Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

[_ Old Earth _] dinosaur were ancestors of birds

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$905.00
Goal
$1,038.00
Barbarian observes:
You seem to have some misconceptions about the way rocks are dated. Would you like to learn about it?

You seem to want to ignore my question. Are the dates infallible? Or do they only change to suit the theories acceptable to the TOE? As for your assumption of my ignorance, I am always willing to learn, especially a subject that morphs quite freely. Keeping up with the current infallible doctrines of the TOE kissers is even harder than keeping up with the edicts of the RCC. Just when you think you know something, they tell you they don’t believe that anymore, all the while maintaining their unblemished infallibility status, and opposing views are declared to be hopelessly inferior.

Barbarian observes:
I can think of another possible reason tests are being put off...
So can I but I try not to be too cynical. I would like to believe that there is some love of the truth in all men. If the tests are put off too long, I fear results will be questioned because carbon in the atmosphere could contaminate the specimens, don’t you? That would surely give it an anomalous young date.

Barbarian observes:
Hmm... which ones in particular? Be careful.
Are you seriously denying that dates are readily changed to suit the TOE? I didn’t think I would have to document such a common occurrence. LOL I think if I did a web search of the term ‘once believed to be * years old’ I would get 60 billion sites and most of them would be scientific recalculations of layers that date fossils or fossils that determine layer dates.

Barbarian observes:
Hmmm... no cells? No tissues, then. Someone needs to do a histological examination, and then test the substance to see if it's made of the same materials as tissue.

It would be remarkable for tissue to last that long. My guess is that it's actually some polymers that replaced the tissue. The fact that they don't report cells suggests that's the case. As soon as I had it out of bone, I'd have it in histo lab, making slides.
Read the article again: medullary bone from the ostrich and emu was virtually identical in structure, orientation and even color, with that seen in the T. rex. The skulls believed to be Neanderthal man in Germany still smelt bad when opened. Maybe we judged them phony too soon. Maybe they were 26,000-27,400 years old after all. You can’t keep a good man down. Time will tell. You can fool all of the people some of the time…. Some of the people all of the time….
 
Barbarian observes:
You seem to have some misconceptions about the way rocks are dated. Would you like to learn about it?

You seem to want to ignore my question. Are the dates infallible?

Nothing humans do is infallible. The question is whether or not the evidence is sufficient to trust them. Would you like to learn why it is?

Or do they only change to suit the theories acceptable to the TOE?[quote:0b924]

No. Physicist first worked out the method before anyone thought of using it for fossils or evolution.

[quote:0b924]As for your assumption of my ignorance, I am always willing to learn, especially a subject that morphs quite freely.

Well, there's probably some misinformation you need to correct first, then.

Keeping up with the current infallible doctrines of the TOE kissers is even harder than keeping up with the edicts of the RCC.

Sounds more like an anger management issue than ignorance, now.

Just when you think you know something, they tell you they don’t believe that anymore, all the while maintaining their unblemished infallibility status, and opposing views are declared to be hopelessly inferior.

Probably, being a little more specific would improve your position, or at least make it clearer what you were talking about.

Barbarian observes:
I can think of another possible reason tests are being put off...

If the tests are put off too long, I fear results will be questioned because carbon in the atmosphere could contaminate the specimens, don’t you?

Not if they took the proper steps to preserve them. My guess is that we don't have a histo examination because someone's not too eager to let an histologist see what the organic material is.

Barbarian observes:
Hmm... which ones in particular? Be careful.

Are you seriously denying that dates are readily changed to suit the TOE?

I was asking for specifics. Do you know of any?

I didn’t think I would have to document such a common occurrence. LOL I think if I did a web search of the term ‘once believed to be * years old’ I would get 60 billion sites and most of them would be scientific recalculations of layers that date fossils or fossils that determine layer dates.

If so, then all you'd need to do is show that the old dates contradicted evolutionary theory and the new ones were adjusted to fit.

Why don't you do it? I promise it will be enlightening.

Barbarian observes:
Hmmm... no cells? No tissues, then. Someone needs to do a histological examination, and then test the substance to see if it's made of the same materials as tissue.

It would be remarkable for tissue to last that long. My guess is that it's actually some polymers that replaced the tissue. The fact that they don't report cells suggests that's the case. As soon as I had it out of bone, I'd have it in histo lab, making slides.

Read the article again: medullary bone from the ostrich and emu was virtually identical in structure, orientation and even color, with that seen in the T. rex.

We know bone (which is mostly calcium phosphate) can survive millons of years. It's the flexible material I'd want to see tested.

The skulls believed to be Neanderthal man in Germany still smelt bad when opened.
[/quote:0b924][/quote:0b924]

Apparently, they were a matter of fraud by one individual. Unfortunately for him, science depends on cross-checking. And so he was caught.

Let us know the specifics so we can see what you're talking about.
 
Barbarian observes:
Nothing humans do is infallible. The question is whether or not the evidence is sufficient to trust them. Would you like to learn why it is?

Sure. Enlighten me with the brilliance of their goodness and glory and majesty and power and I shall repent in the dust and ashes of their mighty evidence.

Barbarian observes:
No. Physicist first worked out the method before anyone thought of using it for fossils or evolution.
Since there are anomalous occurrences of carbon 14 dating where living organisms date to thousands or millions of years old, how can scientists be so sure that certain unusual or even ordinary atmospheric or geological events have tainted all the specimens so that the carbon 14 isotopes have been naturally or artificially reduced in them to cause erroneous results? The method has only been in use for a short period of time and there is no way to check the results beyond written history. Physicists, however godlike they appear to you, are not infallible if they are human. They have not learned everything there is to know about carbon 14 or anything else on this green earth. The dating method has serious problems and it will eventually be discarded and those who held complete faith in it’s claims will be labeled the same unflattering names they used on unbelievers. Have you ever personally seen an isotope of carbon 14 or counted them, btw?

Barbarian observes:
Apparently, they were a matter of fraud by one individual. Unfortunately for him, science depends on cross-checking. And so he was caught.
Let us know the specifics so we can see what you're talking about
This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=42940
Saturday, February 19, 2005

EVOLUTION WATCH
Anthropologist resigns in 'dating disaster'
Panel says professor of human origins made up data, plagiarized works

Posted: February 19, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com
A flamboyant anthropology professor, whose work had been cited as evidence Neanderthal man once lived in Northern Europe, has resigned after a German university panel ruled he fabricated data and plagiarized the works of his colleagues.
Reiner Protsch von Zieten, a Frankfurt university panel ruled, lied about the age of human skulls, dating them tens of thousands of years old, even though they were much younger, reports Deutsche Welle.
"The commission finds that Prof. Protsch has forged and manipulated scientific facts over the past 30 years," the university said of the widely recognized expert in carbon data in a prepared statement.
Protsch's work first came under suspicion last year during a routine investigation of German prehistoric remains by two other anthropologists.
"We had decided to subject many of these finds to modern techniques to check their authenticity so we sent them to Oxford [University] for testing," one of the researchers told The Sunday Telegraph. "It was a routine examination and in no way an attempt to discredit Prof. von Zieten." In their report, they called Protsch's 30 years of work a "dating disaster."
Among their findings was an age of only 3,300 years for the female "Bischof-Speyer" skeleton, found with unusually good teeth in Northern Germany, that Protsch dated to 21,300 years.
Another dating error was identified for a skull found near Paderborn, Germany, that Protsch dated at 27,400 years old. It was believed to be the oldest human remain found in the region until the Oxford investigations indicated it belonged to an elderly man who died in 1750.
The Herne anthropological museum, which owned the Paderborn skull, did its own tests following the unsettling results. "We had the skull cut open and it still smelt," said the museum's director. "We are naturally very disappointed."

Protsch, known for his love of Cuban cigars and Porsches, did not comment on the commission's findings, but in January he told the Frankfurter Neue Presse, "This was a court of inquisition. They don't have a single piece of hard evidence against me."
The fallout from Protsch's false dating of northern European bone finds is only beginning.
Chris Stringer, a Stone Age specialist and head of human origins at London's Natural History Museum, said: "What was considered a major piece of evidence showing that the Neanderthals once lived in northern Europe has fallen by the wayside. We are having to rewrite prehistory."

"Anthropology now has to revise its picture of modern man between 40,000 and 10,000 B.C.," added Thomas Terberger, an archaeologist at the University of Greifswald.
Frankfurt University's president, Rudolf Steinberg, apologized for the university's failure to curb Protsch's misconduct for decades. "A lot of people looked the other way," he said.[/b]
 
Barbarian on the demand that science must be infallible:
Nothing humans do is infallible. The question is whether or not the evidence is sufficient to trust them. Would you like to learn why it is?

Sure. Enlighten me with the brilliance of their goodness and glory and majesty and power and I shall repent in the dust and ashes of their mighty evidence.

You sound just a mite skeered of the truth, son. Here's a place to start. Read, do the interactive demos and then tell me if you find any of it false:
http://vcourseware3.calstatela.edu/Virt ... Rocks.html

Barbarian observes:
No. Physicist first worked out the method before anyone thought of using it for fossils or evolution.

Since there are anomalous occurrences of carbon 14 dating where living organisms date to thousands or millions of years old, how can scientists be so sure that certain unusual or even ordinary atmospheric or geological events have tainted all the specimens so that the carbon 14 isotopes have been naturally or artificially reduced in them to cause erroneous results?

You've been misled. I can easily produce all sorts of "amazing errors", just by using the wrong methods or materials. For example, mollusks tend to get the carbon in their shells from geological material, and the shells are sometimes tested by creationists, who are "shocked" to see that they are tens of thousands of years old. Never millions, because off the scale on C-14 is about 50,000 years.

The method has only been in use for a short period of time and there is no way to check the results beyond written history.

They lied to you about that, too. Recently, they calibrated the system, using lake varves, which are a special sort of lamina that are laid down one dark and one light layer each year. Some lakes have millions of years of them, and using material from them, one can get a good curve.
http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/varves.html

BTW, paleontologists don't use C-14, because it's only accurate out to a few tens of thousands of years.

Physicists, however godlike they appear to you,

Godlike? No matter how badly you're doing, you can only make it worse by foolish accusations. Physicists just know more about physics than you or I. They know that radioisotope testing works, because they have carefully tested it. Here's one test, in which Argon/Argon testing came out with flying colors:
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/rele ... mpeii.html

They have not learned everything there is to know about carbon 14 or anything else on this green earth.

They do, however, know that radioisotopes can be used to date things accurately.

The dating method has serious problems and it will eventually be discarded and those who held complete faith in it’s claims will be labeled the same unflattering names they used on unbelievers.

See above. You've been badly used by the people you trusted.

Have you ever personally seen an isotope of carbon 14 or counted them, btw?

They exist. More surely than you do.

Barbarian observes:
Apparently, they were a matter of fraud by one individual. Unfortunately for him, science depends on cross-checking. And so he was caught.
Let us know the specifics so we can see what you're talking about

This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit

Saturday, February 19, 2005

EVOLUTION WATCH
Anthropologist resigns in 'dating disaster'
Panel says professor of human origins made up data, plagiarized works

Yeah, the one I thought. Turns out the professor didn't even know how to work the machine. And his supervisors thought he was an "expert."

But even having stupid supervisors didn't save him. Eventually, his work was noticed by others, and they checked. And it didn't add up. And then the roof fell in on him.

He prospered by being obscure, and having little of any interest to others in the field. A quick check of journals shows 14 with his name mentioned, and not one in a journal of anthropology.

Don't have him cited in any of my books on human evolution, including two on Neandertals.

How about that?
 
Actually when Barbarian observed that “It came from strata which were dated in tens of millions of years old.â€Â, Unred typo questioned if these were irrefutable dates calculated by the infallible prophets of the TOE. Then Barbarian made the offer to update unred typo on the current evolutionary theories on dating layers, at which point unred typo responded that keeping up with the current infallible doctrines of the TOE kissers is even harder than keeping up with the edicts of the RCC. Although this was said in rather taunting humor, Barbarian replied that anger management might be a problem for unred typo instead of ignorance. Then the Barbarian accused unred typo of demanding that science must be infallible and made rather condescending statements saying: “Nothing humans do is infallible. The question is whether or not the evidence is sufficient to trust them. Would you like to learn why it is?†None of this ever really addressed the original question of these layer dates being infallible or not and unred typo is not the one who is demanding that science be undisputed. My question remains: Are the dates of the layers irrefutable? Can you, in your wildest imagination, ever suppose that the dates are completely wrong by some uncalculated factor, much the same way scientists were influenced by an error in Biblical understanding about the world’s orbit around the sun? The arrogance and passion with which the TOE is defended is reminiscent of that kind of religious fervor.

Barbarian’s insistence that unred typo is “badly used†by trusted people and his assertions of unred being “mislead†and “lied to†by some unnamed “they†are misinformed allegations. I get most of my questions by reading evolutionist’s sites, not creationist material. I think the best way to be informed is by reading first hand information, and using common sense to assess what is being said.


Barbarian observed:
You sound just a mite skeered of the truth, son. Here's a place to start. Read, do the interactive demos and then tell me if you find any of it false:
http://vcourseware3.calstatela.edu/Virt ... Rocks.html

You need a lesson in parent/child relationships. I’m not your son. Your site’s interactive example is plainly flawed from the git-go. The instructions say: On the animated graph below, click and move the slider to the right to simulate the passage of time in a mineral. Each decay of a radioactive parent isotope leaves behind a stable daughter isotope. Notice the decrease in parent U-235 (red spots) and the simultaneous increase in daughter Pb-207 (blue spots) as time passes. The red and blue curves represent the changing amounts of parent and daughter isotopes, respectively. The problem is that it is assumed that the mineral being tested originally had all parent U-235 and none of the daughter Pb-207. It is also assumed that the decay of the parent is the only way that more of the daughter Pb-207 could be present in the mineral. These are assumptions that I believe are entirely false. We know that weathering alters the chemistry of rocks, including their isotopic compositions and that a highly weathered rock may yield unreliable age information., but what don’t we know? Much more research is needed before we toss out the Biblical dates based on hypothetical assumptions.
I see a “it was once believed†phrase in the future of radio dating. Does this mean you can stop talking down to me now that I’m a ‘Virtual Radiochronologist?’

When it was asserted that the methods can not be assumed reliable beyond the range of recorded history, Barbarian wrote:
They lied to you about that, too. Recently, they calibrated the system, using lake varves, which are a special sort of lamina that are laid down one dark and one light layer each year. Some lakes have millions of years of them, and using material from them, one can get a good curve.
http://www.accuracyingenesis.com/varves.html

BTW, paleontologists don't use C-14, because it's only accurate out to a few tens of thousands of years.

Your sources are duping you into their lake varves scam. There is only assumption that the lamina consist of a light and dark layer per year. Actually, any pollen fall could cover the lake every few days, depending on what type of nearby trees, flowers or lake algae is blooming. When windblown dust settles over the lighter pollen, it distinguishes the layer. There is some counting going on. They are counting on the fact that most people won’t be wading out to the middle of the lake to take their own core samples and take the time to painstakingly count the layers and analize their composition one layer at a time. Do you know how thick the layers are? If they are only as thick as a slice of cheese, do you know how thick a million of them would be? If they are less than that, now you have me wondering what happened to all the other debris that settles on the lake bottom. Are you seriously believing that the only layers on the lake bottom are annual algae blooms? No fish poo, no rotten vegetation, no cosmic dust, no road dirt, no pine pollen, no ragweed, no dragonfly wings? Just a single light pollen bloom layer for the entire summer and a nice dark layer for the entire winter with no stirring up for, say, washout thunderstorms or spring flooding? Neat. Go with that. Sounds like a plan.

BTW, if paleontologists used the Carbon 14 method, they may be surprised at what they found and they hate that.

Barbarian mocked:
Godlike? No matter how badly you're doing, you can only make it worse by foolish accusations. Physicists just know more about physics than you or I. They know that radioisotope testing works, because they have carefully tested it. Here's one test, in which Argon/Argon testing came out with flying colors:
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/rele ... mpeii.html
There’s a statement I agree with. Physicists just know more about physics than you or I. Here’s something you can agree with: they are not God and they don’t know what they don’t know. Do you believe it? The glowing Berkeley article about the success of Berkeley’s methods at your Berkeley web site is about as believable as the carbon 14 methods. I didn’t see anyone mention double blind testing overseen by an independent non Berkeley funded scientific watch group. “Oh look, we tested ourselves and we were right with more precision than we had originally hoped for.†The entire premise is flawed and the method utilizes the willingness of people to be charmed with elaborate claims by the profession.

Yes, isotopes exist and you can count them. You can count hairs on a dog’s back and how many he loses and gains in a year, and calculate a approximate ratio of growth rate to hair count, synchronized to the size and variety of dog and adjusted by the approximate climatic conditions factor with a nice chart to show the decline and/or increase and that will tell you the age of the dog, plus or minus 15 years. Who is going to argue with you? The number of isotopes that have decayed won’t tell you how many were there to start with or how many were added or subtracted during the past 5000 years. Who are they trying to fool? You or me or themselves? You seem to want to believe everything they tell you. I’m happy for you.

The Barbarian wote:
Yeah, the one I thought. Turns out the professor didn't even know how to work the machine. And his supervisors thought he was an "expert."
But even having stupid supervisors didn't save him. Eventually, his work was noticed by others, and they checked. And it didn't add up. And then the roof fell in on him.
He prospered by being obscure, and having little of any interest to others in the field. A quick check of journals shows 14 with his name mentioned, and not one in a journal of anthropology.
Don't have him cited in any of my books on human evolution, including two on Neandertals.
How about that?

Your cavalier statements are typical of the reaction of other TOE proponents on this board. Eventually his work was noticed? Right. The article sites a different picture than the one you paint: "The commission finds that Prof. Protsch has forged and manipulated scientific facts over the past 30 years," the university said of the widely recognized expert in carbon data in a prepared statement.
“A flamboyant anthropology professor, whose work had been cited as evidence Neanderthal man once lived in Northern Europe,â€Â
The fallout from Protsch's false dating of northern European bone finds is only beginning.
Chris Stringer, a Stone Age specialist and head of human origins at London's Natural History Museum, said: "What was considered a major piece of evidence showing that the Neanderthals once lived in northern Europe has fallen by the wayside. We are having to rewrite prehistory."
"We had decided to subject many of these finds to modern techniques to check their authenticity so we sent them to Oxford [University] for testing," one of the researchers told The Sunday Telegraph. "It was a routine examination and in no way an attempt to discredit Prof. von Zieten." In their report, they called Protsch's 30 years of work a "dating disaster."
"Anthropology now has to revise its picture of modern man between 40,000 and 10,000 B.C.," added Thomas Terberger, an archaeologist at the University of Greifswald.
Frankfurt University's president, Rudolf Steinberg, apologized for the university's failure to curb Protsch's misconduct for decades. "A lot of people looked the other way," he said.
 
huh

unred typo said:
Reznwerks wrote:
My comment was the uncanny coincidence of Buddha having 12 diciples and Jesus having 12 diciples. Abraham reality is as real as any of the apotles and Jesus. There is no evidence as to their authenticity nor historical accuracy.

You accuse me of paranoid conspiracy theories? LOL.
I don't think I did.

You think all of the Jews and Christians for the last few thousand years are involved in an elaborate fabrication of history.
I don't think I linked the Jews to anything. Christianity on the other hand have made claims that are no where to be substantiated outside the bible. I guess the Jews do as well but they don't proselytize like Christians.


The only stories you believe are those made up by evolutionary spin doctors. In a few hundred years they can deny that Abraham Lincoln existed.
In your world I guess if something cannot be proved to be false then it must be true.LOL In order for Abraham Lincolns existance to be doubted do you realize how many of those who wrote about him (first hand] and their works would have to disappear, along with all the monuments, along with the writings and pictures of Lincoln himself, his records in school, his military records, his political records etc etc etc. Having said all that Jesus has no first hand records at all , plain and simple and he shook up the world.


Regardless of your assertion that Abraham didn’t exist, the record of his having 12 sons and their significance to the beliefs of both Jew and Christian cannot be denied.
Yes it can. We have no record outside of the bible to their authenticity or accuracy.

Abraham, truth or fiction, was a fact before Buddha.
Sorry but we know when the bible was written and how old it is.
http://www.bidstrup.com/bible.htm


Furthermore, Buddha had more than 12 and that number varied widely. Your amazing co incidence is of the same quality as my fictional example of Popeye, or do you think I have a case for my own web site? I’m sure that I could sucker a certain following to believe that Jesus was fabricated from old episodes of Popeye. So what does that prove? Yes, there are lies and believers of lies. Does that prove there is nothing true?
Some things may be true some things are not. Where do you draw the line? Do you accept what can be proved or do you accept what you know to be impossible and not only that but unsubstantiated as well?


Reznwerks wrote:[quote:57288] UT: “totally false claims backed up by real facts.â€Â
How is that possible? LOL
Scroll up to my example of Popeye. It’s not so hard to do.

Reznwerks wrote:
You are so close to understanding it is frustrating. Yes you can claim it but can you prove it? Now you take the bible and its stories as factual but can you prove it? The answer is as you put it "doesn't make it true". Look how many time do I have to tell you that I have no doubt that Christians lived and died and were persecuted. Religions all through history have the same stories. It doesn't validate the belief.
T he facts of his life have never been established and if you looked at the Brittanica you would see it. IT only uses the bible as reference as not to offend anyone. If other evidence were available don't you think it would be used?
The bones have never been found.
Recanted of what? Their beliefs? That is not proof their is reason to believe. Prisoners of war could have been freed if they denounced their country. Some did some didn't. What does that prove?
The issue is not about history it is about truth and evidence.Their isn't any.
Eyewittness accounts of what? By whom? All we have are stories in the bible about characters whose biography cannot be determin ed outside the book they are mentioned. That is not first hand evidence.
OK. So you think I’m so close to understanding that all the religions of the world have the same value and no proof to support their claims.
Yes

Everyone is duped into submission by unscrupulous charlatans who use messages from god to control and manipulate the ignorant masses. God is just a myth, legend or figment of some political despot’s evil imagination.
Could it be? Could it be that finally you understand? However you fail to understand MOTIVE . Why is it that people would try to get you to believe in something? Could it be that religion especially back then controlled power, both political and monetary? Look at Paul and see how he contradicted Jesus' words. Paul whoever he was hijacked Christianity. Christianity became popular through the back door by appealing to the gentiles (which Paul enticed) and Jesus plainly said he had no use for. Check out why Jesus spoke in parables. He didn't do it to appeal to the gentile but to hide the message from them. Paul who never met Jesus changed all that by claiming he had a vision and everyone believed him.

You are the enlightened one who doesn’t believe and you have no motive for your unbelief, nothing in your lifestyle that offends God and no hidden agenda or personal reasons to prove Christianity as a farce.
Why would I have a "motive" for unbelief? How could I deny something if it were true? I don't think God exists or if he does he doesn't care about my lifestyle. I do try not to offend my fellow man and live in harmony with him.

You just have a love for truth and exposing misinformation. I wonder if you spend as much time trying to destroy the faith of Muslims or Hindus.

One thing at a time. I think all revealed religions are false including Islam. Hinduism is not a revealed religion but more of a way of life which is primarily a peacful approach and secondly those two examples don't impact the US like Christianity.

People who die for their country believe in their country. People who don’t really believe in what their country stands for won’t die for it. People who die for their belief in Allah believe in Allah and what they have been told about the hereafter. They are raised to believe in their faith from children. They will die for the claims of Islam. This is the same as dying for your belief in Christianity. This is not the same as dying for Christ because you have experienced his miracles yourself.
Miracles have never been documented by anyone anywhere.

Believers in Christ saw his miracles and his resurrected body.
Again no where is this confirmed outside the bible.

They believed because they saw the evidence first hand. They wrote down their eyewitness accounts. They believed to the point of death and torture. If they didn’t believe it, they could have walked away from the persecution inflicted on Christians. Can you possibly understand the difference? For you, the evidence is by faith. For them, it was undeniable truth.
What is written down cannot be confirmed outside the bible.

The eyewitness accounts are not one book. The Bible is a collection of these individual testimonies. You don’t believe them. That’s your choice.

The bible is a collection of stories written by prejudiced people trying to make a point by making claims that cannot be proved. Do ever watch the early morning infomercials. They all put so called eyewitness testimony that this happened to them or that happened. The truth is often sorely lacking but many will rush right out check in hand to pay out money because they believe . Did they witness the claims ? NO They WANT to believe. Religion and Christianity are a lot the same.

I happen to believe that since these men were willing to die tortuous deaths, they believed what they wrote. They weren’t alone.
I don't doubt they believed. I don't doubt as I said that those who flew their planes into the twin towers believed that at the moment of death they would be in heaven with ??? amount of virgins. Believing doesn't make it true.

There were thousands of witnesses to these events who also died tortuous deaths.
If there were thousands of witnesses no one wrote anything down. Why? The answer is because , again the only testimony to thousands of witnesses being present is in the bible.

Just like there are those who deny the holocaust, there are those who refuse to believe the history of the Bible.
Those that deny the holocaust do so despite the fact we have warm bodies to testifiy to what happened , we have hard facts and the captured records of the Nazis themselves as to what happened. We have no such records as to Jesus or the claims of Christianity.

Some have gone so far as to destroy writings that give evidence of it’s truth hoping they will make it impossible to believe.
Like what was destroyed that we knew existed that would testify to the reality of Jesus?

Jesus wondered if when he returned if he would even find any faith on the earth. Eventually though, every knee will bow to him and everyone will know it was true.
Again why is "faith" so important to Christianity? There is nothing more important to Christianity than believing in something that has no evidence. WHY? Doesn't it make more sense that living the Christian life or embracing it's principles would be more important than professing ones belief?

Reznwerks wrote:
Making choices is not racist. I don't favor one child of mine over another nor do I plot against one child using the other. A good father does not do this and the creator of the universe (if good) would not do it either. Secondly the creator of the universe would not need an intercessory to speak on his behalf.

Your argument is absurd. I guess he should have had his only son born of every virgin on earth and not favor one over the other.
Absurd? Why would a creator God pick on obscure tribe in the desert to be called the chosen? You don't think this is favoritism? If you read the bible especially the O/T it is nothing other than God fighting the battles of the Hebrew.
Jesus was the express image of the invisible God. He chose to be one of us. He wanted to walk a mile in our shoes. Sounds like a pretty cool God to me.
Why? God is perfect and doesn't need other stimuli. He would know what it would be like to be human.


Reznwerks wrote:
So how do you know this? Are you saying you talk to God and he answers? If so can others hear him?
Yes, I talk to God and he answers. Yes, you can too. No, it’s not an audible voice that tells me to kill people or fly out 5th story windows.
Then if others cannot hear him how can you be certain it is not your imagination that speaks to you?

[/quote:57288]
 
Reznwerks wrote:
In your world I guess if something cannot be proved to be false then it must be true.LOL In order for Abraham Lincolns existance to be doubted do you realize how many of those who wrote about him (first hand] and their works would have to disappear, along with all the monuments, along with the writings and pictures of Lincoln himself, his records in school, his military records, his political records etc etc etc. Having said all that Jesus has no first hand records at all , plain and simple and he shook up the world.
You mean re writing history is impossible, like they did and do in Communist countries and other Totalitarian dictatorships? It has been done and continues to this day. Are you seriously ignorant of this?


Reznwerks wrote:
Absurd? Why would a creator God pick on obscure tribe in the desert to be called the chosen? You don't think this is favoritism? If you read the bible especially the O/T it is nothing other than God fighting the battles of the Hebrew.
The Bible is the written history of the Hebrews. It doesn’t tell of the times when God fought for other countries, except as a secondary mention. There were instances when the Jews were being punished by surrounding countries and God fought against them. I think if you read the story of Jonah, you would see that God also sent prophets to other nations and spared others besides his chosen people. He is the God of the entire world. Do you think God should choose people who hate him to fight for? Abraham was the one God blessed because of Abraham’s heart to do right, his righteous obedience and great faith in God. The choosing is not for favoritism but to bring the Savior to the world and only one virgin could fulfill that position, and she was Abraham’s descendant. He was called the friend of God. If you read the book of Jasher, you would understand more about why Abraham was chosen. God promised to make of his descendants a great nation through whom all the world would be blessed. God remained faithful to this promise, even though the Israelites often did not deserve it. They were punished many times and dragged away to slavery a few times. It wasn’t all glory and honor. Did you read the Bible?

Reznwerks wrote:
Why? God is perfect and doesn't need other stimuli. He would know what it would be like to be human.
Why would he? How would he? He has given us the privilege of being made in his image but we have finite bodies that are not God. We are not omniscient or omnipresent. He would not know what it would feel like to be weak and suffer and die. We have wills that are separate from his will. We are our own, distinct persons. Jesus was God in human flesh with all it‘s frailties, distinct from God, separate from God but united by prayer just as we can be, with a will of his own that he voluntarily submitted to God. God was connected to him and experienced our life through him but he was fully human.

Reznwerks once lamented:
You are so close to understanding it is frustrating.
And you are as far from it as you ever were. Reading your post I have come to the conclusion that you will always believe just as you wish and I have already covered the rest of these issues earlier in this thread. Now we are repeating ourselves and I have better things to do with my summer. If you find anything that hasn’t been dealt with in the previous x number of replies, maybe I will drop in and cut/paste up something for you. I find you are pathetically brainwashed and hopelessly cynical and I’m sure you think the same of me. We are completely off topic to boot. Since this is your thread, you may have the last word, Sir.
 
possible

unred typo said:
Reznwerks wrote:
In your world I guess if something cannot be proved to be false then it must be true.LOL In order for Abraham Lincolns existance to be doubted do you realize how many of those who wrote about him (first hand] and their works would have to disappear, along with all the monuments, along with the writings and pictures of Lincoln himself, his records in school, his military records, his political records etc etc etc. Having said all that Jesus has no first hand records at all , plain and simple and he shook up the world.

You mean re writing history is impossible, like they did and do in Communist countries and other Totalitarian dictatorships? It has been done and continues to this day. Are you seriously ignorant of this?

Do you see anyone in this country with that kind of power? Do you believe in live in that kind of country? You must separate probable from possible.


Reznwerks wrote:[quote:3a577] Absurd? Why would a creator God pick on obscure tribe in the desert to be called the chosen? You don't think this is favoritism? If you read the bible especially the O/T it is nothing other than God fighting the battles of the Hebrew.

The Bible is the written history of the Hebrews.
No, the bible has some history of the Hebrews.

It doesn’t tell of the times when God fought for other countries, except as a secondary mention.
Then how would you know when God fought for other counties?

There were instances when the Jews were being punished by surrounding countries and God fought against them.
There we go again. God is fighting with one side against the other and in all cases he's on the side of the Hebrew.

I think if you read the story of Jonah, you would see that God also sent prophets to other nations and spared others besides his chosen people. He is the God of the entire world.
The bible doesn't tell that part of history that you claim.

Do you think God should choose people who hate him to fight for?
He wouldn't be hated if he stayed out of the way.

Abraham was the one God blessed because of Abraham’s heart to do right, his righteous obedience and great faith in God.
You mean that God is so vain that he is touched by someone who believes in him?

The choosing is not for favoritism but to bring the Savior to the world and only one virgin could fulfill that position, and she was Abraham’s descendant.
Why the need for a savior in the first place if God is all powerfull and knowing. Secondly the bible doesn't mention "virgin" at all as the original definition is that of a young woman and if you read the verse in question the prophecy was fullfilled several passages later.This was not propehecy that the Jews acknowleded at the time and therefor not a prophecy at all.

He was called the friend of God. If you read the book of Jasher, you would understand more about why Abraham was chosen. God promised to make of his descendants a great nation through whom all the world would be blessed. God remained faithful to this promise, even though the Israelites often did not deserve it. They were punished many times and dragged away to slavery a few times. It wasn’t all glory and honor. Did you read the Bible?
I can make up any story and say it is true.

Reznwerks wrote:
Why? God is perfect and doesn't need other stimuli. He would know what it would be like to be human.

Why would he? How would he?
He would have no choice. As an all knowing all perfect God it would be impossible for God not to know what the human condition was.

He has given us the privilege of being made in his image but we have finite bodies that are not God. We are not omniscient or omnipresent. He would not know what it would feel like to be weak and suffer and die. We have wills that are separate from his will. We are our own, distinct persons. Jesus was God in human flesh with all it‘s frailties, distinct from God, separate from God but united by prayer just as we can be, with a will of his own that he voluntarily submitted to God. God was connected to him and experienced our life through him but he was fully human.
[/color=blue]That is what the story says but there is absolutely no evidence. It is no more than a novel.[/color]

Reznwerks once lamented:
You are so close to understanding it is frustrating.
And you are as far from it as you ever were. Reading your post I have come to the conclusion that you will always believe just as you wish and I have already covered the rest of these issues earlier in this thread.
Believing is not a choice that one picks and chooses at random. I for instance will choose to accept that which is likely , has evidence or that the testimony is varied and reliable from sources that are credible. Do you read any of the fantastic stories and accept the fantastic claims as really being likely or possible based on what you have observed in your life? Do you really think it likely that a supernatural being could impregnate a human or that by just believing you would gain the favor of this supernatural being and he will allow you to live forever in la la land?

Now we are repeating ourselves and I have better things to do with my summer. If you find anything that hasn’t been dealt with in the previous x number of replies, maybe I will drop in and cut/paste up something for you. I find you are pathetically brainwashed and hopelessly cynical and I’m sure you think the same of me. We are completely off topic to boot. Since this is your thread, you may have the last word, Sir.
Thank you. Fantastic claims demand fantastic evidence.

[/quote:3a577]
 
Reznwerks, I guess my summer has been temporarily cancelled due to inclement weather and since you asked some new and interesting questions I will attempt to answer them.

Reznwerks wrote:
Do you see anyone in this country with that kind of power? Do you believe in live in that kind of country? You must separate probable from possible.
I believe we were talking about sites you posted on the internet. There is an atheistic element among supporters of the TOE because the TOE enables a scientific view of origins that eliminates God. It is the non religion of choice among Communist regimes and other Totalitarian dictatorships. There is much at stake politically for these people. Discrediting religion is something that they focus on. The internet is just one of many places to do that effectively. Are you deliberately being deceptive or are you just naive?


Reznwerks wrote:
No, the bible has some history of the Hebrews.
The Bible is mainly a written history of the Hebrews.

Reznwerks wrote:
Then how would you know when God fought for other counties?
Because the Bible says so. In many places it specifically says that God gave the battle to the enemies of Israel because of Israel’s sin against him.


Reznwerks wrote:
There we go again. God is fighting with one side against the other and in all cases he's on the side of the Hebrew.
No, in many cases, he punished the Hebrews by allowing their enemies to be victorious over them. He fought against them and there were times when there was only a remnant that remained to preserve the line of Abraham.



Reznwerks wrote:
The bible doesn't tell that part of history that you claim.
The book of Jonah is exactly what I told you. Did you read it? God sent Jonah to Ninevah to enemies of the Jews to warn them to repent. They did and He spared them the destruction he promised if they refused to change their evil ways.


Reznwerks wrote:
He wouldn't be hated if he stayed out of the way.
I guess he didn’t take a poll to see what he should do to win the next election for Most Favored God.



Reznwerks wrote:
You mean that God is so vain that he is touched by someone who believes in him?
How do you choose your friends? They shared a love of justice, mercy and truth and they could trust one another. God didn’t have that kind of relationship with very many men.


Reznwerks wrote:
Why the need for a savior in the first place if God is all powerfull and knowing. Secondly the bible doesn't mention "virgin" at all as the original definition is that of a young woman and if you read the verse in question the prophecy was fullfilled several passages later.This was not propehecy that the Jews acknowleded at the time and therefor not a prophecy at all.
I don’t know much about what holds the universes and all the cosmos together, do you? We know a few of the most basic of laws. One is that for every action there is an opposite and equal reaction. I guess that law might have something to do with it. I donno.
A young unmarried woman is a certified virgin in the Hebrew world, unless she is a whore. They were quite specific about that.
The prophets usually made prophesies that were fulfilled in the immediate future so that everyone could trust that the future one would be fulfilled as well.


Reznwerks wrote:
I can make up any story and say it is true.
I believe you could.


Reznwerks wrote:
He would have no choice. As an all knowing all perfect God it would be impossible for God not to know what the human condition was.
Didn’t say he didn’t know what the human condition was. If I drive a nail through your hand, I know you have a nail in your hand and I ‘feel your pain, brother,’ but you personally know you have a nail in your hand in a much more intimate and meaningful way.


Reznwerks wrote:
That is what the story says but there is absolutely no evidence. It is no more than a novel.

Believe as you wish.


Reznwerks wrote:
Believing is not a choice that one picks and chooses at random. I for instance will choose to accept that which is likely , has evidence or that the testimony is varied and reliable from sources that are credible. Do you read any of the fantastic stories and accept the fantastic claims as really being likely or possible based on what you have observed in your life? Do you really think it likely that a supernatural being could impregnate a human or that by just believing you would gain the favor of this supernatural being and he will allow you to live forever in la la land?

Yes, I have observed creation and I see fantastic, amazing evidence of an amazing, fantastic creator.
I don’t know why an omnipotent supernatural being couldn’t do whatever he wanted to do that is possible to do.
I don’t see that by ‘just believing’ God has guaranteed eternal life in “La La Land.†This is more sloppy renderings of the language. If you believe someone, you trust what they say and you follow it. Without the subsequent follow through, there is no promise of eternal bliss. God rewards those who obey and follow him, as he always did. The current evangelical easy believe-ism is a mistranslation of what is really being said in the gospels. The good news is God proved that it would be possible to make a god-man hybrid of our willing spirit and his Holy Spirit and His prototype paid the necessary price to make that transition possible. He said, “because I live, you shall live also.â€Â

Since this is still your thread, you may have the last word again, Sir:

Reznwerks wrote:
Thank you. Fantastic claims demand fantastic evidence.
 
If the "current Biblical paradigm" of the timing of Dinosaurs and mans cohabitation is True......

WHICH I BELIEVE IS FALSE

just think of how sophisticated man would have to be in order to survive living with those beasts!!! Imagine a Raptor pack attack and you will begin to see what I mean.....

I BELIEVE DINOSAURS EXISTED BEFORE EDEN AND WERE DESTROYED IN AN ICE AGE PROPAGATED BY SATAN AND HIS ILK. THERE IS MASSIVE EVIDENCE OF DINO'S DYING IN AN ICE AGE.....
 
Soma-Sight said:
If the "current Biblical paradigm" of the timing of Dinosaurs and mans cohabitation is True......

WHICH I BELIEVE IS FALSE

just think of how sophisticated man would have to be in order to survive living with those beasts!!! Imagine a Raptor pack attack and you will begin to see what I mean.....

I BELIEVE DINOSAURS EXISTED BEFORE EDEN AND WERE DESTROYED IN AN ICE AGE PROPAGATED BY SATAN AND HIS ILK. THERE IS MASSIVE EVIDENCE OF DINO'S DYING IN AN ICE AGE.....
1: No there isn't.
2: Stop yelling.
 
Back
Top