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.

 

The Dodo the bird that killed Yahweh/ Jesus god?

page: 4
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by SheepleFlavored
 





The funny thing is I could definitely see Jesus and Moocowman having a pleasant talk at a pub


LOL the thoughts that fly through my mind .

"Mmmooo, ?"

"Yaaas JC"

"Fink You ad enuf ale dude?, cmo'n I carried you all your life jus awell carry you ome".


[edit on 11-3-2009 by moocowman]




posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by huckfinn
reply to post by moocowman
 


I don't know about the Dodo, but I do know of many human groups that are about to follow in its path.




You're hatred is quite visible, perhaps you could consider trading your fish for a swastika, from this side of the fence you're bringing all fish bearers down to what is allegedly my level.

Did you not learn anything from the fable of "The Sun And The Wind" I clearly have not according to some, but for you to come and join me huffing and puffing, is pretty inexcusable my friend.

Perhaps we're more alike than you would care to think, perhaps you already know this and the hate you have for me is but a reflection of your inner turmoil no ?



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 08:36 AM
link   
this seems related somehow. lol





anyway, perception. it sure can be bent into twisty pretzel shapes.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
reply to post by The time lord
 





I would not be suprised if there is enough genetic variation in all birds that holds all the genes somewhere of the Dodo.


Which would imply animals evolving


Which also implies animals are also de-evolving as the Bible states, because sin currupted the genetic plan of God and people and animals alike lived for less as time went by and also were less pure and prone to death.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
reply to post by B.A.C.
 





Why would it have evolved with useless wings? Can you answer that?



I didn't claim it had,

I'm asking why the Dodo changed, ie from a bird that could fly to a bird wouldn't/couldn't


The Dodo bird did change either by redesign evolution or it's own free will, I'm asking those that insist I accept redesign .

Those who would insist on buying my socks (trying to avoid stereotyping here and also be polite) also insist that the bird had no free will ok I'll go with that.

They also insist that the Dodo bird was designed by an omniscient being that created all that there is, was, and will ever be. They also claim (the ones who would buy my socks) that the creator of all that there is does not change it's mind. okeyedokey.

The dodo starts off as a bird with wings that are used primarily for flying, prior to it's annihilation it was incapable of flight as it's wings had suddenly or over a period of time, become unable to perform the function that they used to as claimed, be designed to do.

If I have to accept that the Dodo was initially designed, then I would have to accept that any change in its' design was caused by the designer.

All well and good so far

However for the designer to change something, this would imply that the initial design was flawed or the design is to be utilized for another purpose.

Those that would insist on buying my socks also insist that, the creator of all that there is cannot be in error IE have a design flaw, this then leaves - utilized for another purpose.


Utilizing for another purpose implies a saving/lack of/ or limitation.

Those that would insist on buying my socks, also claim as previously mentioned that (their) creator is the creator of all that there is/was/ever will be IE omniscient, omnipresent.


So I am asking for an explanation for the paradox of the "All that there is" somehow also "saving/being in want/ or being limited.


At the moment I can only see one possibility of resolving this paradoxical contradiction but I won't discus it right now as I run the risk of those that would insist on buying my socks, suddenly deciding to insist on buying underwear instead or as well.



NO. I don't consider the fact of Evolution incompatible with a Creator. Some may, but don't put them words in my mouth. Maybe the Dodo killed Evolutionary Theory, it didn't kill my idea of a Creator though.

Keep your socks and underwear.

You can still buy first round at the pub though
As long as you have fresh socks and underwear on


[edit on 11-3-2009 by B.A.C.]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by The time lord
 





Which also implies animals are also de-evolving as the Bible states,


Devolution implies the employment of change, okey dokey

Problem = Bible apologists claim the creator does not change his mind =

contradiction.


Again the necessity of change in a design implies a flaw or reemployment for another purpose.

Apologists reject flaw in the design on the grounds that the designer/creator being inerrant.

If flaw is rejected this leaves us with reemployment which implies, limitation/lack/want/need

To imply the existence of lack/want/limitation/need in relation to the creator then implies, the creator is not all that there is/was / or will ever be, which preclude omniscience and omnipresence.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by B.A.C.
 


I'm not trying to put word in your mouth, I was just asking for your explanation of the question I posed which was -



So I am asking for an explanation for the paradox of the "All that there is" somehow also "saving/being in want/ or being limited.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
reply to post by B.A.C.
 


I'm not trying to put word in your mouth, I was just asking for your explanation of the question I posed which was -



So I am asking for an explanation for the paradox of the "All that there is" somehow also "saving/being in want/ or being limited.


I don't consider Evolution or Ourselves or the Dodo being in want. We are in a world that changes, if God didn't create us to change with it that would be imperfect.

That doesn't mean God changed, that means he created us to Evolve with the world. IMHO

Also, I don't agree with religion being taught in schools, that's up to the parent and child to decide.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


Where the hell do people come up with this stuff? The Scriptures (the Tanakh) do not support a man being God let alone the other bs in the op. Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi and never claimed once to be God. That is against the Jewish beliefs; particularly one as religious as Jesus was.




posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 07:25 PM
link   
reply to post by B.A.C.
 





I don't consider Evolution or Ourselves or the Dodo being in want. We are in a world that changes, if God didn't create us to change with it that would be imperfect.


So you imply that the dodo was designed to change ie evolve or devolve and the prime cause of the change/evolution, is the changeing/evolution of our world.

This obviously implies that the evolution is by design each individual infinitesimally small step in the changing/ evolving process is governed by a perfect design. Oky dokey

Problem, this scenario negates free will, the process you have proposed does in no way allow for a variant in the designed variety.





That doesn't mean God changed, that means he created us to Evolve with the world. IMHO


Again, if the creator is all that there is/ever was/ or will be then the creator simply cannot change itself or its mind this would obviously preclude omniscience omnipresence.
Logic would thus dictate that, all that is /was / or will be designed is in fact all that there is as there cannot be anything else.

Again this being the case negates free will as all is designed and any changes/evolution is part of the design.

If one were then to imply that free will was part of the design/change/evolution/devolution then there would have to be an outcome that the designer could not anticipate, which is impossible if the above is true.


The usual response to this is that nothing is impossible for god and just brush it aside.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


What does free will have to do with Evolution? It may be your will to grow a trunk, it isn't gonna happen though. Free will has to do with our decisions, we can't decide to Evolve. Okey dokey?



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by justamomma
reply to post by moocowman
 


Where the hell do people come up with this stuff? The Scriptures (the Tanakh) do not support a man being God let alone the other bs in the op. Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi and never claimed once to be God. That is against the Jewish beliefs; particularly one as religious as Jesus was.



I've no I dead dude, people knock my door and tell me I should live my life like this or that, or I will be tortured for eternity bla bla. When they fail to back up their claims of authority with evidence, they then try and influence the world that I live in so that i should think like them.

If these people stole your book in order to try and persuade me that your god changed into their god i suggest you take it up with them.

What is interesting to note is that never once has a jew tried to make me become a jew or manipulate my life in order to do so by any means.

Same god ?



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 07:41 PM
link   
reply to post by B.A.C.
 





What does free will have to do with Evolution? I


One cancels the other out, read the post again it was your propositions that suggest this conclusion.



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman

No ones forcing you to debate, but I've got loony people shoving invisible gods and demons down my children throats, so I will bloody well debate these people.


I have read a few of your threads. While the other one was closed due to hate policy of this site, I can't figure out why this one is still open with remarks like this one.

You call these people looney, which is your opinion, and in my opinion, is once again, hate speach. You are allowed to believe what you want, and your conundrum, is that you do no agree with these people, so you are attempting to debunk them with every little ridiculous thing you can find.

If these people are so loony, why are you allowing your child to attend this school?

This is your child, that you are creating all these rants about, so if you do not like the education your child is receiving, it is up to you to change it by moving your child to another school.

Do you really think you are going to change policy by ragging on ATS or are you doing something else about this?

I hope you are not ranting and raving about how you feel in front of your young child, telling them what they are learning in school is wrong. You send your child to school, and want them to do well, so your child is doing what you want, trying, and you will only confuse the child.

If this is how you show your rage, and I consider it rage, by how you rant, with all the other things going on in the world, I feel sorry for you, and your child.

You have never mentioned if your child is doing well on other subjects, why is that?

What message are you sending to your child? That hate, and disgust are acceptable?

While I feel for your situation, I can't help but think that you need to go back to school yourself, because I think you missed a few lessons on tolerance. You missed a few lessons on not showing hatred, and failed to learn acceptance.

The education of your child is up to you, and if you are not happy with it, find another school. Majority rules, and the system is not going to change just because of how you feel.

I question your parenting skills, and I really mean it. What kind of messages are you sending to your child? Instead of thinking about yourself for once, and how the school has displeased you, you might put your feelings towards your child, first!





[edit on 11-3-2009 by Blanca Rose]

[edit on 11-3-2009 by Blanca Rose]



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 09:50 PM
link   
The Dodo voted for Hitler in my opinion.

Nazi DoDo!!!



posted on Mar, 11 2009 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman

Originally posted by justamomma
reply to post by moocowman
 


Where the hell do people come up with this stuff? The Scriptures (the Tanakh) do not support a man being God let alone the other bs in the op. Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi and never claimed once to be God. That is against the Jewish beliefs; particularly one as religious as Jesus was.



I've no I dead dude, people knock my door and tell me I should live my life like this or that, or I will be tortured for eternity bla bla. When they fail to back up their claims of authority with evidence, they then try and influence the world that I live in so that i should think like them.

If these people stole your book in order to try and persuade me that your god changed into their god i suggest you take it up with them.

What is interesting to note is that never once has a jew tried to make me become a jew or manipulate my life in order to do so by any means.

Same god ?






The Christians and the Jewish People do not worship the same God. One worships a man and one worships God. The reason that the Jewish will not knock on your door is because we believe that the Creator created Life... this... what we are living in now. There is no need to rack up souls for life after death.. for Life cannot exist in death. It makes no sense. When you die, you die. Jesus was a Jewish Rabbi and very religious.. thus, there is not ONE place where you will find him claiming to be God, since the Jewish do NOT subscribe to God being man.. Hosea 11 speaks that God is not man... thus, Jesus did not EVER believe he was God. He did not believe in resurrection of the physical body after death. That is greek mythology and the Jewish do not subscribe to such.

The same God.... christians and the Jewish? not even close!!

[edit on 11-3-2009 by justamomma]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 05:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Blanca Rose
 





You call these people looney, which is your opinion, and in my opinion, is once again, hate speach. You are allowed to believe what you want, and your conundrum, is that you do no agree with these people, so you are attempting to debunk them with every little ridiculous thing you can find.



You say you've read my posts, then why is it you fail to comment on quite a few dialogues that I've entered into with what appear to be decent reasonable people which happen to have christian beliefs ?

The dialogues in question have appeared to be on the face of it, reasonable, engaging , and balanced. With both parties endeavoring to appreciate the others point of view and taking the opportunity to consider their own actions/attitudes.

What I personally have noted of these particular posters, is their somewhat reluctance to be considered associated with the unreasonable people that would insist their beliefs should dictate how I should live.


I would agree with you totally that I'm somewhat annoyed and sometimes angered with "some" people. However for this be continually deliberately misconstrued as hate can only be construed as an attempt by individuals, to avoid justifying their lack of condemnation of interfering with the lives of those who don't share their beliefs by having a post closed down.


I've posed a very valid question in this thread, the intention being to question the alleged authority of the subject matter which is used by "some" who would dictate how I should live.


Those people who choose not to knowingly impose upon me, don't seem to experience the alleged hatred you speak of. Many of them appear to be very reasonable and display greater understanding and wisdom of their teachings. Suffice to say that these people would appear to have a deep understanding of the phrase "turn the other cheek".


You appear not to believe that it is possible for me to take people to task without hating them which I find unreasonable.

As I recall it was Christ himself that had a fit of anger at the temple throwing tables around the place and such, would you say that Christ hated the priests ? Or what they did ?

According to your scriptures, when christ questioned the source of authority and those that would abuse it, his words were twisted in order to shut him up.

Are you my friend, acting any different to the pharisees in wanting my thread shut down?

Please bear in mind I've not in any post claimed to hate anyone, you make this presumption.

Are you acting from a point of fear or compassion, which according to christ are the only places you can act from ?

If you don't wish to try and explain what appears to be the paradox of the Dodo, that's ok you don't have to, you can accept someone else s explanation fine by me, but please extend them the courtesy of voicing their opinion by not insisting the thread be shut down because you don't like it.



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   
here's the answer !




posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
If you don't wish to try and explain what appears to be the paradox of the Dodo, that's ok you don't have to, you can accept someone else s explanation fine by me, but please extend them the courtesy of voicing their opinion by not insisting the thread be shut down because you don't like it.


Yes, winged things that don't fly. A paradox.
Eyes that don't see. Another paradox.
And the greatest paradox of all:
Self-made creatures.
Jesus did confess to making all of this.
But, he also forgave himself for making it.
Consider that it was not made benevolently.
Rather, it was made violently, in anger, for vengeance.
So everything suffers and dies within a given set of limits.
This is not Jesus' best work.
This is his worst work.
But, repenting, Jesus said he came to "destroy the works of the devil".
The devil being a "work" of Jesus.
Likewise, if we would "follow" Jesus, we would admit to making this.
Then we would repent and choose to save ourselves from it instead.
We save ourselves by irrevocably choosing not to see [experience] it anymore.
This is done through "forgiveness".
To forgive, it is better to get an idea why a world made in anger is "there" in the first place.
And going back to that 'cause', we can change our mind about it.
The world of form is a rash response to emotional presumptions.
It was made in the blink of an eye...not six days...not six seconds.
It is a complex projection of concepts, all symbolically represented.
What we call a "body" is really a *symbol* of an idea.
The concepts are paradoxical, so the symbols are also a paradox.
Together, the concepts are confusing.
Escape from concepts requires that the thinkers own up to their thoughts.
Then, disown them.
The concepts, together, make a single self-concept.
This means the world of form is how we see our Self.
It is not how our Self is.
We must see past what we "see" with "eyes that don't see"...and envision what symbolizes our original Self.
To "follow" Jesus means that each of us must admit we made "the world".
Presently, we are in huge denial.
Everyone wants to *blame* it on whomever...anyone but themselves.
They blame because they feel guilty about it.
They feel guilty because the world is not so much disfunction as it is functioning as it was set-up to be.
It that is true, it symbolizes an attack on everything by everything.
If that is true, it symbolizes intent to kill and murder and mock and destroy.
Forgiveness, however, questions how true this is.
If it is not true at all, and if there is but one maker, can there really be grounds for guilt?
If it is something we do to ourselves, can we blame anyone or anything?
The way it is set up, however, it is set up to perpetuate denial and blame.
Is it 'obvious' that we are not the makers of this malaise?
Think again.
A maker in denial would not be "obvious".

Christ!

[edit on 12-3-2009 by Christ!]



posted on Mar, 12 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by justamomma
He did not believe in resurrection of the physical body after death. That is greek mythology and the Jewish do not subscribe to such.



Originally posted by justamomma
There is no need to rack up souls for life after death.. for Life cannot exist in death. It makes no sense. When you die, you die.


Whatever you believe Jesus believed is speculation.
What is more sure is that the Pharisee believed in a bodily resurrection after bodily death...and the Saducees didn't.


The Sadducees are mentioned in the New Testament/Greek Scriptures of the Christian Bible. The Gospel of Matthew indicates that the Sadducees did not believe in the resurrection of the dead. Matthew 22:29, 31-32 says:

29 In reply Jesus said to them: “You are mistaken, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God ... [30] ... 31 As regards the resurrection of the dead, did you not read what was spoken to you by God, saying, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob’? He is the God, not of the dead, but of the living.” en.wikipedia.org...




Only one chapter of the Mishnah deals with theological issues; it asserts that three kinds of people will have no share in "the world to come:" those who deny the resurrection of the dead, those who deny the divinity of the Torah, and Epicureans (who deny divine supervision of human affairs). en.wikipedia.org...



Finally, unlike the Sadducees, the Pharisees also believed in the resurrection of the dead in a future, messianic age. The Pharisees believed in a literal resurrection of the body[9].


So, you are merely indicating that you are of the Saduccee persuasion of Jewish heritage, and that you can speak for Jesus regarding what he believed about resurrection. And you project your beliefs onto his shoulders, as if he believed like you. But the records indicate otherwise.


Sayings gospel of Thomas.

52. His disciples said to him, "Twenty-four prophets have spoken in Israel, and they all spoke of you."

He said to them, "You have disregarded the living one who is in your presence, and have spoken of the dead."

11. "The dead are not alive, and the living will not die." www.gnosis.org...



Originally posted by justamomma
The reason that the Jewish will not knock on your door is because we believe that the Creator created Life... this... what we are living in now.


So, the "Jewish" are reluctant to bring bad news?
Who can blame them!
I wouldn't want to knock on doors either if my message was "hey, this is "life". You're gonna die. And when you're dead your dead."
But then, that would be just a Sadduccee scenario.
Those who knock on doors have a more Pharisee school of thought.
And that is primarily because Paul was a student of that school of thought.


Originally posted by justamomma
we believe that the Creator created Life... this... what we are living in now.


What are you "living" now?


11. "The dead are not alive, and the living will not die." www.gnosis.org...


What can die was never alive,
and what is alive will never die.
So, what *can* die is already "dead".


Originally posted by justamomma
The same God.... christians and the Jewish? not even close!!


Be honest. It's too close for your level of comfort. So you are reacting to what is really an intra-tribal matter between you who consider yourself "Jewish".

The following three are part of Pauline/Pharisee "Judeo-Christian" legacy:

1. Belief in resurrection from the dead
2. Belief in a divine Torah
3. Belief in divine supervision of human affairs.

Too close for comfort?


Originally posted by justamomma
The Christians and the Jewish People do not worship the same God. One worships a man and one worships God.


The net effect is the same.
If you think God made man, you value man the same as they.
And you will meet them in the same dust, from which they came, and to which they always seem to return.
Why is "when you're dead you're dead" a better, or more "Jewish" belief?

Jesus did not believe that he was a body.
The body *can* die...so it was never alive.
Jesus believed he was Spirit.
The Spirit is alive...and so, it cannot die.

Neither christians nor jew understand this.



Christ!






[edit on 12-3-2009 by Christ!]




top topics



 
5
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join