It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

God Did It! The rest is post modern chatter!

page: 59
23
<< 56  57  58    60  61  62 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Or evolved wings and lost them as soon as they landed.

Either sounds just as plausible lol.




posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: Akragon

What I don't understand is if one part is a story how do you know other parts are not. And who decides what is allegory and what is historically true?

God.

Obviously.



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Joecanada11

Theres archeological evidence for quite a few things in the bible... but theres obviously some (many) things that are just fictional... that is one obviously

Adam and Eve

The entire book of Job

Sodom and Gomorrah

The dude that lived in a fish for three days...

We could go on and on

The book of psalms are actually songs people sang way back in the day...

Leviticus was written for Levite priests

Many of the stories were actually plagiarised from other cultures

Funny thing though... the best way to figure out whats true and what isn't is to read the book... and find evidence for the stories, IF there is any...

Kinda goes with the theme of this thread... or at least what the opponents of the OP are trying to tell him




posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Lol I know you are being sarcastic but seriously. If you are a Christian and you believe Noah to be allegorical then what logic is there to believing Christ walked on water or rose from the dead.



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Joecanada11

That is the basis of their faith that he was God...

Likely added to give him the image of Godhood as well...

Though in reality, One does not need the miracles to believe what Jesus taught




posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

I'm no fool I understand some things happened. I also understand that many of the things that did happened were exaggerated. Or that natural disasters such as the plagues of Egypt were attributed to supernatural means because they didn't know the things we know now.



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: TerryDon79

Lol I know you are being sarcastic but seriously. If you are a Christian and you believe Noah to be allegorical then what logic is there to believing Christ walked on water or rose from the dead.


Coz.

God.

(I'm doing really well at this "God did it" thing, don't you think?)



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

Absolutely. And some things he taught were great. But he also failed to condemn slavery and speficially mentioned that slaves should obey their owners.



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Joecanada11


I'm no fool I understand some things happened. I also understand that many of the things that did happened were exaggerated. Or that natural disasters such as the plagues of Egypt were attributed to supernatural means because they didn't know the things we know now.


Actually i recently watched a show that attributed the plagues of Egypt to a Volcano eruption... put a little reality spin on the story... and it had nothing to do with Christianity, it was a secular program


Absolutely. And some things he taught were great. But he also failed to condemn slavery and speficially mentioned that slaves should obey their owners.


Well that is true, but slavery wasn't really abolished until recently... And "slaves" in the bible had to be treated quite well... they were more like employees so to speak




posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Akragon

I read an article regarding the plagues that spoke of the volcanic eruption as well. Basically it caused a chain reaction of events but there was nothing supernatural about it.

Slaves whether treated well or not were still property. Which is wrong no matter how well you are treated. There is still a lack of freedom. Anyways I digress.



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 09:47 PM
link   
You also were engrained to follow the crowd which claims to be 'progressive' so that you can conform to a secular agenda that doesn't want to answer to a higher power. You don't know what's right for you because you've never stepped out of your mental box. But it's a cool place to live. Ignorance is bliss. Just think, you're going with the flow of everyone else. Like a lemming. To be accepted and to not have any restraints. That's what everyone wants. To be their own god. Not have one. a reply to: jimmyx


edit on 9-5-2016 by TheCretinHop because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 10:10 PM
link   
a reply to: TheCretinHop

No that's not going with the crowd at all. There is no evidence of god which is what the thread is about. No proof. I don't claim to be my own god. I don't claim there is a god because it's an unfounded claim.



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: TheCretinHop

And please enlighten me on this agenda? What is the agenda and what is the goal. Who's in on this big conspiracy?



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 10:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: TheCretinHop

And please enlighten me on this agenda? What is the agenda and what is the goal. Who's in on this big conspiracy?


It's the "athiest agenda". We need to "spread our religion".

Or, it's the "scientific agenda to educate people".

I think the first one is what the religious fundies think, but the second one is what's happening regardless of religious beliefs.



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Your stealing my fun Terry. I wanted to hear what he thinks the agenda is so I can see how illogical it is. Oh well.



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 10:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: TerryDon79

Your stealing my fun Terry. I wanted to hear what he thinks the agenda is so I can see how illogical it is. Oh well.


Awww. I'm sorry. I can delete my post and talk about unicorns if you want?



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: TerryDon79

Haha well there is evidence of a unicorn like creature as posted in another thread.

I think it's funny that the OP makes a couple posts with no substance and continues to ignore the scriptures that are in conflict with his premise.
edit on 9-5-2016 by Joecanada11 because: Spelling error



posted on May, 9 2016 @ 10:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: TerryDon79

Haha well there is evidence of a unicorn Luke creature as posted in another thread.
I saw that. 'Twas funny lol



I think it's funny that the OP makes a couple posts with no substance and continues to ignore the scriptures that are in conflict with his premise.
I think they think that if they say "God did it" or "proof God did it" enough times it will come true.

Sorry fundies! This isn't the wizard of oz. You can't say something 3 times, click your pretty red shoes and make it come true. That's just not the way the world works outside of tv land.
edit on 952016 by TerryDon79 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2016 @ 12:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2
I'm not promoting my faith - just offering a different perspective. A Biblical perspective back up by true science.


But you haven't posted any science whatsoever that backs up your biblical perspective. You took a loose example of a cherry picked fact and claimed that an ancient scripture might have referred to this because it said that the earth was hung on nothing, which is wrong as is. You are guessing and projecting it as truth. It's not actually truth, it's your opinion. The sooner you admit this, the better. Otherwise you could be destined to follow down the same path as many other fundamentalists, and harm innocent people over your version of the truth. I really don't want to see that. Humans are fallible. They don't have all the answers, especially not ancient folks from 4000 years ago. To assume that requires a HUGE amount of faith in man.


Actually, science is just catching up to what the Bible writers knew ahead of time.


Then why does the majority of known science conflict with the majority of the bible? You can't say that science is right about this one thing but dismiss evolution and numerous other fields of study because they aren't mentioned in your religious book. That's ridiculous.

edit on 5 10 16 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 10 2016 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: edmc^2

If you actually need to ask that question then you've proven that you don't understand science.

The earth doesn't have pillars. Direct conflict with science and direct conflict with your precious Job verse.

The earth does not have foundations nor a cornerstone. Again direct conflict !

Thanks for playing take home the consolation prize.


Nice try but as usual, it's your understanding that is in contradiction here.

OK - let's break it down into two parts and address first this:

You said:



The earth doesn't have pillars...


and



The earth does not have foundations..


Now this tells me you haven't put much thought into it and 'prolly was just repeating what someone else said. In any case, you're quite mistaken to assume --



The earth doesn't have pillars...or ...The earth does not have foundations..


Because the earth DOES INDEED have "PILLARS" or "FOUNDATION".

The very word PILLAR indicates this to be so (#3 below)


Full Definition of pillar
1
a : a firm upright support for a superstructure : post
b : a usually ornamental column or shaft; especially : one standing alone for a monument
2
a : a supporting, integral, or upstanding member or part
b : a fundamental precept
3
: a solid mass of coal, rock, or ore left standing to support a mine roof
4
: a body part that resembles a column

www.merriam-webster.com...

It's akin to the roots of a tree.

One scientific study explains it this way:


Mountains, Airy said, exert less gravitational pull than they should do because they have roots. Their less dense material extends down into the planet, in whose denser interior they float like icebergs in water. Continental masses, Airy said, stand high above the ocean floor because they are buoyant; in their case, floating in a substrate of denser rock. They stand proud, but only because they have much larger roots below. Mountains are higher than plains for the same reason that big icebergs stand taller than small ones...


www.geolsoc.org.uk...


Determination of the age of the mantle part of continental roots is essential to our understanding of the evolution and stability of continents.


www.sciencedirect.com...



The Earth's rigid lithosphere varies laterally in thickness and strength. Areas of thicker, older lithosphere known as continental roots penetrate deeper into the mantle in some places under continents. Because these continental roots are in contact with deeper, more viscous mantle, the shear traction at the base of the lithosphere in those areas is increased by up to a factor of 4 compared with a model lithosphere without continental roots.

To study how those areas of increased traction affect patterns of lithospheric stress above, Naliboff et al. examined a model of mantle flow coupled to a model of the elastic lithosphere. The authors find that greater traction at the bottom of thicker areas of continental lithosphere raises elastic stress in the lithosphere above by at most a factor of 1.5.

Furthermore, greater lithospheric stress is not located simply in small areas directly above deep continental roots; instead, increased stress is spread out over a larger regional area.


www.sciencedaily.com...

Like I said - when compared to true science, the Bible is 100 % accurate.




top topics



 
23
<< 56  57  58    60  61  62 >>

log in

join