problem with one of the Big Bang’s rivals, the steady state theory, is that it teaches creation had no beginning and will have no end, and exists as a separate entity apart from a creator. The steady state view existed from about 1915 to about the early 1960s when the Big Bang hypothesis became increasingly prominent. Since the steady state theory was abandoned almost five decades ago, the Big Bang theory has been without a widely accepted rival.
The steady state theory also suffers from many problems, not the least of which is the requirement that hydrogen atoms continually form, evidently out of nothing, and from them new stars are being assembled as old ones burn out. Ironically, the big bang has the same problem—except it puts the formation of all mass from nothing all at one time, rather than continuous and gradual. Although no direct evidence now exists that could account for the spontaneous generation of hydrogen, a new modified steady state theory has been proposed by followers of late Fred Hoyle (Hoyle, Burbidge, and Narlikar 2000).
The problem that theists first must deal with is the question of the validity of the Big Bang. If it proves unsupportable, and contrary to the scientific evidence, there is no point in endeavoring to harmonize the theory with theology—a mistake many theologians are presently making. Unfortunately, a tendency exists for theologians to uncritically accept unproven scientific theory. It still may be premature—and erroneous according to some observers—to uncritically accept Big Bang cosmology as a whole, although many of its conclusions are probably valid, such as the suggestion that universe had a beginning and is in motion to achieve stability.
Summary
Big Bang cosmology (and cosmology in general as related to origins) is now swimming in a cauldron of conflicting ideas, theories, and personalities (Levy-Leblond 1990; Williams and Hartnett 2005). An enormous amount of information has been discovered about the universe in the last century, some of which supports the Big Bang, some of which does not (Waldrop 1991). Research developments designed to answer specific questions about cosmology inevitably have raised three or four new questions.
A few cosmologists even have concluded that the Big Bang hypothesis that has so far held sway for only a few score of years should be abandoned (Martin, 1999; Mitchell, 2002). If the Big Bang cosmological scenario is abandoned, the question of what will replace it is a major issue because a more viable nontheistic contender does not now exist. All of the competing theories suffer from as many, if not more, problems than the Big Bang. Although it is difficult to make confident predictions regarding the future of Big Bang cosmology, our concern here is the fact that much intolerance against qualified scientists forces us to question the objectivity of modern science. My focus in this paper was not the validity of the Big Bang, but the intolerance of scientists.
Scientists know a great deal about the universe, yet still are burdened with profound ignorance about many major cosmological questions such as the origin of the universe. Many of the theories discussed, such as the Big Bang, are based on much valid evidence but this does not mean that the theories themselves are proven beyond doubt. We must acknowledge that we are burdened with many huge gaps in our knowledge about the universe, and the conflict that believers and nonbelievers invariably face is not over the facts, but over the interpretation of the facts. To present the Big Bang theory as proven fact, as is often the case, is currently inappropriate.
The Big Bang theory also holds an enormous emotional sway over many people. Critics are silenced, often ruthlessly, and little is said in the media about these dissenters. In spite of its difficulties, even minor evidence that it is valid tends to be touted among scientists and the mass media as clear evidence, proving it beyond criticism. Supportive discoveries have received headlines or front page news coverage in both small and regional papers, while the nonsupportive discoveries have largely been ignored by the media.
The concern is not that these ideas should not be discussed, but that they are discussed as if they are proven facts not to be questioned—and many authors argue far beyond the evidence for the Big Bang theory as fact. As an example, some authors assume the oscillating hypothesis—that history consists of a perpetual series of endless Big Bangs and Big Crunches—is fully proven (Saslaw 1991). Although one is less apt to encounter such dogmatic statements in carefully written scientific papers, the following is typical of the unwarranted confidence common in the media
Labeling this what it is—speculation—will help us to evaluate more carefully what is true and will facilitate helping scientists reach the truth. Speculation passed off as fact impedes knowledge and does not help either science or religion.
The fact is, as University of California scientist Blas Cabrera stated, “science fills the same human needs as religion, and in many ways, replaces such— physics even has its priests—the advocates of the various theories that happen to be popular at the moment.” Cabrera went on to stress, “There comes a point in one’s work where you can no longer calculate everything . . . a point where imponderables affect your decisions . . . [and at this point] you must make a scientific leap of faith” (Cabrera 1982, p. 136).
Conclusions
Theories of the universe obviously have enormous implications in the problem of origins. Over 26 years ago, Sullivan, in an introduction to the New York Times Survey of Science, wrote that the year 1981
Although much of this concern was relative to the biological evidence for evolution, much also relates to other topics, such as cosmology. Sullivan’s statement is still very true today.
I'll be the first to admit that humanity does not have all the answers, yet. We may never have all the answers.
I'll also say, it is doubtful that the ancients found all the answers just by thinking about it. The people who lived 5000 years ago did not know more about origins than we do today.
The uncertainties we have today about what we know, does not validate what people thought was true 5000 years ago.
We must also consider that many of our unanswered questions may be the wrong questions to ask. They may well be predicated on a misunderstanding of fundamental concepts.
For example, it may be incorrect to assume that there was a prime-mover that initiated the Big Bang, because causality may not have existed prior to that event. Causality may be a function of our universe-specific physics. Time, as well, may not exist outside of our universe. There might not be a time before the Big Bang. Without the presence of time, or causality, asking what set the Big Bang in motion is nonsensical.
Time and causality are IMHO linked. You can not have one without the other. Sometimes I imagine time as a wave, and causality/reality as times corresponding particle.
They may indeed be linked. They are different concepts, so I addressed them separately in my previous post for the sake of clarity.
That link has been wandering around the back of my mind for a few years now. It goes something like this:
Time is a wave and reality is the waves corresponding particle, a wave-particle.
If you measure the wave-particle's location it becomes a fixed place. If you measure the wave-particule's momentum it becomes a wave.
Location would be like taking a photo of all reality in an instant.Momentum would be the relitive rate time is flowing.
If that were the case, time/reality being a wave or a particule would depend on the observer. Remember Schroedinger's cat in a box.
oh jesus
Jesus-Yes. Correct, no one enters the Fathers Kingdom except through him, the Christ. And that just isn't the God creator of this universe! And Christ said that he comes before God. But God said have no god before me. (Obviously there were others he was jealous of. Get it? Many don't have all the story and working off halve of the (books). But if you seek you will find. Or don't. It's your choice and no body else's.
Answer this
What loving Father loves his kids and then puts them in a room full of snakes and tells them if they get bit he will punish them? Well that isn't any loving Father but that is the GOD creators plan, that's the difference. The Father invites you as did the Christ by your Free Will, the other forces his will over you. Christ and the Father-Mother Spirit didn't create evil, they are perfect in every way always infinite. Period. Seek and you will find!
Before you ask someone for help, it's always best to know who you're talking to. After all you might just get what you ask for. And then again nothing if you don't.
But if some one says God talks to them, Run the other way. If some one says they have to impose Christ's word on you, Run away again. They are not who you think.
The power brokers all try to steal the keys to the Fathers Kingdom to keep them self important and your needs at their will. You don't need them really, just your own free will is it. Seek and you will find. Christ was perfect in every way and his words are the only words you ever need, but many Christan's are most times a different sort. Know them by their works and their powers over you! Christ said give up all power. Bingo. Remember always that Christ, Father and Mother Spirit did not make money, corruption, sickness or evil of any kind, Period!
Let me get this straight, Jones. . . I can drop to my knees at church or by my bedside and talk to God whenever I wish, and call it praying; and for this I am held in high esteem as a humble and pious man who acknowledges a higher power. But if I claim that God - omniscient, omnipotent, and everywhere - talks to me, then all of a sudden I'm crazy as a bedbug!? Hey, God is God: he talks to whomever he chooses. And those of us not on speaking (or listening) terms with the Creator of the Universe should show a little more gratitude that there are those blessed and/or gifted among us who can interpret his 'Word' for us. Oh thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you!
Jesus didn't write a dam thing, show me the gospel of Jesus in the bible.
The Supreme Court has determined that Atheism is a Religion? Isn't that an oxymoron?
It's amazing to me how the Atheists claim that we Christians shove our religious beliefs down their throats, while at the same time they come onto a site like this to tell us how stupid and ignorant we are for such beliefs.
For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't, no proof is enough.
Comment collapsed by the community. Who is the "community?" How do I reach them?
Let me explain it to you Janine.
First we atheists can come here and do just as you say, we have that freedom. Just as you and yours have the freedom to put up some of the dumbest billboards in existance, come to my door bothering me with your fantasies, can pray and read the bible in schools or work, etc, etc, etc. But you and yours have the biggest persecution complex I have ever seen.
The atheism as a religion is difficult to understand I know, but lets look deeper shall we...
So we see that a sky daddy isn't needed. Now, lets look at a reason this is important.
Any clearer? So in order to have the same rights that the religious have, look at we are forced to do. Sad I know, but your the ones with the persecution complex!
Atheism can be described as a religion about like bald can be described as a hair color.
The fish etching is nothing more than an advertisement for a pro bass fishing contest Peter was holding that week. This is container is an antique live bait well fisherman used to use.
Well sean,God only made so many perfect heads,and put hair on the rest of them.
Jesus Christ - the only man to resurrect after 3 days proving his deity. Jesus is Lord!
The resurrected god played out a dozen times before the christians fastened upon it for their version. Over 20 versions exist - the Egyptians had several, the Indians had a few, the Greeks had a handful, even the Meso-Americans had their dying/resurrected gods. Virgin births are nothing new either. Flood stories abound from Australia to Germany.
umm the only difference is... JESUS BACKED IT UP!
and umm *cough* peter, paul, matthew ,luke, andrew, etc. all DIED under roman oppression claiming they saw the risen lord jesus. now why would these men die for something they know to be a lie? why would they face beatings and floggings? embarrassment , and shame? they walked with this man jesus for 3 years! and jesus told them, "i will be crucified, but fear not cus i will rise 3 days later" If jesus never rose, then these men wouldn't have DIED, GAVE THEMSELVES UP TO TORTURE, BEATINGS/ claiming it
muslims die every day, tortured, murdered, and their corpses pissed on and their holy book burned and pissed on and yet they keep believing...... just like the christians under roman times. .............. people die for ideals all over the world every day... believe me, christians are not the only ones, not even the first ones.
LIAR!
Prove Jesus existed. The BABBLE isn't proof!!
Physical proof. Nothing exists. Admit it. You believe in false idols!
Don't know much about world religions I take it. Plenty of god-men were resurrected.
Justin, Pics or it didnt happen
Justin, it is best not to argue the bible. Or so I was told by one of my relatives. Speak your peace, and be done. Pray for them. I know I'm a bit of a hypocrite at times, but I try not to argue but my temper does get the best of me at times. Sorry.
Pedestrian-in-SF….or it could be that hearing the prophecies that existed in pre-Jewish and in the Jewish history they copied them.
Justin -- please tell me why the greatest teacher who ever lived didn't write any of his own thoughts down? A man who loved to teach, to educate himself? Allegedly a very well educated, literate person? Why are they afraid of Jesus's own words?
People speak that they don't know anything and then profess as if they do. HA HA HA Truely, only the words of the Christ is all that anyone needs. Take it or leave it. You win your own battle.
RandomFox, the greatest teacher who ever lived did write his own thoughts. It's called the bible, which is the word of God, not the word of men. He's the same One who had Paul and Peter write the following:
"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."
"Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."
"I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ."
So you see, everything that is written, was given by to the prophets and apostles by him.
"Jesus" and "God" are simply figments of your over-active imaginations.
or some great weed.
Don:
How do you know? Who told you? God?
I'm writing this, right now. Is it being given to me? Perhaps I am a prophet here to sow seeds of doubt and test your faith?
As a matter of fact, that is exactly what I am. You know how you can believe that? Because I just told you so, and my word is the Word of God.
So said a Roman who never met Jesus. His name was Saul. If someone with a background like his came to me today, and told me the same story, I would wonder what he was up to.
Also, I would say I agree with him while he was there because I would know what he did to people who didn't agree. Then later I would talk to his friends and family about getting him some mental health counseling.
Funny and pitiful speculations by Tabor and his Natgeo atheistic pro-masonry staff. Funny lies to stir-up their defeated ego. Pitiful!
Science backs up Tabor...what science backs up the existence of "god"? Go ahead...pray for a cure and ignore modern scientific medicines..then get back to me on which method works the best in helping to prevent smallpox or polio. No wonder those of your ilk see science as an enemy. What`s ridiculous is the conclusions you arrive at originating from the days shepherds sat around campfires telling fables as a means to teach children the value in obeying a "god" they invented simply as a way to answer the many questions they had about natures ways. Be satisfied with Einstein and his well founded assertion that energy cannot be destroyed or created, but only altered.
I find that funny because an atheist can't become a mason.
Seems to me resurrection or not Jesus eventually did die or he would be walking the earth today.
no. jesus sits in heaven on the throne at the right hand of the father. after his resurrection he stuck around for about 40 days making himself known to his disciples, believers and unbeliever alike. then he ascended into heaven. THAT'S WHY HIS DISCIPLES DIED FOR THE BELIEF AND THAT'S WHY CHRISTIANITY IS BASED OFF MARTYRDOM! CUS THE EARLY CENTURY CHRISTIAN SAW THE RISEN CHRIST!
AMEN!
more unproven lies.
If Jesus is the Son of God then who is his mother? Mrs. God? Neither alternative makes much sense. Nothing can just come out of nothing. Not God and not the universe by itself
Well, if you would read the bible you would know more. God existed before anything else. There is plenty of evidence out there, people are just blind to the truth or wish not to see it or acknowledge the presence they may feel.
My question is, how many people can sit here and say that their vehicle lurched over the side of a steep hill toward gator infested water and suddenly was swayed back up the hill with the driver having no control? I call it a miracle, even though I was hysterical. How does one explain the small things? The waterspout that formed right outside my backdoor, and slammed a wall of water into my house and yet no damage was done? Or when Fran hit, and trees fell on both sides of the houses, but our house was untouched. Other houses had broken glass, and the worst for us was a piece of the gutter that had managed to rip loose and spin as a small tornado spun by the hurricane went down our little street, mere feet from us? We were praying. I was praying. Looks to me like God was protecting us! So there is my reasons. That and, when my grandmother died I walked by her room and she was standing there in white garb, and there was an angel. When I did another take both were gone, but I know what I seen and for a week the area around our house smelt of roses and fresh flowers yet not a single flower grew.
So what you`re saying is that "god" only struck the houses of people he didn`t like....right? So, do you think religious zealots are more likely to "hear" the voice of "god" telling them to kill sinners?
Martyrdom......now where else do we tend to hear that lovely word????? Think about it......
There is plenty of evidence out there, people are just blind to the truth or wish not to see it or acknowledge the presence they may feel.
In fact, there is absolutely NO evidence anywhere, whatsoever. Aside from the writings in the Old and New Testaments, no other culture reported anything of any kind about a god-man referenced by the Bible, despite being one of the best recorded periods in human history.
THAT is why it is called faith; for its complete and total lack of proof.
Believing something does not make it true and that which is true, will be true, whether you believe it or not. It seems to me that a little more humility would greatly enhance the discourse.
Believe in God or don't...it doesn't matter to me one way or the other. There is enough documented historical evidence that a man going by the name we eventually translated at Jesus was traveling around preaching the word of a higher power. Regardless of whether you believe in the existence of said power, the messages are still good messages. Was Jesus the physical son of God? Depends on who you ask.
Regardless of what you believe, the message is what gives many the guidance to live a good life. But with any belief, you will always find the zealot who will vehemently argue, and sometimes violently react to anyone who doesn't share their one sided belief. If you truly believe that God exists, then limiting your basis of belief on a book that has been translated and rewritten to fit any number of despotic leaders' agendas is not the way to go. If you believe that a god gave you free will, then exercise it and question conformity. If you don't believe in a god, then hold on to whatever it is that you do build your basis of existence on. The truth is rarely found at the polar end of a discussion, it's usually in the middle somewhere. Find the middle.
If Jesus is the Son of God then who is his mother? Mrs. God? Neither alternative makes much sense. Nothing can just come out of nothing. Not God and not the universe by itself"
Ah yes but God's word says Michael was living with his Father long before he ever came down as a person of flesh. Jesus/Michael is not an imperfect human as ourselves. not human. Your train of thought is very very small. think more.. as for nothing can come out of nothing,, well God is the Alpha and the Omega. the universe is growing as we speak. why? God's word says that the heavens are being stretched. my point is He is created the universe.and is still expanding it ever more.
Anybody mention how many people have been killed in the name of their god? Man kills for territory/food supplies, women, prestige(warrior societies, the better warrior the higher the status), and for religion. How many people have been killed in the name of a god?
Starsailing, you remind me of the immortal words of Dr. Sagan;
"The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by
all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become momentary
masters of a fraction of a dot. Think of the endless visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this
pixel the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their
misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds.
Our posturings, our imagined self-importance, the delusion that we have some privileged
position in the Universe, are challenged by this point of pale light. Our planet is a lonely speck in
the great enveloping cosmic dark. In our obscurity, in all this vastness, there is no hint that help
will come from elsewhere to save us from ourselves.
The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the
near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the
moment the Earth is where we make our stand.
It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is
perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny
world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to
preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known."
Carl Sagan, Pale Blue Dot (New York: Ballantine Books, 1997) 13
Joe F Las Vegas, I was watching a program on discovery the other day and it said just what you claim could never happen. I will take my faith or the word of science before babble from you.
Coldcode: the difference between their MARTYRDOM and the religion you refer to is Christ disciples were chase around and killed for their beliefs and teachings. I read nothing where they killed others for not believing in their religion. These were peaceful people that were imprisoned for nothing more than teaching a religion of love, peace and hope. A religion that has been twisted by the Evilgilicals into a religion of profit. Their god is the almighty dollar.
Well SP---glad I remined you of that. By the way, did I ever tell you the story of how I was caught in the confessional with Linda? She was taller so I stood on the kneel down on pad, which in turn turned the light on to show booth was occupied. During recess, the nun came in saw the light on, while I was seeing the light! How about the time I was forced to become an alter boy. First mass there were 3 of us boys. Donny and john started drinking wine from the jug just like Jed did on Beverly Hillbillies. When the priest raised his arms up in the air to start the service, John ran to the side door and upchucked, donny hearing the sound then did the same. priest looked at me...service was halted until 2 other boys replaced John and Don. Then there was the advice I gave to the hottest nun during a basketball game. She quit the nunnery next week and we never saw her again. I've brought back to life 7 people who had their hearts stop.......I will tell you this. Man is god. Man can create life, take life away, and bring that life back.
Doesn't look like a fish to me. Smells a little fishy though.
It was etched in a giant rock, most likely with another piece of rock. What do you expect? Should it have 3D lifelike gills and everything?
Looks more like a person in a robe to me. Even then they knew fish didn't have a round object at the front of their mouths and what appears to be arms.
Sorry, but it looks like a fancy robed person to me.
Glad to see someone else saw that too! That is what I saw first, a person in a dress or robe. Would have never connected it with a whale or fish. Look at the designs on the robe. They are consistant with some geometrical decorations found on blankets and robes.
There is too much focus on belief and faith, and not enough focus on what Jesus said. The comparison between the two is like sentimentality versus enlightenment, or image versus substance. For more of that Jesus said, do a search for: Secret Gospel of Thomas.
secret gospel of thomas is false and is not considered canon "god inspired or, from the very breathe of god" it is not to be believed! only the bible we have today is the very word of god. God divinely crafted the bible through the hearts of the writers and the church
" only the bible we have today is the very word of god."
And this is after how many versions? Your statement discounts the Torah, which was around for about 3000 years before?
no it doesn't because the torah is the old testament which is still the very word of God. and last time i checked it's included in the finished product we have today as the holy bible
Justin, you are right that the Secret Gospel of Thomas is not to be believed. Rather, it is something to be considered in thought, but only to the limit of one's spiritual ability. There has been is too much emphasis on rote belief and not enough on emphasis on comprehension. The Secret Gospel of Thomas was found by chance and is considered to be authentic. It is a collection of answers to questions, versus an icon scratched in limestone. Anyone may choose one or the other to be more meaningful.
@Justin Bryant
You have chosen to accept as fact a certain number of writings and teachings of Christianity that are highly arguable and scientifically questionable in that they lack empirical evidence. The reality is that your personal beliefs are just that, personal beliefs based on blind faith.
Those beliefs are your choice to which you are entitled, as my beliefs are mine. I am very comfortable with my beliefs; I am secure and content with my beliefs; therefore, I am happy to keep them to myself and I have no necessity to share or argue my beliefs with anyone. I can only suggest that you follow a similar path. The avid argumentation you present regarding your beliefs expose both doubt and insecurity in what you claim are your beliefs. If you truly believe what you say you do, you would not need to defend or argue those beliefs. You would merely sit contentedly in front of your computer and read the futile arguments of others.
And if you even think of excusing your behavior with the "spreading the word of God" evangelical nonsense, you will have most definitely proved your doubt and insecurity.
I'll take the words of Christ over Gods any day.
mhemjay,
The problem with your suggestion is that, if you don't believe in Jesus--the one who shed his blood for you and for everyone--then there is no salvation and no hope of eternal life. You people act as though Christians are just trying to shove our own beliefs down peoples throats and maybe that seems to be the case sometimes by those who have forgotten the point of being a witness. But the point is that we are not trying to get you to join our club for the sake of joining our club, but because without faith in Christ, you remain on the same path that you have always been on and that is to death, Hades, judgment and then the lake of fire. This should be the reason behind why a Christian tells anyone about what Christ did for them. Yet people continue to reject him because they love to remain sowing to the sinful nature. They don't come to the light because they love the acts of the sinful nature and so remain in the darkness.
What people don't understand is that, everyone who comes into the world is on his/her way to destruction as soon as they come to an age of accountablity and that because sin entered into the world through one man, followed by death. And just as sin entered the world through one man, so also eternal life entered into the world through one righteous man, Jesus Christ.
"Whoever has the Son has life. Whoever does not have the Son will not see life for the wrath of God rests upon him."
I'm surprised how many "Christians" are republican. There is nothing in the republican party platform that follows Jesus's teachings. Help the rich. Keep the poor in servitude. Defund education (because educated people tend to vote Democrat) and social safety nets. Be greedy. When you are wealthy, hoard your wealth and allow a tax code to do it. Put it in off-shore accounts so the government can't get to it. Help rich people make even more money. Gut any attempt at improving health care. Try to turn education into a for-profit business. Try to turn health care into a strictly for-profit business. Commodify everything. Yeah, this is what Jesus would do. Real Christians would never vote republican.
You are absolutely correct. It`s incredible the kind of blindness that affects most religious conservatives. They are people caught up in being loyal to only a label, which speaks volumes as to why their words make a mockery of a NT personage known as Jesus. Promoting enlightenment has always been an uphill battle for the intelligent, reason being mankind is creating a new crop of ignorant humans at the rate of one a second. No wonder most religious conservatives see an objective education as something to shun, it gets in the way of traitional old-time religion where the wind blows because "god" sneezes, hence the need to keep the public as ignorant as possible so that the conservative party can generate as many of their base as possible. Who can hear the likes of the Republican leadership and not be ashamed of such ignorance? What does such leadership say about those who can appoint them to leadership in the first place? Rightwingers have had the better part of 30 years to undermine responsible american government with all their taxcuts and anti american labor positions. Makes it real hard to understand how millions in labor can bring themselves to support a Republican party that despises them.
This thread is the epitome of my problem with american Christians.
Apparently it isnt offensive to suggest that people who disagree with you are going to hell but IT IS OFFENSIVE TO SUGGEST THEY ARENT. Stay in your church and I will stay in my science room, come out of your church and I will fight you in the streets to win back the america we created before yall started to attack her.
jones-1576915 - flagged as myth advertisement
What I find interesting just from a historical biblical view, is that the inscriptions say Jehovah and how most "christian" religions have wiped god's name out of the bible and thier teachings completely. Yet there is the name of god right there.
Don,
The problem with your statement is this:
You believe I will go to hell if I don't worship your god and christ. But I don't believe that. Therefore, your preaching becomes just that, preaching.
Your belief does not supercede mine. And yet I have never approached a stranger and told him that if he doesn't believe the way I do, he will some how be punished and suffer, perhaps eternally.
So, why do you insist on doing it? Why do Christians want prayer in class? I don't want to pray in class, and I don't want to lose time for education to an activity that means nothing to me.
Why do Christians want the Ten Commandments in front of courthouses? I don't believe in all of the 10, and the court will only uphold, like, two. I'm pretty certain that no American court has ever punished someone for not keeping holy the sabbath. And if one did...
And why do Christians come to a Science blog (about archaeology) and preach to us? Yes, we get it. You believe God is God and Jesus is Christ and the only way to eternal salvation is through Christ. Got it. Now could you please stop.
@Don
You've entirely missed my point. Your personal beliefs are exactly that: YOUR PERSONAL BELIEFS. You cannot expound on my beliefs because I have not disclosed my beliefs and have no intention of doing so. I am quite comfortable in my beliefs and am quite sure that I will not experience any of the horrors you so ardently believe that I will suffer because I don't believe just like you. You expose a perfect example of your doubt and insecurity in your own beliefs because, if it was otherwise, you would have no need to "witness" so publicly an ideology that is suspect in its origins and evolution.
If you truly believed as you indicate, you would have no need to castigate me for a belief system that I refuse to discuss and that you know nothing about. For all you know of me and my beliefs, I could be the most devout and pious Christian on the face of the Earth, quietly going about my business without having to blare to the world, "Ooh, look at me I'm a Christian and if none of you believe just like me you're all going to burn in an eternal lake of fire". Hardly the actions or words of a devout follower of the teachings of the Christ, now is it?
Peace, my friend; easy to find if the God you believe in is in your heart and not just an idea rambling around in your mind and remember that your beliefs do not set you above others.
Its nice to have found something of historical significance. Maybe it will give clues as to where the body went.
Funny and pitiful speculations by Tabor and his Natgeo atheistic pro-masonry staff. Funny lies to stir-up their defeated ego. Pitiful!
Atheists can't be masons. What are you talking about?
Professor Orlando #10
To be a Mason one must believe in god.
Are you a Professor the way Harlan Sanders was a Colonel?
One must be a Christian to be permitted to join the Freemasons. Atheists aren't allowed to join the organisation, Falconer. A lack of capitalisation doubtless confused you. It has nothing to do with masons who are bricklayers.
An atheist wrote this above when complaining about Christians who proseletyse:
Atheists who sneer and jeer at Christians are just as annoying as Christians who preach their religion to the uninterested. On either side the self righteous and arrogant will convert no one.
It's trolling.
I know, thats what I said (capitalisation isn't needed as I have never heard of a "pro-brick layer agenda"! LOL!). Actually, according to my dad who was a mason, you don't have to be a Christian. You need to believe in a higher power or "architect". Keep trying bud, you'll get it someday.
Oh, and peridot, we don't want to convert you.
You want to know what trolling is? Religious posts in a science forum.
Something does sound fishy. They didn't want them to explore, so they built condos on top of an ancient tomb, and now they have to drill through a patio and look at it with cameras so they don't disturb the graves?
Strange indeed. I think P.T. Barnum may be involved. From the grave.
What makes this so fishy, is the fact that they dug them up in the eighties. They could have etched the crude image on the surface themselves. Some of you are getting too emotional over something that is likely nothing more than a ploy. These grave robbers of today always claim historic values because they know it's the only way to get the nod to desecrate graves. Truly faithful people would never uncover dead people and place their corps in museums.
Please stop screaming, Justin, you're giving me a headache. As a Christian, let me tell you a secret: you're not going to convert or persuade anyone by yelling. It's good you have the conviction and faith you have. Have you ever had anyone ask you if you're a Christian, then tell you, 'I thought you were, you're always so happy and positive all the time'? When that happens then you know you have Him in your life. Happens to me all the time.
Jesus told us to *attract* people to Him by our behaviour and how we lived our lives. Looking at the people here, it's unlikely anyone would be attracted to Christ by any purported Christian's actions here. Here there is anger, self righteousness, hatred, judgmentalism, superiority and many other unpleasant human traits.
Jesus told us, 'Love Thy Enemy.' He also said, 'Love Thy Neighbor As Thyself.'
Where's the love, Christians?
How can you not believe in God? does not nature, the universe, the make up of the human body, SCREAM CREATOR? SCREAM DIVINE INTELLIGENCE? just look at creation and all the wonders! DON'T BE BLIND!
We just don't. This is a religion article so hopefully atheists won't get on here and be rude, but we just didn't get religion from our parents, so we don't believe.
I can see and think, try it sometimes.
How can you prove there is a god? Just saying this exists, that exists isn't proof. Sorry but your sadly mistaken. I suppose in your world, all the peoples are made in "gods" image? What a crock. That means you have to blame YOUR god for the hatred, the killing, the floods, the tsunamis, the hurricanes, etc. You can't just thank him for the good..
Divine Intelligence? LMAO who created YOUR creator who created all of this? You can't say POOF god existed at this time and was uber smart to start creating this and that and the other crap. There isn't a god, just because the babble says so, doesn't make it true. Science is true, religion is wrong.
And Doug, YES I am very much an Atheist. I was raised in a religious household and until I was 13 I went to church, was even in a private christian school til 6th grade. So yeah, I have experience and knowledge and truth. Religious folks don't have that!
420. i pray that your eyes be opened. because you have shut them only to your five senses and that is a sad thing. I pray that Jesus opens them. Science can't mend a broken heart, heal pain (anxiety, worry), answer your questions like "what is my purpose in this life? what happens after i die? is their an afterlife? wat REALLY MATTERS in this short period of time we live here? what am i living for?" these are the questions that the Lord himself aka Jesus answers. through the word of god (bible) and by spiritual revelation to those who CHOOSE TO BELIEVE IN HIM. but you 420, reject HIS love,death on the cross, deity and existence. and choose to be blind. GOD help you. there is way more to this life and world then what you can see, hear, touch, smell and taste
Strangely, JB nothing screams "creator" to me. Tell us all, if the heavens truely do proclaim the glory of god (as the book says), why do you need the book? Exactly what purpose does the bible have, if we can all see god, just by looking around?
because the bible informs us of who god is, wat God's plan was from creation, His love for mankind, how life works. people wanna find the answers on their own or through science and self discovery. but the answers are already in his word! but it takes faith (to believe the unseen, accept it as truth) to really have your eyes open to the deity of Christ as God and that he was literally GOD on earth
You are right on Justin! The universe SCREAMS design and therefore therefore a designer. Unbelievers would have us believe that the way that a child is brought into this world and developes in a mothers womb was set up by evolution, which is basically saying that it happened by chance. And do I need to mention this planet that we live on that is surrounded by a protective barrior from all that space debrie. Or consider the variety of vegetables and fruits, the characteristics of prey and preditor with thier camoflouage, speed and stealth. Or consider the make-up of the human body; lets water out, but doesn't let it in, self healing, eyes to see out of the body with, a mouth for the spirit to speak with, complete with its own super computer. Darwin was in idiot! And I'm sure that he knows that now. I am convinced that if each person could spend just 1 minute in Hades, when they came back they would be scared out of their minds and the would be on their faces crying and begging for Jesus to come into their lives and save them. Unfortunately they don't get to experience that and so they remain where they are. On the otherhand, there wouldn't be much need for faith if they got to experience the consequences for sin before they died.
@Justin: if humans originated on a planet that couldn't support life, that would be compelling, but we originated on a planet that could, through every known fact, support life. if there is no intelligent designer THIS is how the universe should look... with life on life supporting planets. all the patterns make sense given nature, not divine intervention.
Just because a theist answered philosophical questions, like "whats the meaning of life" doesn't mean those answers are correct, nor does it mean those questions must be answered in a theistic way for a more complete understanding of reality.
Finally if your going to use the bible as your argument for why god exists, you have to first demonstrate that the bible can be relied on for it's facts throughout, problem is that there's a ton of internal inconsistencies, not to mention things that complete contradict how the world really works, heck even genesis is backwards, light before emitters, a light emitting Moon, birds before insects, flowering plants before the animals that spread fruit seeds, etc.
Justin
"no it doesn't because the torah is the old testament which is still the very word of God. and last time i checked it's included in the finished product we have today as the holy bible"
So, have you or any other Christians ever actually read the original words from the original pages of the Bible? I'm guessing that you have not. See, everything you read has been put in your hands by man or machine so how do you know that what you are reading are the actual words from God?? Do you have an answer to that?
Hopefully atheists wont be rude?what comment section are you reading?
For some faithful people yall sure get pissed off when other people dont share your faith.
Is your faith so weak it cant be challenged by someone who disbelieves?
And yeah I not only didnt get religion from my parents, but I grew up in the church. I worked there. And I saw how things really are in the church. ANd then I got educated and I saw there was nothing in life that supported the bible or the quran or any of the religious books over one and another. WEll nothing to support most of them at all. ANd then I discovered that REALLY learning about something was more beautiful than sitting their in ignorance admiring it;s beauty but thinking someone else must have created it.
The smilie face on mars was not created by intelligent hands and most would agree, despite it looks so familiar and intelligently designed. Same with the old man in the rock.
Don-816006 you are hopelessly ignorant of how the world works around you. I'm not going to debate your ignorant statements, but if you really wanted to know truth you should at least entertain the thought of doing a little learning.
420, yes I'm sure many people raised with religion give it up as they grow up, and some 'get religion' after a non-religious upbringing. But mostly, I think it works as I said - people are either given religion as children and stick with it, or they just don't have it.
Justin, I was raised in a Christian home, and I thought I believed it, up until I was 14. I realized it made no sense. I read the whole bible rather than cherry picking through the verses that our pastor always gave us. There were a lot of contradictions, and areas where the "all loving" god wasn't loving at all.
Now, you said earlier that we need a god to know our purpose in life. I don't. I've always felt my purpose was to help other people and inspire them. I am majoring in Fine Arts at the moment, so that I can improve my skill in drawing and painting. I know how much a painting can inspire a person, and I believe inspiration desperately needs to be passed around in this day and age. I'll also look into nursing, or even being a veterinarian, I've just always wanted to save lives.
So I know my purpose in life. I didn't need a god to tell me.
One last thing: the universe, human body, etc, doesn't scream divine intelligence/creator to me. To me it screams what an amazing realm we live in, and it makes me think of how much time it took for it to come to this point, and it was a very, very long time! Giving something a creator sometimes discredits the journey it took to be what it is now. Life is so much more beautiful to me now than it was when I was a Christian.
Sorry for the wall of text. Have a good one =)
It screams "bad creator". I'm sorry, but I wouldn't hire your god to design anything, ever again. There are so many flaws in the "design" of the human body that to presume a perfect being did this is silly and sad.
And why would a god design a world of "kill or be killed"? Why couldn't all life forms just get all the energy they need from the sun? Or geothermal energy? Why do we have to kill to survive?
And why would any god, anywhere, create spiders? I mean, are you serious?
Crow-I agree that the all-loving God thing always threw me and does to this day lol.
I agree you don't need God to know your purpose in life. Heck I do know God and now that my kids are getting older my purpose has been rather blurry.
I disagree about the whole universe/human body thing though. I lack faith I guess. I don't have enough faith to believe this could have all happened by accident. The chances are just so...so...astronomical. Spontaneous life. Hmp. No, I can't buy that one. We have I-phones for goodness sakes. We aren't just alive, we have thrived.
I TOTALLY agree about the spiders though Hambone. I don't care if they DO eat other bugs.
The "Scream Creator" comment is true to all who can see that and God the creator did create the mess we have. But Christ never said he created this place, he was perfect in every way as is his Father and Mother-Spirit. His message was about him coming here to save us from the evils of this creation and take us back to the place where we are truly from. Who is it that wants you for a servant in Heaven and condemn you to Hell if you refuse him? And who was it that wants you as a brother and sister on earth and follow him into his Father Kingdom, free of the grips of all evil, and live in Joy and Jubilation forever? Do these really sound like the same paths and message to you? Christ came to cure the pain and suffering, disease and corruption that had been created on earth. Christ provide the way out of here (the prison is the body of man) through him (Christ) at the point of death from this defective creation. THE CHRIST will take you to the Light! The Light is the Mother Spirit from which all came from. How is it man has Faith that he won't fly off the spinning planet when every known test by man proves he will?
The lack of faith isn't faith. Bald isn't a hair color. Not stamp collecting isn't a hobby. Inactivity isn't an activity. Abstinence isn't a sex position.
Shirley there's an area that is neither accident nor intention, and that is the area in which we, and all we can perceive, were created and dwell. Events being determined by the parameters of ongoing processes, or some such phraseology.
I once heard someone say that believing that all this happened by chance is more unbelievably unbelievable than some cosmic image of Zeus stirring it all up. They continued to say that it takes more faith to believe that it was all chance. Interesting idea.
Interesting in the sense that it applies the term 'faith,' to man's rational processes in combination with his ability to create theories to fill in the imperceptible. Transferring one's faith in one's imaginary Father-God to one's real-world companions may be said to require an increase of trust, but a decrease in belief.
I think I'm too stupid to understand what you wrote. You mean that using the word "faith" is a misnomer there? That trust is the better word? If that's it, then I think I agree.
Ok, concern about disturbance of a gravesite, so, build a condominium on top!
Like, nothing to see here, move on, or you'll get baptized by Mormons.
Apparently the religious practice calls for leaving a space between the rock of the tomb and the structure that lies over it. I've changed the phrasing slightly to reflect that a bit more.
That is the best headline that this secular enlightened web news page could come up with? Oh wait...never mind I forgot that respect and tolerance only applies to those that the secularists deem worthy, you know virtue according to man in all of their reasoning and wisdom.
respect should only be given to ideas that can be demonstrated as factual through empirical evidence, not appeals to emotion or ignorance.
Please, write a better headline for this article, FOXNEWS. I'd be interested in reading an improved version. :)
James, the cemetery where your relatives and ancestors are interred should be investigated. Archaeology isn't my field but perhaps I could get a grant to exhume them for the purpose of research. Any complaints would, of course, be of no use because there's no need to respect your ideas or feelings.
To you religious folks here is a fundamental question you'll never answer or grasp: Why or How did your god create Adam from thin air and Eve from his rib, yet needed a host for his "first son jesus?"
@ Justin.. Sadly you buy into the lies and crap. The babble was written centuries after the "so-called event." The reason for it having been written so late, was there weren't anyone alive to challenge the facts of the story. Jesus and religion was crafted to control people. If there were "apostles" most likely them and your false messiah jesus were very illiterate as were most common folk and almost all the populations at the time.
These people with their "finds" are just trying to drum up support for Israels holy war with Islam. They offer no proof of anything. No independent testing, like all religious whack-jobs they say their word is absolute and final.. The shroud of Turin is another laughable find and fraud. WHY, if your Jesus were so Fn important, is there no cross? No crown of thorns. No nails, etc. No artifacts to prove its existence.. Those would surely exist if the events were true and jesus were really real.
How can any answer be correct, coherent or truthful in your eyes when your eyes are already shut tight? Read the Bible with open eyes and more importantly an open mind and you will find the answers that you seek and maybe even a little Faith. Peace.
the evidence that Jesus TRULY walked this earth OVERWHELMS your disbelief (just do some research on roman historians who documented of christ). you obviously need thorns, nails, etc to believe which shows your refusal to accept the truth anywayz. and ummm the pharisees (religious sect/ upholder of jewish law), ROMAN EMPERORS challenged, beaten, tortured, excommunicated all people who believed/ proclaimed the name of Christ during that time... so you tell me they tried to prevent these things for a guy who never existed?
Second, The Actual MEN that walked with Christ wrote their testimonies of Christ during their lifetime. AND THEY ALL SUFFERED HORRIBLE DEATHS KNOWING they saw, talked and walked with the resurrected Christ, AKA JESUS AKA GOD. your spiritually blind and you refuse to accept the truth. your stubborn heart and clouded mind don't want to accept Jesus as God. YOU ARE YOUR OWN GOD.
YOU DON'T EVEN read the bible. cus it says adam was created from the DUST OF THE EARTH (GROUND/CLAY) . JESUS HAD TO COME BY SPIRIT AND NOT BY NATURAL CONCEPTION TO PROVE THAT HIS BIRTH WAS HOLY AND DIVINE
@420 Frees the mind - How Can It be Control, When Jesus said "Love was the greatest commandment", there are nothing but pure love in the new testament .
Man had to be redeemed by man yet deity at the same time.
I can answer why god made Adam and Eve. He was lonely. He could create angles (robots) without free will. They do not have a choice, they are forced to serve. He wanted something to choose him without forcing them to. He wants us to love him, honor, and worship him; to choose to do so willingly.
What about the devil? Does he have any power over you? Does he control you in any way? No, the only thing the devil can do is deceive. Your brain plays tricks on you, or you believe in false logic. If the end of days comes it will not be the devils fault it will be mans'. The other issue is that to say God is not "evil" is placing limitations on his power. To be perfect one must be good and evil, most people cannot accept a God that is evil or that he lets evil happen so "the Devil" was created. To have good you must have evil, to have a positive you must have a negative.
What came before God? Well, God killed them all. He is the ultimate predator, he made us in his own image. What are we, predators. Who did God give favor to, Cain or Able? I have argued with many about this and when the text says "also" that means that Cain gave his best TOO (my Hebrew still needs some work however). That means that God favored Able because he was a shepard and hunter instead of a farmer.
When God appeared before the Jewish people and asked them to be examples there were many civilizations that had built massive cites, pyramids, etc. why did God not pick those people? Because they placed to much importance on material. What has God not allowed the Jewish people to do until now? Stop moving from place to place.
When you get to understanding how the universe works, there still remains these questions. Who designed this wonderful system in which we live. From the smallest scale to the largest there are entire worlds beyond what you can see with your own two eyes. Did this system happen by chance? Not a chance, it had to be engineered by something or someone. The second question that remains is energy. Who or what added the energy that is in the universe? If entropy rules, why has everything not died out yet? Why did all the matter in the universe all go to one point in the first place? It is a cycle, "there will be a new heaven and a new earth".
Smoke another bowl and break out a bible. You will find all kinds of nifty information encoded in it, you just have to have an open mind. God could be the universe itself, with all of us being made up of pieces of him. He wants you to choose him.
420,
You're just repeating what you hear others say in order to remain in the sinful nature. There were hundreds of prophecies regarding Jesus prior to his arrival and he fulfilled everyone of them, which is documented in the gospels. For example, how do explain the Psalms that fortold about men casting lots for his clothing and then finding that the Roman soldiers did exactly that, cast lots for Jesus clothing? The writing and the actual events are hundreds of years apart and in some prophies are much older. What.... is it going to take you standing before God at the great white thone judgment to get the point across?
420,
You said: " Why or How did your god create Adam from thin air and Eve from his rib, yet needed a host for his "first son jesus?"
Answer: Jesus needed to become a man so that he could be our kinsman redeemer. In otherwords, he had to become one of us in order to by us back. He had to be exposed to sin as a man just as we are, yet he was without sin and therefore, death could not hold him. He took upon himself the wrath that we deserve, that is, he appeased God's need for the consequences of sin, which is death. He stood in for us paying the penalty on our behalf. Yes, this is the person that all unbelievers reject, the One who came to save you from the consequences of sin.
good points Don.
If there were no God, there would be no atheists. ~ G. K. Chesterton
Why is the Atheist’s main target always Jesus of Nazareth, and
never Buddha, Confucius, or Mohammed?
Why is the aspiring athlete’s target always the
true champion and never the runner-up?
The atheist can’t find God for the same reason that a thief can’t find a police
officer.
Belief is a wise wager. Granted that faith cannot be
proved, what harm will come to you if you gamble on its truth and it proves
false? If you gain, you gain all; if you
lose, you lose nothing. Wager, then, without hesitation, that God
exists. ~ Blaise Pascal
Atheism cheapens everything it touches - look at the results of communism, the most powerful form of atheism on earth. ~ Paul Kreeft
Hey Tired
I can create "angles" too. 90 degree, 45 degree, lots of "angles".
Answer: Jesus needed to become a man so that he could be our kinsman redeemer.
So, that means Adam was not a man?
He could create angles [sic] (robots) without free will. They do not have a choice, they are forced to serve.
And, the one angel who decided to not be a robot? Ahh, Lucifer. See how that (doesn't) work?
How can any answer be correct, coherent or truthful in your eyes when your eyes are already shut tight?
Exactly whose eyes are shut tight? It is a central tenet of the Christian faith to shut out every possible contradiction or line of questioning that may cause doubt, because there is only one unforgivable "sin:" unbelief. How perfectly self-reinforcing.
Second, The Actual MEN that walked with Christ wrote their testimonies of Christ during their lifetime.
Completely and utterly false. The dates of the writings are quite well known to have been long after the "authors" lived. The term "pious fraud" describes this, and was tossed around quite a bit in reference to the early believers and the Canonization process.
I thought the amusing thing about this article is that it appears in the Cosmic Log section. Cosmic, as in Outer Space.
@Jp I'm not sure, but my working theory is that Buddha, Confuscious, et al, never claimed to be anything OTHER than mere mortals with viewpoints that seemed to make sense to folks and a desire to express said viewpoints, kind of like what Dr. Phil does in the here and now. People take potshots at the notion that here is this quasi-Jewish hippie because he allegedly claimed to not only be one of us but also the guy who gave everything we know the original kick in the pants to get things started. Assuming that's true, I believe it's because he needed to see this world through mortal eyes to know whether the immortal ideals were fairly applicable. Confuscious himself (am I spelling that correctly? w/e) formed a doctrine that people know what a good, righteous, pious, or virtuous being would do with their time and abilities. He used the term Li. People whose religious leanings favor some version of Christianity use W.W.J.D., do they not? Ergo, it is not so far removed from the ideal to go with the Confuscian doctrine over believing that there are talking reptiles out there. Robert Pirsig's Zen and the art of Motorcycle Maintainence took a similar notion that people know quality writing when they see it.
As for your second question, the analogy assumes that atheists are just trying to do the same thing as religious folks, i.e., get into some kind of desirable apres vie. Naturally, this is not always the case, since people do in fact have the ability to believe as they wish without impediments. My personal view on the free will issue is that it is called free will because it is without some invisible force proverbially or literally grabbing one's wrists and preventing evil acts. We are allowed to kill, or steal, or what-have-you, and deal with the consequences of those choices, whether those consequences occur in this life or in the time after.
For those who can actually approach the idea with a certain willingness to think for one's own self, an argument that I saw starting on page 799 of Neal Town Stephenson's Cryptonomicon has proven to be of interest to me in understanding some of these religious views. I reccommend it without further comment.
As for the subject at hand, I think it's exciting that these archaeologists have found whatever it is they have found, but I think that the speculation concerning its significance is just that, speculation. At least, until they have tangible proof.
"Why is the Atheist’s main target always Jesus of Nazareth, and never Buddha, Confucius, or Mohammed?"
The atheists' target in not Jesus, it's Christians. And perhaps that's because Buddhists, Confucians, and Moslems (and Jews, for that matter) have not mounted a massive assault on science in the form of Intelligent Design (or it's antecedent Creation Science, an oxymoron if there ever was one). In spite of what ID supporters say, evolution is one of the bedrocks of modern science, it has stood the test of time and become more and more rigorous with the passing years. ID, on the other hand had been shown by the courts to be a thinly disguised attempt to inject religious teachings into the classroom. ID has no testable theories - nothing, other than "It looks designed, therefore it HAD to be designed. Look up Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, a case in which ID was thoroughly demolished, and a conservative, Republican, Christian judge, appointed to the bench by George W. Bush, listened to both sides and declared that ID is not a science and should not be taught as such.
As to Pascal's Wager, suppose there is a God, and you face him at your death, and he says, "So, you believed in me because it was the safest bet?" I'll bet he would be really impressed with that.
And communism is not a form of atheism. What a ridiculous statement. Communism is a social, political, and economic ideology. One of its tenets is that religion, like nationalism, is a form of control used to exploit the masses. They may have something there.
"If there were no God, there would be no atheists."
If the claims for and about God weren't so ridiculous, there'd be no need for atheists.
"The atheist can’t find God for the same reason that a thief can’t find a police
officer."
Nonsense. Police officers exist, the thief simply doesn't want to find one. A great many atheists have tried sincerely to find God and have found the evidence for his existence to be severely lacking.
JP:
Your question is extremely provincial. You are merely speaking of atheists in the Western, "christian" world. You see, Christianity is the overwhelmingly most popular religion in the West. Therefore, it is the one exerting the most influence and power over people's lives. I'm sure in other parts of the world, where the "champion" religion is not Christianity, then those atheists target Allah or Vishnu or Thor.
It's not my fault your god doesn't want me to believe in him.
Frees the Mind
About the Host you asked about.
Christ was begot long before Atom was Created by this Creator we call God. Christ is pure spirit begot first of all things after the Father and Mother-Spirit consort to begot their ONLY begotten son. There was nothing other than the Trinity before that but exisited from that time forward. Christ entered the tomb (vessle, body, prison) by worldly birth just as we all did. (Men tend to believe in men more than just spirits) Christ from the beginning, his conception had within him the Holy Spirit (Mother-Spirit) and brought that with him to this place (Earth) to teach others the way back home and out of this defective tomb we live in. It is that Spirit that could heal the sick and lame command the eliment at his will and so on. What Christ didn't do was force one agaist their own Free Will. One either believes in light or they believe only in empy darkness, a darkness where there can be nothing before there is something. Which of corse is not true. Everyone should by now realize that thought and will preceed action. So something has to exist to start something or it will not start, kind of like Atom. He wouldn't start until he was given a spirit. And that was the Holy Spirit. Get it?
No. Your explanation was not only scattered, confused and devoid of fact, it was confusing as heck. Try using less of the language of the Bible, as you don't seem to properly understand the meanings of the words.
That read like a 3rd grader writing theological science-fiction out of a thesaurus.
Why? Why would he have to become one of us? If he is all powerful, why the charade about 'becoming one of us'?
Crossan is the anti-Christ :) Seriously, whether you believe in resurrection or not, to think that the first Christians believed in a "spiritual" resurrection just doesn't square with the overwhelming data. Also when it comes to faith, the neat thing about Christianity is that is also a faith of facts and history. There is plenty there (places, people, archaeology, manuscripts). You can do your own research about them, more than on any other world religion and reach your own conclusion. What is sadder than an unexamined life?
WHAT DATA?! There is none. Zero. Nothing!
THAT is why fantasies like the Shroud of Turin are so vitally important. The believers are absolutely desperate to find one shred of physical proof to justify their faith!
Yeah, what data? There is actually plenty of evidence that they DID believe in a "spiritual" resurrection. Read Paul's letters very carefully - he talks about a Christ who is clearly a spirit, and he says quite clearly that our next body is a spiritual one. The "appearances" he cites sound more like visions (such as he had), not physical appearances.
As far as history goes, plenty of "places and people" prove nothing. I can write a novel that references historic people and insert a fictional character and mention actual place names. As to archaeology, it mostly confirms that many of the places mentioned in the Bible did exist, but the events that supposedly took place actually did not (e.g., no worldwide flood, no Exodus, no massive group of people wandering around Sinai for 40 years, etc.).
religion! politics! never discuss either with nimrods!
My grandmother always said, "Never discuss politics or religion in polite company," but I think what you said is far more succinct and to the point.
Because your grandmother knew that impolite nimrods would show up.
Mine said never to argue with a fool because people might not know the difference. I think she got that from someone else, though.
I wonder how long before the Jews make claims that the fish symbol was Jewish and this proves that Jesus was only a profit. Then they will assassinate anyone that disagrees and claims that believing in Jesus is an existential threat to the State of Israel.
Uh, Jesus was a "profit"? LOL!
Well, he was to the Vatican...
Thank you lokay5, you made my day! Leave it to a christian to use their 'prophet' for the primary purpose of earning a 'profit'.
lokay, you are hilarious
A "profit"? Didn't god give you the ability to spell?
The "fish" is very crude as a fish symbol. If you turn it 90 degrees, it looks like a person in a robe.
Does a dyslexic person believe in Dog?
no.
...they believe in obama
I think the jokes is:
an Dyslexic Agnostic Insomniac lies awake all night wondering if there really is a Dog or not... LOL
Why don't you tell us the answer?
Here's one for you: Why does a self-centered, egotistical pride gushing human think he/she is the top of existence and that all the amazing life on this planet is the result of accidents? Even in the face of all scientists telling us they have NO IDEA how DNA came to exist, and they cannot create even one protein, much less a one-cell creature in their soup and lightning experiments?
Scientists actually don't put us at the top of existence, religious people do. And much of the life on this planet IS the result of accidents. Were it not for a comet plowing into the Gulf of Mexico 65 million or so years ago, dinosaurs might still be the dominant animals, and we would never have come about.
Other than that, science does not say that "all the amazing life on this planet is the result of accidents." Accidents plus laws of nature and physics. And don't ask Who laid down those laws? They're not that kind of law. You need to learn a lot more about science before you go criticizing it.
The fact that we can't create life (just yet) doesn't mean we won't someday. And even if we never do, it still doesn't give you the right to insist that only a supernatural being could do it.
"My way or the highway" isn't exactly free will
Sure it's free will. You can either get on God's plan or blow Him off, it's your choice.
But the bigger question for Agnostics and Atheists is this: Would you want to spend an eternity with someone you don't like? If you have God issues, why would you want to spend an eternity in Heaven with Him? You have the choice to deny Him and "party like it's 1999" and suffer the consequences!
I think the issue for us is, where is the evidence? Why should I believe in the Christian god and not the Hindu gods? Where's the case? If I'm going to believe in one thing without evidence I may as well believe in tons of other things without evidence. You act like Christianity is the only religion.
John Ford,
It's actually not god who says, "my way or the highway." It's his followers.
And atheists or people of other religions don't dislike your god, we don't believe in him. See the difference? Do you dislike Zeus? Do you dislike Vishnu? Do you dislike bigfoot?
No? Why not? Because you don't believe they exist.