fronzz Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Okay, Im a newcomer to this topic, so im gonna start at the beginning (solrta). Stone person a for action z. If person X sins then he must take a 2 year female goat, with no deformities, strike off the head and wipe two strokes of blood on the altar and 3 strokes on the left ear. Then burn the incese and lamb to make an aroma pleasing to the Lord. I will cover your face withy my hand while I, the Lord, pass you or you will die by looking at me. Take a 21/2 year old male donkey, no deformities and go to the top of hill X, make an altar and sacrifice your son. Just some, IMHO, the most rediculous things the Bible contains. These were put there by God to TEST the people of Israel in their faith of God that He would deliver them from the other countries... Ok, that part is done lol. I am a Christian, a reformed christian. We use the Heidelberg catechism in our church and the Canons of Dordt, and the Belgic confession. I'll only go into the Heidelberg Catechism though. This catechism was written by Zacharias Ursinus (1534-1583) and Caspar Olevianus (1536-1584) in Heidelberg, Germany and published in 1563 in German. It was endorsed by the Synod of Dort and embraced by Reformed Churches in many different countries. It is the custom of many churches that use it to explain it from the pulpit every Sunday afternoon, so it is divided into fifty-two sections. Q. 21. What is true faith? A. True faith is not only a certain knowledge, whereby I hold for truth all that God has revealed to us in his word, (a) but also an assured confidence, (B) which the Holy Ghost © works by the gospel in my heart; (d) that not only to others, but to me also, remission of sin, everlasting righteousness and salvation, (e) are freely given by God, merely of grace, only for the sake of Christ's merits. So basically, if you don't have that faith, you arent going to believe, only a person with a believing heart will let God into his/her life... I dont feel like typing anymore atm. when you have steel barsTHE GREAT RACE TO 99 FM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djo0 Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Well, most religious people hold illogical beliefs ie. Christians who rely on the Bible as proof of their specific God, and some are "close minded" because they choose to accept a non-empirical way of gaining truth in favour of things like the Bible, moslty for illogical reasons. And choosing the Bible as infalliable truth over empiricism is slightly crazy.The Bible is pretty much just there to tell us to do good deeds, such as be a good neighbor, love your enemy, etc. Are those crazy? It's not like the Bible is a science or history book. LIke the person above said, it's a book of morals telling us how we should act. Most of it was written over 2000 years ago, so you cna't expect it to get all of the scientific facts right. "Nobody cheers for Goliath" ~Wilt Chamberlain~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satenza Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Well, most religious people hold illogical beliefs ie. Christians who rely on the Bible as proof of their specific God, and some are "close minded" because they choose to accept a non-empirical way of gaining truth in favour of things like the Bible, moslty for illogical reasons. And choosing the Bible as infalliable truth over empiricism is slightly crazy.The Bible is pretty much just there to tell us to do good deeds, such as be a good neighbor, love your enemy, etc. Are those crazy? It's not like the Bible is a science or history book. LIke the person above said, it's a book of morals telling us how we should act. Most of it was written over 2000 years ago, so you cna't expect it to get all of the scientific facts right. Well since you're liberal christians (well Jesse is i think) I am pretty sure every thing you beleive from the Bible is common sense that existed before the Bible was even written. Which leaves us the things you don't follow (the crazy stuff). This is my problem with liberal christians i don't understand why you need to follow or label yourself as christians for pretty much acting as you would anyways - following common sense. Like agnostic people, deists or atheists. I don't really know why you need stories to teach you these, but these things are not crazy. Now you probably do hold beliefs that go beyond logic and rationality such as Jesus being the son of God and rising into heaven to release you of all sins and all that jazz. That part of your faith is slightly crazy, just as you would call me crazy if believed a vampire lives in my neighborhood. The Bible is just a peice of romanticism that teaches a few good things that we would have known already through common sense. With so many trees in the city you could see the spring coming each day until a night of warm wind would bring it suddenly in one morning. Sometimes the heavy cold rains would beat it back so that it would seem that it would never come and that you were losing a season out of your life. But you knew that there would always be the spring as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person had died for no reason. In those days though the spring always came finally but it was frightening that it had nearly failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assassin_696 Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Interestingly, some work was done by a project called the Jesus Seminar a few years ago which set out to critically examine the historicity of Jesus. Findings indicated that Jesus only ever said 18% of things normally attributed to him, and most of his sayings were in fact, largely unoriginal and common of the time. A newer project is being undertaken at the moment which is starting out to examine whether or not Jesus ever actually existed. The evidence is divided at the moment. "Da mihi castitatem et continentam, sed noli modo" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fronzz Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Josephus was an athiest/agnostic. This is what he wrote concerning Jesus. 3.3 Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day. when you have steel barsTHE GREAT RACE TO 99 FM! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satenza Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Concerns have been raised about the authenticity of the passage, at least in part, and it is widely held by scholars that part of the passage is an interpolation by a later scribe. Judging from Alice Whealey's 2003 survey of the historiography, it seems that the majority of modern scholars consider that Josephus really did write something here about Jesus, but that the text that has reached us is corrupt to a perhaps quite substantial extent. In the words of the Catholic Encyclopedia entry for Flavius Josephus, "The passage seems to suffer from repeated interpolations." There has been no consensus on which portions are corrupt, or to what degree. In antiquity, Origen recorded that Josephus did not believe Jesus was the Christ,[38] as it seems to suggest in the quote above. However, one may construe that when Josephus had written "He was the Christ," he may have simply been referring to Jesus by a name that the Roman people (Josephus' audience) had come to know Jesus as, considering that during the later part of the first century Jesus was simply known as "Christus" throughout Greek and Roman society (as is evident in Tacitus' reference below). If such an interpretation is true, the sentence would thusly be rendered as "He is the one known as the Christ." However, this interpretation is obviously debatable. Michael L. White argued against authenticity, citing that parallel sections of Josephus's Jewish War do not mention Jesus, and that some Christian writers as late as the third century, who quoted from the Antiquities, do not mention the passage.[39] While very few scholars believe the whole testimonium is genuine,[40] most scholars have found at least some authentic words of Josephus in the passage.[41] Certain scholars of Josephus's works have observed that this portion is written in his style With so many trees in the city you could see the spring coming each day until a night of warm wind would bring it suddenly in one morning. Sometimes the heavy cold rains would beat it back so that it would seem that it would never come and that you were losing a season out of your life. But you knew that there would always be the spring as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person had died for no reason. In those days though the spring always came finally but it was frightening that it had nearly failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evrae Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Okay, Im a newcomer to this topic, so im gonna start at the beginning (solrta). Stone person a for action z. If person X sins then he must take a 2 year female goat, with no deformities, strike off the head and wipe two strokes of blood on the altar and 3 strokes on the left ear. Then burn the incese and lamb to make an aroma pleasing to the Lord. I will cover your face withy my hand while I, the Lord, pass you or you will die by looking at me. Take a 21/2 year old male donkey, no deformities and go to the top of hill X, make an altar and sacrifice your son. Just some, IMHO, the most rediculous things the Bible contains. These were put there by God to TEST the people of Israel in their faith of God that He would deliver them from the other countries... Ok, that part is done lol. I am a Christian, a reformed christian. We use the Heidelberg catechism in our church and the Canons of Dordt, and the Belgic confession. I'll only go into the Heidelberg Catechism though. This catechism was written by Zacharias Ursinus (1534-1583) and Caspar Olevianus (1536-1584) in Heidelberg, Germany and published in 1563 in German. It was endorsed by the Synod of Dort and embraced by Reformed Churches in many different countries. It is the custom of many churches that use it to explain it from the pulpit every Sunday afternoon, so it is divided into fifty-two sections. Q. 21. What is true faith? A. True faith is not only a certain knowledge, whereby I hold for truth all that God has revealed to us in his word, (a) but also an assured confidence, (B) which the Holy Ghost © works by the gospel in my heart; (d) that not only to others, but to me also, remission of sin, everlasting righteousness and salvation, (e) are freely given by God, merely of grace, only for the sake of Christ's merits. So basically, if you don't have that faith, you arent going to believe, only a person with a believing heart will let God into his/her life... I dont feel like typing anymore atm. My problem with this is that you can replace ' a believing heart' with 'gullibility', and still keep the same meaning. Though it does seem much less flattering. Thats the problem with language - you can give the same meaning positive or negative connotations very easily. I have to get practically naked when I'm cooking bacon.I may be immature, but that made me laugh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartless619 Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 one thing id like to point out..im not sure how far this has come and all but.. Athiest here and agnostics are telling us christians to be open minded? when...really you have to be open minded to think that maybe there is something out there..a greater being...so athiest and agnostics stop telling us to be so open minded when really your the ones being close minded... with all your sayings...."well if i cant see it then its not real" and some others if i stumble apon will post here Do you think every atheist thinks this way? Let me enlighten you and everyone else as to what atheism fundamentally means. Everyone huddle round and listen up, this is important so we don't continue misrepresenting each other. and do you think every Christian is as close minded as you say we are? IGNORE THESE FOUR WORDS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satenza Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 He has already aid about 15 [bleep]ing times that he doesn't think ALL christians are close minded. With so many trees in the city you could see the spring coming each day until a night of warm wind would bring it suddenly in one morning. Sometimes the heavy cold rains would beat it back so that it would seem that it would never come and that you were losing a season out of your life. But you knew that there would always be the spring as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person had died for no reason. In those days though the spring always came finally but it was frightening that it had nearly failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defender2516 Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 He has already aid about 15 [bleep] times that he doesn't think ALL christians are close minded. Atheists have intresting charaters. From my perspective of them, they base things off evidence, logic, rationality. Their goal when talking to a christian? Point out how his beliefs are illogical, unevidential, and unrational by his research and findings (thus why he Athiest). Yet its amazing that a Athiest, being logical and the common sense type of man has no common sense or logic when dealing with people. Adding insults and emotional cuts to your posts will not get a Christian to be open minded. They would simpley only retract. There is no such thing as a open minded Athiest, because he is the excate opposite of a christian. For example, A Christian believes there is a God, no other way around this. A Athiest believes there is no God, and there is no other way around this. You cannot say "There may be and i'll change my mind later", you cannot, that would make you Agnostic or whatever Religion you may take on. A Agnostic is a person who would be most open minded because he believes a God may or may not exist. ~Defender~ If you love me, send me a PM. 8 - Love me2 - Hate me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satenza Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 I agree, which is why I have said on numerous occassions atheism is just as illogical as deism and I am agnostic. Oh and the [bleep] was because pretty much every time somone posts to something warri0r says i always see "Well not ALL christians are close minded" and it's getting incredibly annoying that people can't read previous posts. With so many trees in the city you could see the spring coming each day until a night of warm wind would bring it suddenly in one morning. Sometimes the heavy cold rains would beat it back so that it would seem that it would never come and that you were losing a season out of your life. But you knew that there would always be the spring as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person had died for no reason. In those days though the spring always came finally but it was frightening that it had nearly failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defender2516 Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 I agree, which is why I have said on numerous occassions atheism is just as illogical as deism and I am agnostic. What is Deism? I have heard of it before, I thought it was more of a person who is Agnostic. Isn't it those people who believe in more than one God or something? ~Defender~ If you love me, send me a PM. 8 - Love me2 - Hate me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satenza Posted July 25, 2007 Share Posted July 25, 2007 Pretty much the opposite of Atheism - they believe there is a God but are not sure what or which it is. With so many trees in the city you could see the spring coming each day until a night of warm wind would bring it suddenly in one morning. Sometimes the heavy cold rains would beat it back so that it would seem that it would never come and that you were losing a season out of your life. But you knew that there would always be the spring as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person had died for no reason. In those days though the spring always came finally but it was frightening that it had nearly failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 one thing id like to point out..im not sure how far this has come and all but.. Athiest here and agnostics are telling us christians to be open minded? when...really you have to be open minded to think that maybe there is something out there..a greater being...so athiest and agnostics stop telling us to be so open minded when really your the ones being close minded... with all your sayings...."well if i cant see it then its not real" and some others if i stumble apon will post here Do you think every atheist thinks this way? Let me enlighten you and everyone else as to what atheism fundamentally means. Everyone huddle round and listen up, this is important so we don't continue misrepresenting each other. and do you think every Christian is as close minded as you say we are? When did I EVER say that? Show me and I'll not only eat my shoe, but apologise profusely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 He has already aid about 15 [bleep] times that he doesn't think ALL christians are close minded. Atheists have intresting charaters. From my perspective of them, they base things off evidence, logic, rationality. Their goal when talking to a christian? Point out how his beliefs are illogical, unevidential, and unrational by his research and findings (thus why he Athiest). Yet its amazing that a Athiest, being logical and the common sense type of man has no common sense or logic when dealing with people. Adding insults and emotional cuts to your posts will not get a Christian to be open minded. They would simpley only retract. There is no such thing as a open minded Athiest, because he is the excate opposite of a christian. For example, A Christian believes there is a God, no other way around this. A Athiest believes there is no God, and there is no other way around this. You cannot say "There may be and i'll change my mind later", you cannot, that would make you Agnostic or whatever Religion you may take on. A Agnostic is a person who would be most open minded because he believes a God may or may not exist. ~Defender~ No I don't. You're assuming all atheists are strong atheists. I am this kind of atheist: Definitions of atheism on the Web: the doctrine or belief that there is no God a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn Atheism is the state either of being without theistic beliefs, or of actively disbelieving in the existence of deities. In antiquity, Epicureanism incorporated aspects of atheism, but it disappeared from the philosophy of the Greek and Roman traditions as Christianity gained influence. ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism The belief that God does not exist. library.thinkquest.org/25416/gloss.htm One who denies or disbelieves the existence of a God.# http://www.stsams.org/dictionary.html A belief that there are no gods. Greek "a-theos": without-god. http://www.reasoned.org/glossary.htm belief that there is no god and that religion should be suppressed. http://www.naiadonline.ca/book/01Glossary.htm n a) a disbelief [or unbelief] in the existence of deity B) the doctrine that there is no deity tangents.home.att.net/data/rlgdef.htm Atheists In modern times, those who do not accept the monotheistic Christian God or any god. It formerly signified those who did not believe in the accepted divinity or divinities of the State or populace. -atm.htm]http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/etgloss/[wagon]-atm.htm An atheist is one who does not believe in the existence of God or gods. Pretty simple, right? studentorgs.georgetown.edu/guskeptics/definitions.htm a (ÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¢â¬ÅwithoutÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâà Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartless619 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 one thing id like to point out..im not sure how far this has come and all but.. Athiest here and agnostics are telling us christians to be open minded? when...really you have to be open minded to think that maybe there is something out there..a greater being...so athiest and agnostics stop telling us to be so open minded when really your the ones being close minded... with all your sayings...."well if i cant see it then its not real" and some others if i stumble apon will post here Do you think every atheist thinks this way? Let me enlighten you and everyone else as to what atheism fundamentally means. Everyone huddle round and listen up, this is important so we don't continue misrepresenting each other. and do you think every Christian is as close minded as you say we are? When did I EVER say that? Show me and I'll not only eat my shoe, but apologise profusely. not you but your atheist friends have said it. IGNORE THESE FOUR WORDS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warri0r45 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 one thing id like to point out..im not sure how far this has come and all but.. Athiest here and agnostics are telling us christians to be open minded? when...really you have to be open minded to think that maybe there is something out there..a greater being...so athiest and agnostics stop telling us to be so open minded when really your the ones being close minded... with all your sayings...."well if i cant see it then its not real" and some others if i stumble apon will post here Do you think every atheist thinks this way? Let me enlighten you and everyone else as to what atheism fundamentally means. Everyone huddle round and listen up, this is important so we don't continue misrepresenting each other. and do you think every Christian is as close minded as you say we are? When did I EVER say that? Show me and I'll not only eat my shoe, but apologise profusely. not you but your atheist friends have said it. Then next time please try and direct the comment at the right people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assassin_696 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 Right, this is getting annoying. Richard Dawkins puts it like this: Imagine a scale from 1 to 7 ranking religious beliefs. 1 would be a religious person who is so absolutely convinced that there is a god that no amount of evidence could ever convince him/her otherwise. 7 is an atheist's equivalent. Dawkins, myself and the vast majority of other atheists would put ourselves at about a 6; that is to say we are almost certainly convinced that there is a not a god, but not totally closeminded to the possibility that there might be one. All it would require would be a scrap of evidence or proof and we would reconsider, many are scientificially minded and we follow the evidence wherever it leads us. Stop generalising, stop trying to turn the tables on us and come with something better. "Da mihi castitatem et continentam, sed noli modo" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defender2516 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 if you come to my house, you got no worries, I can't afford to turn tables :lol: haha, joking aside.. I'm not sure why you would call yourself a Athiest, but not say you are a Strong Athiest. Its one of those "Politically Correct" crap that really doesn't effect your status at all, but a escape goat from saying "i'm not open minded". If your Athiest, your close minded. Its a simple as that.. if you will let Evidence change your perspective, then you should stop calling yourself Athiest and claim to be Agnostic. Not Athiest vs Strong Athiest. I never heard of Christian and Strong Christians. I never heard a single Christian come on here and say "i'm a strong christian", thats because there is no difference. So I don't see why Athiest would have that. Dam.. Athiests sure are picky about their little status'es :P ~Defender~ If you love me, send me a PM. 8 - Love me2 - Hate me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assassin_696 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 It's because you're confusing definitions and generalising opinions, you have to accept that there are Christians with varying degrees of faith, some are abolsutely convinced that there is a God, some are fairly sure but might change their minds if questioned. Why don't I call myself an agnostic? Because even though you cannot conclusively disprove why Zeus, or Thor or the toothfairy doesn't exist, that doesn't mean you should call yourself an agnostic about them. When no evidence is provided for the existence of something you should assume a position of skepticality but not total close mindedness. I'm not closeminded, and I think you'll find very few atheists are. If theists were able to come up with some genuinely convincing proof as to why God exists I would change my mind (I cannot speak for my co-thinkers) I'm open minded to the possibility, but you haven't so that's why I call myself an atheist. You, as a Christian are an atheist about 99% of the gods that have ever been dreamt up in the history of mankind, we just go one further (to steal a line). I fail to see the problem, especially since I wouldn't call all Christians or religious people close minded, on the contrary, I just believe they're opening their mind to the wrong kind of input. "Da mihi castitatem et continentam, sed noli modo" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evrae Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 You'vegot mr wondering now about how many strong athiests there are. I can only think of one route that would lead that way, and that is Marxism - it comes with the package - but thats not too big nowadays. Assassin seems to have beaten me to replying, and said all I would have, and more. So I will content myself with asking this. That is the Mandelbrot set in your sig isn't it? I have to get practically naked when I'm cooking bacon.I may be immature, but that made me laugh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
assassin_696 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 Assassin seems to have beaten me to replying, and said all I would have, and more. So I will content myself with asking this. That is the Mandelbrot set in your sig isn't it? Yeah it is, good spot :) "Da mihi castitatem et continentam, sed noli modo" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splatmster24 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 one thing id like to point out..im not sure how far this has come and all but.. Athiest here and agnostics are telling us christians to be open minded? when...really you have to be open minded to think that maybe there is something out there..a greater being...so athiest and agnostics stop telling us to be so open minded when really your the ones being close minded... with all your sayings...."well if i cant see it then its not real" and some others if i stumble apon will post here Do you think every atheist thinks this way? Let me enlighten you and everyone else as to what atheism fundamentally means. Everyone huddle round and listen up, this is important so we don't continue misrepresenting each other. and do you think every Christian is as close minded as you say we are? When did I EVER say that? Show me and I'll not only eat my shoe, but apologise profusely. not you but your atheist friends have said it. Then next time please try and direct the comment at the right people. and this is one of the main reasons i have decided that religous conversations are completly pointless. people always think that they are right. the way i see it it shouldnt make a difference wether or not i believe god created the heavens and the earth? How can me going to church every sunday make a major difference in your life? Why should it concern you if i decide to save myself until marriege? the answer is that it doesnt. so dont diss my religoun just because you dont think its right. Say what you mean and mean what you say because those that matter don't mind, and those that mind don't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonavolaii Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 According to the bible, the world is 6000 years old. Yet, it is PROVEN the world is approximately 4.5 billion years old. Fossils, examinations of the earths crust say that the world is billions of years old. Some people with a voice in their head is all the proof it is 6000 years old. Fossil examinations have proven absolutely nothing, they tested a LIVE Seashell and the result was that it had been dead for 3600 years. There are 4 factors wrong with this method of carbon dating. [*:dakz62rp]How much carbon was there in the first place? After all it is handed down through mother to child, animals as well as humans eat at different rates...[*:dakz62rp]Was the substance (mostly Carbon14) added or removed? Some plants that absorb Carbon natuarally don't absorb C14, this would give them and there eaters an unnaturally old age...[*:dakz62rp]Was the speed of decay constant? This can never be proven as with the rest of them however C14 could be washed into, or out of a dead creature.[*:dakz62rp]It has never been proven that these methods of dating work. Also on your so-called proof in the layers of the earth, the earth layers age is measured by the fossils that lye in them, the age of those fossils is determined by the age of the layers they are in. This is called circular reasoning and is as you no doubt agree, not the highest form of logic. Layers can also be formed quickly as even old tests have proved. Here is another point in which shows the world cannot be 6000 years old: Please, explain to me how the light from the distant stars is here. How can we see anything in the universe past our own solar system. We simply wouldn't be able to, for light wouldn't have had enough time to travel this far. Genesis 1:3 'And God said 'let there be light' and there was light...' Genesis 1:14 'And God said 'let there be lights in the expanse of the sky...' Here we see that God created the light Before the lights If that is the case then how can you claim that the light we see 'From other galaxies' is actually from them. Furthermore if the light had to travel that distance the earth would be far older than even evolutionists claim. Another point, is dinosaurs. The bible does in fact mention mythological beasts, whether it is talking about dinosaurs or not is irrelivent. A biblical day(when god created the earth) may have a different meaning, timewise, than our 24 hour system. It wouldn't make sense if they had big days, as the bible includes sentences such as "he travelled for X days" If in fact, the days back then were big enough to account for the billions of years this earth has been around for, in this 'X days' he would have been dead in the first day. Thats true it may have another meaning, however it also states certain numbers that due to circumstances cannot have been much different, (the great flood, Jesus' life, persecution of christians in the first century which has been proved) Fossils are billions of 'today's years' old, but apparently the bible is 6000 years old. I explained above about the argument about different sized days cannot be true, so if you believe in the bible, you cannot believe in dinosaurs. Which have been proven, you might as well not believe in gravity.Dinosaurs are evolutionists claimed 'trumps card', however certain reports have even reported some of these 'exctinct' animals to be alive in more remote parts of the world(peredactyls in mid-africa) also, the sudden deaths of these animals can be explained by the great flood, depleting the oxygen levels by a great amount. There have been many religions over the centuries. Each religion can be baught down to 2 reasons, one of which is morals. Religion works great as a set of moral guidelines untill people start killing each other over whose god is better, or untill those guidelines become outdated. Christians aren't killing off vast numbers of any other religion at the moment (except Muslims, and that doesn't count because our motive is oil, not religious zeal, though you could make a case that the Middle Eastern conflict is a modern day crusade for the holy land). So is Christianity completely outdated? The Muslim rational for not eating pigs is that they are "Dirty" animals and it is not gods will for us to eat them. This may have made sense thousands or even hundreds of years ago, when pigs may have had bacteria in them that could cause certain diseases. This is not true today. The Christian rational for not having sex before marriage is that it is gods will for us to create families and not have sex before marriage. This may have made sense hundreds of years ago when sex before marriage created unwanted children and social decay. It is not true today. How many cases of sexually transmitted deseases are there in the world today? How much do you yourselves claim(most of you) that the current world population is growing to fast? I rest my case... The other reason is to explain what science and technology can't.First, you have just admitted that science cannot explain all things second, it is completely irrational to try to explain things such as miracles which's by defenition defy science, with science. One example is the ancient egyptions. They did not have the science and technology to know how the sun rose and set, it appeared to them to move across the sky. So they invented a god that moved the sun across the sky. Today we know that is [cabbage], and the Earth revolves around the sun - which is why it appears to move across the sky. We know this because of the science and technology we have today.Not arguing here but that has nothing to do with the bible Lets briefly compare a story of the bible, to a religious story we have today. The sun moving across the sky in ancient egypt, and jesus being the son of god. They both took true facts. There was really a man called jesus who claimed to be the son of god. And the sun does in fact appear to move across the sky. And then turned them into stories to explain what science and technology can't. A god passes through 12 gates, fights a serpent and carries the sun across the sky, and A man called Jesus claimed to be the son of god and performed mericles. (sp) My question: How is the Ancient Egyptions religion, which we all know is rubbish, any different to the stories in the bible? There are in fact still people today who believe in ancient religions, because of faith even though they are wrong, and that is all that christianity is.It has never been proven that the bibles claims of Jesus as the son of God and doing miracles is false, in fact there is more proof that the bible is true than any other book in history. [*:dakz62rp]The new testament alone is more than 10 times the evidence than any antieque documents [*:dakz62rp]Proof of this: [*:dakz62rp]Homer iliad, earliest copy found 400BC, time gap between making and earliest existing copy, 400 years, 643 original manuscripts [*:dakz62rp]Herodotus history, 900AD, 1350 years, 8 copies [*:dakz62rp]Thucydides history, 900AD, 1300 years, 8 copies [*:dakz62rp]Plato, 900AD, 1300 years, 7 copies [*:dakz62rp]Demosthenes, 1100AD, 1400 years, 200 copies [*:dakz62rp]Ceasar galic wars, 900AD, 1000 years, 10 copies [*:dakz62rp]Livy history of rome, 4th century most are 10th century, 400 - 1000 years, 1 partial 19 copies [*:dakz62rp]Tacitus annals, 1100AD, 1000 years, 20 copies [*:dakz62rp]Pliny secundus Natural history, 850AD, 750 years, 7 copiesNow for the good part...[*:dakz62rp]New testament ALONE, 114AD, 50 years, 5366 copies + around 20000 non-greek copies[*:dakz62rp]One passage of the bible of today matched with the earliest manuscripts found reveal that in a passage of around 500 words there are only 4 spelling mistakes wich do not even appear in the hebrew version. In total in the entire bible there would be a maximum of 2% mistakes than since Genesis was written Also to disclaim all beliefs hat the bible is just a little book we should use for moral guide or another version of the same old religeon... [*:dakz62rp]Christianity is a religeon about God trying to reach man, ALL other religeons are man trying to reach God.[*:dakz62rp]Almost all if not all religeons claim you must be a good person to get in to heaven, valhalla whatever, however christianity claims that all men (and women) are beyond endless hope to get into heaven. That is why God sent his son, Jesus, the only way to free all mankind was to have a pure offering, not anilmal, animal was only good for 1 or 2 sins. A pure human being was needed to be sacraficed for mankind. Gods son was the only possibility.[*:dakz62rp]You claim that christians are on a 'crusade' to kill muslims, as for today, that is either really just bush trying to make peace or a desperate attempt to get oil from already depleting deposits. As for early crusades, near to none of the men that joined them were christian and the whole event was shrouded in corruption.[*:dakz62rp]The bible claims that if you do not repent or try to pretend that your fate does not await you, you shall go to hell. This seems more than enough proof to say that the bible should not be thought of as a book to recieve moral guidance from. Now for some proofs against the only other logical explanation than religeon (although I will soon prove that evolution itsself is a religeon) You want to start playing with proof of the age of the universe? Bring it on... [*:dakz62rp]The suns diameter decreases with 6 feet a day, you can see this in the constantly darker solar eclips. only 1 million years ago life on this planet would have been impossible, not even bothering to explain how venus and mercury 'emerged' from the middle of the sun.[*:dakz62rp]the magnetic field around the earth decreases at a certain rate, tenthousand years ago our planet would have had the polarity of a magnetic star, that is scientificly seen the MAXIMUM for any planet in the universe.[*:dakz62rp]Comets, with all the hazards in the solar system alone they could not exist for any longer than about 10000 years. if you would claim an oort cloud well then prove it, if you cant see it it isn't there because comets cannot travel faster than light.[*:dakz62rp]Imagine a merry-go-round, there are children on it, these big footballers spin it counter clockwise. At a certain speed the children say 'faster faster' at speed 2 they say 'wheeeeeeeee' At speed 3 they say 'slow down slow down!' at speed 4 they just hang on for dear life :D At speed 5 they all fly away from the merry-go-round and which way do they spin? counter clockwise. There are whole galaxies spinning in different directions. This makes the big bang theory implausible [*:dakz62rp]Phisically any action with a chance of 1 against (10 to the power of 40000) Is impossible. The chances that a singel enzyme would by accident come together is 1 against (10 to the power of 3000000)That should be enough proof against evolution for now. a religeon is a belief without fundament. Evolution has no proof and therefore no fundament. Information is not material, if i were to delete your harddrive it would weigh exactly the same as before. the same can be said about energy. This means that information is not a material entity. thus we do not live in a materal based world. Have I burst the buble on all of your ideas yet? All good newbies go to Lumbridge, I respawn in Camelot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djo0 Posted July 26, 2007 Share Posted July 26, 2007 That should be enough proof against evolution for now. a religeon is a belief without fundament. Evolution has no proof and therefore no fundament. Evolution has plenty of proof. Though there are unexplained parts to the idea, it is almost certain that this is how organisms evolved. I don't think that this takes away from what God did. I believe that he guided evolution to create humans. I guess that you would say I am one of those "intelligent design" people. Evolution and Christianity don't contradict. In fact, even the Pope has accepted evolution as God's way of creating life. "Nobody cheers for Goliath" ~Wilt Chamberlain~ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now