The world is coming to an end (1 Viewer)

[inasero]

Looks interesting I'll have a read soon.

Why is it shocking for humans and dinosaurs to have co-existed? I'm not saying it happened, I'm just curious as to the implications...

Because it shows how easily someone could discard all forms of scientific reason for bunkum.

That's why. It's mind-bogglingly stupid. Throwing aside reason and rationality and using vague excuses and junk-science to promote preposterous theories.

you haven't answered my question

What? I did answer your question you drooling incompetent. Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere you illiterate fool.

no, you didn't
QED

 

[inasero]

I started reading the thread from the beginning, and then I got to this:


Actually, if you even watched a decent Hollywood movie, you'd know that, traditionally, the horsemen are Death, Pestilence, Conquest, and War.

And it's not really "in the Bible". These are a later addition to Biblical tradition; only "Death" is mentioned directly. And really, usually the horsemen are just a motif for judgement day. In modern times, unfortunately, the four horsemen of apocalypse are what idiotic Christians like yourself use as a religious sledgehammer. The horsemen are not a prevalent theme in the Bible and shouldn't be a prevalent theme in any discussion - fuck, they don't even appear until Revelation. And to quote someone on that book:


- Thomas Jefferson

Then there are all the religious people that hate Revelation; Martin Luther thought it was horrible, Mother Theresa never cited it in any of her works, many religious scholars dismiss it. Most of all: It must be the most-cited Book by raving, American, hateful, bigoted, violent people people on earth. I find Revelation to be more violent than the Koran, and only surpassed by the lovely Old Testament tales where Moses ravished in the bloody slaughtering of innocent women and children.

TL;DR VERSION: In conclusion, you seem pretty ill-informed on everything, and I couldn't be fucked reading anything else you write.

Wait did you just say you'd rather believe a Hollywood interpretation of the Bible rather than going straight to the source?

Anyway...

I see your point only death is referred to by name in the book of Revelation. However, it's not true that the judgements that the horsemen represent are not a prevalent theme in the Bible. In fact I didn't know that myself until I read Matthew 24- otherwise known as the "Olivet Prophecy". I've quoted the text somewhere in the first two pages of this monstrosity of a thread. Jesus' prophecy is in the context of Jesus' disciples asking him what the "signs of the end of this age" would be and he replies:

"Watch out that no one deceives you. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ' and will deceive many. You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains.

"Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come."

And while there have been alot of awful things committed by religious bigots in history, alot of them would take Bible verses out of context to suit their own political agenda and don't accurately reflect the true Gospel message. I hope this doesn't stop you from finding out for yourself what a truly awesome and interesting book the Bible is.

 

[inasero]

Shocking in that if this were the case you would think someone would have written about it or there would be some signs that these giant monsters where roaming the earth fucking shit up.

I will consider this claim seriously if you can produce any evidence at all supporting it.

I never made the claim that humans and dinosaurs co-existed...I think you must be confusing me for *TRUE*

 

[inasero]

Punch on, The Mod verse the BOSer
When: Next BOS meat
Where: The Streets
Who: Inasero 'THE BIBLE BASHING' Moderator VS Schroe 'THE TERMINATOR' dingerrr.

Two packs of ice-cream will be vindication enough when oil prices hit the fan same time next year- I'm quite looking forward to it actually

edit: the ice-cream I mean

 

[inasero]

LOL

Yr doing Medicine aren't you Inasero? You explain to me how Jesus faked being born to a virgin.

Or I can draw you a picture.

Hint: The picture includes a penis.

Words fail me...

Mate stop taking my words out of context and go back a few pages- my post was in reply to claims that the historical Jesus set out to fulfil prophecy as an impostor.

 

[inasero]

As far as you're aware? I'm sorry but if you don't know then stop claiming it's a divine prediction because what I suggested seems far more reasonable until it's disproven as a possibility. IDK if I'm right (I'm not a bible historian) but what I do know is that most/all of these claims are dismissed either as being extreme confabulations of the meaning of the text, predictions that were likely to come true anyway, or predictions made after the event occured... this is most likely another one of these, if I really have to I'll google it up.

Jesus explicitly and specifically prophesied that the temple would be destroyed, I don't see how this is a "confabulation", nobody could have known it was going to happen, and it was predicted well in advance of time.

Actually, I'd say a purple giraffe is more likely than the existence of noah's ark in all seriousness... Anyway my point was to explain why the absence of evidence != evidence of absence thing shouldn't lead us towards acceptance of things which we can't disprove but I would suggest that we should in fact accept things as truths based on our current best evidence available.

And I was saying that our "current best evidence available" doesn't satisfactorily explain natural phenomena...

The ship could not even be built... no one can re-create such a ship to the specifications in the bible... There comes a point in the size of a ship where wood is no longer feasible.

I don't know about the size of the ark and that would affect it's feasability...fill me in please.

We don't need a worldwide flood to explain the existence of dinosaur fossils.

Any more than we don't need millions of years of fossilization? All is conjecture.

One of those conditions is not 'a world-wide flood'.

Don't take what I'm saying as gospel, I'm not God and I wasn't there to witness the events. But again, on the balance of probabilities it would be a good explanation...certainly better than the current theory that's floating around.

What do you mean? We do.

If there are I've not come across any.

What? They've been found in layers separated by millions of years :/ The record will ALWAYS be incomplete... Where do you get these utterly crap ideas from? Seriously stop reading fundie christian websites and see what the other side has to say... at least wikipedia it.

Carbon dating has been shown to be wildly inaccurate in measurements.

I'm afraid I think you're completely wrong about the bible having been confirmed and validated time and time again... especially since many of the claims cannot be validated/positively refuted. There is a lot of historical truth in the bible as there are some scientific truths, there are also many gaping errors which the fundametalist can only get past through the sort of obscufation and confabulation that leads to works such as those by nostrodamus being 'predictive'.

Alot of the things you believe in likewise cannot be fully explained, and yet you hold on to them with the same tenacity. Science cannot fully answer for evolution (hence the theory of evolution), dinosaurs and the aforementioned gap in the fossil record (one example is the supposed development of reptiles to birds). We believe what we do on the basis of probabilities, and God's mercy in revealing to us the truth. I believe in the Bible because it's the divinely inspired word of God and it explains everything, just as I respect your decision to believe in what you choose to believe.

]No there isn't and to say otherwise is such a slap in the face to so much of our scientific tools/discoveries that you had better have some damn good evidence.

I never made those claims.

 

[inasero]

Answer mine then Inasero.

How can any rational person honestly believe that Jesus was born to a virgin?

I know that claim sounds insane and I can understand if you think there's a screw loose up there, I don't blame you. But you know, as Christians we don't believe you come to know God through rational reasoning- in the sense that we don't demand scientific validation for His existence. Which is all good and well because God wants us to turn to Him and say we're really sorry for messing everything up- not out of our own strength, our own intelligence, but by His mercy and our repentant heart.

Later, nobody can say that they came to know God through their own means, but truly acknowledge that God was working in their lives and give Him the respect and honour that He deserves.

I think this Bible verse sums it up beautifully:

"But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. Therefore, as it is written: "Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.""

 

[Enteebee]

Jesus explicitly and specifically prophesied that the temple would be destroyed, I don't see how this is a "confabulation", nobody could have known it was going to happen, and it was predicted well in advance of time.

Ok because you wanted to push me on it I did 5 seconds of google research... It's believed mark was written decades after the event and other prophets made similar predictions about the destruction of the temple... apparently it was some sort of a standard way to demonstrate god punishing israel, sorta like I guess how for america it might be common to depict the destruction of the statue of liberty.

And I was saying that our "current best evidence available" doesn't satisfactorily explain natural phenomena...

Such as? Give an example... if you mean those you offered up (regarding the fossil record etc) those are jokes.

I don't know about the size of the ark and that would affect it's feasability...fill me in please.

Genesis 6:15 This is how you shall make it: the length of the ark three hundred cubits, its breadth fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits.

Translation: 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high

It is impossible to build with what noah had available, let alone how he got every species on the boat... let alone there being absolutely no evidence for a worldwide flood...

Any more than we don't need millions of years of fossilization?

We don't, there are a variety of dating methods we use to date them... However some of them probably did require millions of years. There's many different ways to end up with fossils.

All is conjecture.

This is where you're wrong and to be honest it's quite insulting to call the work of... just about all science 'conjecture', how demeaning. The claims made by scientists are independently verified by a a myriad of different scientists (with different beliefs, many christians, muslims etc) working in a myriad of different scientific fields (molecular biology, radiology, taxonomy, geology, botony) and using a myriad different proven techniques.

Don't take what I'm saying as gospel, I'm not God and I wasn't there to witness the events. But again, on the balance of probabilities it would be a good explanation...certainly better than the current theory that's floating around.

Yeah, you say that, but you offer up no good reason why this is so.

If there are I've not come across any.

What, you want to be walking along and trip over a fossilised dog?

Carbon dating has been shown to be wildly inaccurate in measurements.

Ok, carbon dating does have its limitations however as for wildly inaccurate, most inaccurate measurements have been taken because proper testing proceedure has not been observed or they are simply outlier measurements (you run the tests ... say100 times, 10 of them for some reason are far out of whack, but the other 90 are all within a very small MOE). There are also other dating techniques than carbon-14 (including other means of radiometric dating, tree dating etc) which independently confirm (where possible) that the measurements all at the very least seem to correlate.

The thing you have to realise is that the people who discovered the inaccuracies... were scientists themselves, often the ones working on the project. Science has self-checking mechanisms all along the way (including repeating tests, various avenues of peer review and finally the need for scientific consensus).

Alot of the things you believe in likewise cannot be fully explained, and yet you hold on to them with the same tenacity.

The parts where it cannot be explained I do not believe in. Obviously if we're going to get a little philosophical in the end I am believing in things that I cannot know (for certain), however it seems to me that my modus operandi of accepting/refuting different ideas (i.e. theory of knowledge), as in the "WHY" of why I accept science is much more consistent than your own "why". Why do you accept the bible? Why do you then not accept other religious/pseudo-philosophical texts which you have equal reason to accept?

I believe in the Bible because it's the divinely inspired word of God and it explains everything.

I.e. This is why you say you believe the bible, the first we can dismiss as it's rather circular the second 'explains everything' is quite interesting... Ok, so how were we created (god did it will be the answer, don't post up the specific verse for specifics, i'll then just go into how he did that, in the end you'll be left with 'god did it').. Ok, then if this is what the answer, isn't this on par with what you end up with from... most monotheistic religious texts? In fact, isn't 'God did it' quite on par with "any supernatural thingy did it" ?

Science cannot fully answer for evolution (hence the theory of evolution),

You don't understand what it means for something to be a theory. Gravity is a theory. Flight is a theory.

dinosaurs and the aforementioned gap in the fossil record (one example is the supposed development of reptiles to birds).

There are gaps... these are to be expected.

Mate stop taking my words out of context and go back a few pages- my post was in reply to claims that the historical Jesus set out to fulfil prophecy as an impostor.

There's a number of ways the myth could have come about:

- It's a mistranslation, they never actually meant virgin.

The Hebrew word in Isaiah is (almah), which undisputedly means 'young woman', with no implication of virginity. If 'virgin' had been intended (bethulah) could have been used instead (the ambiguous English word 'maiden' illustrates how easy it can be to slide between the two meanings). The 'mutation' occurred when the pre-Christian Greek translation known as the Septuagint rendered almah into .... (parthenos), which really does usually mean virgin. Matthew (not, of course, the Apostle and contemporary of Jesus, but the gospel-maker writing long afterwards), quoted Isaiah in what seems to be a derivative of the Septuagint version (all but two of the fifteen Greek words are identical) when he said Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, 'Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel' (Authorised English translation). It is widely accepted among Christian scholars that the story of the virgin birth of Jesus was a late interpolation, put in presumably by Greek-speaking disciples in order that the (mistranslated) prophecy should be seen to be fulfilled. Modern versions such as the New English Bible correctly give 'young woman' in Isaiah. They equally correctly leave 'virgin' in Matthew, since there they are translating from the Greek

- Jesus was not born to a virgin however the myth sprung up, check out snopes if you don't think these sort of myths can just spring up culturally.
- No one ever checked to make sure she was a virgin.
- His mother was really a different woman.

 

[Mumma]

i got attacked by a velociraptor yesterday

 

[HalcyonSky]

Jesus explicitly and specifically prophesied that the temple would be destroyed, I don't see how this is a "confabulation", nobody could have known it was going to happen, and it was predicted well in advance of time.

The son of god would make much more astounding predictions than simply stating a reasonably foreseeable event. None of jesus's "predictions" really amaze me, he was no more impressive than a modern day psychic

And I was saying that our "current best evidence available" doesn't satisfactorily explain natural phenomena...

examples? please give examples, or are you just talking out of your ass?

I don't know about the size of the ark and that would affect it's feasability...fill me in please.

no comment. If you take stories like the ark seriously in this day and age, there's nothing i can do for you.

Don't take what I'm saying as gospel, I'm not God and I wasn't there to witness the events. But again, on the balance of probabilities it would be a good explanation...certainly better than the current theory that's floating around.

despite the complete lack of evidence there was ever any world-wide flood?

Alot of the things you believe in likewise cannot be fully explained, and yet you hold on to them with the same tenacity. Science cannot fully answer for evolution (hence the theory of evolution), dinosaurs and the aforementioned gap in the fossil record (one example is the supposed development of reptiles to birds). We believe what we do on the basis of probabilities, and God's mercy in revealing to us the truth. I believe in the Bible because it's the divinely inspired word of God and it explains everything, just as I respect your decision to believe in what you choose to believe.

Why don't you look up the definition of scientific theory and take a long hard look at yourself

 

[Enteebee]

btw... I don't really think that inasero believes in the whole noah's ark story. I believe most of this stuff is just some game theists play to endulge a little in their immortal fantasies.

 

[^CoSMic DoRiS^^]

I remember challenging my year 8 scripture teacher on the noah's ark issue and she went on some rambling story about the remains of the ship being found on some mountaintop in Turkey and how this was proof that the flood really happened because omg why would a BOAT be on a MOUNTAIN? I don't really remember the details but I do remember getting my mum to sign a note to get me out of scripture from that point on...it was too ridiculous the way she scraped the bottom of the barrel for explanations when someone asked for them, e.g. dinosaurs came from space or some shit and Adam and Eve's remains had been found by scientists and had no navels SO THEY MUST HAVE BEEN DIVINELY CREATED. Weirdest teacher ever, hands down lol.

 

[boris]

btw... I don't really think that inasero believes in the whole noah's ark story. I believe most of this stuff is just some game theists play to endulge a little in their immortal fantasies.

He believes Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus, so I don't think there is any limit to the insanity they'll convince themselves is real.

 

[Iron]

I would think that the ark would be an excellent idea... Nuclear reactors could provide power almost indefinitely. Greenhouses could maintain plantlife. Animals could be bred and
slaughtered.

...Excuse me... ..Also when... when they go into the ark everyone would still be alive. There would be no shocking memories, and the prevailing emotion will be of nostalgia for those left behind, combined with a spirit of bold curiosity for der adventure ahead! Ahhhh!

 

[CharlieB]

I remember challenging my year 8 scripture teacher on the noah's ark issue and she went on some rambling story about the remains of the ship being found on some mountaintop in Turkey and how this was proof that the flood really happened because omg why would a BOAT be on a MOUNTAIN? I don't really remember the details but I do remember getting my mum to sign a note to get me out of scripture from that point on...it was too ridiculous the way she scraped the bottom of the barrel for explanations when someone asked for them, e.g. dinosaurs came from space or some shit and Adam and Eve's remains had been found by scientists and had no navels SO THEY MUST HAVE BEEN DIVINELY CREATED. Weirdest teacher ever, hands down lol.

I find it sad that your faith was so easily shaken by an incompetent teacher.

 

[Enteebee]

He believes Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus, so I don't think there is any limit to the insanity they'll convince themselves is real.

I don't really... believe him. I think it's just a part of the ritual that goes along with the pseudo-belief.

 

[^CoSMic DoRiS^^]

I find it sad that your faith was so easily shaken by an incompetent teacher.

...there wasn't any faith there to begin with. I was in the class because the parentals thought it would be a good idea.

But even if I had believed in any of it, people like her would be the reason I'd leave the church for sure.

 

[emytaylor164]

btw... I don't really think that inasero believes in the whole noah's ark story. I believe most of this stuff is just some game theists play to endulge a little in their immortal fantasies.

I believe that noahs ark happened

 

[^CoSMic DoRiS^^]

I believe that noahs ark happened

based on what?

 

[emytaylor164]

my faith i dont need proof to believe that the bible is true.