MonroeTalks.com > Categories > Religion & Philosophy > The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method


Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7   Go Down

Author Topic: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method  (Read 4034 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

marilyn.monroe

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9218
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #75 on: June 18, 2012, 08:14:10 AM »

ORIGIN OF THE CRYSTAL LOAD IN SILICIC MAGMA SYSTEMS: TANDEM ZIRCON GEOCHEMISTRY AND GEOCHRONOLOGY IN RHYOLITES OF THE WESTERN MOUNT BENNETT HILLS, SNAKE RIVER PLAIN, ID
HILL, Melissa, Geosciences, Boise State University, and SCHMITZ, Mark D., Department of Geosciences, Boise State University
One deficiency in geochronology applied to silicic magma systems is the apparent discrepancy between U-Pb and 40Ar/39Ar ages, with the U-Pb zircon method consistently yielding ages >1 Ma older than 40Ar/39Ar sanidine ages. Is this discrepancy a product of long residence time in the magma chamber, or do these older ages result from crystal inheritance? A long residence time questions the accuracy of U-Pb applied to silicic magma systems, whereas crystal inheritance supports the accuracy of the method and indicates the need for reassessment of the K decay constant. In order to address this problem, samples were collected from a stack of 10 rhyolite units in the western Mount Bennett Hills (WBH), which is an area of voluminous, high-temperature silicic volcanic stratigraphy along the northern margin of the central Snake River Plain, Idaho. We posit that combining cathodoluminescence (CL) imaging and LA-ICPMS trace element results with CA-TIMS ages can provide the ideal data set for assessing the magmatic evolution of these rhyolites in terms of their genesis, differentiation, and residence times. Zircon grains were mounted, imaged via CL, and analyzed for trace elements and U-Pb isotopes via LA-ICPMS. Three zoning patterns were identified from the CL images: weak oscillatory zoning, planar zoning, and dark cores. Each zoning pattern displays unique trace element signatures and/or ages. Miocene-aged oscillatory zoned grains display continuous differentiation trends supported by Ti-in-zircon thermometry. Miocene planar zoned crystals are geochemically discordant to the oscillatory zoned grains and must be older due to the presence of oscillatory overgrowths. Eocene to Cretaceous dark cores have the highest trace element concentrations relative to other zoning patterns and support xenocrystic inheritance in the rhyolites. However, the resolution of these LA-ICPMS ages is inadequate for resolving the <1 Ma age differences necessary for testing crystal recycling, thus requiring the tandem approach of applying a higher precision dating method. We will report results for select zircon grains plucked from grain mounts and analyzed via U-Pb CA-TIMS in order to obtain high precision ages (+/- 0.01 to 0.03 Ma), which will aid in distinguishing recycling from slow growth in the Miocene crystal populations.
https://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2011AM/finalprogram/abstract_197237.htm




Humans evolved from a prehistoric shark that roamed the seas more than 300 million years ago, say scientists.
 
The primitive fish named Acanthodes bronni was the common ancestor of all jawed vertebrates on Earth - including us, according to new research.
 
A re-analysis of a braincase dating back 290 million years shows it was an early member of the modern gnathostomes - meaning 'jaw-mouths' that include tens of thousands of living vertebrates ranging from fish to birds, reptiles, mammals and humans.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2158733/Acanthodes-bronni-Humans-evolved-prehistoric-SHARK-300m-years-ago.html


The theory of evolution is evolving so fast it is hard to keep up!
Logged

Forsythia

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1986
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #76 on: June 18, 2012, 08:22:46 AM »

Xerxes, you have Less in a corner, and you know what happens when he feels threatened.  Something tells me you're really making him question his faith.  The way he protests suggests that his faith is not as strong as he preaches.

That being said, I have nothing against Christianity or any other religion.  I have studied all forms of Pagan religion, all sects of the Christian religions, and I have even studied Laveian Satanism.  All religions have their merits.  The only religion I can see that doesn't really have any merits is Scientology.  That being said, believe what you want, but don't take your holy books literal.
Logged
For those who have problems with my posts, please feel free to fill out the form at the link below and I will get back to you as soon as possible.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGF4UVJ5UmpZLUhzX0dMNEotSEljTXc6MQ


Ignorance is only blissful for the ignorant.  The rest of us have to put up with you idiots.

"Prayer is nothing more than bargain basement anger." A. LaVey


"A christian telling an atheist he is going to hell is about as scary as a small child telling an adult they won't get any presents from santa." - R. Gervais

LessGovernment

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom"
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #77 on: June 18, 2012, 09:23:14 AM »

the thread has over 1200 hits - it must be because EVERYONE is soaking up Xerxes stuff...

Like believing gives some special ability to understand.

1 Corinthians 2:14  But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Now, considering that PARTS of the Bible are true in your eyes - when you want to assert God tells His followers to murder, rape, commit adultery, and smash baby skulls into rocks with all malice and intent in their wicked hearts; tell me why Paul didn't say this - that "ye cannot know"?

What do you mean I feel threatened, Forsythia?  Xerxes is pushing a religion here also - quadrupeds turned into whales over millions of years, human eyesight is a product of random chance, humans were dumb and primitive apes once and now we have automobiles and space flight?

Doesn't explain the tropical paradise under Antarctica, or them giant rock formations I mentioned earlier - we were never stupid apes, sorry; always made in God's image, with an instructional manual and moral examples in our conscience.

Logged
"Wherefore governments rather depend upon men than men upon governments. Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad; if it be ill, they will cure it. But, if men be bad, let the government be ever so good, they will endeavor to warp and spoil it to their turn." - William Penn

Forsythia

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1986
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #78 on: June 18, 2012, 09:53:10 AM »

the thread has over 1200 hits - it must be because EVERYONE is soaking up Xerxes stuff...

Like believing gives some special ability to understand.

1 Corinthians 2:14  But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Now, considering that PARTS of the Bible are true in your eyes - when you want to assert God tells His followers to murder, rape, commit adultery, and smash baby skulls into rocks with all malice and intent in their wicked hearts; tell me why Paul didn't say this - that "ye cannot know"?

What do you mean I feel threatened, Forsythia?  Xerxes is pushing a religion here also - quadrupeds turned into whales over millions of years, human eyesight is a product of random chance, humans were dumb and primitive apes once and now we have automobiles and space flight?

Doesn't explain the tropical paradise under Antarctica, or them giant rock formations I mentioned earlier - we were never stupid apes, sorry; always made in God's image, with an instructional manual and moral examples in our conscience.

What religion is he pushing?  I explained to you in another thread why evolution is NOT a religion.  You never replied to that post because you can't say anything against it.  Also there very well could have been vegetation in antartica.  The reason being is because there used to be one big continent called Pangea.  Have you heard of it?  What rock formations are you talking about?  I'll find something to scientifically debunk whatever you say.  Also, if your god is real then why doesn't it talk to people anymore?  The god of the bible was quite the chatter.  He would send angels and buring bushes, and rain fire and brimstone.  He was quite active back in the day.  Why isn't he as active now?
Logged
For those who have problems with my posts, please feel free to fill out the form at the link below and I will get back to you as soon as possible.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGF4UVJ5UmpZLUhzX0dMNEotSEljTXc6MQ


Ignorance is only blissful for the ignorant.  The rest of us have to put up with you idiots.

"Prayer is nothing more than bargain basement anger." A. LaVey


"A christian telling an atheist he is going to hell is about as scary as a small child telling an adult they won't get any presents from santa." - R. Gervais

LessGovernment

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom"
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #79 on: June 18, 2012, 11:22:36 AM »

OK kids - here we go, let me try it this way; my historical method, let me author a novel here! ... See, my mocking friends want me to always read/address what they post, while they still always gloss over what I post - and - such is the intellectual exercise called Monroetalks!  ;D  Which I have been seeming to enjoy once again in recent weeks hmmmm...how long will I keep it up?

Of course, everyone loves a good argument(look at the thread views when I get involved, hahahahaha!!!  ;D)...and...I think my side is winning; either way, all I can do is hope some seeds of TRUTH are planted for the believers whose faith has been waning as unemployment skyrockets and this country's Christian political leaders keep destroying our financial system and starting all manners of war against brown people and other 'dissenters' of world government whose natural resources/labor they want. 

The fence-sitters are another group - they believe in a 'god', a moral force/standard somewhere out there; but they won't call it Jesus, and they won't subscribe to that antiquated, outdated King James Bible from 1611 because they think all these modern advances PROVE that God's old way of doing things should CHANGE to keep up with the times...all of this, from evolution on down, is a MORAL issue/question in its totality...not a scientific one.

Either way, I am convinced our society is experiencing one of the greatest challenges to our moral underpinnings that we have ever seen - where - the General Principles of Christianity are about to be voted out as the ultimate "the rule of law" by professing Christians in our government(who also like evolution theory), since they are the worst offenders/hypocrites to God's clear principles and commands.  See, the parent tells the child "NO!"; and, the government is supposed to be the child of "the people", not the other way around - but they do this intimidation crap(the bandwagon Xerxes has jumped on), with all the God-less evolution fancy dance that is funded with tax dollars and government funny money; and they distract us, and plant seeds of doubt, and make us wonder and question, and fight with each other(divide and conquer)  - while they wax worse and worse morally as nobody is looking, or studying history, or VOTING - and then suddenly, as Thomas Jefferson predicted - "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."

It all ties together with us Ron Paul Christians: we get that the evil all around us is choking the life our of our Republic - and certainly charlatan churches preaching a counterfeit Christ HELP the government force the people into submission to men, and not God - and that's too bad; but, like the Gold & Silver thread SMASH is running - I pretty much dabble in this creation/evolution/PURE faith of our founders PHILOSOPHY thing because this is close to my heart/understanding more than studying the Federal Reserve System - and while pointing to the pure faith our founders subscribed to that made them WISE unto the plans of wicked professing Christian hypocrites that caused the pilgrims to take to boats and flee the church/state of England and start anew here. 

Now, the history was they came here; England helped, pursued them, kept a watch over them, lent them money, supervised and profited off their productivity and ingenuity - and then - got GREEDY; so, they had to be thrown off by force in the Revolutionary War, and that war was basically men saying "God gave me life, the ability to work, and I am entitled to the fruits of my labor; we are not opposed to paying taxes, funding government for punishment of evil doers and national defense - but anything above and beyond that, is highly questionable; so posterity - WATCH THESE GUYS! - even though they say they're Christians like us"

Ya know - like - "don't fund evolution theory with tax dollars to teach our children there is no God; we got here by a cosmic burp 4.6 Billion years ago."  That's your bird's eye view of what I am doing, in all humility, still lacking all the answers; yet confident Jesus is the truth, the life, and the way!

Now, Isaiah 55:11 says "So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." - so for all you Christians watching, whose faith in the Bible is being attacked by Xerxes here with all his pseudo-science(the religion called "millions of years" with the deity of TIME atop that government supported pyramid scheme) and false accusations about the Bible's preservation/credibility let me say that when you go out to witness Christ to other folks, use SCRIPTURE to win souls - and remember - Jesus quoted Genesis 25 times, so the creation account is (Acts 17) Paul's best recommendation to explain God/Christ to gentiles.

As far as Xerxes big "historical method" about Jesus' 2nd coming that didn't happen and blah blah blah - I already addressed that when I responded by recommending John MacArthur's series called "Where in the World is History Headed" - you see, Jesus prophesied Peter's death by crucifixion to people who thought He would be "right back" - and the tone of the New Testament may certainly have changed as disappointment about the 2nd coming not happening within one generation of Christ's ascension - but - what is important for the Christian(as I keep pointing out) is their MORAL CONDUCT until He comes back - because - so many cite His name and His church as their moral guide when they want credibility to 'govern' people publicly or privately; since it is the MOST popular in America.

[as an aside, let me say here] See, the evolution theory says "no God, no moral standards"; yeah, homosexual marriage, adultery, fornication, lying, theft, misrepresentation, government-endorsed-sanctioned theft/murder; just make up a god in your own mind that suits your lifestyle ... yeeeaaahhh!!!  That is what the religion of evolution ultimately teaches; it also teaches, "we're smart, your dumb - we PAID for all this research to prove the Earth is Billions of years old, we are the government - OBEY! - and - "we're Christians just like you, even though we violate the commandments daily; you have no right to call us out as hypocrites(or our clergy), or criticize our evolution theory, using scripture or American history because we are God-instituted government"

This is a cyclical pattern in world history - the Roman Empire and it's fall, our revolution against England; there is a PURE faith out there.

As far as the 2nd coming: here's John MacArthur's point - (and I do recommend you get the audio of all 5 sermons from the series) - this is from the 1st one - I will HIGHLIGHT what Xerxes is doing here - it is nothing new:

"Let me remind you of something. In the early church they believed that Jesus was coming back very soon. You remember the questions of the disciples? "Will You at this time bring Your Kingdom?" Right? And the question of the disciples, "What is the sign of Your return?"

They believed it was immediate.

In John 14 when Jesus said I'm going away and I'm going to come back and receive you to Myself that where I am there you may be also, but before I come back I'm going to go to the Father's house and get your room ready, and they believed it would be very soon. They tended to think it would be in their lifetime.

Peter, of course, knew it wasn't going to be in his lifetime. He knew that for certain. You say, "How do you know?" Because Jesus told him it wouldn't be in his lifetime. You say, "When did He tell him that?" Look at John 21, in John 21 verse 18 Jesus says to Peter, "Truly, truly I say to you, when you were younger you used to gird yourself and walk wherever you wished." In other words, you did exactly what you wanted. "But when you grow old, you'll stretch out your hands," mark that little phrase there in verse 18, it's used in extrabiblical literature to describe crucifixion. You're going to get crucified, and he did.

And someone else is going to gird you or tie you down and bring you where you don't want to go. Now look at verse 19, "Jesus said this signifying by what kind of death Peter would glorify God." Peter was told you're going to die, which means, "Peter, you're going to die before the Lord returns, before I come back." So Peter knew that he wasn't going to live till the Second Coming. He wasn't going to be around until the return of Jesus Christ, because he had a specific word.

But in that same text of John 21, Jesus said to Peter something else. Peter having heard that got the message. Then he saw John and he said, "Well, what about him? What about him?" To which Jesus replied, "If I decide that he lives till the Second Coming, it's none of your business." All right, but it did leave the thought. Maybe John is going to live to the Second Coming.
And so, there were some in the early church who believed that Jesus would return in their lifetime. Why not? Their hearts were filled with anticipation. In fact, as you read through the epistles, there's a certain expectancy. You hear the Apostle Paul say, "We shall not all sleep," right? First Corinthians 15:51, he includes himself. Doesn't say "they" or "them" that happen to be alive in the far-beyond when it happens. "We shall all be changed. The trumpet will sound, the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed." We remember, don't we, 1 Thessalonians chapter 4, "We do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep that you may not grieve as do the rest who have no hope, if we believe Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus." Then he goes on to say, "Then we when Jesus comes who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them to meet the Lord in the air," and so forth.

There's no question there was a high level of expectation that Jesus would come in their lifetime. One other text, James 5:8 and 9, he says, "You too be patient, strengthen your hearts for the coming of the Lord is at hand." That's James 5:8. They were living in expectancy. They were living in anticipation. The Lord didn't tell them when He was going to come. They assumed it would be in their lifetime.

Now remember our study of 1 Thessalonians? I don't think there's any church in the New Testament that was more expectant than the Thessalonians. In chapter 1 of 1 Thessalonians he identifies their steadfastness of hope in the Lord Jesus. In verse 10 he says they were waiting for His Son to come from heaven. And then in chapter 2 verse 19 he says that you are my joy in the presence of our Lord Jesus at His coming. And then in chapter 5 of 1 Thessalonians and verses 1 and 2, "As to the time and epochs, brethren, you have no need of anything to be written to you for you yourselves know full well the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night." So they were living in anticipation of His return.

Now remember, the Thessalonians had a problem, what happened? Some of their number began to...what?...die. And they began to die, they call it falling asleep because they knew it was temporary. And as they began to die, the Christians became very distressed because they had thought that everybody would sort of be alive and Jesus would be right back. And they began to grieve. And they began to be worried about those that died, would they miss the Rapture, would they miss the return of Christ, would they miss the Kingdom, would they miss heaven? And it was those kinds of questions and queries in their minds that prompted Paul to write as he did in 1 Thessalonians and also in 2 Thessalonians. Why the delay? And so there were many Christians who had expected the Lord to come quickly. And when He didn't come, mark it, they got emotionally involved, they became disappointed.

They didn't understand it and their friends were dying. And when the mockers came and began to ridicule them, it was effective when it hit those that were emotionally upset. "Where is Jesus Christ, you guys? Isn't He supposed to be here? I mean, shouldn't it have happened long ago? I mean, people are dying off over here." Capitalizing on their emotional disappointment and their sort of personal trauma, this particular ploy became effective.

So Peter says to them, "Know this..." you've got to understand some things. You've got to understand how the scoffers are going to work. You've got to understand how they're going to operate. I've got to warn you about their plan and their M.O. First of all, he says, first of all...by the way, that is not the first in a list of things, that's the preeminent, that's the priority thing. "It is a priority that you know how they are going to try to steal your hope," because if they can steal your hope they can feed your flesh and they can take away your motivation and your joy."

[like Xerxes and his side assert - we came from apes, not God; why believe?]

"Peter knows how critical a strong confidence in Christ's return is. Boy, when he gets to verse 11 through 18, he really lays out the practical impact of believing in the return of Christ. And so, Satan works very hard to take away that hope. You show me a liberal theologian, you show me one who doesn't believe in the truth of the Scripture and I'll show you someone every time who denies the Second Coming of Christ. So Christians need to know that Satan is going to make the effort to mock the Second Coming.

Here we are sitting here two thousand years later and when the mockers come along and say, "Hey, folks, where is Jesus? Where is He? I mean, the folks back in the first century were upset that He wasn't around, here you are two thousand years later, don't you think the whole thing is a hoax?" And maybe there are some folks who have been distressed in life and burdened enough in life and disappointed enough in life and longing for the coming of Jesus Christ and it hasn't happened. That maybe this is pretty intimidating stuff.

And maybe they're going to say...Ah, maybe it's just a spiritual thing and the Kingdom comes to your heart and that's it, and we just live our life and die and then go to heaven and there isn't ever a coming of Christ and there's never a Kingdom and there's never a time of real reward, and there's never a time of judgment...we'll just kind of pass that all off.

So Peter puts it in perspective. He says, back to verse 3, "In the last days," I need to comment on that phrase, it's a common New Testament phrase and a common New Testament idea taken out of Isaiah 2. It refers to the era since Christ came the first time. It refers to the New Testament age. This is the last days. It just means the time of the New Covenant, the time after Christ, the entire time from the first coming to the Second Coming. Had we time I would take you to passages. You might want to note them, Acts 2:17; 2 Timothy 3:1; Hebrews 1:2; 1 Peter 1:20; 1 John 2:18 and 19; James 5:3; Jude 18.

There's a few examples, if you didn't get them all they're on the tape.
But repeatedly in the New Testament the phrase "the last days" refers to that entire period of time from the decisive event of the arrival of Messiah to His return. It is all the last days, it is all the last days. And I love what J.N.D. Kelley says in his commentary on 2 Peter, he says that this entire age is to be marked, quote: "By the emergence of saboteurs of sound religion," end quote. And the saboteurs are out there trying to sabotage the Second Coming. And they've been doing it since Christ came throughout all the last time.

Now would you notice again in verse 3, Peter says, "Mockers will come." Future tense, this is prophetic. But because he is prophesying very much the same words as in Jude 18, "In the last time there shall be mockers," Jude says it that way, because he is prophesying he is saying that from now on throughout the last days this is going to be true. Now that doesn't mean that he's saying it's not true then, we know it was true then. You remember in Matthew 24 that the Lord said this would happen also.

The first thing the Lord says in response to their question in verse 4 is, "See to it that no one misleads you about My return, for many are going to come in My name saying I'm Christ and mislead many." Down in verse 11 He says, "Many false prophets will arise and mislead many."

Over in verse 23, "There are going to be some coming saying, 'Here is Christ and there is Christ," and false Christs and false prophets arise and show signs and try to mislead if possible even the elect." I'm telling you in advance. A lot of false doctrine, a lot of false prophets. So Peter echoing, as it were, the words of our Lord says it's going to come, but he's not denying that it exists right then.

In fact, it's not even new. You want to go back into the Old Testament and you can find those who mocked God. You can go back into Isaiah 5 and hear that terrible mocking of verse 19, the sinners say to God, "Let Him make speed, let Him hasten His work that we may see it, let the purpose of the Holy One of Israel draw near and come to pass that we may know it." The prophets said God's going to judge you, and the mockers said...Well then let Him have at it, let Him do it, hurry up, God, if You're really there and You're going to judge us, let's see You do it.  They shake their fists in God's face, mocking the prospect of judgment.

No, that isn't anything new, it's always been around. There have always been those who mocked the threat of judgment, mocked the promise of judgment. Nothing new at all.

So, says Peter, in the last days mockers will come with their mocking. By the way, he takes a strong Hebrew form, puts it into the Greek...mockers with their mocking...a very strong form to emphasize what they do. They attempt to attack the reality of Christ's return, Christ's judgment by ridicule. It isn't an intellectual argument, it's an emotional one. It's not a strong logical argument, it is really simply intimidation of something that is ridiculed as a silly belief for weak, non-intellectual minds. It plays on disappointment. That still works today on some who are intimidated by the so-called intellectual elite who will deny the return of Christ.

But notice the second argument, they go really beyond this and this is an argument they don't want to make but it's an argument that Peter makes for them. What is really interesting is the argument from morality, verse 3, the end of the verse says, "These mockers will come in with their mocking are following after their own lusts." Now, friends, here's the true motive. Here is the true motive. "Following after" is "walking." This is their life style. Walking means the course of conduct, the course of life style. They are walking after their own epithumia, what is that? Passion, sexual desire.

« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 11:45:31 AM by LessGovernment »
Logged
"Wherefore governments rather depend upon men than men upon governments. Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad; if it be ill, they will cure it. But, if men be bad, let the government be ever so good, they will endeavor to warp and spoil it to their turn." - William Penn

Forsythia

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1986
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #80 on: June 18, 2012, 11:56:24 AM »

And with that long post you really didn't address anything Xerxes or I asked you.  All you did was use it as your bully pulpit as you so often do.  I'm sorry, but there are too many lies in your post to address them all.  I'll just go with a few.

Claim 1 Evolution is immoral: False.  Evolution can only be described as immoral if you consider nature immoral.  In addition From Talk Origins
Quote
Any morals derived from evolution would have to recognize the fact that humans have evolved to be social animals. In a social setting, cooperation and even altruism lead to better fitness (Wedekind and Milinski 2000). The process of evolution leads naturally to social animals such as humans developing ethical principles such as the Golden Rule.

Claim 2 Evolution encourages promiscuity and lust:  False  Evolution promotes promiscuity as much as germ theroy promotes germs.  Evolution cannot promote anything.  It describes the process in which we evolved, nothing more.

Claim 3 Evolution promotes homosexuality:  False.  If you think about it evolution doesn't promote homosexuality.  How can a species evolve if they can't breed.  Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's associated with something totally different.  If you're going to condemn homosexuality then why aren't you condeming people who shave their side burns or wear clothing woven of two different cloths.  Seriously get your leviticus straight, and don't pick and choose.To quote @lolgop "I would be a fundamentalist christian, but I don't want to think about gay sex that much."

If need be I'll post more later, but I think this post gets my point across.



Logged
For those who have problems with my posts, please feel free to fill out the form at the link below and I will get back to you as soon as possible.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGF4UVJ5UmpZLUhzX0dMNEotSEljTXc6MQ


Ignorance is only blissful for the ignorant.  The rest of us have to put up with you idiots.

"Prayer is nothing more than bargain basement anger." A. LaVey


"A christian telling an atheist he is going to hell is about as scary as a small child telling an adult they won't get any presents from santa." - R. Gervais

LessGovernment

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom"
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #81 on: June 18, 2012, 12:30:22 PM »

is THIS what you asked me Forsythia?

What religion is he pushing? Evolution: the BELIEF that over millions of years one KIND of animal will turn into another KIND of animal, when all we can observe, test, demonstrate is that VARIATIONS exist within the kinds through a manifested jumbling of genetic material that already exists - NOT beneficial mutations, or, and ADDING of genetic material.

I explained to you in another thread why evolution is NOT a religion.  You never replied to that post because you can't say anything against it.

Well, I sometimes let Hovind do my speaking for me - you want SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that likewise casts DOUBT on evolution?  You want SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATIONS that show CREATION is a very REALISTIC option and not just a fantasy for "complete dunces" like me and other Bible believing Christians like the majority of our founders who signed the Declaration of Independence and framed our Constitution and Bill of Rights?

Start at the 9:00 minute mark if you want to skip some scripture, and get to the SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATIONS that put evolution into the RELIGION category ... how about you PROVE Hovind, and all the citations/people-to-contact he provided are LIARS who made this stuff up in order to dumb people down...

Age Of The Earth by Dr. Kent Hovind

Did Hovind head up a mega-church like Joel Osteen, Jerry Falwell, or start the Willow Creek felt needs church movement?  Did he try to enrich the Southern Baptist Convention, or start a seminary - or - did he just encourage people to get saved?  Can't quite figure our the FRAUD he and other creationists are perpetrating...unlike the government that FUNDS the evolution religion with TAX DOLLARS.

Also there very well could have been vegetation in antartica.  The reason being is because there used to be one big continent called Pangea.  Have you heard of it?

I have heard of Pangea - the idea that the continents all used to be connected: NEWS FLASH - they still are!!!!  Take the water our of the oceans and there is LAND/Earth's crust under there connecting all the continents - neat, huh?

Hovind has something to say about Pangea in his "lies in the textbooks" Seminar part 4 - I like his perspective: Where is most of South America?  Did it evolve as they stretched apart?

Kent Hovind on Pangaea

What rock formations are you talking about?  I'll find something to scientifically debunk whatever you say.  OK...have at it...

"...giant rock formations seen like Sacsayhuaman[ http://www.world-mysteries.com/mpl_9.htm ] where rocks bigger than anything a modern crane can hoist are fused together..."

Also, if your god is real then why doesn't it talk to people anymore?  The god of the bible was quite the chatter.  He would send angels and buring bushes, and rain fire and brimstone.  He was quite active back in the day.  Why isn't he as active now?

Do you BELIEVE God did those things?  Do you want Him to do them again BEFORE you will believe?  That has already been addressed; the UNBELIEVING will NOT be convinced even if God were to raise someone from the dead(Luke 16 - the parable of the rich man and Lazarus); secondly, creation and conscience revelation has already been given unto ALL mankind - so - denial of the Creator renders ALL mankind without excuse, Romans 1:20.

Now we live in the post-Christ era of world history; remember, there was a (B.C. = before Christ) era - now the Christ-deniers want everything to say (B.C.E. = before the common era)?  Funny how MOST word dates have that life of Christ as some sort of history marker, especially if he was just a fake whose followers wrote about made up illusions about Him healing the sick, restoring sight, raising the dead, and appearing to over 500 witnesses after arising from the dead himself ... it was so convincing it seems that Constantine Christianized the whole Roman Empire in 325 A.D. [ Constantine - When the Church marries the State ]because those delusional stories about the Creator sending his Son had traveled far and wide via their version of the internet(called human interaction, quoting God/Christ to audiences of people, the same way the Christian church does it today)...some do it for money no doubt, but, others do it so other souls will be reconciled to the Creator, and their souls will not spend eternity in hell after this life passes.

John 20:29  Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.[30] And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: [31]  But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

See, evolution only wins if the Christians DOUBT God did it the way He said He did in the Bible ... that is the church marrying the state once again...
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 12:53:06 PM by LessGovernment »
Logged
"Wherefore governments rather depend upon men than men upon governments. Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad; if it be ill, they will cure it. But, if men be bad, let the government be ever so good, they will endeavor to warp and spoil it to their turn." - William Penn

Forsythia

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1986
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #82 on: June 18, 2012, 12:54:46 PM »

No matter how much you say it, Evolution is not a religion.  Here's proof.

Quote
Evolution merely describes part of nature. The fact that that part of nature is important to many people does not make evolution a religion. Consider some attributes of religion and how evolution compares: • Religions explain ultimate reality. Evolution stops with the development of life (it does not even include the origins of life).
 • Religions describe the place and role of humans within ultimate reality. Evolution describes only our biological background relative to present and recent human environments.
 • Religions almost always include reverence for and/or belief in a supernatural power or powers. Evolution does not.
 • Religions have a social structure built around their beliefs. Although science as a whole has a social structure, no such structure is particular to evolutionary biologists, and one does not have to participate in that structure to be a scientist.
 • Religions impose moral prescriptions on their members. Evolution does not. Evolution has been used (and misused) as a basis for morals and values by some people, such as Thomas Henry Huxley, Herbert Spencer, and E. O. Wilson (Ruse 2000), but their view, although based on evolution, is not the science of evolution; it goes beyond that.
 • Religions include rituals and sacraments. With the possible exception of college graduation ceremonies, there is nothing comparable in evolutionary studies.
 • Religious ideas are highly static; they change primarily by splitting off new religions. Ideas in evolutionary biology change rapidly as new evidence is found.
 

2. How can a religion not have any adherents? When asked their religion, many, perhaps most, people who believe in evolution will call themselves members of mainstream religions, such as Christianity, Buddhism, and Hinduism. None identify their religion as evolution. If evolution is a religion, it is the only religion that is rejected by all its members.
 

3. Evolution may be considered a religion under the metaphorical definition of something pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion. This, however, could also apply to stamp collecting, watering plants, or practically any other activity. Calling evolution a religion makes religion effectively meaningless.
 

4. Evolutionary theory has been used as a basis for studying and speculating about the biological basis for morals and religious attitudes (Sober and Wilson 1998). Studying religion, though, does not make the study a religion. Using evolution to study the origins of religious attitudes does not make evolution a religion any more than using archaeology to study the origins of biblical texts makes archaeology a religion.
 

5. Evolution as religion has been rejected by the courts:
Assuming for the purposes of argument, however, that evolution is a religion or religious tenet, the remedy is to stop the teaching of evolution, not establish another religion in opposition to it. Yet it is clearly established in the case law, and perhaps also in common sense, that evolution is not a religion and that teaching evolution does not violate the Establishment Clause.
 
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA610.html

As for your walls....

Quote
Vince Lee is an author, architect, and explorer who has studied and consulted on various ancient sites where people moved large megaliths. He theorized that the blocks at Sacsayhuaman were put into place by carving them and then lowering them into place. The stones would have been precisely carved in advance to create the tight joints made to fit into prepared pockets in the wall. Then the stones would be towed up a ramp and above the wall, where they would be placed on top of a stack of logs. The logs would be removed one at a time to lower the stones into place. In contrast Protzen, a professor of architecture, has shown how the Inca built long and complex ramps within the stone quarries near Ollantaytambo, and how additional ramps were built to drag the blocks to the construction above the village.[17] He suggests that similar ramps would have been built at Sacsayhuaman.

I'll keep dropping the bombs if you want....oh wait...


Hovind doesn't address the plate tetonics issue except by lying.... so here's proof for Pangea.

Quote
Plate tectonics was uncertain as recently as the 1960s, but evidence in its favor has become overwhelming: • Plate motions are measured directly (Davidson et al. 1997).
 • The eastern edge of the continental shelves of North and South America fit closely (within 50 km) with the western continental shelves of Africa and Europe (Bishop 1981). The Mid-Atlantic Ridge has the same shape.
 • Plant and animal fossil distributions, geological formations, and indications of ancient climate match up in Africa and South America as if the continents once fit together (Davidson et al. 1997).
 • When new rocks are formed, they record the earth's current magnetic field, which reverses occasionally. The magnetic field pattern recorded in the sea floor rocks shows bands mirrored across a spreading center (Bishop 1981; Davidson et al. 1997). (See also Magnetic reversals.)
 • Paleomagnetic studies show different polar wandering on different continents, indicating that the continents moved relative to one another (Bishop 1981; Davidson et al. 1997).
 • Oceanic sediments are young and thin, indicating that sea basins are relatively young (Graham 1981).
 • Maps of earthquake locations show plate boundaries and the paths of subducting plates (Davidson et al. 1997; Graham 1981).
 • Hot spots leave trails such as volcanic island chains as the plates move over them (Davidson et al. 1997).
 

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CD/CD740.html

Here's a map that gives more proof for Pangea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Snider-Pellegrini_Wegener_fossil_map.gif

Now if you have some science to back up your claims feel free to drop some knowledge our way.  Instead you're using a book written by MAN about your god.  Also, why do you use the king james version?  Everyone knows the catholic church was the first church, and therefore had to be correct.  Oh and what about all the books that were left out of the bible? 

Honestly, believe what you want, but don't say you're right when you don't have the proof to back it up.  I believe in a female diety.  I adore and worship the Goddess, not as much as I should, but I hit the major holidays, and She understands.  Regardless, I don't push my beliefs on somone.  if someone asks, I tell them.  You have this thing where you feel you need to convert everyone, and it's not appealing to people.
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 01:01:56 PM by Forsythia »
Logged
For those who have problems with my posts, please feel free to fill out the form at the link below and I will get back to you as soon as possible.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGF4UVJ5UmpZLUhzX0dMNEotSEljTXc6MQ


Ignorance is only blissful for the ignorant.  The rest of us have to put up with you idiots.

"Prayer is nothing more than bargain basement anger." A. LaVey


"A christian telling an atheist he is going to hell is about as scary as a small child telling an adult they won't get any presents from santa." - R. Gervais

LessGovernment

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom"
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #83 on: June 18, 2012, 01:02:25 PM »

Talk Origins is NOT "bombs" of any sort ... evolution theory is RELIGION because: as Hovind wisely points out ... you need to explain by OBSERVATION the ORIGIN of all these different manifestations that mankind can see today ...


The Six Meanings of Evolution

    Cosmic evolution: the origin of time, space, and matter from nothing in the “big bang”
    Chemical evolution: all elements “evolved” from hydrogen
    Stellar evolution: stars and planets formed from gas clouds
    Organic evolution: life begins from inanimate matter
    Macro-evolution: animals and plants change from one type into another
    Micro-evolution: variations form within the “kind” - Only the last one, micro-evolution, has anything to do with real science.

Logged
"Wherefore governments rather depend upon men than men upon governments. Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad; if it be ill, they will cure it. But, if men be bad, let the government be ever so good, they will endeavor to warp and spoil it to their turn." - William Penn

Forsythia

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1986
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #84 on: June 18, 2012, 01:48:53 PM »

Talk Origins is NOT "bombs" of any sort ... evolution theory is RELIGION because: as Hovind wisely points out ... you need to explain by OBSERVATION the ORIGIN of all these different manifestations that mankind can see today ...


The Six Meanings of Evolution

    Cosmic evolution: the origin of time, space, and matter from nothing in the “big bang”
    Chemical evolution: all elements “evolved” from hydrogen
    Stellar evolution: stars and planets formed from gas clouds
    Organic evolution: life begins from inanimate matter
    Macro-evolution: animals and plants change from one type into another
    Micro-evolution: variations form within the “kind” - Only the last one, micro-evolution, has anything to do with real science.

There is no difference between micro and macro evolution.  That's what you creationists confuse.  You use deception and obfuscation to cloud the actual truth.  What Hovind talks about with his $250,000 challenge to prove evolution is insane.  He asks to prove evolution, but demands that the beginning of the universe must be proven.  Evolution also has nothing to do with abiogenesis.  That being said, abiogenesis has all but been proven.  All the scientific evidence points to abiogenesis being how things started.  There have been experiments where simple proteins have been created in an environment that was similar to the primordial soup which existed after the earth cooled.  Why do you choose to ignore all the evidence? Believe it or not you can believe in god and evolution.  Most people do because it's rational.  Here's some more proof.

Quote
Nothing in the real world can be proved with absolute certainty. However, high degrees of certainty can be reached. In the case of evolution, we have huge amounts of data from diverse fields. Extensive evidence exists in all of the following different forms (Theobald 2004). Each new piece of evidence tests the rest. • All life shows a fundamental unity in the mechanisms of replication, heritability, catalysis, and metabolism.
 • Common descent predicts a nested hierarchy pattern, or groups within groups. We see just such an arrangement in a unique, consistent, well-defined hierarchy, the so-called tree of life.
 • Different lines of evidence give the same arrangement of the tree of life. We get essentially the same results whether we look at morphological, biochemical, or genetic traits.
 • Fossil animals fit in the same tree of life. We find several cases of transitional forms in the fossil record.
 • The fossils appear in a chronological order, showing change consistent with common descent over hundreds of millions of years and inconsistent with sudden creation.
 • Many organisms show rudimentary, vestigial characters, such as sightless eyes or wings useless for flight.
 • Atavisms sometimes occur. An atavism is the reappearance of a character present in a distant ancestor but lost in the organism's immediate ancestors. We only see atavisms consistent with organisms' evolutionary histories.
 • Ontogeny (embryology and developmental biology) gives information about the historical pathway of an organism's evolution. For example, as embryos whales and many snakes develop hind limbs that are reabsorbed before birth.
 • The distribution of species is consistent with their evolutionary history. For example, marsupials are mostly limited to Australia, and the exceptions are explained by continental drift. Remote islands often have species groups that are highly diverse in habits and general appearance but closely related genetically. Squirrel diversity coincides with tectonic and sea level changes (Mercer and Roth 2003). Such consistency still holds when the distribution of fossil species is included.
 • Evolution predicts that new structures are adapted from other structures that already exist, and thus similarity in structures should reflect evolutionary history rather than function. We see this frequently. For example, human hands, bat wings, horse legs, whale flippers, and mole forelimbs all have similar bone structure despite their different functions.
 • The same principle applies on a molecular level. Humans share a large percentage of their genes, probably more than 70 percent, with a fruit fly or a nematode worm.
 • When two organisms evolve the same function independently, different structures are often recruited. For example, wings of birds, bats, pterosaurs, and insects all have different structures. Gliding has been implemented in many additional ways. Again, this applies on a molecular level, too.
 • The constraints of evolutionary history sometimes lead to suboptimal structures and functions. For example, the human throat and respiratory system make it impossible to breathe and swallow at the same time and make us susceptible to choking.
 • Suboptimality appears also on the molecular level. For example, much DNA is nonfunctional.
 • Some nonfunctional DNA, such as certain transposons, pseudogenes, and endogenous viruses, show a pattern of inheritance indicating common ancestry.
 • Speciation has been observed.
• The day-to-day aspects of evolution -- heritable genetic change, morphological variation and change, functional change, and natural selection -- are seen to occur at rates consistent with common descent.
 
Furthermore, the different lines of evidence are consistent; they all point to the same big picture. For example, evidence from gene duplications in the yeast genome shows that its ability to ferment glucose evolved about eighty million years ago. Fossil evidence shows that fermentable fruits became prominent about the same time. Genetic evidence for major change around that time also is found in fruiting plants and fruit flies (Benner et al. 2002).
 
The evidence is extensive and consistent, and it points unambiguously to evolution, including common descent, change over time, and adaptation influenced by natural selection. It would be preposterous to refer to these as anything other than facts.
Logged
For those who have problems with my posts, please feel free to fill out the form at the link below and I will get back to you as soon as possible.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dGF4UVJ5UmpZLUhzX0dMNEotSEljTXc6MQ


Ignorance is only blissful for the ignorant.  The rest of us have to put up with you idiots.

"Prayer is nothing more than bargain basement anger." A. LaVey


"A christian telling an atheist he is going to hell is about as scary as a small child telling an adult they won't get any presents from santa." - R. Gervais

LessGovernment

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom"
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #85 on: June 18, 2012, 03:01:01 PM »

I am well aware people can believe in God and evolution, but Xerses believes in evolution and NO God with an insulting attitude.

Everyone knows I believe in the literal six day creation because I am smart enough not to confine a God that can create into the finite capacity of my limited knowledge.

Kent Hovind also debated Hugh Ross about gap/day age theory...when it comes down to the scriptures, Hugh Ross has death before sin and the Sun before the Earth if I recall...God said he made the Earth first, then the Sun...and Hovind is dead right about the ORDER things must have evolved, all dependacies in nature matter...

There are just tons of things out there to look at that provoke questions about origins...and...life on this planet before Noah's flood versus the Earth taking shape over billions and millions of years are the two theories, and I do tend to think it was perfect before Adam sinned, and now things are breaking down as the Lord tarries His coming...too bad a lot of Christians only had Hovind to assert that...

Logged
"Wherefore governments rather depend upon men than men upon governments. Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad; if it be ill, they will cure it. But, if men be bad, let the government be ever so good, they will endeavor to warp and spoil it to their turn." - William Penn

marilyn.monroe

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 9218
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #86 on: June 18, 2012, 04:08:34 PM »

There is no difference between micro and macro evolution.  That's what you creationists confuse.  You use deception and obfuscation to cloud the actual truth.  What Hovind talks about with his $250,000 challenge to prove evolution is insane.  He asks to prove evolution, but demands that the beginning of the universe must be proven.  Evolution also has nothing to do with abiogenesis.  That being said, abiogenesis has all but been proven.  All the scientific evidence points to abiogenesis being how things started.  There have been experiments where simple proteins have been created in an environment that was similar to the primordial soup which existed after the earth cooled.  Why do you choose to ignore all the evidence? Believe it or not you can believe in god and evolution.  Most people do because it's rational.  Here's some more proof.

Where did the stuff to create simple proteins come from in the first place?
Logged

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #87 on: June 18, 2012, 05:11:24 PM »

Firstly, let me remain on thread topic and address Less's complete lack of Biblical understanding, in light of the historical method.


Less quotes John 14 and John 21, mentioning that Jesus predicted Peter's death. BUT that is ONLY in JOHN. A gospel that came after Peter was already dead! That was not mentioned in the other gospels. What a coincidence. A quick study into other religions will reveal the same deceptive tactics on writing so-called prophesies AFTER the events happen.

John came about 80 years after Jesus died, and again Peter was already dead. Remember, the earliest gospels of Mark and Matthew, which came 35 to 50 years after Jesus dies, have the apocalyptic Jesus, but the ones that come later *change* the texts. Luke changes the coming Kingdom of the Son of Man, making it a place "within you." That was not taught in Mark and Matthew. And Paul's earliest and most credible writings have him preaching the end is near!

Scholars believe 2 Thess and 2 Peter to be forgeries, that seek to cover up the fact the end had NOT come. Less, read some Bart D. Ehrman, who destroys all your heroes in debate with real textual knowledge. Read his works the Historical Jesus, Misquoting Jesus, Jesus Interrupted, Did Jesus Exist, Forgery, etc., etc... I've read them. I don't think you're brave enough to read those. I believe you're scared.

John changes the day that the Passover falls on, having Jesus crucified on a different day than the Synoptics. Bet Less didn't know that. Read Mark 14, John 18:28, John 19:14, and Leviticus 23 for a reference of what the Passover is. Jesus is crucified on two different days!

Jesus refuses to work signs in the earliest gospels, but in John he works them, so that people would believe. In John 13-16, Jesus has short term memory loss. Peter says, to Jesus, "Lord, where are You going?" A few verses later, Jesus says, "I go away to Him who sent Me, and none of you ask Me, "Where are You going?" Lol... Maybe they smoked some cannabis. John 13:13/John 16:5

I, also, pointed out a major textual problem with John, in relation to contextual credibility, which is a point of the historical method.

According to this part of the historical method, scholars don't see it credible that Jesus and Nicodemus, both 1st century Jews, in John chapter 3, would have been speaking in Greek, but rather would have been speaking in Aramaic.

In this conversation Nicodemus misunderstands Jesus, in relation to being born-again/born from above. Nicodemus misunderstands him on the double meaning Greek word "Anothen." Anothen can mean "again" or "above." There is no double meaning word in Aramaic for "above." Based on this it doesn't seem probable Jesus and Nicodemus ever had this conversation, but rather, some later Greek writer, 70 years after Jesus died, invented this story.


Isn't it strange the the most popular verse in Christianity, John 3:16, was probably never spoken by Jesus. Isn't it strange that the earliest and most reliable Gospel is the shortest, but the latest gospel, which came long after Jesus died, has the most elaborate detailed discussions? The mark of FICTION.


Come on, Folks. Time to study the historical Jesus in light of the historical method and a comparison between gospels.
Logged

MonroeMonkey

  • Guest
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #88 on: June 18, 2012, 05:20:10 PM »

In relation to dating, Marilyn copied and pasted a website, which I read. You're not going to get perfect accuracy in such dating of ancient rocks, BUT there is NO controversy among the academy of sciences to these rocks being millions/billions of years old. The margin of difference can be up to a million years, BUT we're talking about five hundred million year old rocks, in some cases! They may tweak methods in relation to the decay rate, but even with a more precise measurement, those rocks will still be millions/billions of years old. For example, the Galapagos, they are roughly 4 to 5 millions years old, which are they really, 4 or 5? We don't know for sure, BUT we do know they are millions. We have the range they fall into without perfect precision.

And, yes, Marilyn, our ancestors swam in the waters before becoming tetrapods, quadrupeds, and now bipeds. I'm gonna go eat right now, but I'll post some more convincing evidences later.
Logged

LessGovernment

  • Hero Talker
  • ******
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1261
  • "Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom"
Re: The Impossible Life of Jesus – The Historical Method
« Reply #89 on: June 18, 2012, 06:54:03 PM »

Less's complete lack of Biblical understanding - and John MacArthur's too!!!

same deceptive tactics - no EYEWITNESS accounts of the life of Jesus were EVER recorded, by anyone?; especially people who travelled with Him, in that could be recalled or written down - that is quite a presumption - just call people who cannot defend themselves LIARS, and believers "complete dunces" - darn good debate tactic.

I am sure John MacArthur dealt quite well with the fact that your WHOLE mocking approach is based on capitalizing on emotions of disappointed believers...not history...not intellectual...and you are certainly not spiritually qualified to address any Biblical matters because you are a proud Christ-rejecting person with a bias against any book of moral instruction that would cite a Supreme Being as an authority over your life and conduct to the degree you WILL BE held equally accountable as believers will be.

you're scared. - or - I choose not to waste my time?  If you see an old lady fall down on the railroad tracks, and you see the gates go down and her struggling to get up in time; are you going to help her because that moral example has been passed on from generation to generation over millions of years from monkeys, or, because she is your human equal and you have a conscience that has been pricked/alarmed that she may die if you do nothing to help her?

scholars, scholars, scholars - I think John MacArthur is a scholar, your appeal to authority(that you slam me for) means what?

...it doesn't seem probable Jesus and Nicodemus ever had this conversation...some later Greek writer...invented this story. - and you can PROVE that - Nicodemus didn't record this conversation, and, there were NO eyewitnesses - you're certain of this via your "historical method"?

You got nothin' Xerxes, nothing at all - just an attitude about it.  Only false Christians are capitalizing off Christianity; guys like me go to work everyday, and live paycheck to paycheck - I am not deceiving anyone through purporting/broadcasting my personal faith - I am not being paid to sell Hovind videos or MacArthur sermons...you are the one who feels threatened that God's commands may actually be binding upon your created life...and you just won't have that, now will you!

BTW - why do you keep answering me if I am such a fool, or potentially a "complete dunce"?  Trying to PRESERVE something...
« Last Edit: June 18, 2012, 08:03:24 PM by LessGovernment »
Logged
"Wherefore governments rather depend upon men than men upon governments. Let men be good, and the government cannot be bad; if it be ill, they will cure it. But, if men be bad, let the government be ever so good, they will endeavor to warp and spoil it to their turn." - William Penn
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7   Go Up