It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


‘Variability’ % proves God is the SPECIAL CAUSE, skeptics, why are you ignoring?

page: 10
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:15 PM

Originally posted by keepureye2thesky
.....I must
say that I am blown away by the size of these arenas he fills. ....

Well thanks for viewing....I'd say that was probably a Christian Woodstock, kinda concert he was probably a guest speaker with an ongoing event of people already there...

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:18 PM

Originally posted by operation mindcrime

Shouldn't we, for mathematical sake, at least have to known the exact size of our universe and the number of stars within it??

I mean, our closest neighbor could be 100 light years away and it could still count as "pretty close by" depending on your point of reference, right?

It would seem that this variability 94/6 isn't limited by size bro...

Did you realize you can approximate the mean or a population with as lil as 30 samples?

The size of our solar system alone should have produced EARTH's in 94% of the areas....

edit to add.....IF it were RANDOM

[edit on 12-8-2010 by OldThinker]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:19 PM

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by MrXYZ

OT, you might wanna get your info from a REAL science source...not

Now that's a good post XYZ. You took some time to check out the source' Good for you.

I'm going to your link.

Wow that site speaks volumes dosn't it? Why didn't you link that on my thread or did I miss it? It's in my favorites I'll look at it extensivly tonight.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by randyvs]

You're welcome

Whatever people believe, I strongly suggest going to science websites (PURE SCIENCE, not science sites with an agenda) if you're looking for sources to discuss science. In return, if you wanna discuss religious scriptures and things, going to a religious website is probably better.

Some other good science websites:

Centauri Dreams


Visiting them should hopefully prevent some people from using "weak" arguments against things like evolution...such as the famous "if we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?"

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:22 PM

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by MrXYZ

OT, you might wanna get your info from a REAL science source...not

soo....ALL the info there is bad science...because the inverse of real is FAKE?

If your point is here's another point of view, that would been more persuasive...and polite for that matter....

Yes, I'll review...thank you for posting it


PS: I have always wished they would chance the name tho

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:29 PM
reply to post by MrXYZ

Visiting them should hopefully prevent some people from using "weak" arguments against things like evolution...such as the famous "if we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?"

Yes I do thank you for the links my man.

I know what you mean about that arguement. it runs along the same lines as the circular arguement " where did it's Daddy come from?'.
drives me loco and accomplishes nada.

Like Nophun said to me once "it makes me want to throw my PC across the room".
I try to be a lot more understanding since he told me that.
I don't enjoy getting people that upset.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by randyvs]

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:29 PM

Originally posted by Jimjolnir

I respect a lot of what you posted above, with regerds to such cataclysmic changes, such as radiation and supernovae. Yet, my question remains... and then, why do we presume that our accepted table of elements and the subsequent life thereof, is universal?

that's balanced, thank you. let's just stay within our circle of planets, we should see similiar life universally

Why do those who read the bible think that they are on higher ground somehow?

they shouldn't in fact scripture says "Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others"

Why do those who read the bible think that they are the only ones whom god wishes to address?

I dunno? I don't

I'm sorry, where is your god? I believe in god, .....

so does the devil, OT thinks there more to it....I am so glad you ranted, it was great!

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:36 PM

Originally posted by mothershipzeta
From Wikipedia:

Common-cause variation is characterised by:

* Phenomena constantly active within the system;
* Variation predictable probabilistically;
* Irregular variation within an historical experience base; and
* Lack of significance in individual high or low values.


Careful now ru hurting your argument?

"constantly active" hmm? you mean like common to our solar sytem? yet the WHOLE thing could only produce 1 smaller than a pinhead planet that support life?

"predictacle probability" you mean klike 'CHANCE'?

"historical base"-how old is the universe now? and yet only one lil tiny area?

"lack of outliers"-you mean like 'TIME'?

0 for 4 bro!!!!

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:45 PM

Originally posted by MrXYZ
Whatever people believe, I strongly suggest going to science websites (PURE SCIENCE, not science sites with an agenda) if you're looking for sources to discuss science. In return, if you wanna discuss religious scriptures and things, going to a religious website is probably better.....

Here's a concept that you may not know....

In fact it's from the Bible....


Your discreet argument above holds no water....there is no either/or in truth....just like George Washington Carver [c. 1864-1943]
agricultural chemist, inventor of over 300 products...


"Without my Savior, I am nothing."
"I love to think of nature as an unlimited broadcasting station,
through which God speaks to us every hour, if we will only tune in."
"God is going to reveal to us things he never revealed before if we put our hands in his. No books ever go into my laboratory, a thing I am to do and the way of doing it are revealed me."

and....Wernher Von Braun [1912-1977]; first Director of NASA, pioneer of space exploration....

who said....

"Scientific concepts exist only in the minds of men.
Behind these concepts lies the reality which is being revealed to us, but only by the grace of God."

to repeat frined it is not either/or.....

I could pull up a few thousand similar quotes from respected scientist if you'd like?

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:51 PM

Originally posted by unfndqlt
Can you post a source please?


The reason why prophecy is an indication of the divine authorship of the Scriptures, and hence a testimony to the trustworthiness of the Message of the Scriptures, is because of the minute probability of fulfillment.

Anyone can make predictions. Having those prophecies fulfilled is vastly different. In fact, the more statements made about the future, and the more the detail, then the less likely the precise fulfillment will be.

For example, what's the likelihood of a person predicting today the exact city in which the birth of a future leader would take place, well into the 21st century? This is indeed what the prophet Micah did 700 years before the Messiah. Further, what is the likelihood of predicting the precise manner of death that a new, unknown religious leader would experience, a thousand years from now - a manner of death presently unknown, and to remain unknown for hundreds of years? Yet, this is what David did in 1000 B.C.

Again, what is the likelihood of predicting the specific date of the appearance of some great future leader, hundreds of years in advance? This is what Daniel did, 530 years before Christ.

If one were to conceive 50 specific prophecies about a person in the future, whom one would never meet, just what's the likelihood that this person will fulfill all 50 of the predictions? How much less would this likelihood be if 25 of these predictions were about what other people would do to him, and were completely beyond his control?

For example, how does someone "arrange" to be born in a specific family?

How does one "arrange" to be born in a specified city, in which their parents don't actually live? How does one "arrange" their own death - and specifically by crucifixion, with two others, and then "arrange" to have their executioners gamble for His clothing (John 16:19; Psalms 22:18)? How does one "arrange" to be betrayed in advance? How does one "arrange" to have the executioners carry out the regular practice of breaking the legs of the two victims on either side, but not their own? Finally, how does one "arrange" to be God? How does one escape from a grave and appear to people after having been killed?

Indeed, it may be possible for someone to fake one or two of the Messianic prophecies, but it would be impossible for any one person to arrange and fulfill all of these prophecies.

John Ankerberg relates the true story of how governments use prearranged identification signs to identify correct agents:

David Greenglass was a World War II traitor. He gave atomic secrets to the Russians and then fled to Mexico after the war. His conspirators arranged to help him by planning a meeting with the secretary of the Russian ambassador in Mexico City. Proper identification for both parties became vital. Greenglass was to identify himself with six prearranged signs. These instructions had been given to both the secretary and Greenglass so there would be no possibility of making a mistake. They were: (1) once in Mexico City, Greenglass was to write a note to the secretary, signing his name as "I. JACKSON"; (2) after three days he was to go to the Plaza de Colon in Mexico City and (3) stand before the statue of Columbus, (4) with his middle finger placed in a guide book. In addition, (5) when he was approached, he was to say it was a magnificent statue and that he was from Oklahoma. (6) The secretary was to then give him a passport.

These six prearranged signs worked. Why? With six identifying characteristics it was impossible for the secretary not to identify Greenglass as the proper contact (John Ankerberg, John Weldon and Walter Kaiser, "The Case for Jesus The Messiah", Melbourne: Pacific College Study Series, 1994, 17-18).

How true, then, it must be that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah, if he had 456 identifying characteristics well in advance, and fulfilled them all! In fact, what does the science of probability make of this?

The science of probability attempts to determine the chance that a given event will occur. The value and accuracy of the science of probability has been well established beyond doubt - for example, insurance rates are fixed according to statistical probabilities.

Professor Emeritus of Science at Westmont College, Peter Stoner, has calculated the probability of one man fulfilling the major prophecies made concerning the Messiah. The estimates were worked out by twelve different classes representing some 600 university students.

The students carefully weighed all the factors, discussed each prophecy at length, and examined the various circumstances which might indicate that men had conspired together to fulfill a particular prophecy. They made their estimates conservative enough so that there was finally unanimous agreement even among the most skeptical students.

However Professor Stoner then took their estimates, and made them even more conservative. He also encouraged other skeptics or scientists to make their own estimates to see if his conclusions were more than fair. Finally, he submitted his figures for review to a committee of the American Scientific Affiliation. Upon examination, they verified that his calculations were dependable and accurate in regard to the scientific material presented (Peter Stoner, Science Speaks, Chicago: Moody Press, 1969, 4).


posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:53 PM
more: For example, concerning Micah 5:2, where it states the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem Ephrathah, Stoner and his students determined the average population of BETHLEHEM from the time of Micah to the present; then they divided it by the average population of the earth during the same period.

They concluded that the chance of one man being born in Bethlehem was one in 300,000, (or one in 2.8 x 10^5 - rounded),

After examining only eight different prophecies (Idem, 106), they conservatively estimated that the chance of one man fulfilling all eight prophecies was one in 10^17.

To illustrate how large the number 10^17 IS (a figure with 17 zeros), Stoner gave this illustration :

If you mark one of ten tickets, and place all the tickets in a hat, and thoroughly stir them, and then ask a blindfolded man to draw one, his chance of getting the right ticket is one in ten. Suppose that we take 10^17 silver dollars and lay them on the face of Texas. They'll cover all of the state two feet deep. Now mark one of these silver dollars and stir the whole mass thoroughly, all over the state. Blindfold a man and tell him that he can travel as far as he wishes, but he must pick up one silver dollar and say that this is the right one. What chance would he have of getting the right one? Just the same chance that the prophets would've had of writing these eight prophecies and having them all come true in any one man, from their day to the present time, providing they wrote them in their own wisdom (Idem, 106-107).

In financial terms, is there anyone who would not invest in a financial venture if the chance of failure were only one in 10^17? This is the kind of sure investment we're offered by god for faith in His Messiah.

From these figures, Professor Stoner, concludes the fulfillment of these eight prophecies alone proves that God inspired the writing of the prophecies (Idem, 107) - the likelihood of mere chance is only one in 10^17!

Another way of saying this is that any person who minimizes or ignores the significance of the biblical identifying signs concerning the Messiah would be foolish.

But, of course, there are many more than eight prophecies. In another calculation, Stoner used 48 prophecies (Idem, 109) (even though he could have used Edersheim's 456), and arrived at the extremely conservative estimate that the probability of 48 prophecies being fulfilled in one person is the incredible number 10^157. In fact, if anybody can find someone, living or dead, other than Jesus, who can fulfill only half of the predictions concerning the Messiah given in the book "Messiah in Both Testaments" by Fred J. Meldau, the Christian Victory Publishing Company is ready to give a ONE thousand dollar reward! As apologist Josh McDowell says, "There are a lot of men in the universities that could use some extra cash!" (Josh McDowell, Evidence that Demands a Verdict, California: Campus Crusade for Christ, 175).

How large is the number one in 10^157? 10^157 contains 157 zeros! Stoner gives an illustration of this number using electrons. Electrons are very small objects. They're smaller than atoms. It would take 2.5 TIMES 10^15 of them, laid side by side, to make one inch. Even if we counted 250 of these electrons each minute, and counted day and night, it would still take 19 million years just to count a line of electrons one-inch long (Stoner, op. cit, 109).

With this introduction, let's go back to our chance of one in 10^157. Let's suppose that we're taking this number of electrons, marking one, and thoroughly stirring it into the whole mass, then blindfolding a man and letting him try to find the right one. What chance has he of finding the right one? What kind of a pile will this number of electrons make? They make an inconceivably large volume.

This is the result from considering a mere 48 prophecies. Obviously, the probability that 456 prophecies would be fulfilled in one man by chance is vastly smaller. According to Emile Borel, once one goes past one chance in 10^50, the probabilities are so small that it is impossible to think that they will ever occur (Ankerberg et. al., op. cit., 21).

As Stoner concludes, 'Any man who rejects Christ as the Son of God is rejecting a fact, proved perhaps more absolutely than any other fact in the world (Stoner, op. cit., 112).'

God so thoroughly vindicated Jesus Christ that even mathematicians and statisticians, who were without faith, had to acknowledge that it is scientifically impossible to deny that Jesus is the Christ. our thanks to David Williams, a mathematician who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Last century, a lecturer on Russian literature, Carlyle, Emerson, Tolstoy and others discovered the amazing mathematical design in the Bible, firstly in the Greek, and later in Hebrew. He found that the Bible is divisible by seven in 56 DIFFERENT ways. This was Ivan Panin, author of 'God's Amazing Seal', the 'Numerical Bible' and 'The Inspiration of the Scriptures Scientifically Demonstrated'.

Applying the same criteria to the books of other religions, Panin proclaimed 'No order at all; and not of God'. He discovered that everything in God's creation: animal, vegetable, or mineral, has a unique mathematical signature.

Yes, sir, God so thoroughly vindicated Jesus Christ the unbeliever will be speechless at the judgment. But Jesus Christ was sent to Israel at the end of their dispensation, when their denominations were apostate. And God is no respecter of persons. He promised to reveal and vindicate Jesus Christ to us Gentiles at the end of our dispensation, when our denominations are apostate.

God never leaves Himself without a witness. Jesus said, 'As it was in the days of Lot, so will it be when the Son of man is revealed' by the same Sign which vindicated Him to be Messiah in the days of His flesh.

Now, in the days of Lot, the Gentile civilization was in a Sodom condition. Homosexuality was rampant. Before God sent Fire from heaven which destroyed them, He sent three witnesses to those who claimed to be His Own. Two went and preached to Lot's group, the nominal, worldly church down in Sodom.

Our Gentile civilization is in a Sodom condition. God's sent two witnesses to the nominal church of the world: a Billy Graham and Oral Roberts. The world knows about it. By the great ministry of these God-given men, He's shaken the nations. They performed no miracles. Only blinded a few eyes. Preaching the Gospel blinds the unbeliever.

But, remember, the word 'CHURCH' means, "called out." Abraham had separated himself from all that. The third One stayed behind and talked with Abraham, who called Him 'LORD'. That was God. Read your Bible; Abraham called Him, capital, "L-O-R-D", Elohim, "Lord God." Abraham fed Him the meat of a calf, milk of a cow, butter, and cakes. He ate it. And He was Elohim.

He stayed with the elect Church. He never went down to the church in Sodom; He came to the called out, the elected church: Abraham.

He was a stranger. And while He was talking, He said, 'Abraham'. Now, remember, He NEVER called him Abram. Just a few days before that, his name had been changed from Abram to Abraham. He said, "Abraham, where is Sarah (not Sarai, Sarah, her new name - which had been changed just a few days before)? Where is Sarah, thy wife?"

He was God, veiled behind the flesh of a created Man, and He proved He was the Word by discerning the thoughts and intents of Abraham and Sarah's heart. That's the Messianic Sign.

God veiled Himself behind the virgin-born flesh of Jesus Christ and discerned the thoughts and intents of the people's hearts to vindicate that in him dwelt the fullness of the godhead bodily.

You'll remember, Jesus told Peter his name - and the name of his father. When Jesus discerned Nathanael's heart, Nathanael called Him 'Elohim' ... Lord. So did the little prostitute at the well, when Jesus told her all about herself.

Jesus said this would repeat in our day, just before God destroys all life by Fire from heaven. In this day He veiled Himself behind the flesh of a sinner saved by grace, revealing 'Jesus Christ the same, yesterday, and today, and forever' - discerning the thoughts and intents of people's hearts around and around the world, before congregations of up to 500,000; healing the sick, restoring sight, raising the dead, and casting out demons.

This is the last Sign promised to the Gentiles. And God vindicated His Word in the ministry of the late William Branham. His ministry restored the apostolic faith, finished the mystery of God, and is now calling the wise and foolish virgin out of Babylon; bringing His elect into oneness with the word and maturity for the manifestation of the Sons of God and the translation. source:

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:57 PM

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by OldThinker

“Wow OT, I never thought about it that way…so are you saying the Bible is true?”

“Yep it is the only mathematical probability.”

Assuming that creationism is a mathematical likelihood, how then do you jump to the assumption that the bible is the accurate truth

How about Bible Reliability in the Manuscripts?



"Manuscripts relates to the tests used to determine the reliability of the extant manuscript copies of the original documents penned by the Scripture writers (we do not possess these originals). In determining manuscript reliability, we deal with the question: How can we test to see that the text we possess in the manuscript copies is an accurate rendition of the original? There are three main manuscript tests: the Bibliographic, Eyewitness, and External (a second acronym — BEE — will help you remember these).

The bibliographic test considers the quantity of manuscripts and manuscript fragments, and also the time span between the original documents and our earliest copies. The more copies, the better able we are to work back to the original. The closer the time span between the copies and the original, the less likely it is that serious textual error would creep in. The Bible has stronger bibliographic support than any classical literature — including Homer, Tacitus, Pliny, and Aristotle.

We have more than 14,000 manuscripts and fragments of the Old Testament of three main types: (a) approximately 10,000 from the Cairo Geniza (storeroom) find of 1897, dating back as far as about AD. 800; (b) about 190 from the Dead Sea Scrolls find of 1947-1955, the oldest dating back to 250-200 B.C.; and (c) at least 4,314 assorted other copies. The short time between the original Old Testament manuscripts (completed around 400 B.C.) and the first extensive copies (about 250 B.C.) — coupled with the more than 14,000 copies that have been discovered — ensures the trustworthiness of the Old Testament text. The earliest quoted verses (Num. 6:24-26) date from 800-700 B.C.

The same is true of the New Testament text. The abundance of textual witnesses is amazing. We possess over 5,300 manuscripts or portions of the (Greek) New Testament — almost 800 copied before A.D. 1000. The time between the original composition and our earliest copies is an unbelievably short 60 years or so. The overwhelming bibliographic reliability of the Bible is clearly evident.

The eyewitness document test (“E”), sometimes referred to as the internal test, focuses on the eyewitness credentials of the authors. The Old and New Testament authors were eyewitnesses of — or interviewed eyewitnesses of — the majority of the events they described. Moses participated in and was an eyewitness of the remarkable events of the Egyptian captivity, the Exodus, the forty years in the desert, and Israel’s final encampment before entering the Promised Land. These events he chronicled in the first five books of the Old Testament.

The New Testament writers had the same eyewitness authenticity. Luke, who wrote the Books of Luke and Acts, says that he gathered eyewitness testimony and “carefully investigated everything” (Luke 1:1-3). Peter reminded his readers that the disciples “were eyewitnesses of [Jesus’] majesty” and “did not follow cleverly invented stories” (2 Pet. 1:16). Truly, the Bible affirms the eyewitness credibility of its writers.

The external evidence test looks outside the texts themselves to ascertain the historical reliability of the historical events, geographical locations, and cultural consistency of the biblical texts. Unlike writings from other world religions which make no historical references or which fabricate histories, the Bible refers to historical events and assumes its historical accuracy. The Bible is not only the inspired Word of God, it is also a history book — and the historical assertions it makes have been proven time and again.

Many of the events, people, places, and customs in the New Testament are confirmed by secular historians who were almost contemporaries with New Testament writers. Secular historians like the Jewish Josephus (before A.D. 100), the Roman Tacitus (around A.D. 120), the Roman Suetonius (A.D. 110), and the Roman governor Pliny Secundus (A.D. 100-110) make direct reference to Jesus or affirm one or more historical New Testament references. Early church leaders such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, Julius Africanus, and Clement of Rome — all writing before A.D. 250 — shed light on New Testament historical accuracy. Even skeptical historians agree that the New Testament is a remarkable historical document. Hence, it is clear that there is strong external evidence to support the Bible’s manuscript reliability."

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:59 PM
TD, how about Bible Reliability with archeology?

Returning to our MAPS acronym, we have established ,the first principle, manuscript reliability. Let us consider our second principle, archaeological evidence. Over and over again, comprehensive field work (archaeology) and careful biblical interpretation affirms the reliability of the Bible. It is telling when a secular scholar must revise his biblical criticism in light of solid archaeological evidence.

For years critics dismissed the Book of Daniel, partly because there was no evidence that a king named Belshazzar ruled in Babylon during that time period. However, later archaeological research confirmed that the reigning monarch, Nabonidus, appointed Belshazzar as his co-regent whi1e he was away from Babylon.

One of the most well-known New Testament examples concerns the Books of Luke and Acts. A biblical skeptic, Sir William Ramsay, trained as an archaeologist and then set out to disprove the historical reliability of this portion of the New Testament. However, through his painstaking Mediterranean archaeological trips, he became converted as — one after another — of the historical statements of Luke were proved accurate. Archaeological evidence thus confirms the trustworthiness of the Bible.


posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 04:01 PM
TD, what about Bible Reliability around fulfilled Prophecy?

The third principle of Bible reliability is Prophecy, or predictive ability. The Bible records predictions of events that could not be known or predicted by chance or common sense. Surprisingly, the predictive nature of many Bible passages was once a popular argument (by liberals) against the reliability of the Bible. Critics argued that the prophecies actually were written after the events and that editors had merely dressed up the Bible text to look like they contained predictions made before the events. Nothing could be further from the truth, however. The many predictions of Christ’s birth, life and death (see below) were indisputably rendered more than a century before they occurred as proven by the Dead Sea Scrolls of Isaiah and other prophetic books as well as by the Septuagint translation, all dating from earlier than 100 B.C.

Old Testament prophecies concerning the Phoenician city of Tyre were fulfilled in ancient times, including prophecies that the city would be opposed by many nations (Ezek. 26:3); its walls would be destroyed and towers broken down (26:4); and its stones, timbers, and debris would be thrown into the water (26:12). Similar prophecies were fulfilled concerning Sidon (Ezek. 28:23; Isa. 23; Jer. 27:3-6; 47:4) and Babylon (Jer. 50:13, 39; 51:26, 42-43, 58; Isa. 13:20-21).

Since Christ is the culminating theme of the Old Testament and the Living Word of the New Testament, it should not surprise us that prophecies regarding Him outnumber any others. Many of these prophecies would have been impossible for Jesus to deliberately conspire to fulfill — such as His descent from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Gen. 12:3; 17:19; Num. 24:21-24); His birth in Bethlehem (Mic. 5:2); His crucifixion with criminals (Isa. 53:12); the piercing of His hands and feet at the crucifixion (Ps. 22:16); the soldiers’ gambling for His clothes (Ps. 22:18); the piercing of His side and the fact that His bones were not broken at His death (Zech. 12:10; Ps. 34:20); and His burial among the rich (Isa. 53:9). Jesus also predicted His own death and resurrection (John 2:19-22). Predictive Prophecy is a principle of Bible reliability that often reaches even the hard-boiled skeptic!


posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 04:05 PM
TD, because the Bible story is LOGICAL....I just had to resurrect one of OT's Jesus pun intended

btw, Why does Atheist Richard Dawkins sound religious? After all he agrees with most religions on Jesus?

If Jesus is the only way, why do so many think he was just a good man?

Check out the following list…

1) Islam……
Holds Jesus to be a prophet, or messenger of God, along with Muhammad, Moses, Abraham, Noah, and others.

2) Jewish…….
American rabbi and author Milton Steinberg (1903 – 1949) wrote that Jews saw the historical Jesus as a “noble and loving Jewish teacher."
Source: M. Steinberg, 1975 Basic Judaism pp. 106-107, New York: Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich

3) Baha’i……
Founded in 19th-century Persia, considers Jesus, along with Muhammad, the Buddha, Krishna, and Zoroaster, and other messengers of the great religions of the world to be Manifestations of God (or prophets), with both human and divine stations.
Source: Stockman, Robert (1992). "Jesus Christ in the Baha'i Writings". Bahá'í Studies Review

4) Krishna......
-The International Society for Krishna Consciousness considers Jesus to be a shaktyavesha, the beloved son of Krishna who came down to Earth to preach God consciousness.
-Contemporary Sant Mat movements regard Jesus as a Satguru.
-Ramakrishna believed that Jesus was an Incarnation of God Swami Vivekananda has praised Jesus and cited him as a source of strength and the epitome of perfection.
-Paramahansa Yogananda taught that Jesus was the reincarnation of Elisha.

5) Buddists……
Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama regard Jesus as a ‘bodhisattva’ who dedicated his life to the welfare of human beings.
Source: Beverley, James A. "Jesus Christ also lived previous lives", he said. "So, you see, he reached a high state, either as a Bodhisattva, or an enlightened person, through Buddhist practice or something like that".

6) Sikh......
See Jesus as a wonderful parallel with the person of Nanak, the first Sikh with Allah and the Buddha.

7) Manichaeism......
Accepted Jesus as a prophet, along with Gautama Buddha and Zoroaster.
Source: Bevan, A. A. (1930). "Manichaeism". Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Volume VIII Ed. James Hastings. Londo

8) New Agers......
Generally teach that Christhood is something that all may attain. Alice A. Bailey, who, invented the term ‘New Age’, refers to him as ‘Master Jesus’ and believe he had previous incarnations.

9) Jesus Seminars......
Portrays him as an itinerant Hellenistic Jewish sage who did not die as a substitute for sinners nor rise from the dead, but preached a "social gospel" of goodness.

10) Deists......
Thomas Jefferson, Founding Fathers of the United States, created the Jefferson Bible entitled "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth" that included only Jesus' ethical teachings because he did not believe in his divinity

EVEN today’s famous atheists Richard Dawkins recognizes, “What was interesting and remarkable about Jesus was not the obvious fact that he believed in the God of his Jewish religion, but that he rebelled against many aspects of Yahweh's vengeful nastiness. At least in the teachings that are attributed to him, he publicly advocated niceness and was one of the first to do so!”

Yet the comments stated above, although they agree…defies intellectual logic in my mind…

A short illustration…Remember Back to the Future and the DeLorean (sp?) Imagine if you were Michael J Fox and someone asked you to go to five (only 5) different time zones/geographical areas and meet one person in each time zone/area and ask them, "please write a book about God, I'll be back in 5 years to collect it."

Five years later you went and picked up the five books. Logically speaking what are the chances those five books would agree? What are the chances those five books would build upon one another? What are the chances you could make any semblance out of live by or the like? Snowballs in your know where, right?

Different people! Different cultures! Difference Time frames! Different Premises! Different World view! etc...

Logically speaking you would have five unconnected books with five different perspectives, right?

Well, the Bible (torah, prophets, gospels, epistles, revelation) are not 5 books by five authors, but 66 books by 40 authors...who did not know one another, did not live in the same town, did not live in the same time line...authors were of every occupation and financial status........yet......the Bible is a one-themed, continuing story.

Doesn't prove it God's Word yet though...just something that might warrant another look.

Point 2 ---- Here's an undisputable fact (I believe at least after examining) Jesus of Nazareth claimed to be God, his followers claimed He claimed to be God...and...non Christian journalist (such as Josephus) claimed He claimed he was God. Doesn't appear here to be different agendas going on. He said it, His followers said He said it, third parties said He said it and even his enemies said He said it (Sanhedrin, Pharisees, etc)

SO...with all that said...we have only two LOGICAL outcomes. No religious double-talk here) Either you BELIEVE or you REJECT. Really no other options right? If you believe, then to you HE IS LORD. If you REJECT there are really only two options for you.

1) JC knew he wasn't telling the truth, therefore he would be A LIAR

2) JC didn't know he wasn't telling the truth, therefore he would be A LUNATIC.

That's the only three logical outcomes...LIAR, LUNATIC or LORD. There is no room for him being a good guy and all, no room for him being a prophet as every other religion on the face of the earth calls him.

Because prophets don't lie and they are not usually in psych wards.

Point 3 ---- Most direct followers were killed for believing in JC. If they had stole his body and the Romans excused, at least one of them would have squilled just before their execution right? I would have...

but NO-All these ordinary folks were willing to die for what they saw… ???

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 04:13 PM

Originally posted by randyvs
Snf for you OT

What a great mind you have. You bring proof to so much of the things I already KNOW thru faith. This is a perfect example of that. Seti hears nothing, because there is nothing of intelligent life out there. Deep space is still in our dimension. The only other intelligent life is in spirit form and on a different plain.
I believe Gods plan in the beginning was for men to be immortal, populate the cosmos, reproduce himself thru us, as we live to gain the knowledge
it takes for us to become Gods.
Satans jealousy has only caused that plan to be postponed not indefinetly.The Bible even says there will be an end to the universe some day.

While this topic raises some intresting points I would like to say something about God creating us to populate the Cosmos.

I am really really hoping that God is not that boring. What would be the purpose of exploring the cosmos if nothing else is out there? There would be no reason for us to leave this planet if all there is for us is to colonize another planet, populate it to the point of overpopulation, only to repeat it.

I like to beleive the saying - God is playing in front of an audience that is to afraid to laugh. Want to know if God has a sense of humor, look at the platypus.

Also, imo, saying that we are a complex species is naieve at best, especially when we do the things we do, coupled with the fact we have not come across anything any more complex than us. It was stated there might be other planes of existance. Since we cannot reach this in our current form, couldnt one rationalize that we are not complex enough to be apart of it?

While I have the utmost repsect ofr other religious beleifs, I take exception to the bible and how it was put together. I take exception to the fact information was left out based on the specific beleif that was being put in place (council of Nicene if you are Catholic - I am).

I see all of these different groups claiming to be followers of the one true God, yet at the very same time they have hand picked the information they want, and suppresed the information that doesnt agree with their views.

If by your argument God created us to seek knowledge, then why are we keeping it from ourselves when it comes to our understanding of God?

Do I think we are alone in the Universe? -
No I dont. As a species we cannot get along for one day iwthout killing each other. If I were an alien species monitoring Earth, I wouldnt make contact either, being we could be a virus to other civilizations when it comes to death and destruction through petty arguments and disagreements.

Do I think God exists? -
I do based on Faith, belief in things unseen.

Is God and other life in the galaxy compatible? -
Absolutely - What makes us special to the point of God not creating anything else out there? Afterall, we have animals on this planet, which is another life form.

As far as SETI not hearing anything, there are many explanations for this. From no life being present as some have suggested, to us looking in the wrong area for signals (we look here based on our own limited understanding of how physics work - ignoring Quantum Mechnics for the time being), to Aliens not wanting anything to do with us because of our inability to get along with each other.

Other than my ramblings, some intresting ideas I will look at.

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 04:23 PM
reply to post by Xcathdra

So glad you stopped by...great post!

Question: is it logical to think an all powerful, all-knowing entity could preserve its message if it desired?

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 04:25 PM
btw, flight got delayed, so I'll be here for a lil longer....

Man I love providence...


posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 04:30 PM

Originally posted by Xcathdra
- ignoring Quantum Mechnics for the time being)....

OT's got lil bit on that too...

Link: Source for a whole lot more:

Here’s some related Quantum stuff

……6) What’s missing in Quantum Physics? Mathematically, why doesn’t it all break apart? The more we learn about subatomic particles called ‘gluons’, the more the universe seems to be made of nothing at all? Scientist says that all the electrons and subatomic particles of an atom are held together in their precise position and orbit by an invisible force, by which without it, everything would fall apart and reality as we know it, would cease to exist in an instant.
Quotes from Discovery Magazine in 2000, “The weirdness comes from the gluons. Quantum chromodynamics, the force that holds protons together, is modeled closely on quantum electrodynamics, the force that holds atoms together—but the gluons change screening to antiscreening, intuitive to bizarre.” And, “The closer you look, the more you find the proton is dissolving into lots of particles, each of which is carrying very, very little energy," says Wilczek. "And the elements of reality that triggered the whole thing, the quarks, are these tiny little things in the middle of the cloud. In fact, if you follow the evolution to infinitely short distances, the triggering charge goes to zero. If you really study the equations, it gets almost mystical." More info here:

Another question? Saw this on ‘Genius Forum’ Is there substance that holds all things together? According to the ‘Bundle Theory’ there isn't. It says all things are just bundles or sums of their properties. The objection to this view comes from the substrate theory which asks: If there is no substance what is it that holds these properties together? There must be some substance that has these properties is what they say.

We never reach the substance because whenever we talk about something we talk about its properties. The definition of substance makes it impossible. Substance would be something that has no properties, which is unthinkable.

At the fundamental level all things are made out of subatomic particles, if I'm not mistaken. Namely, electrons, protons and neutrons. The number of protons in a nucleus determines an atom's chemical element, and chemical elements and their various combinations are what everything is made of (excluding dark energy and dark matter).

However there is an even more fundamental level. Leptons, quarks (particles that make up protons and neutrons) and gauge bosons (which are the carriers of fundamental forces) are regarded as fundamental particles because they have no substructure that we know of. If this is true then they are the particles from which everything else is made of, which makes them the closest we get to substance.”

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 04:37 PM

Originally posted by DisappearCompletely
reply to post by randyvs

I'm sorry you feel that way, but the fact of the matter is that I cooked spaghetti and meatballs with the Master Himself, therefore I have as much proof for my claims as you do yours.

Sir Isaac Newton [1642-1727]

Mathematician, Physicist
Inventor of calculus
Law of universal gravitation
Newton's three laws of motion:

1) Law of inertia 2) Force=mass*acceleration 3) Principle of action and reaction

Published "Newton's Prophecies of Daniel"
after his study and translation of the Book of Daniel [in the Bible]

"About the time of the end, a body of men will be raised up who will turn their attention to the Prophecies, and insist upon their literal interpretation, in the midst of much clamor and opposition."

"There are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history."

" This thing [a scale model of our solar system] is but a puny imitation of a much grander system whose laws you know, and I am not able to convince you that this mere toy is without a designer and maker; yet you, as an atheist, profess to believe that the great original from which the design is taken has come into being without either designer or maker! Now tell me by what sort of reasoning do you reach such an incongruous conclusion?"

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 04:44 PM
reply to post by OldThinker

Dear God man, .... what are you talking about.

Face it OT, you only seek to reaffirm your own belief's, ... this page seems to be the last grasps of a desperate man,

What would you like me to say OT ?? " your right" ... god sits on a throne in heaven, he awaits to judge you".

Would that stop the madness ??

You have been checked, checked mated, multiple times on your own thread, and when you are, you either completely overlook it, or try to change boards.

You and Randy seem like intelligent people, ... why you would choose to live inside of a box is beyond me. I suppose when you reach a certain age, it would be life shattering to completely change your belief's, ... but when you hold onto nonsense which such certainty you reach a state of spiritual death in a sense.

Jesus was simply trying to relate complex idea's to the people of the time, ... idea's which havent' even been accepted today, as they deal with higher dimensions and the mechanics of things.

It's kind of like an Ape finding a mechanical pen, .... they praise this pen and think it to be the end all, be all of existance, ... it must be right ?? it is so advanced, so new, .. it can magicaly write. But it is really only a fraction of whats out there, .. and a thousand years later, they still worship this pen, ... even as they invent ray guns, ... because their ancestors tell them how great the pen is, ... and it MUST be the only way.

Christianity is that pen.

new topics

top topics

<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in