reply to post by SkepticOverlord
Why am I unable to start a new thread here????????
New Forum For The Debate of Origins and Creationism, page 5
privacy
reply posted on 14-6-2010 @ 08:04 PM by Taliesin McKnight
reply to post by helen670
Yes, some people do believe in Creationism. They believe that God took clay and fashioned a man. didnt want the man to be alone, so god took out a rib and shaped it into a woman. then a talking lizard got us to eat a from a forbidden fruit tree we were comanded not to eat, which is why we die.
also, we speak different languages because they were building the tower of babel and god didnt want them to reach heaven, so he confused their speech and they couldnt understand each other, which is how we got different languages. not that people simply evolved on different parts of the earth! certainly not.
the very thought that such ignorantine bronze age myths are even thought of being taught in public schools or even private schools is appauling to me. it sounds like it was written for small children, not educated adults with the capacity for critical thought.
Yes, some people do believe in Creationism. They believe that God took clay and fashioned a man. didnt want the man to be alone, so god took out a rib and shaped it into a woman. then a talking lizard got us to eat a from a forbidden fruit tree we were comanded not to eat, which is why we die.
also, we speak different languages because they were building the tower of babel and god didnt want them to reach heaven, so he confused their speech and they couldnt understand each other, which is how we got different languages. not that people simply evolved on different parts of the earth! certainly not.
the very thought that such ignorantine bronze age myths are even thought of being taught in public schools or even private schools is appauling to me. it sounds like it was written for small children, not educated adults with the capacity for critical thought.
reply posted on 14-6-2010 @ 08:16 PM by Taliesin McKnight
reply to post by Jahosaphat
i noticed that you said that jesus said.. and quoted him right there from the good book. in response i would just like to point out that quoting the bible is not quoting jesus. this is why in my view.... (and of course i respect your opinions, but we are sharing two totally different points of view. sharing oposing ideas. i hope we can do this peacefully. now, why cant you directly quote jesus from the good book?)
first of all, no one knows what jesus ever said. none of the gospels were written while jesus was supposedly alive. none. the earliest gospel was written in 70 CE. thats nearly 40 years after his death. have you ever played that game called telephone? you whisper something in one persons ear and they wwhisper what they heard into the next persons ear. by the time it gets back to you it was totally different from what was originally said. try that for a couple hundred years. also, there were hundreds of gospels, hundreds. some said jesus was crucified, some that he lived to old age. some say he was an angry child, some that he was married with children. even the four gospels chosen at the council of nicea contradict one another. for example, look at the geneologies of mathew and compare them to luke. they cant even agree on who josephs father is, or on which son of david jesus is descended from. add to this that the death and resurrection myth attributed to christ is of ancient pagan heritage and happened many times, or the three sages who are shown to witness the birth of horus in the birth room at the temple of luxor. the hundreds of gospels all contradict. furthermore, on ething i havent added here... monly about 2 lines of text say anything about jesus before the year 150. isnt that odd for someone that raised the dead and healed the sick, etc. the roman wrote about everything, documented everything. where is there any documentation? there isnt. except in the passage ascribed to the jewish historian josephus, but only reference a christ figure and was shown to be a forgery.
therefore, there is no way of knowing what miracles jesus performed or what he said or did. 40 years of playing telephone and you get things different. eventually it gets blown all out of porportions. thats why i think its quite unreal when i hear someone quote the bible and say that jesus said.... etc. a direct quote from 2000 years ago.
i was just trying to point out that quoting the bible is not quoting jesus or his actual words. .. oh yeah.. i forgot to mention that the bible has been mistranslated over and over again. and of course edited.
peace
[edit on 14-6-2010 by Taliesin McKnight]
[edit on 14-6-2010 by Taliesin McKnight]
i noticed that you said that jesus said.. and quoted him right there from the good book. in response i would just like to point out that quoting the bible is not quoting jesus. this is why in my view.... (and of course i respect your opinions, but we are sharing two totally different points of view. sharing oposing ideas. i hope we can do this peacefully. now, why cant you directly quote jesus from the good book?)
first of all, no one knows what jesus ever said. none of the gospels were written while jesus was supposedly alive. none. the earliest gospel was written in 70 CE. thats nearly 40 years after his death. have you ever played that game called telephone? you whisper something in one persons ear and they wwhisper what they heard into the next persons ear. by the time it gets back to you it was totally different from what was originally said. try that for a couple hundred years. also, there were hundreds of gospels, hundreds. some said jesus was crucified, some that he lived to old age. some say he was an angry child, some that he was married with children. even the four gospels chosen at the council of nicea contradict one another. for example, look at the geneologies of mathew and compare them to luke. they cant even agree on who josephs father is, or on which son of david jesus is descended from. add to this that the death and resurrection myth attributed to christ is of ancient pagan heritage and happened many times, or the three sages who are shown to witness the birth of horus in the birth room at the temple of luxor. the hundreds of gospels all contradict. furthermore, on ething i havent added here... monly about 2 lines of text say anything about jesus before the year 150. isnt that odd for someone that raised the dead and healed the sick, etc. the roman wrote about everything, documented everything. where is there any documentation? there isnt. except in the passage ascribed to the jewish historian josephus, but only reference a christ figure and was shown to be a forgery.
therefore, there is no way of knowing what miracles jesus performed or what he said or did. 40 years of playing telephone and you get things different. eventually it gets blown all out of porportions. thats why i think its quite unreal when i hear someone quote the bible and say that jesus said.... etc. a direct quote from 2000 years ago.
i was just trying to point out that quoting the bible is not quoting jesus or his actual words. .. oh yeah.. i forgot to mention that the bible has been mistranslated over and over again. and of course edited.
peace
[edit on 14-6-2010 by Taliesin McKnight]
[edit on 14-6-2010 by Taliesin McKnight]
reply posted on 15-6-2010 @ 04:49 AM by Astyanax
reply to post by Jahosaphat
Jesus said this, eh? The bit about the arc lights an' all?
Sent you email, did he?
reply to post by trueperspective
I expect every overstimulated, undereducated god-botherer driven to insane fury by the hopelessness of overcoming evidence and reason with fairytales and lies probably thinks this.
Normal people, however, know that the boot is on the other foot.
Jesus says:
"Such a splendor of human perfection is like the brightness of 100, 1,000 arc lamps. They provide light--that's undeniable. But it is artificial light which, if a small device breaks down, immediately fades, and nothing is left of it."
Jesus said this, eh? The bit about the arc lights an' all?
Sent you email, did he?
*
reply to post by trueperspective
Did you ever think that maybe secular Origins science, that is based purely on hypothesis (because NO ONE has ever observed the past first hand), is an organization of God haters that want to undermine something that is offensive because it tells them that they are evil and must answer to a Holy God...
I expect every overstimulated, undereducated god-botherer driven to insane fury by the hopelessness of overcoming evidence and reason with fairytales and lies probably thinks this.
Normal people, however, know that the boot is on the other foot.
reply posted on 15-6-2010 @ 07:11 AM by rnaa
reply to post by Taliesin McKnight
You are making good points. But to be fair, faith healers were a dime a dozen, and Jesus wasn't anything special in that regard. Those attributes were probably added to his reputation specifically to enhance his standing with respect to all the other itinerant preacher/healers.
It is pretty unlikely that every faith healer would have come to the attention of the historians, or that they would have considered one from the distant provinces as anything worth noticing.
...about 2 lines of text say anything about jesus before the year 150. isnt that odd for someone that raised the dead and healed the sick, etc. the roman wrote about everything, documented everything. where is there any documentation?...
You are making good points. But to be fair, faith healers were a dime a dozen, and Jesus wasn't anything special in that regard. Those attributes were probably added to his reputation specifically to enhance his standing with respect to all the other itinerant preacher/healers.
It is pretty unlikely that every faith healer would have come to the attention of the historians, or that they would have considered one from the distant provinces as anything worth noticing.
reply posted on 16-6-2010 @ 01:56 AM by Astyanax
reply to post by rnaa
You know, if Nero hadn't blamed the Great Fire of Rome on the Christians, the faith would probably have died a natural death around 75AD of so.
You know, if Nero hadn't blamed the Great Fire of Rome on the Christians, the faith would probably have died a natural death around 75AD of so.
reply posted on 20-6-2010 @ 05:30 PM by rnaa
reply to post by Astyanax
Doubtful, the 'world' was ripe for a new movement. Scapegoating of innocents certainly hardened their resolve and attracted attention, but it was a growing movement anyway.
Might have looked different, though. Paul's Church may not have won out, it might very well have been the Gnostics. But I don't think the Jewish Jesus cults would have just disappeared back into mainstream Judaism and not branched out into the non-Jewish world. They were already much too established for that.
You know, if Nero hadn't blamed the Great Fire of Rome on the Christians, the faith would probably have died a natural death around 75AD of so.
Doubtful, the 'world' was ripe for a new movement. Scapegoating of innocents certainly hardened their resolve and attracted attention, but it was a growing movement anyway.
Might have looked different, though. Paul's Church may not have won out, it might very well have been the Gnostics. But I don't think the Jewish Jesus cults would have just disappeared back into mainstream Judaism and not branched out into the non-Jewish world. They were already much too established for that.
reply posted on 7-11-2010 @ 11:50 AM by Raiment
reply to post by daggyz
No one seems to consider that science, academia, peer-reviewed articles, graduate school placements, employment and tenure are all linked together. Isn't that an 'academic conspiracy' right there? 70% of pholospohy professors are atheists. If evolution has two legs (or four) to stand on, a little shaking up from intellgent design theorists should not knock them down. What are scientists so afraid of?
No one seems to consider that science, academia, peer-reviewed articles, graduate school placements, employment and tenure are all linked together. Isn't that an 'academic conspiracy' right there? 70% of pholospohy professors are atheists. If evolution has two legs (or four) to stand on, a little shaking up from intellgent design theorists should not knock them down. What are scientists so afraid of?
reply posted on 18-11-2010 @ 05:36 PM by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by Raiment
Absolutely nothing. ID papers are free to submit themselves for publication in peer-reviewed journals. They're free to attempt to engage the discussion on an academic level.
Instead, they insist on making it a public policy issue.
Absolutely nothing. ID papers are free to submit themselves for publication in peer-reviewed journals. They're free to attempt to engage the discussion on an academic level.
Instead, they insist on making it a public policy issue.
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
Trees that witnessed the rise and fall of empires throughout history
Fragile Earth: 16 hours ago, 50 flags
Fragile Earth: 16 hours ago, 50 flags
Fibonacci Numbers, Phi, and the Venus/Earth Relation
Philosophy and Metaphysics: 12 hours ago, 19 flags
Philosophy and Metaphysics: 12 hours ago, 19 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
7-year-old's suicide shocks Detroit community
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 6 hours ago, 59 replies
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 6 hours ago, 59 replies
Trees that witnessed the rise and fall of empires throughout history
Fragile Earth: 16 hours ago, 49 replies
Fragile Earth: 16 hours ago, 49 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.220 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.002 seconds
Page processed in: 0.220 seconds
