It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: AfterInfinity
Do you have any sources for that?
Also of note may be the clear majority of Catholics (65 percent) who believe the Bible is the inspired word of God but should not be taken literally word for word,
After a century of excavations trying to prove the ancient accounts true, archeologists say there is no conclusive evidence that the Israelites were ever in Egypt, were ever enslaved, ever wandered in the Sinai wilderness for 40 years or ever conquered the land of Canaan under Joshua's leadership. To the contrary, the prevailing view is that most of Joshua's fabled military campaigns never occurred--archeologists have uncovered ash layers and other signs of destruction at the relevant time at only one of the many battlegrounds mentioned in the Bible.
Today, the prevailing theory is that Israel probably emerged peacefully out of Canaan--modern-day Lebanon, southern Syria, Jordan and the West Bank of Israel--whose people are portrayed in the Bible as wicked idolators. Under this theory, the Canaanites who took on a new identity as Israelites were perhaps joined or led by a small group of Semites from Egypt--explaining a possible source of the Exodus story, scholars say. As they expanded their settlement, they may have begun to clash with neighbors, perhaps providing the historical nuggets for the conflicts recorded in Joshua and Judges.
"Scholars have known these things for a long time, but we've broken the news very gently," said William Dever, a professor of Near Eastern archeology and anthropology at the University of Arizona and one of America's preeminent archeologists.
originally posted by: godlover25
Are you serious?
I have to stop replying.
I don't know if your purposely trolling or totally confused.
Either way, obviously what I'm saying is not registering.
Pando (Latin for "I spread"), also known as The Trembling Giant, is a clonal colony of a single male quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides) determined to be a single living organism by identical genetic markers and one massive underground root system. The plant is estimated to weigh collectively 6,000,000 kg (6,600 short tons), making it the heaviest known organism. The root system of Pando, at an estimated 80,000 years old, is among the oldest known living organisms.
Pando is located 1 mile southwest of Fish Lake on Utah route 25. in the Fremont River Ranger District of the Fishlake National Forest, at the western edge of the Colorado Plateau in South-central Utah, at N 38.525 W 111.75.
If the 2350 date were correct, then human civilization would’ve had to undergo an extreme population explosion in the millenium following the flood. According to Biblical sources, there would have been millions of Jews leaving Egypt, so assuming a global population of 40 million around that time (~1350 BC), and comparing that to global population estimates later in history (an estimated 200+ million by 0 AD), would require an incredibly high population growth between 2350 BC and 1350 BC (5,000,000 fold increase in 1,000 years), and a much lower population growth after 1350 BC – usually less than 5 fold population growth within any 1,000 year period between 1350 BC and 1800 AD.
(3) The distribution of animals is not what we would expect if there were a global flood killing all life. If all life was limited to the top of a mountain in the Middle East in 2350 B.C., then how to explain the distribution of animals across the world? All the kangaroos on the Ark went to Australia? How did the animals get to the Americas? If they crossed via an ice-bridge in the Bering Strait, then the Americas should be limited to animals that are warm blooded and capable of traveling hundreds of miles across snow. This means no reptiles, no spiders, etc. Yet, the Amazon contains a wide variety of animal biodiversity. And why didn’t American desert animals stay behind in the deserts of the Old World? (See related post: “Creationism versus Animal Biodiversity”)
(4) Genetic evidence shows that human beings are far to genetically diverse to be descended from a single family in 2350 B.C. If Noah’s Ark were true, then all men alive today would’ve gotten their Y-chromosomes from Noah, and all human mitochondrial DNA would come from Noah’s wife and the three daughter-in-laws. Studies of the human Y-Chromosome show that you’d need far more than 4,300 years to accumulate that many mutations. Human beings could not be descended from a single male in 2350 B.C. What the studies show, instead, is that, in order to explain the number of mutations in the human Y-Chromosome, you have to allow for roughly 60,000-90,000 years. Similarly, human mitochondrial DNA requires roughly 160,000 years to accumulate that many mutations — showing that Eve could not have lived 6,000 years ago as the Bible says.
Additionally, once the animals left the Ark, there are a lot of nearby regions they could inhabit, but didn’t. For example, all varieties of rattlesnakes are found in the Americas (33 species, and numerous subspecies). There are none in the Old World – despite the fact that there are regions similar to the American deserts – the Sahara, the Middle East, the Gobi Desert, etc. Llamas fit this same pattern – found in the New World, but not in the Old World. The Caucus (where the Ark supposedly landed) and Himalaya mountains have different species than the Rocky Mountains and Andes. Why didn’t some of the Rocky Mountain species stick around in the Caucus Mountains – they were already there the minute they stepped off the Ark. Similarly, the species in the South American tropics aren’t found in Old World tropics (Southeast Asia and Africa), and vice-versa. For example, New World cats and monkeys are different species than Old World cats and monkeys. Theoretically, with the movement of creatures caused by the global flood, one could find the same species living in distant places. Somehow, we don’t.
originally posted by: godlover25
reply to post by mythos
Never, especially not in the OP, did I ask somebody to show me ONE verse where God asks somebody to commit a violent act,
Nor did I ever deny God did such a thing, lest I deny my God,
I understand God has handed down judgements in the past and used men as His means to accomplish this.
I said, show me ONE verse where God commands CHRISTIANS, since the FIRST CENTURY UP UNTIL THE CURRENT TIME, to use violence in any way, shape or form,
and, the God haters have been unable to do so,
originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: godlover25
What was the original topic of the thread, again? Yet people are talking about Noah's Ark, and DNA, and polling data. There are some subjects many people just refuse to have a discussion about, and anything relating to Christianity seems to be one of them. Repeat slogans? Sure, we can do that. Bring out old, erroneous information for the seventeenth time? No problem. But to say; "All right, a question has been posed. Let's verify the meaning so we are talking about the same thing and examine the question?" Nah, isn't going to happen.
For those who read the last page or two of a thread before jumping in to comment, the question, or challenge of this thread is to find any verse in the Bible that instructs modern Christians to kill, rape, lie, or any of that other bad stuff.
That seems clear enough, but people seem to insist that specific directions, given only to the Jews of 3,000 years ago, apply to American Christians today. Another religion, another people, another time, another purpose, yet people say that verses telling ancient Jews to smite the Molibianites (or whoever) mean that I have to go search out any descendants of the Molibianites and smite them mightily.
The indefensibility of that position may explain why the thread has been steered so thoroughly off-topic.
I really appreciate your efforts, but it is clear that no one wants to take up your challenge. They may be too cowardly to try and fail, or too afraid to admit that you are right. There may be other reasons for their reluctance to tackle the issue head on. Whatever the reason, you can carry home the trophy on this particular issue as no one wants to challenge you for it.
originally posted by: chiefsmom
reply to post by godlover25
Looks there there are a few already.
I have a question for you though.
How can the bible as written, be of "today" when it wasn't written for "today"?
If that is your case, there is no way you can lose, the way you are asking.
originally posted by: charles1952
the question, or challenge of this thread is to find any verse in the Bible that instructs modern Christians to kill, rape, lie, or any of that other bad stuff.
They may be too cowardly to try and fail, or too afraid to admit that you are right. There may be other reasons for their reluctance to tackle the issue head on.
you can carry home the trophy on this particular issue as no one wants to challenge you for it.
ETA ... Oh .. and if you were honest .. you would take note that the OP of this thread is telling lies about what people post. He claims that people are calling Jesus evil. That's pure bunk. In fact, people are saying the exact opposite.
You have refused twice, make that three times to answer my questions, even though one set was merely eight true and false questions. Bypassing all of that, you make a statement.
Your statement addresses absolutely nothing which I wrote about. Perhaps you added something to the conversation in some other way with your 27 words. I counted them because I was impressed by how much you could put into so short a sentence. Just one sentence, remarkable.
In that one sentence you accuse me of being either a liar or crooked. You accuse the OP of being crooked, and the thread being a farce.
Perhaps it was because you were too tired to type any more than that, but you make extraordinary claims with absolutely no evidence at all. Isn't that the position that "non-scientific, brain dead, superstitious, ignorant, redneck, Christians" are accused of taking? Well, I suppose I understand you better now.
You have found a wonderful way of dodging the questions asked. Have you more methods? I can hardly wait to see them.
Have you any evidence that I am a liar or crooked? Present it, please. If not, as with any other unsupported statement, I expect you to retract it.
What a shame I have to go through all of this to ask you to return to the topic and engage in a discussion. I want you to find that verse which shows the OP is wrong. Perhaps he is right, perhaps he is wrong. Let's find out. But stop wasting our time please. Stay on the subject and display the verse.
originally posted by: Prezbo369
Damn....no 'with respect' from charles....he must be p****d
AI is right though.....the OP's question is malformed.
When and where your god apparently commanded people to kill, maim and rape young girls is irrelevant, it's still immoral and vile.
The principal was not restricted to Crusade leaders, and was articulated by other Churchmen. The Bolognese legal scholar Johannes Teutonicus wrote in 1217 (around the same time as the above) in a commentary on Gratian: "If it can be shown that some heretics are in a city then all of the inhabitants can be burnt"
The idea of "Killing them all" and leaving it to God to sort out the souls of the dead is a popular one among traditionalist Christians. Indeed it is characteristically Christian. It only makes sense to those who believe in heaven and an afterlife. The phrase would be meaningless to an atheist. It is not difficult to find Christians today who espouse such views. Devout believers in US military units including Marines, Army Rangers, and Special Forces favour a slightly different formulation "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out." This phrase is found printed on T-shirts sold on military bases - The phrase even serves as an unofficial motto for some organizations in the US police and military.
So there you have it. Show me where God says that I should kill, rape, pillage or plunder today, and I'll admit I cannot follow Him,and publicly renounce my faith.
Given that as the problem we're looking at, I can only think of a few possible answers to the OP:
1.) It is a logical impossibility to answer the question.
2.) The question is so structured as to allow only one answer, and that answer is "X."
3.) No, I can't find such a verse.
4.) Here is the verse you requested. I can prove that it is addressed to modern Christians, that it requires them to rape, kill, plunder or pillage, and that I have properly interpreted the context of the verse.
My own feeling? Before listening to people who will attempt to be logical, dispassionate, and accurate? There isn't such a verse, but nobody really expected there to be one. It's only an issue for fringe elements.
As I say, I might be suffering from blindness. Here is your chance to take a breath, slow down, stop insulting, and actually begin a decent discussion.
originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: charles1952
Its not blindness Sir Charles... Its misunderstanding the sly trick question...
He's looking for a verse that commands Christians to kill that can be found in the bible...
A book which consists of two "testaments" the OLD and the NEW...
HE will reject anything that tells followers of the OLD to kill... yet still claim it is Gods word, but he wasn't talking to Christians...
Going by the NEW a verse can not be found obviously... but the evidence is abundant in the OLD...
SO either God changed his attitude with the introduction of Jesus... OR The OT isn't God...
Yet the OP also claims the OT God is the same as Jesus... which simply doesn't make sense all things considered...
The problem is the OP claims Both the OLD and the NEW are Gods words... and the books says God doesn't change...
SO... IF this is the same God, he does change.... OR... He is still a ruthless tyrant, which we can find no evidence of in the NT... aside from revelation perhaps...