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.

 

Questions That Deserve an Answer

page: 2
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 05:25 AM
link   
here is the psalm for people to look at

Psalm 22

New King James Version (NKJV)

Psalm 22
To the Chief Musician. Set to “The Deer of the Dawn.”[a] A Psalm of David.
1 My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?
Why are You so far from helping Me,
And from the words of My groaning?
2 O My God, I cry in the daytime, but You do not hear;
And in the night season, and am not silent.

3 But You are holy,
Enthroned in the praises of Israel.
4 Our fathers trusted in You;
They trusted, and You delivered them.
5 They cried to You, and were delivered;
They trusted in You, and were not ashamed.

6 But I am a worm, and no man;
A reproach of men, and despised by the people.
7 All those who see Me ridicule Me;
They shoot out the lip, they shake the head, saying,
8 “He trusted in the LORD, let Him rescue Him;
Let Him deliver Him, since He delights in Him!”

9 But You are He who took Me out of the womb;
You made Me trust while on My mother’s breasts.
10 I was cast upon You from birth.
From My mother’s womb
You have been My God.
11 Be not far from Me,
For trouble is near;
For there is none to help.

12 Many bulls have surrounded Me;
Strong bulls of Bashan have encircled Me.
13 They gape at Me with their mouths,
Like a raging and roaring lion.

14 I am poured out like water,
And all My bones are out of joint;
My heart is like wax;
It has melted within Me.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
And My tongue clings to My jaws;
You have brought Me to the dust of death.

16 For dogs have surrounded Me;
The congregation of the wicked has enclosed Me.
They pierced[c] My hands and My feet;
17 I can count all My bones.
They look and stare at Me.
18 They divide My garments among them,
And for My clothing they cast lots.

19 But You, O LORD, do not be far from Me;
O My Strength, hasten to help Me!
20 Deliver Me from the sword,
My precious life from the power of the dog.
21 Save Me from the lion’s mouth
And from the horns of the wild oxen!

You have answered Me.

22 I will declare Your name to My brethren;
In the midst of the assembly I will praise You.
23 You who fear the LORD, praise Him!
All you descendants of Jacob, glorify Him,
And fear Him, all you offspring of Israel!
24 For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted;
Nor has He hidden His face from Him;
But when He cried to Him, He heard.

25 My praise shall be of You in the great assembly;
I will pay My vows before those who fear Him.
26 The poor shall eat and be satisfied;
Those who seek Him will praise the LORD.
Let your heart live forever!

27 All the ends of the world
Shall remember and turn to the LORD,
And all the families of the nations
Shall worship before You.[d]
28 For the kingdom is the LORD’s,
And He rules over the nations.

29 All the prosperous of the earth
Shall eat and worship;
All those who go down to the dust
Shall bow before Him,
Even he who cannot keep himself alive.

30 A posterity shall serve Him.
It will be recounted of the Lord to the next generation,
31 They will come and declare His righteousness to a people who will be born,
That He has done this.

i think verse 16 to 18 says it all

seeing they pierced his hands and feet on the cross

and then drew lots for his clothes




posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 05:42 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 06:21 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Ok, since my Campus WiFi just reset and idiotically lost my full post, I'll do this in short form.

1:
Self-fulfilling prophecy, Jesus had access to the Psalms
Prophecy itself is not a prophecy, is not specific, is not descriptive, and is generally easy to mold around other events.

2:
No evidence to say that the dude existed in the first place
No evidence to say that the dude, if he existed, matched your description as 25+ years of his life are absent
Jesus could have been a mythic character, a mythic embellishment of a real figure, a mythic amalgamation of several real characters, etc.
Memes.

3:
My worldview is not where I derive meaning and purpose from, I derive it from actions and goals. The world should not be something that molds itself to human purpose, especially since it's billions of years older than humanity and the universe is vast beyond imagination.

4:
The origin of life is verifiable via experimentation
Abiogenesis is separate from evolution (at this point you're ignorant on purpose as this has been explained to you)
Evolution would take place regardless of natural or supernatural origins for life
Abiogenesis has been repeatedly tested and makes specific predictions. A system of faith doesn't involve rigorous testing over several decades under close scrutiny.

5:
Dumbest question of all.
Answer: RNA
We have evidence of RNA arising naturally in conditions like those found in the early stages of the Earth (Oddly enough, you think the Earth is (1.17 x 10^-6)% the age of life) about 3.5 billion years ago as evidenced by geology.
RNA arises naturally, phospholipid bilayers arise naturally, the two together easily form proto-life.

So, here's a question for you:
How can you be so ignorant of biology yet argue against it?
How do you think a worldview must determine the purpose of a life?
Why do you consider that passage which is anything but descriptive of Jesus as being prophetic?
Where is your evidence to support any of your claims?
edit on 22/6/11 by madnessinmysoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:20 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



4. Since the origin of life is neither observable, verifiable, or falsifiable, how does the theory of evolution (Abiogenesis) amount to anything at all more than just another system of faith?


Any honest person, evolutionist or otherwise, will admit that they don’t know. Nobody knows. Creationists *think* that God created life, but the don’t *know* it, not like how academics know about thermodynamics or natural selection. Abiogenicists (those scientists that study the origin of life – which is an entirely separate field of study from the study of evolution, and not generally related, though it does use the tenets of evolution to venture theories) don’t *know* how life started, but they have a few good ideas that are supported by a certain amount of evidence.

Faith? Ha.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:22 AM
link   
reply to post by SaberTruth
 


Do believe deities dictate geoligical events such as floods, volcanoes? What about disease and bacteria? Punishment from God.

Also, what's a list of creationist scientists have to do with truth? Or how does that support any argument regarding the existence of a deity?



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   
reply to post by bogomil
 



And verse 19-21 contradicts it.


Please, explain how verses 19-21 contradicts the premise that is speaking about Jesus?


Why do you think there are 34.000 different sub-sets of the christianities?


Because people have different opinions and views about a "Subject".

Peace



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Seed76
 



Originally posted by bogomil
Why do you think there are 34.000 different sub-sets of the christianities?


It just shows that we are so unsure about the word of God, that we feel we must tweak it, change it, amend it, take bits out, make up new metaphysical claims.

And these simple differences have massage effects on societies; look at the Israel dispute; both partie's "GODs" promised them land in scripture; no political resolution will end the tension.

What about Ireland; Protestants killing Catholics, gunfire and murder? Just a cultural problem?

What about suicide bombers who blow up the Coptic chruches; they really do believe they will get into paradise; because they are doing Allah's will. Martyrdom and Jihad ARE concepts in the Quran.
edit on 22-6-2011 by ExistentialNightmare because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2011 by ExistentialNightmare because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   
Alright, I'll bite.

1. How can someone explain away prophet David's graphic descriptions of Jesus' death by crucifixion a thousand years before Jesus was born? (Psalm 22)

Originally, not having heard that arguement before. I would've assumed that the story of Jesus was made up around past prophesies. So that even if that was written long before jesus, it woudn't of proven anything, just that the story element was thought up a long time ago.

Reading Psalms 22, that sounds like a joke. I couldn't find anything that sounded remotely like what supposedly did happen with jesus.

2. How can someone explain the fact that one single, basically uneducated and virtually untraveled man from Nazareth, dead at age 33, who only taught publicly for 3 1/2 years, radically changed hundreds of millions of lives and society across the globe up to this day and this age?

Corrupt churches picked up stories about jesus and used them to manipulate people. Maybe a few were sincere and just mislead. The finally decided to get together and decide which stories to go with and which ones to drop, for consistency. Became the official roman religion, and then we entered the dark ages.

Remember, Mohamed was no better, but he's radically changed the world to. It was neither Mohamed or jesus that changed anything, but people latching onto the ideas and making change with them,

3. Is your current worldview giving you an adequate sense of meaning and purpose?

I can say for sure that I wouldn't have that sense if I'd stayed with what I was raised in, but that's a different story. Actually, I've never heard a good explanation for why 'not actually ever dying', or having a magic man in heaven as your buddy, gives meaning and purpose, whilst connections to people that you can actually see exist, and doing good with the life you get, are apparently meaningless.

Not to mention that's completely irrelevant to if somethings true.

4. Since the origin of life is neither observable, verifiable, or falsifiable, how does the theory of evolution (Abiogenesis) amount to anything at all more than just another system of faith?

How we became the way we are today is observable though. And the evidence doesn't point to being made exactly as we are today, only 6000 years ago, out of dust.

Abiogenesis itself, we've only put our feet in the water as far as bioengineering. We won't be able to go back and see our creation, but we can see evidence implying that abiogenesis isn't impossible. Viruses seem to of came into existence separate and after cellular life. Meteorites hitting earth with fossilized bacteria in them, gradually becoming more sure life was once on mars.

I just said in a different topic; just because we don't understand something doesn't mean it's proof of god. Argument out of Ignorance. 20 years from now, we probably will understand how to make life from non-living materials ourselves, and people will find more excuses why god needs to be included in the picture.

5. Which came first, the DNA or the protein to make the DNA?

Protein, I'm assuming. Don't know what you're getting at. Again, we don't know everything about abiogenesis yet, but that doesn't prove it didn't happen.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 



4. Since the origin of life is neither observable, verifiable, or falsifiable, how does the theory of evolution (Abiogenesis) amount to anything at all more than just another system of faith?


Any honest person, evolutionist or otherwise, will admit that they don’t know. Nobody knows. Creationists *think* that God created life, but the don’t *know* it, not like how academics know about thermodynamics or natural selection. Abiogenicists (those scientists that study the origin of life – which is an entirely separate field of study from the study of evolution, and not generally related, though it does use the tenets of evolution to venture theories) don’t *know* how life started, but they have a few good ideas that are supported by a certain amount of evidence.

Faith? Ha.


What you say is right scientists have a certain amout of evidence, but people that believe the scientist do not all they have is faith in what the scientist is saying. Just like the people living with Jesus would have a certain amount of evidence for his works and what not, but people living now just have faith about Jesus and his works. I just don't see the differnce some people are trying to create saying they have evidence yet they do not work in lab preforming these experiments.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by digby888
 


bible.cc...

Here's a link with all the parrallel translations, so people may read the variations on the original text and research them accordinly.

Peace



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Doublemint
 


Faith in the scientific method is a lot different to faith in biblical dogma.

Connotations of "faith":-


Complete trust or confidence in someone or something

- this restores one's faith in politicians


Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof


A system of religious belief

- the Christian faith


A strongly held belief or theory

- the faith that life will expand until it fills the universe


Google.com - Type "define: faith"

I can put a certain ammount of "trust" in science (or at least the scientific method); and of course science can only analyse current evidence; and if it makes a mistake, it's it's beneficial to truth in order to accept any new evidence; and accept any refutation of theory that may cause or suggest.



Perhaps this video will explain further.
edit on 22-6-2011 by ExistentialNightmare because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by SaberTruth
 



Originally posted by SaberTruth
a detailed study on the matter of Noah's Ark


Which is crap because there is absolutely no geologic evidence of a worldwide flood. There is no evidence of a genetic bottleneck of all species worldwide at the exact same period within human history. There is absolutely no way in which a ship that size made of wood could have been sea worthy. There's no evidence of a sudden destruction of all human civilization worldwide either.

I mean, I made a whole thread ages ago and any possible pro-flood argument has been demolished there.

Also, this isn't a study, it's a propaganda resource. A study implies scientific rigor of some sort, none of which can be found in this ridiculous website you've linked.



interesting study on ancient words having bearing on the Flood as well as other topics


What? I'm sorry, but ancient words have nothing to do with geologic events. In fact, every single culture on the planet could have the exact same story of an ancient flood down to the smallest detail and it wouldn't prove that an ancient flood happened because there is no geologic evidence.



creation scientists from Y1K to Y2K


...scientists who happen to be creationists aren't 'creation scientists'...and considering that less than 1% of all modern scientists are creationists....



Jesus' influence on history


You mean Christianity's influence on history, which is undoubted. Anyone who thinks Christianity had no influence on history is idiotic, just like it would be idiotic to think that Greek paganism had no effect on history.

One last thing I wanted to add on the Noah story, which I've posted in the thread I linked to as well, here are two great videos which explain the idiocy of thinking the ark was viable as a sea-going vessel.



edit on 23/6/11 by madnessinmysoul because: Added videos

edit on 23/6/11 by madnessinmysoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 09:59 AM
link   
This isn't a thread about the feasibility of "Noah's Ark".



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Let's keep it on topic in YOUR threads.



It doesn't appear that you are responding to many of the reasonable answers to your question.
edit on 23-6-2011 by ExistentialNightmare because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
double
edit on 23-6-2011 by ExistentialNightmare because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Well, it was brought up...and hey, it's a thread about questions which deserve an answer. My question, which I feel deserves an answer is:

How the hell do people believe in a story that is so fundamentally flawed?

And I did make an on-topic post that addressed all of the questions in easy to read point form without being replied to. Your questions were answered and in some cases shown to be either dishonest or ill-informed. I'll go with the latter, as I'd give you the benefit of the doubt.
edit on 23/6/11 by madnessinmysoul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by madnessinmysoul
 


This is the best part there is no evidnce for a world wide flood. Still you are unable to prove to me that a world wide flood did not happen. Evidnce is not proof because evidnce can be inaccurate. If you are able to prove that the evidnce is accurate then we can start talking about proof, but untill then you are just making wild claims.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Doublemint
 


You are unable to prove that there ISN'T a teapot orbitting our sun, especially if it is out of range of our best telescopes.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 12:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by ExistentialNightmare
reply to post by Doublemint
 


You are unable to prove that there ISN'T a teapot orbitting our sun, especially if it is out of range of our best telescopes.


True but I'm not the one making claims so the burdon of prove is not on me but on you.




top topics



 
4
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join