Creation vs. Evolution

[MichaelCadry]

Let's see your unambiguous evidence of "divine inspiration". Perhaps you will succeed where millions before you have failed. My guess is that you will quote your flawed, man-made bible to do so.This religious platitude would only convince Cadry. In other words, it's meaningless.

Silent Hunter,

You can demean my last name, Cadry, but that won't make you still, anything but, a charlatan. Our Bible's contents were given to us from God, Who chose writers whom He would have. And what 6days has to say about our gracious and forgiving Creator is Hardly Meaningless!!

Michael

 

[Rosenritter]

The only documentation of Jesus actually existing is the gospels. There is no other source and even they were written decades after the claimed events. All other documentation from the time merely talks of christian believers, not Jesus.

Don't bother to check your facts much before making broad absolute declarations? Guess this sort of destroys your argument...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Josephus' reference to James the brother of Jesus​

And now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus. Now the report goes that this eldest Ananus proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and who had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests. But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king, desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrin without his consent. Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest.

Flavius Josephus: Antiquities of the Jews Book 20, Chapter 9, 1^[25] For Greek text see ...


I'll mention this now. Josephus worked for the Roman government. They paid his salary. He has no reason to invent a Jesus where none existed.

 

[MichaelCadry]

The only documentation of Jesus actually existing is the gospels. There is no other source and even they were written decades after the claimed events. All other documentation from the time merely talks of christian believers, not Jesus.

There is another source. The Qur'an!! Regardless of that, the many writings by those who knew Jesus and then those who knew of Him are plentiful, regardless of whether you choose to believe them or not. You believe writings about Darwin, right? Oh, they aren't as old, eh? So what?!

So David really was an adulterous king who God supposedly favoured. Not really helping the case for consistency are you?

Ty, you don't know God or David. God favored David, yes! David believed in God the way that God wanted others to believe in Him -- believing and loving without seeing. David committed a variety of sins, yes, but God forgives sins and loves you irregardless. As long as you stick by God, He sticks by you. And even when you falter, He still sticks by you. Now His Son Jesus also taught us that man can forgive each others' sins also. Now whose sins are more severe? David's or your own. You don't even believe the God that made it possible for you to be here even exists, or even loves you. Who do you think God loves more, you, or David still? David's sins are not even comparable to your own!! You have got everything All Mixed Up. That is something only you can choose to change. Us stupid Christians keep thinking that, by forgiving your sins to not believe God exists, that we can somehow reach through to you and help you change. Aren't we mistaken? There you go. We believed in a mistake. There are mistakes and there are sins. Not believing in or loving your own God is a very harsh sin! One of the worst!! Didn't Jesus say that the Most Important Commandment of His was to 'Love God with all your heart, MIND, and soul?' You've got some 'splaining to do!!

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Michael

 

[Tyrathca]

There is another source. The Qur'an!!

Which was written CENTURIES later, so it is little more than copies of the bible with invented alterations. It does nothing to help your case.

Regardless of that, the tons of writings by those who knew Jesus and then those who knew of Him are plentiful, regardless of whether you choose to believe them or not.

The 'tons' of writing is actually only the gospels. No other writings exist.

You believe writings about Darwin, right? Oh, they aren't as old, eh? So what?!

No I believe the science and data that Darwin started. I've never read Darwin's Origin of Species, but even if I had I wouldn't great if as you treat your bible

Ty, you don't know God or David. God favored David, yes! David believed in God the way that God wanted others to believe in Him -- believing and loving without seeing. David committed a variety of sins, yes, but God forgives sins and loves you irregardless.

Except when he smites you or sends you to hell...

Now whose sins are more severe? David's or your own.

Apart from my atheism I'd suspect David.

You don't even believe the God that made it possible for you to be here even exists, or even loves you.

I've never understood why that is such a bad thing and upsets a omnipotent god so easily. Is God a mega narcissist?

Not believing in your own God is a very harsh sin!!

If good had such a problem with it be can tell me himself, your opinion on the matter is far from reliable. I won't hold my breath though.



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Rosenritter]

Dear gcthomas,

Hey, how are you doing? I'm glad to see you here. I just wanted to tell you that there were dragons for real. I doubt that they were fire-breathing variety, but our Bible mentions them often. It also mentions the unicorn and bullock {steer}, and I'm sure they once existed also. The dragon was ugly and flew, like it's namesake, the dragonfly.

I miss Alwight/Alan! I have been waiting for an email from him. Should get it 2morrow. I hope that he has started his radiation therapy. That chemo he was on is useless and dangerous.

Much Love & Cheerio!!


Michael

Michael, you've seen a unicorn before I'm sure. They have great strength and a prominent horn as their main characteristics. Perhaps you have been to the zoo, or seen Animal Planet, or maybe you've seen the mutant variety while watching Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

The Indian rhinoceros (Rhinoceros unicornis), also called the greater one-horned rhinoceros and great Indian rhinoceros, is a rhinoceros native to the Indian subcontinent.

Some varieties have two horns, one large, and one small, which explains why Jacob refers to the horns of unicorns, in reference to one of his grandchildren becoming greater than the other. It's primarily a one-horned creature, but a lesser horn behind the greater in one of the varieties.

Deuteronomy 33:17 KJV
(17) His glory is like the firstling of his bullock, and his horns are like the horns of unicorns: with them he shall push the people together to the ends of the earth: and they are the ten thousands of Ephraim, and they are the thousands of Manasseh.

 

[Rosenritter]

Ignoring pertinent information is what creationists are famous for and explains why you keep posting nonsense.I don't ignore your responses, you admittedly do. It's a sign of integrity you obviously lack which goes directly to sincerity.Then I wonder why you bother responding at all.This looks a lot like you attempting to shift the burden of proof. You asserted an engraving looked like a dinosaur, which, using some imagination, it does.

Is it so difficult to admit that the carving COULD simply be an abstract of the artist's imagination and it just happens to LOOK like a stegasaur (sp) to us? If not, what makes this one carving special?

Hunter, your typical posts are usually nothing more than vile personal attacks, sometimes with a variable mix of idiocy. There's good reason to ignore you as it's usually a waste of time. Were you to act in a halfway respectable manner more often I would attempt conversation.

Since you bring up the burden of proof, yes the burden of proof lies on you. GCThomas claimed that there could not possibly be evidence of co-existence between man and dinosaur. He said that type of evidence would kill evolution theory. He said that, I didn't. What he asked for was this:

Anatomically correct drawings of dinosaurs on verified ancient pottery or cave walls. Something that doesn't require a level of gullibility to believe.

So I gave him another five from spots all over the globe. His response was to claim that one of them was a hippo. The one caved into the walls of a Buddhist temple displaying the uniquely characteristic back plates that every dinosaur-loving child knows and recognizes as being their beloved "Stegosaurus."

With GCThomas taking a little break, it seems you're trying to tag-team for him. But he's already lost the match on rules he defined. So now you are suggesting that someone just imagined this very creature which just coincidentally happens to match our precise reconstructions from fossil remains. Yes, Hunter, the burden of proof does lie on you at this point. You (and Thomas) are the ones claiming that living humans never saw dinosaurs. Yet it's carved in the walls of temples, cathedrals, on pottery, burial stones, metalwork, and royal seals.

What makes it special you ask? Because Stegosaurus is iconic and unique among the ancient dragons. Many other varieties might be more easily ignored or dismissed because there is a passing resemblance to birds, or snakes, or fish.What also makes it special? It was first in my last list of pictures, and because of the moronic assertion that it bore more resemblance to a hippo. Other than that it is not particularly special, it is just one out of many such evidences that abound.

 

[MichaelCadry]

Which was written CENTURIES later, so it is little more than copies of the bible with invented alterations. It does nothing to help your case.

I never said that anyone had invented any alterations. You say that! We have even found the Dead Sea Scrolls which are word for word what our Bible says.

The 'tons' of writing is actually only the gospels. No other writings exist.

I thought of using a different word, but tons is my slang for 'many, many, or much, much!! Do you mean the 'Four Gospels' or the whole Bible as a 'Gospel'?

No I believe the science and data that Darwin started. I've never read Darwin's Origin of Species, but even if I had I wouldn't great if as you treat your bible

Except when he smites you or sends you to hell...

What did you expect? A slap on the back OR butt??

Apart from my atheism I'd suspect David.

You see? That's where you are screwing up!!

I've never understood why that is such a bad thing and upsets a omnipotent god so easily. Is God a mega narcissist?

God made many, many great things for His creations to enjoy. He tried giving those to all, until some of them tried to overtake His Place/Throne. That is when things changed. You are on the receiving end of what the one who rebelled against Him did. You are being misled by the one who defied Him. You've been told, but you don't 'believe' in the devil/Satan. That is your problem.

If good had such a problem with it be can tell me himself, your opinion on the matter is far from reliable. I won't hold my breath though.



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

If you won't believe it from those whom He has sent before, then why bother? He isn't going to each atheist to voice things to them one by one.

Michael

 

[Tyrathca]

Don't bother to check your facts much before making broad absolute declarations? Guess this sort of destroys your argument...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus


I'll mention this now. Josephus worked for the Roman government. They paid his salary. He has no reason to invent a Jesus where none existed.

That would be more compelling of you had read the start of that article. Namely that it was written in 93-94 AD. He was little more than repeating the claims of others who had probably died some time prior.

A useful document yes, though one must also be wary of the likely interpolations it accrued.



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Tyrathca]

I never said that anyone had invented any alterations. You say that!

I assumed given you attend Muslim that you'd agree that the Koran has alterations.

I thought of using a different word, but tons is my slang for 'many, many, or much, much!! Do you mean the 'Four Gospels' or the whole Bible as a 'Gospel'?

I mean the new testament +/- the gnostic gospels not included.

What did you expect? A slap on the back OR butt??

If a human did what God is claimed to they would be executed for crimes against humanity at the Hague. If this does it we're meant to call it love.

You are on the receiving end of what the one who rebelled against Him did. You are being misled by the one who defied Him.

You're never given a good explanation for how you know you aren't being deceived by Satan. You're very sure if yourself that you can tell the difference but not clear on how our how your confidence couldn't just be part of Satan's deception.

If you won't believe it from those whom He has sent before, then why bother? He isn't going to each atheist to voice things to them one by one.

Why not? He's omnipotent supposedly so talking to one person is just as hard as speaking to all of them for him (if he existed). Surely if he is as smart as you think he is he'd realise that communicating in the same way as false gods and charlatans instead was not very convincing.

It's like God went out of his way to be indistinguishable from frauds.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Jonahdog]

6: I just said I don't accept your holy book and you give me Bible verses to convince me? You waste my time.

 

[Rosenritter]

You do not understand the use of the term "theory" in science. My suggestion is that you find a local university and take some basic science courses. Perhaps then you will be in the position to discuss with the adults.

We know that Theory is elevated to the Christian equivalent of Gospel.

 

[Rosenritter]

That would be more compelling of you had read the start of that article. Namely that it was written in 93-94 AD. He was little more than repeating the claims of others who had probably died some time prior.

A useful document yes, though one must also be wary of the likely interpolations it accrued.



Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Normal accepted methods of recording history date themselves some years after the event. Josephus had access to the written records far more closely than you, which in your arrogance unilaterally declared that none existed.

You have a reason, a bias, to deny the history. Josephus has a bias, to please his Roman employers, which were enemies of Christianity at that time. If Jesus were a creation then why would Josephus displease his boss by writing it into the official history?

Face it, you were wrong. Other histories apart from those in scripture record Jesus. Plenty of people wrong about lots of things, its not unique, but you may earn honor and respect if you accept it graciously. That's harder to come by.

 

[Rosenritter]

I assumed given you attend Muslim that you'd agree that the Koran has alterations.

I mean the new testament +/- the gnostic gospels not included.
If a human did what God is claimed to they would be executed for crimes against humanity at the Hague. If this does it we're meant to call it love.

You're never given a good explanation for how you know you aren't being deceived by Satan. You're very sure if yourself that you can tell the difference but not clear on how our how your confidence couldn't just be part of Satan's deception.
Why not? He's omnipotent supposedly so talking to one person is just as hard as speaking to all of them for him (if he existed). Surely if he is as smart as you think he is he'd realise that communicating in the same way as false gods and charlatans instead was not very convincing.

It's like God went out of his way to be indistinguishable from frauds.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Can you explain what you mean in reference to Hague?

 

[gcthomas]

We know that Theory is elevated to the Christian equivalent of Gospel.

Just like believing the gospel. :chuckle:
Except that scientists spend most of their time trying to overthrow theories. It is the way to make your name and rigourously test a theory.

Which Christian gets lionised for trying to test and overthrow Gospel?

 

[Cross Reference]

Just like believing the gospel. :chuckle:
Except that scientists spend most of their time trying to overthrow theories. It is the way to make your name and rigourously test a theory.

Which Christian gets lionised for trying to test and overthrow Gospel?

The clear evidence is that science hasn't succeeded. But that hasn't detered them, right? In fact, real scientists have given up, leaving the whole anchovie to the pseudo's.

 

[Jonahdog]

The clear evidence is that science hasn't succeeded. But that hasn't detered them, right? In fact, real scientists have given up, leaving the whole anchovie to the pseudo's.

gc is correct Want to win a Nobel? Overthrow the current theory of evolution. The grown-ups with wait.

 

[gcthomas]

The clear evidence is that science hasn't succeeded. But that hasn't detered them, right? In fact, real scientists have given up, leaving the whole anchovie to the pseudo's.

You are so wrong it is hard to know where to start.

Perhaps this: science is continually trying to improve its model so it more closely matches reality. This much is fact.
Established religions spend an inordinate amount of time and effort trying to stop any changes in interpretation, corrections to texts or rejections of parts deemed unreliable. This much is apparent.

 

[Tyrathca]

Can you explain what you mean in reference to Hague?

The Hague is the home of the UN International Court of Justice. If someone is on trial for crimes against humanity then this is where it typically occurs. Things like genocide, mass torture, organised raping and pillaging etc

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[Rosenritter]

Just like believing the gospel. :chuckle:
Except that scientists spend most of their time trying to overthrow theories. It is the way to make your name and rigourously test a theory.

Which Christian gets lionised for trying to test and overthrow Gospel?

There are Christians that get martyred for testing and overthrowing dogma. Sometimes by fire, other times by lions. They are sometimes called heretics. Others of us call them martyrs.

By the way, a scientist that tests and overthrows evolution theory gets fired, the labs refuse to return any further results to him, and so forth. That was already proved pages back in this thread a few weeks ago.

 

[Rosenritter]

The Hague is the home of the UN International Court of Justice. If someone is on trial for crimes against humanity then this is where it typically occurs. Things like genocide, mass torture, organised raping and pillaging etc

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

No, no, I understand what "Hague" mean (but thank you anyway) but it's the rest of your implication concerning it that I was hoping you would specify.