Proof we were Created - Yes, I said Proof!

"Original Text, lol. If the text we have is corrupt how do you know the "original" is accurate?

Using the bible to prove the bible is circular logic. It doesn't fly.

Side note - yes I believe we were created. But I believe that God didn't necessarily 'spot zap' two human beings into existence for our 'creation'. He can use any method he wants ... be it 'spot zapping Adam and Eve' or be it Him using evolution or be it Him having his other creations (aliens) create us in a lab somewhere.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by TheTalentedMrBryant

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by Wertdagf
This bull%&*^ only works in English?... and its not even pi? That's not proof....

We should all be wary because people that make threads like these always end up hurting themselves or others.

edit on 24-8-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)

It's always important you read the OP first. Here is the link to the HEBREW. HEBREW WORDS

Your argument is based on Ad Hominem, speaking down on the object rather than speaking to the subject. Try a different approach after you read the OP.

I don't see how you can continuously deny the fact that this occurs in other non religious texts.

In the OP, I used Greek and Latin. Again, read the OP.

Stop telling people who disagree with you to read the OP. You should check your condescension elsewhere when you go and make a thread making ridiculous claims. I did read the OP, clearly, as I had to click on your links to find the calculations.

I don't care what language you used, it's irrelevant. In fact, the fact that these coincidences in text continue to happen across multiple languages, is more evidence that it means nothing and is just a coincidence.

reply to post by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

I hold with ToTheTenthPower's post. He has essentially expressed every flaw I feel is blatantly evident in virtually every thread you have posted so far. If I see your name as the author of any thread from this day forward, I will most likely close the thread immediately. You have cried wolf far too many times, Enoch. I no longer believe in your wolf, nor trust your judgment in recognizing one.

Have a good one.

You have argued against every thread I have ever authored. Why should your statement above appear different in the next thread I author? Speak to the subject. It is evident. I have nothing to do with it other than showing why it is so. In every post, I have added more information as an additional layer. ATS has the mandate to deny ignorance. Attacking me does not deny the OP.

The quality of the poster does affect the quality of the post, just as the quality of the cook affects the quality of the soup.

Did you even bother reading ToTheTenthPower's post, which is linked in this post as well? I highly recommend you do so. In fact, I highly recommend anyone who is actually interested in ACCURACY and not just EGOTISTIC GRATIFICATION or BLIND PIETY check out his post. As I said, it is linked.

Enoch is ignoring that post for a reason: he cannot refute it or defend himself against it.

Originally posted by EnochWasRight

Originally posted by Cuervo
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

I believe in creation and evolution. Since we can prove evolution already, I'm always excited when somebody also proposes evidence pointing to an intelligent design. However, this doesn't actually prove anything. You are using the same ole' circular logic that most people do concerning the bible. You are using an insulated system to prove that very same system. Logic can not not work that way nor can evidence. But... BUT...

It does prove it by many witnesses. Nature is a witness as a mirror. DNA is a witness as in a mirror. The letters of Hebrew speak directly to the letters of creation being WORD. It is evident on levels that probability cannot handle. When the probability reaches a certain point, we say that something is evident. Apart from any evidence against, it is solid proof that cannot be denied. My other witness is the fact that no reply in this thread has yet to reach out with anything other than Ad Hominem as a foundation. If the evidence itself cannot be refuted, it stands for now.

If there were not enough, the statements in Revelation, Isaiah and Matthew 24 all describe our current historical difficulties of tyranny with a precision that cannot be denied. Again, I cannot fathom how anyone misses it. It's in our faces with clarity.

Yes because any rational person would argue that who ever wrote Mathew had probably read Isaiah since it was written hundreds of years after and was very likely influenced by it.

If you look for Similarity in say... Lord of the Rings and say,, Star Wars there are many. Obi-one is similar to Gandalf. Sauron to Palpatine, Lord of the Nazgul to Darth Vader. A lot of the philosophical quotes are similar in context as well.

Does that mean the same person wrote both...? no
Does that mean God wrote Both... no?

Everything you write here seems to be a case of 2+2 = 5

But you seem to immediately discredit more simple reasons because they don't fit your predetermined narrative.
Once you have a predetermined narrative on any subject you can bend just about any book or story ever written around it.

Its a bit like verbal Paradolia.

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by TheTalentedMrBryant

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by TheTalentedMrBryant

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by TheTalentedMrBryant
Macbeth, Act II, Scene III

Macbeth says:
"The spring, the head, the fountain of your blood."

If you employ the same convoluted mathematics from your links to the above line, the result is 3.141584569 x 10^69, en even closer approximation.

Turns out Shakespeare was God.

You might have missunderstod the OP.

You should get exactly: 3.1415 no more than 4 desimals.

But i think the biggest different is that Macbeth text is about a different thing altogether compared to the text in the bible. That is probably why you ended up With a greater desimal.

I understand. My point being is that these kinds of things happen in other texts, and the fact that it happened in the Bible should not validate the Bible as being written by a god.

The Bible is not written by God. There is only two Things i know of that God has written.

1. The writing on the wall.
2. The 10 commandments.

Jesus, Lived to manifest Our written Word of God.

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

Surely you can't really be missing my point.

I think i must be missing Your point, if what i said made no sense?

The argument isn't about who wrote what. It's that his entire argument relies on the findings of numbers in the Bible, when you can find numbers and codes in several texts.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by spy66

 

Many things in the Bible are paraphrased renditions of writings from cultures both older and far removed. This is evidence that a great deal of the Bible is not actually original, but an amalgamation of an unspecified number of cultures. That is the point MrBryant was making.

edit on 24-8-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)

I man not going to disagree

I really dont know the Whole histore behind the Books that now make up the Bible.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

What was one of the first things you typed in the OP? That anyone who disagrees with you is delusional. Tit for tat my friend.

Here are my words.

"In this simple thread, I will show you undeniable proof that Creation over Evolution is the primary truth appealing to the rational mind. Delusion can be the only state of mind for anyone trying to cling to any other conclusion. Why is this the reasonable answer? See the evidence, then understand that these are proofs that deny lower axioms of ignorance. Until someone can demonstrate a higher axiom of truth, this view stands. "

Delusion can be the only state of mind for anyone trying to cling to any other conclusion. This is what I stated. What conclusion is that? Proof we are created.

Offer another conclusion if you have one. I have yet to hear anyone state the case for evolution in any way shape or form. Why is that? There are volumes of information on the internet that could be used in support of accidental, spontaneous or naturally selected genesis. Where are the replies to counter the obvious? There are none. Why? It would be delusional, in light of the truth, to claim anything other than the truth.

If you can support evolution as a cause, then do so. If not, what other option do you have? None. We are either a creation of something or we are nothing arising to something with no intent. Which is it?

What did Hermes say in the Corpus Hermeticum?

Corpus Hermeticum

No one says that a statue or a portrait has come into being without a sculptor or a painter; then has this work come into being without a creator? What blindness! What sacrilege! What mindless arrogance! My son Tat, never deprive the works of creation of their Creator. He is greater than anything the name of God implies, so great is the Father of all; for He is single and His work is just this: to be Father [Aleph Bet].

Here is a video that counters my claim. Since no one here can counter the claim with a video, I'll provide my own counter argument. Which one meets the merit of our rationality? I choose the one where God tells us that his very name represents the words and letters of DNA.

Originally posted by TheTalentedMrBryant

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by TheTalentedMrBryant

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by TheTalentedMrBryant

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by TheTalentedMrBryant
Macbeth, Act II, Scene III

Macbeth says:
"The spring, the head, the fountain of your blood."

If you employ the same convoluted mathematics from your links to the above line, the result is 3.141584569 x 10^69, en even closer approximation.

Turns out Shakespeare was God.

You might have missunderstod the OP.

You should get exactly: 3.1415 no more than 4 desimals.

But i think the biggest different is that Macbeth text is about a different thing altogether compared to the text in the bible. That is probably why you ended up With a greater desimal.

I understand. My point being is that these kinds of things happen in other texts, and the fact that it happened in the Bible should not validate the Bible as being written by a god.

The Bible is not written by God. There is only two Things i know of that God has written.

1. The writing on the wall.
2. The 10 commandments.

Jesus, Lived to manifest Our written Word of God.

edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)

Surely you can't really be missing my point.

I think i must be missing Your point, if what i said made no sense?

The argument isn't about who wrote what. It's that his entire argument relies on the findings of numbers in the Bible, when you can find numbers and codes in several texts.

I see Your point. I am still trying out the OPs work, and have not yet understood fully what it is about.
Some times i have to do this for a while before i get it. It is quite New for me.

And if you divide all the numbers mentioned by the OP with 7.32112 and multiply with the sacred KacD you get a reference to the OMNIPRESENT and ALL KNOWING entity called God (or The Lord) in Genesis 3:


"8 They heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the garden at the time of the evening breeze, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord God among the trees of the garden.
9 But the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, ‘Where are you?’"


It is good to know that the good Bible we have to take litterally describes God as someone who can be heard wander about in the Garden of Eden enjoying the evening breeze.
So they hide. Gods reaction is totally consistent with an ALL KNOWING God - as in He can't find them and has to play Hide and Go seek - give up and ask where they are.

Well

This very first part of the Bible lends little toward the God Theory itself.

To comment further on the first post. What a load of far fetched Bull.

reply to post by EnochWasRight

Delusion can be the only state of mind for anyone trying to cling to any other conclusion. This is what I stated. What conclusion is that? Proof we are created.

Read the following:



THAT is the definition of ad-hominem.

Regardless of YOUR beliefs, if you stated what you stated above, which effectively is this:

"Delusion is the state of mind of anybody who holds opinion different than my own, on this subject."

Than you are not only insulting another person, you are holding yourself on a pedestal as being somehow superior for simply believing something that is in itself spurious.

Your demeanor is intellectually dishonest to both yourself and those you are attempting to 'educate'.

~Tenth

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
***snip***
Offer another conclusion if you have one. I have yet to hear anyone state the case for evolution in any way shape or form. Why is that? There are volumes of information on the internet that could be used in support of accidental, spontaneous or naturally selected genesis. Where are the replies to counter the obvious? There are none. Why? It would be delusional, in light of the truth, to claim anything other than the truth.
***snip***

Why mention the volumes on the internet and not mention the vast amount of supporting evidence in Scientific Work?

Why mention the volumes on the internet as supporting evidence and promptly disregard it?

You disregard the we have proof and evidence and all you have is faith and "mumbo jumbo" derived from numbers and Word Counts from scripture that has been written and rewritten hundreds of times.

Sorry - but you are the delusional one here.

reply to post by EnochWasRight

There are volumes of information on the internet that could be used in support of accidental, spontaneous or naturally selected genesis.

So you're telling me that you are choosing to ignore these volumes of information until someone posts it in this thread? Come on, that's intellectually dishonest and you know it.

Why are you asking for someone to disprove your theory (and that's exactly what it is, a theory) if you know you're going to end up rejecting it anyways? You already have your mind made up, and the overwhelming disagreement in this thread so far shows that you are going to stick to your guns no matter what.

I came here for proof and all I got was big steaming cup of crap. This has to be one of the most bizare attepts at proof I have seen here.

Words are used to describe proof and not represent it as the only means for that proof to be actually, dare I say it, proof. The OP's whole argument is based on words that are from God, so since these words are from God then we are created from intelligent design.

I wish the OP would also understand that if the words were not from God then his argument is totally baseless. One would think that the proof is first whether the words are of God or of Man and to prove that we already know that Man exists so the proof would be whether God exists too. Faith is not a form of proof and even if the OP has all the faith in the world it doesn't suggest the proof of anything. There is zero proof of god, that is why we have faith, and for one to want proof just means they lack in faith.

The OP presented zero proof that God exists and so provided zero support as to who wrote the "words". I do believe we were create by the natural laws of our universe, so in that sense the OP was right, but to also suggest intelligent design he has a long way to go prove that.

Well, I guess I will have to leave and find some where alse to play.
This guy has talked in circles for so long, written about as much and said as little as anyone I have ever known.

Reminds me a lot of Sheldon on "Big bang Theory".

Life is nothing if it can't be made more complicated.

Enoch, you silly troll. I don't know if you guys notice, but he doesn't give a flying # what we think. All he cares about is corrupting others with his nonsense.

reply to post by EnochWasRight


man wrote the bible..

man wrote all the religious texts.

they have nothing to do with "God".

they have to do with control. power. greed.

nothing good has ever come of them.

all your word play does nothing

but prove ANY truth has been

hidden...

Sorry, but, the origins of these texts are man made. In fear. There is no proof of a Creator, if so, where is HE??

If he did create this world, this Universe.....then he allows murder, rape, stealing, killing, mutilation of young innocent life...atrocities that make a normal person cry in their tracks.

No, these teachings, writing were from people that had imagination, professed by people that wanted control over a group of people.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, If there is a GOD, A Creator, Would HE allow the torture, the inhumanity, the destruction of earth itself as we rape her of the resources, starve people, kill the innocent. I think NOT!

Unfortunately, over time.....and a lot of time you have to ask the basic question, and we have waited, if there is a GOD WHERE IS HE???? (and no he is not inside each of us...that is the latest explanation, because there is none..if he were, then we would not have the pain, suffering and atrocities we see every day.)

reply to post by ItDepends

if there is a GOD WHERE IS HE???? (and no he is not inside each of us...that is the latest explanation, because there is none..if he were, then we would not have the pain, suffering and atrocities we see every day.)

You can't appreciate pleasure without pain to contrast it, you can't appreciate light without dark, etc.

The universe is about balance, and if there is no counterweight (bad, dark, etc.) to compliment the other, everything would fall apart.

By the way, they say God is invisible. Did you know you have an invisible side to yourself which dictates who you are and what kind of person you are? God is not just inside you, he is also outside of you. Life itself is God, and you are part of it.