The Religion Discussion

[Habit7]

Wow so Jesus was born on Dec 25? Tell me more

So you're saying Hindus, Muslims etc will not be going to heaven?

Who cares what I say? The Bible, which proclaims itself to be word of Almighty God, says you cannot get to heaven but by the atoning work of Jesus Christ being applied to one's life.

The Gita and Qur'an also proclaim themselves to be the word of Almighty God and they say differently.

Well then examine the claims of them, they all cannot be equally true, either they are all wrong or one is right. I have come to the belief that the Bible is right.

Mentioning the fact that others claim to be true is not sufficient. You need to argue which truth claim exceeds the other, attempting to bring ambiguity doesnt prove a point.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

So you're saying Hindus, Muslims etc will not be going to heaven?

Who cares what I say? The Bible, which proclaims itself to be word of Almighty God, says you cannot get to heaven but by the atoning work of Jesus Christ being applied to one's life.

The Gita and Qur'an also proclaim themselves to be the word of Almighty God and they say differently.

Well then examine the claims of them, they all cannot be equally true, either they are all wrong or one is right. I have come to the belief that the Bible is right.

Mentioning the fact that others claim to be true is not sufficient. You need to argue which truth claim exceeds the other, attempting to bring ambiguity doesnt prove a point.

no ambiguity. I having been asking what makes one more right than the other since the beginning of this thread.

You "coming to believe" something does not necessarily make it true.

[Habit7]

I having been asking what makes one more right than the other since the beginning of this thread.

And I have been pointing out to strong arguments for you to put your trust in and you choose to disregard them. For instance, look at Daran's unfactual atheist meme above comparing other deities to Jesus, point out one that has a precise prophecy of his birth, life and death as set out by the prophet throughout the Book of Isaiah and more specifically Isaiah 53. Keeping in mind Isaiah prophesied 700 years before the birth of Christ.

You response was more or less, "Nostradamus had prophecies too." I challenged you to bring one of his prophecies that was comparable and as precise. I didn't hear from you until after the topic changed.

You are asking a question you don't believe there is an answer for. And when you hear the answer you are sticking your fingers in ears and blowing raspberry.

[marlener]

Rocknrolla you have been to heaven a couple of times you say!? I just need to be sure that was what was said. I usually post less and read and reread posts by others.See what they have said and where they are going with their posts.Yes Turbotusty and Rocknrolla share rather close beliefs.Daran that post you put up with You say,bible says.have been up at least three time in this thread and if anyone bother to look at the bible to see if what was posted to printed they will remove it. Mg keeps saying that atheists don`t blame God but right here in this thread there are countless incidents of them doing just that. Atheists are not going to get into heaven if they die denying Christ.

[meccalli]

You shouldn't take zeitgeist at face value. Too much holes to fill.

[rocknrolla]

hmm

[Daran]

You shouldn't take zeitgeist at face value. Too much holes to fill.

I'm not. Just shows that religions can be interpreted to suit almost any ideal or story line.

Habit7, isn't it a remarkable coincidence that the religion 90% of people were born into, always appears to be as if it's the only right religion?

You've been raised with a bias. Not your fault, but you really cannot acclaim your version of Christianity to be the only right one.

[Habit7]

If you would allow me to borrow your logic then it will equally wrong for you to hold your atheist belief and claim atheism to be true.

[megadoc1]

^word

[bluefete]

I will start with the first one: This is in no way a good comparison with Jesus Christ.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/egy/leg/leg11.htm

VIII.
THE LEGEND OF THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF HORUS, AND OTHER MAGICAL TEXTS.

THE magical and religious texts of the Egyptians of all periods contain spells intended to be used against serpents, scorpions, and noxious reptiles of all kinds, and their number, and the importance which was attached to them, suggest that Egypt must always have produced these pests in abundance, and that the Egyptians were always horribly afraid of them. The text of Unas, which was written towards the close of the Vth Dynasty, contains many such spells, and in the Theban and Saïte Books of the Dead several Chapters consist of nothing but spells and incantations. many of which are based on archaic texts, against crocodiles, serpents, and other deadly reptiles, and insects of all kinds.

All such creatures were regarded as incarnations of evil spirits, which attack the dead as well as the living, and therefore it was necessary for the well-being of the former that copies of spells against them should be written upon the walls of tombs, coffins, funerary amulets, etc. The gods were just as open to the attacks of venomous reptiles as man, and Ra, himself, the king of the gods, nearly died from the poison of a snake-bite. Now the gods were, as a rule, able to defend themselves against the attacks of Set and his fiends, and the poisonous snakes and insects which were their emissaries, by virtue of the "fluid of life," , which was the peculiar attribute of divinity, and the efforts of Egyptians were directed to the acquisition of a portion of this magical power, which would protect their souls and bodies and their houses and cattle, and other property, each day and each night throughout the year.

When a man cared for the protection of himself only he wore an amulet of some kind, in which the was localized. When he wished to protect his house against invasion by venomous reptiles he placed statues containing the in niches in the walls of various chambers, or in some place outside but near the house, or buried them in the earth with their faces turned in the direction from which he expected the attack to come.

Towards the close of the XXVIth Dynasty, when superstition in its most exaggerated form was general in Egypt, it became the custom to make house talismans in the form of small stone stelae, with rounded tops, which rested on bases having convex fronts.

On the front of such a talisman was sculptured in relief a figure of Horus the Child (Harpokrates), standing on two crocodiles, holding in his hands figures of serpents, scorpions, a lion, and a horned animal, each of these being a symbol of an emissary or ally of Set, the god of Evil. Above his head was the head of Bes, and on each side of him were: solar symbols, i.e., the lily of Nefer-Tem, figures of Ra and Harmakhis, the Eyes of Ra (the Sun and Moon), etc. The reverse of the stele and the whole of the base were covered with magical texts and spells, and when a talisman of this kind was placed in a house, it was supposed to be directly under the protection of Horus and his companion gods, who had vanquished all the hosts of darkness and all the powers of physical and moral evil.

Many examples of this talisman are to be seen in the great Museums of Europe, and there are several fine specimens in the Third Egyptian Room in the British Museum. They are usually called "Cippi of Horus." The largest and most important of all these "cippi" is that which is commonly known as the "Metternich Stele," because it was given to Prince Metternich by Muhammad 'Ali Pasha; it was dug up in 1828 during the building of a cistern in a Franciscan Monastery in Alexandria, and was first published, with a translation of a large part of the text, by Professor Golénischeff. 1 The importance of the stele is enhanced by the fact that it mentions the name of the king in whose reign it was made, viz., Nectanebus I., who reigned from B.C. 378 to B.C. 360.

The obverse, reverse, and two sides of the Metternich Stele have cut upon them nearly three hundred figures of gods and celestial beings. These include figures of the great gods of heaven, earth, and the Other World, figures of the gods of the planets and the Dekans, figures of the gods of the days of the week, of the weeks, and months, and seasons of the year, and of the year. Besides these there are a number of figures of local forms of the gods which it is difficult to identify.

On the rounded portion of the obverse the place of honour is held by the solar disk, in which is seen a figure of Khnemu with four ram's heads, which rests between a pair of arms, and is supported on a lake of celestial water; on each side of it are four of the spirits of the dawn, and on the right stands the symbol of the rising sun, Nefer-Temu, and on the left stands Thoth.

Below this are five rows of small figures of gods. Below these is Harpokrates in relief, in the attitude already described. He stands on two crocodiles under a kind of canopy, the sides of which are supported by Thoth and Isis, and holds Typhonic animals and reptiles. Above the canopy are the two Eyes of Ra, each having a pair of human arms and hands. On the right of Harpokrates are Seker and Horus, and on his left the symbol of Nefer-Temu.

On the left and right are the goddesses Nekhebet and Uatchet, who guard the South of Egypt and the North respectively. On the reverse and sides are numerous small figures of gods. This stele represented the power to protect man possessed by all the divine beings in the universe, and, however it was placed, it formed an impassable barrier to every spirit of evil and to every venomous reptile. The spells, which are cut in hieroglyphics on all the parts of the stele not occupied by figures of gods, were of the most potent character, for they contained the actual words by which the gods vanquished the powers of darkness and evil. These spells form the texts which are printed on p. 142 ff., and may be thus summarized:--

The first spell is an incantation directed against reptiles and noxious creatures in general. The chief of these was Apep, the great enemy of Ra, who took the form of a huge serpent that "resembled the intestines," and the spell doomed him to decapitation, and burning and backing in pieces. These things would be effected by Serqet, the Scorpion-goddess. The second part of the spell was directed against the poison of Apep, and was to be recited over anyone who was bitten by a snake. When uttered by Horus it made Apep to vomit, and when used by a magician properly qualified would make the bitten person to vomit, and so free his body from the poison.

The next spell is directed to be said to the Cat, i.e., a symbol of the daughter of Ra, or Isis, who had the head of Ra, the eyes of the uraeus, the nose of Thoth, the ears of Neb-er-tcher, the mouth of Tem, the neck of Neheb-ka, the breast of Thoth, the heart of Ra, the hands of the gods, the belly of Osiris, the thighs of Menthu, the legs of Khensu, the feet of Amen-Horus, the haunches of Horus, the soles of the feet of Ra, and the bowels of Meh-urit. Every member of the Cat contained a god or goddess, and she was able to destroy the poison of any serpent, or scorpion, or reptile, which might be injected into her body. The spell opens with an address to Ra, who is entreated to come to his daughter, who has been stung by a scorpion on a lonely road, and to cause the poison to leave her body. Thus it seems as if Isis, the great magician, was at some time stung by a scorpion.

The next section is very difficult to understand. Ra-Harmakhis is called upon to come to his daughter, and Shu. to his wife, and Isis to her sister, who has been poisoned. Then the Aged One, i.e., Ra, is asked to let Thoth turn back Neha-her, or Set. "Osiris is in the water, but Horus is with him, and the Great Beetle overshadows him," and every evil spirit which dwells in the water is adjured to allow Horus to proceed to Osiris. Ra, Sekhet, Thoth, and Heka, this last-named being the spell personified, are the four great gods who protect Osiris, and who will blind and choke his enemies, and cut out their tongues. The cry of the Cat is again referred to, and Ra is asked if he does not remember the cry which came from the bank of Netit. The allusion here is to the cries which Isis uttered when she arrived at Netit near Abydos, and found lying there the dead body of her husband.

At this point on the Stele the spells are interrupted by a long narrative put into the mouth of Isis, which supplies us with some account of the troubles that she suffered, and describes the death of Horus through the sting of a scorpion. Isis, it seems, was shut up in some dwelling by Set after he murdered Osiris, probably with the intention of forcing her to marry him, and so assist him to legalize his seizure of the kingdom. Isis, as we have already seen, had been made pregnant by her husband after his death, and Thoth now appeared to her, and advised her to hide herself with her unborn child, and to bring him forth in secret, and he promised her that her son should succeed in due course to his father's throne.

With the help of Thoth she escaped from her captivity, and went forth accompanied by the Seven Scorpion-goddesses, who brought her to the town of Per-Sui, on the edge of the Reed Swamps. She applied to a woman for a night's shelter, but the woman shut her door in her face. To punish her one of the Scorpion-goddesses forced her way into the woman's house, and stung her child to death. The grief of the woman was so bitter and sympathy-compelling that Isis laid her hands on the child, and, having uttered one of her most potent spells over him, the poison of the scorpion ran out of his body, and the child came to life again.

The words of the spell are cut on the Stele, and they were treasured by the Egyptians as an infallible remedy for scorpion stings. When the woman saw that her son had been brought back to life by Isis, she was filled with joy and gratitude, and, as a mark of her repentance, she brought large quantities of things from her house as gifts for Isis, and they were so many that they filled the house of the kind, but poor, woman who had given Isis shelter.

Now soon after Isis had restored to life the son of the woman who had shown churlishness to her, a terrible calamity fell upon her, for her beloved son Horus was stung by a scorpion and died. The news of this event was conveyed to her by the gods, who cried out to her to come to see her son Horus, whom the terrible scorpion Uhat had killed. Isis, stabbed with pain at the news, as if a knife had been driven into her body, ran out distraught with grief.

It seems that she had gone to perform a religious ceremony in honour of Osiris in a temple near Hetep-hemt, leaving her child carefully concealed in Sekhet-An. During her absence the scorpion Uhat, which had been sent by Set, forced its way into the biding-place of Horus, and there stung him to death. When Isis came and found the dead body, she burst forth in lamentations, the sound of which brought all the people from the neighbouring districts to her side. As she related to them the history of her sufferings they endeavoured to console her, and when they found this to be impossible they lifted up their voices and wept with her.

Then Isis placed her nose in the mouth of Horus so that she might discover if he still breathed, but there was no breath in his throat; and when she examined the wound in his body made by the fiend Aun-Ab she saw in it traces of poison. No doubt about his death then remained in her mind, and clasping him in her arms she lifted him up, and in her transports of grief leaped about like fish when they are laid on red-hot coals. Then she uttered a series of heartbreaking laments, each of which begins with the words "Horus is bitten." The heir of heaven, the son of Un-Nefer, the child of the gods, he who was wholly fair, is bitten! He for whose wants I provided, he who was to avenge his father, is bitten! He for whom I cared and suffered when he was being fashioned in my womb, is bitten! He whom I tended so that I might gaze upon him, is bitten! He whose life I prayed for is bitten! Calamity hath overtaken the child, and he hath perished.

Whilst Isis was saying these and many similar words, her sister Nephthys, who had been weeping bitterly for her nephew Horus as she wandered about among the swamps, came, in company with the Scorpion-goddess Serqet, and advised Isis to pray to heaven for help. Pray that the sailors in the Boat of Ra may cease from rowing, for the Boat cannot travel onwards whilst Horus lies dead. Then Isis cried out to heaven, and her voice reached the Boat of Millions of Years, and the Disk ceased to move onward, and came to a standstill.

From the Boat Thoth descended, being equipped with words of power and spells of all kinds, and bearing with him the "great command of maa-kheru," i.e., the WORD, whose commands were performed, instantly and completely, by every god, spirit, fiend, human being and by every thing, animate and inanimate, in heaven, earth, and the Other World. Then he came to Isis and told her that no harm could possibly have happened to Horus, for he was under the protection of the Boat of Ra; but his words failed to comfort Isis, and though she acknowledged the greatness of his designs, she complained that they savoured of delay. "What is the good," she asks, "of all thy spells, and incantations, and magical formulae, and the great command of maa-kheru, if Horus is to perish by the poison of a scorpion, and to lie here in the arms of Death? Evil, evil is his destiny, for it hath entailed the deepest misery for him and death."

In answer to these words Thoth, turning to Isis and Nephthys, bade them to fear not, and to have no anxiety about Horus, "For," said he, "I have come from heaven to heal the child for his mother." He then pointed out that Horus was under protection as the Dweller in his Disk (Aten), the Great Dwarf, the Mighty Ram, the Great Hawk, the Holy Beetle, the Hidden Body, the Divine Bennu, etc., and proceeded to utter the great spell which restored Horus to life.

By his words of power Thoth transferred the "fluid of life" of Ra, and as soon as this came upon the child's body the poison of the scorpion flowed out of him, and he once more breathed and lived. When this was done Thoth returned to the Boat of Ra, the gods who formed its crew resumed their rowing, and the Disk passed on its way to make its daily journey across the sky. The gods in heaven, who were amazed and uttered cries of terror when they heard of the death of Horus, were made happy once more, and sang songs of joy over his recovery. The happiness of Isis in her child's restoration to life was very great, for she could again hope that he would avenge his father's murder, and occupy his throne.

The final words of Thoth comforted her greatly, for he told her that he would take charge of the case of Horus in the Judgment Hall of Anu, wherein Osiris had been judged, and that as his advocate he would make any accusations which might be brought against Horus to recoil on him that brought them. Furthermore, he would give Horus power to repulse any attacks which might be made upon him by beings in the heights above, or fiends in the depths below, and would ensure his succession to the Throne of the Two Lands, i.e., Egypt. Thoth also promised Isis that Ra himself should act as the advocate of Horus, even as he had done for his father Osiris. He was also careful to allude to the share which Isis had taken in the restoration of Horus to life, saying, "It is the words
of power of his mother which have lifted up his face, and they shall enable him to journey wheresoever he pleaseth, and to put fear into the powers above. I myself hasten [to obey them]." Thus everything turned on the power of the spells of Isis, who made the sun to stand still, and caused the dead to be raised.

Such are the contents of the texts on the famous Metternich Stele. There appears to be some confusion in their arrangement, and some of them clearly are misplaced, and, in places, the text is manifestly corrupt. It is impossible to explain several passages, for we do not understand all the details of the system of magic which they represent. Still, the general meaning of the texts on the Stele is quite clear, and they record a legend of Isis and Horus which is not found so fully described on any other monument.

Footnotes

lxxi:1 See Metternichstele, Leipzig, 1877. The Stele was made for Ankh-Psemthek, son of the lady Tent-Het-nub, prophet of Nebun, overseer of Temt and scribe of Het (see line 87).

Next: Summary: IX: The History of Isis and Osiris

[Habit7]

please, no more, i think it is already established that it is wrong and he doesnt even know half of the people in that meme far less their history.

[AdamB]

Well I know that you are fairly new to the discussion (at least since I joined it) so I will quote a prior posting

Christians interpret the OT through the NT, so if the NT doesn't reiterate a OT principle in the NT we don't carry it over. That being generally said, it is important to note that in the Pentateuch there are moral laws (eg 10 commandments), ceremonial laws (for sacrificial system) and the federal law (to govern the Israelites). With the exception of the Sabbath, all the moral law is repeated in the NT and we follow it. The ceremonial law was done away with as Christ is the once and for all sacrifice and the federal law doesn't apply to any of us now because we don't live in pre-first century theocratic Israel. However Christians study these abrogated laws to understand the character of God but we don't practise them.

So your example of Exodus 35:1-3 falls in the category of the federal law. This law that required capital punishment, was specific to the Jews, living in the Jewish land only at that time. Since the theocratic Jewish nation has come to an end since 70 A.D. and Jesus announced that the Sabbath day rest pointed to Him, and those who put their trust in Him will receive the eternal rest from work in salvific relationship with Him, the Sabbath day rest is not observed by Christians in the same sense as it was in the Old Testament.[/quote]
This is all such hogwash...those who don't know any better may accept it, just as you have done.

The jews, who were the "possessors" of the law and the OT scriptures, should interpret it according to the NT? How silly of them! They should have waited for hundreds or thousands of years for the NT to "interpret" their scriptures.

The question is: What "federal" laws do christians have to follow?

Another question: In what SENSE is the Sabbath day rest observed by christians? (NON-SENSE it seems...but let's have your answer.)

Last question: What is the basis for these claims? If you examine the evidence you will see that it is based on scripture that could be interpreted many ways, not only the way that you have chosen to interpret it. In addition, there would be clear scriptures that would contradict those which you bring to court. So let's see then...

[bluefete]

For those of us old enough to remember this totally politically incorrect but hysterically funny show from back in the day:

Love Thy Neighbour - Religious Fervour.

[nareshseep]

The Backfire Effect

The Misconception: When your beliefs are challenged with facts, you alter your opinions and incorporate the new information into your thinking.

The Truth: When your deepest convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, your beliefs get stronger

http://youarenotsosmart.com/2011/06/10/ ... re-effect/


Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. For example, in reading about current political issues, people usually prefer sources that affirm their existing attitudes. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

[AdamB]

Wow so Jesus was born on Dec 25? Tell me more

So you're saying Hindus, Muslims etc will not be going to heaven?

Who cares what I say? The Bible, which proclaims itself to be word of Almighty God, says you cannot get to heaven but by the atoning work of Jesus Christ being applied to one's life.

The Gita and Qur'an also proclaim themselves to be the word of Almighty God and they say differently.

Well then examine the claims of them, they all cannot be equally true, either they are all wrong or one is right. I have come to the belief that the Bible is right.

Mentioning the fact that others claim to be true is not sufficient. You need to argue which truth claim exceeds the other, attempting to bring ambiguity doesnt prove a point.

I remember "Achillies", your christian brother, made similar claims but what it came down to is that he never studied the Quran or other religious scriptures to any significant extent but, just like you, he came to the belief that the Bible was right.

When exposed, he disappeared into the sunset....

I have been here in discussions for almost a year now. Unfortunately, due to other more important priorities, I am unable to be as active as you and some others. I made this known a few months ago. However, you choose to take that as some form of "victory"....just as you choose to worship a man and a ghost, and choose to believe that the man died for your sins, so you're "saved" and have no federal law to which you must abide...even tho the man said he came not to abolish the law or the gospel but to fulfil it....carry on. Cheers.

[Habit7]

Its a pity that you dont have more time to as a Muslim to attempt to instruct Christians how to interpret their Bible.

I, for the most part in trinituner, avoided this thread, but when I saw your claims and the atheists claims against Christianity go unchallenged I had to jump in the fray (98 pgs ago). There is no victory or loss in this, the effect of me proclaiming the gospel here will either be message of salvation to some or an article of further condemnation on the day of judgement to many. I pray that you will be a member of the former.

[nareshseep]

Its a pity that you dont have more time to as a Muslim to attempt to instruct Christians how to interpret their Bible.

I, for the most part in trinituner, avoided this thread, but when I saw your claims and the atheists claims against Christianity go unchallenged I had to jump in the fray (98 pgs ago). There is no victory or loss in this, the effect of me proclaiming the gospel here will either be message of salvation to some or an article of further condemnation on the day of judgement to many. I pray that you will be a member of the former.

And we will hope as well everyone sees the "light" and be saved from the damnation of ignorance.

[AdamB]

Its a pity that you dont have more time to as a Muslim to attempt to instruct Christians how to interpret their Bible.

I have been doing just that all along but it's a pity you choose to ignore it because "salvation on a silver platter" is more appealing....can't give you wrong, it your choice, and on the day of Judgment no one will have anyone to blame but their own selves.

Just as you acknowledge that the OT has been abrogated, so too has the NT. If you deny the truth of the Quran, what is the difference between you today and the Jews of 2000 yrs ago denial of the message of GOD sent to Jesus? If the federal laws could be changed before, it could be changed again. If you deny this then you are just being biased, plain and simple.[color=#0000FF][/color]

I, for the most part in trinituner, avoided this thread, but when I saw your claims and the atheists claims against Christianity go unchallenged I had to jump in the fray (98 pgs ago).
I hope you understood my claims because they could very well be the means by which GOD may be trying to guide you to the truth.

Like you didn't read the posts of dspike? If you did, what do you think of his "christian worldview"?

There is no victory or loss in this, the effect of me proclaiming the gospel here will either be message of salvation to some or an article of further condemnation on the day of judgement to many. I pray that you will be a member of the former.

We are on the same page, I pray that GOD ALMIGHTY grant you the ability to see truth as truth and falsehood as falsehood as two directly opposing concepts cannot both be true. The evidence is being established against everyone, even the clowns who are in ignorance of GOD thinking that they hold the upper hand of understanding.

[djaggs]

This information can also be found online:

Doesn't the religion of Mithra prove that Christianity is false?
By Matt Slick

Some critics of Christianity teach that the Christian religion was not based upon divine revelation but that it borrowed from pagan sources, Mithra being one of them. They assert that the figure of Mithra has many commonalities with Jesus, too common to be coincidence.

Mithraism was one of the major religions of the Roman Empire which was derived from the ancient Persian god of light and wisdom. The cult of Mithraism was quite prominent in ancient Rome, especially among the military. Mithra was the god of war, battle, justice, faith, and contract. According to Mithraism, Mithra was called the son of God, was born of a virgin, had disciples, was crucified, rose from the dead on the third day, atoned for the sins of mankind, and returned to heaven. Therefore, the critics maintain that Christianity borrowed its concepts from the Mithra cult. But is this the case? Can it be demonstrated that Christianity borrowed from the cult of Mithra as it developed its theology?

First of all, Christianity does not need any outside influence to derive any of its doctrines. All the doctrines of Christianity exists in the Old Testament where we can see the prophetic teachings of Jesus as the son of God (Zech. 12:10), born of a virgin (Isaiah 7:14), was crucified (Psalm 22), the blood atonement (Lev. 17:11), rose from the dead (Psalm 16:10), and salvation by faith (Hab. 2:4). Also, the writers of the gospels were eyewitnesses (or directed by eyewitnesses as were Mark and Luke) who accurately represented the life of Christ. So, what they did was write what Jesus taught as well as record the events of His life, death, and resurrection. In other words, they recorded history, actual events and had no need of fabrication or borrowing.

There will undoubtedly be similarities in religious themes given the agrarian culture. Remember, an agriculturally based society, as was the people of the ancient Mediterranean area, will undoubtedly develop theological themes based upon observable events, i.e., the life, death, and seeming resurrection of life found in crops, in cattle, and in human life. It would only be natural for similar themes to unfold since they are observed in nature and since people created gods related to nature. But, any reading of the Old Testament results in observing the intrusion of God into Jewish history as is recorded in miracles and prophetic utterances. Add to that the incredible archaeological evidence verifying Old Testament cities and events and you have a document based on historical fact instead of mythical fabrication. Furthermore, it is from these Old Testament writings that the New Testament themes were developed.

Following is a chart demonstrating some of the New Testament themes found in the Old Testament.



As you can see, there is no need for any of the Christian writers to borrow from anything other than the Old Testament source in order to establish any Christian doctrine concerning Jesus. If the argument that pagan mythologies predated Christian teachings and therefore Christianity borrowed from them is true, then it must also be truth that the pagan religions borrowed from the Jewish religion because it is older than they are! Given that all of the Christian themes are found in the Old Testament and the Old Testament was begun around 2000 B.C. and completed around 400 B.C., we can then conclude that these pagan religions actually borrowed from Jewish ideas found in the Old Testament. Think about it, the idea of a blood sacrifice and a covering for sin is found in the first three chapters of Genesis when God covered Adam and Eve with animals skins and prophesied the coming of the Messiah.

Furthermore, those who wrote about Jesus in the New Testament were Jews (or under the instruction of Jews) who were devoted to the legitimacy and inspiration of the Old Testament scriptures and possessed a strong disdain for pagan religions. It would have been blasphemous for them to incorporate pagan sources into what they saw as the fulfillment of the sacred Old Testament scriptures concerning the Messiah. Also, since they were writing about Jesus, they were writing based upon what He taught: truth, love, honesty, integrity, etc. Why then would they lie and make up stories and suffer great persecution, hardships, ridicule, arrest, beatings, and death all for known lies and fabrications from paganism? It doesn't make sense.

At best, Mithraism only had some common themes with Christianity (and Judaism) which were recorded in both the Old and New Testaments. What is far more probable is that as Mithraism developed, it started to adopt Christian concepts.

"Allegations of an early Christian dependence on Mithraism have been rejected on many grounds. Mithraism had no concept of the death and resurrection of its god and no place for any concept of rebirth -- at least during its early stages...During the early stages of the cult, the notion of rebirth would have been foreign to its basic outlook...Moreover, Mithraism was basically a military cult. Therefore, one must be skeptical about suggestions that it appealed to nonmilitary people like the early Christians."1

What is more probable is that with the explosive nature of the Christian church in the 1st and 2nd century, other cult groups started to adapt themselves to take advantage of some of the teachings found in Christianity.

"While there are several sources that suggest that Mithraism included a notion of rebirth, they are all post-Christian. The earliest...dates from the end of the second century A.D."2

Therefore, even though there are similarities between Christianity and Mithraism, it is up to the critics to prove that one borrowed from the other. But, considering that the writers of the New Testament were Jews who shunned pagan philosophies and that the Old Testament has all of the themes found in Christianity, it is far more probable that if any borrowing was done, it was done by the pagan religions that wanted to emulate the success of Christianity.

Also ask yourself this question, where is Mithraism today ??

[AdamB]

^More hogwash!! The Jews who lived by the OT know nothing of GOD having a son or any of that resurrection drama. Not only is it untrue but there is no need for such blasphemy...ask the Jews.

[AdamB]

Who Was Jesus?
The Jewish View of Jesus
Stated simply, the Jewish view of Jesus of Nazareth is that he was an ordinary Jewish man and preacher living during the Roman occupation of the Holy Land in the first century C.E. The Romans executed him - and also executed many other nationalistic and religious Jews - for speaking out against Roman authority and abuses.

Was Jesus the Messiah According to Jewish Beliefs?After the death of Jesus, his followers - at the time a small sect of former Jews known as the Nazarenes - claimed he was the Messiah prophesied in Jewish texts and that he would soon return to fulfill the acts required of the Messiah. The majority of contemporary Jews rejected this belief and Judaism as a whole continues to do so today. Eventually, Jesus became the focal point of a small Jewish religious movement that would evolve into the Christian faith.

Jews do not believe that Jesus was divine, the Son of God, or the Messiah prophesied in Jewish scriptures. He is seen as a "false messiah," meaning someone who claimed (or whose followers claimed for him) the mantle of the Messiah but who ultimately did not meet the requirements laid out in Jewish beliefs. According to Jewish scripture and belief, the true Messiah (pronounced "moshiach" in Hebrew) must meet the following requirements. He must:

•Be an observant Jewish man descended from the house of King David
•Be an ordinary human being (as opposed to the Son of God)
•Bring peace to the world
•Gather all Jews back into Israel
•Rebuild the ancient Temple in Jerusalem
•Unite humanity in the worship of the Jewish God and Torah observance
Because Jesus did not meet these requirements, from the Jewish perspective he was not the Messiah.

[djaggs]

The bible cannot be understood by simply studying it with one’s natural intellect. The scriptures were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in a way that it becomes necessary for God to breathe life into it. Only then will one’s understanding become fruitful. The eyes of the Jews were blind to the scriptures they could not understand who was the Messiah..

2 Corinthians 3:6, 13-16
6Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth , but the spirit giveth life .

12 Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great boldness of speech-- 13 unlike Moses, who put a veil over his face so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were blinded. For until this day the same veil remains unlifted in the reading of the Old Testament, because the veil is taken away in Christ. 15 But even to this day, when Moses is read, a veil lies on their heart. 16 Nevertheless when one turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.

If you look at the following scriptures, after Jesus was crucified he appeared to His disciples and this is what happened:

Luke 24:13-32
13 Now behold, two of them were traveling that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was seven miles from Jerusalem. 14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened. 15 So it was, while they conversed and reasoned, that Jesus Himself drew near and went with them. 16 But their eyes were restrained, so that they did not know Him. 17 And He said to them, "What kind of conversation is this that you have with one another as you walk and are sad?" 18 Then the one whose name was Cleopas answered and said to Him, "Are You the only stranger in Jerusalem, and have You not known the things which happened there in these days?" 19 And He said to them, "What things?" So they said to Him, "The things concerning Jesus of Nazareth, who was a Prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people, 20 and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to be condemned to death, and crucified Him. 21 But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel. Indeed, besides all this, today is the third day since these things happened. 22 Yes, and certain women of our company, who arrived at the tomb early, astonished us. 23 When they did not find His body, they came saying that they had also seen a vision of angels who said He was alive. 24 And certain of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said; but Him they did not see." 25 Then He said to them

"O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?"

27 And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.” ( by saying Moses and all the prophets they mean the Old Testament )

30 Now it came to pass, as He sat at the table with them, that He took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to them. 31 Then their eyes were opened and they knew Him; and He vanished from their sight. 32 And they said to one another, "Did not our heart burn within us while He talked with us on the road, and while He opened the Scriptures to us?"[/i]

When Jesus walked with the disciples and taught them, before He was crucified, they never understood what He was saying. If you read the Gospels you will see they were confused at what he said, especially the pharisees. Later on in Luke it says…

Luke 24:36-49

[i]36 Now as they said these things, Jesus Himself stood in the midst of them, and said to them, "Peace to you." 37 But they were terrified and frightened, and supposed they had seen a spirit. 38 And He said to them, "Why are you troubled? And why do doubts arise in your hearts? 39 Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see I have." 40 When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His feet. 41 But while they still did not believe for joy, and marveled, He said to them, "Have you any food here?" 42 So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb. 43 And He took it and ate in their presence. 44 Then He said to them, "These are the words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms concerning Me." 45 And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures. 46 Then He said to them, "Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, 47 and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48 And you are witnesses of these things. 49 Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high."

The Gospel cannot be understood without belief in Jesus. It was only when they realised He was alive, and that everything He told before was true that the scriptures were opened up to them. Studying the written letter of the word is good, but if you want to understand what it says, Jesus has to open those scriptures to you. Jesus is the Word, He is the life of the Word, so only He can give us understanding.

Many cults (as well as religions) have been formed as a result of not understanding this principle. You cannot separate the Word from Christ, because the two are one.

In my youth I spent many days trying to read the bible but it never made any sense to me. I eventually left the Church and became essentially what would be considered an atheist. I spent many years scoffing at Christians and essentially despising them. My mother however was a devout Christian woman who was grieved in her heart because of me. I caused her much sorrow and her response was to pray continually that God would open my eyes.

When I was 27 years of age, Jesus came to me (in my room, not Church) and my life was changed forever. I didn’t know that I was a lost soul just wandering aimlessly, I did not know that I needed saving ( I didn’t even know that was possible ) but He opened His Word to me and spoke into my heart. That was like an atom bomb going off inside my soul. I was permanently changed forever


(Hebrews 4:12 12 For the word of God is living and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the division of soul and spirit, and of joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. )-.

My family could not understand what had happened to me. But for me to get to that point, I had to humble myself completely. All my pride went out the door, and I became empty of myself. The bible says …

James 4:6
But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: "God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble."

If anyone truly wants to know if the Bible is the Word of God and Jesus is truly the Son of God and saviour of the world, all he has to do is humble himself and ask God. Jesus said:

John 6:
37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. 40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day."

John12:
[i]44 Then Jesus cried out and said, "He who believes in Me, believes not in Me but in Him who sent Me. 45 And he who sees Me sees Him who sent Me. 46 I have come as a light into the world, that whoever believes in Me should not abide in darkness. 47 And if anyone hears My words and does not believe, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. 48 He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him--the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day.[/i]

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

The Misconception: When your beliefs are challenged with facts, you alter your opinions and incorporate the new information into your thinking.

it is a pity that this is misconception as applied to most since we are SUPPOSED to alter our opinions and incorporate the new information into our thinking. That is the logical thing to do.

An example of this illogical thinking comes from someone Habit7 had posted earlier Dr. Jason Lisle, a Christian Creation Scientist (whatever that is), when he said that he ignores any scientific discovery that contradicts the Bible.

check around 1:30


It seems that creationists need their own museum since the information in normal museums contradicts what these creationists believe to be in the Bible. Why do they contradict?

[megadoc1]

^More hogwash!! The Jews who lived by the OT know nothing of GOD having a son or any of that resurrection drama. Not only is it untrue but there is no need for such blasphemy...ask the Jews.

yeah we see how Jesus dealt with the jews when they tried to kill him for saying he was son

Joh 10:31 Then the people again picked up stones to throw at him.
Joh 10:32 Jesus said to them, "I have done many good deeds in your presence which the Father gave me to do; for which one of these do you want to stone me?"
Joh 10:33 They answered, "We do not want to stone you because of any good deeds, but because of your blasphemy! You are only a man, but you are trying to make yourself God!"
Joh 10:34 Jesus answered, "It is written in your own Law that God said, 'You are gods.'
Joh 10:35 We know that what the scripture says is true forever; and God called those people gods, the people to whom his message was given.
Joh 10:36 As for me, the Father chose me and sent me into the world. How, then, can you say that I blaspheme because I said that I am the Son of God?
Joh 10:37 Do not believe me, then, if I am not doing the things my Father wants me to do.
Joh 10:38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, you should at least believe my deeds, in order that you may know once and for all that the Father is in me and that I am in the Father."

Who Was Jesus?
The Jewish View of Jesus
Stated simply, the Jewish view of Jesus of Nazareth is that he was an ordinary Jewish man and preacher living during the Roman occupation of the Holy Land in the first century C.E. The Romans executed him - and also executed many other nationalistic and religious Jews - for speaking out against Roman authority and abuses.

Was Jesus the Messiah According to Jewish Beliefs?After the death of Jesus, his followers - at the time a small sect of former Jews known as the Nazarenes - claimed he was the Messiah prophesied in Jewish texts and that he would soon return to fulfill the acts required of the Messiah. The majority of contemporary Jews rejected this belief and Judaism as a whole continues to do so today. Eventually, Jesus became the focal point of a small Jewish religious movement that would evolve into the Christian faith.

Jews do not believe that Jesus was divine, the Son of God, or the Messiah prophesied in Jewish scriptures. He is seen as a "false messiah," meaning someone who claimed (or whose followers claimed for him) the mantle of the Messiah but who ultimately did not meet the requirements laid out in Jewish beliefs. According to Jewish scripture and belief, the true Messiah (pronounced "moshiach" in Hebrew) must meet the following requirements. He must:

•Be an observant Jewish man descended from the house of King David
•Be an ordinary human being (as opposed to the Son of God)
•Bring peace to the world
•Gather all Jews back into Israel
•Rebuild the ancient Temple in Jerusalem
•Unite humanity in the worship of the Jewish God and Torah observance
Because Jesus did not meet these requirements, from the Jewish perspective he was not the Messiah.

but how is this becomes true to you, if you Muslim folks believe Jesus is the messiah or a true prophet as prophesied in the Jewish scriptures? the Jews thinks he was a false prophet and rejected him as such but islam totally disagree with them on that ,so why are you quoting from those who strongly disagree with your views on Jesus? just so you can make a point against those who views on Jesus you disagree with? what a crank!

[RBphoto]

When I was 27 years of age, Jesus came to me (in my room, not Church) and my life was changed forever. I didn’t know that I was a lost soul just wandering aimlessly, I did not know that I needed saving ( I didn’t even know that was possible ) but He opened His Word to me and spoke into my heart. That was like an atom bomb going off inside my soul. I was permanently changed forever

Did you have to close your eyes and suck his word out of a hose?

[djaggs]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/23/a-surprising-map-of-where-the-worlds-atheists-live/?ico=home^editors_choice

A surprising map of where the world’s atheists live

By Max Fisher and Caitlin Dewey, Published: May 23, 2013 at 3:05 pm


Pope Francis’s pronouncement that God has “redeemed all of us … even the atheists” Wednesday surprised both believers and nonbelievers around the world, who are used to stricter edicts from the Catholic church. It also got us wondering where the world’s atheists live.



There’s surprisingly little data available on the subject. But a 2012 poll by WIN/Gallup International — an international polling firm that is not associated with the D.C.-based Gallup group — asked more than 50,000 people in 40 countries whether they considered themselves “religious,” “not religious” or “convinced atheist.” Overall, the poll concluded that roughly 13 percent of global respondents identified as atheists, more than double the percentage in the U.S.

The highest reported share of self-described atheists is in China: an astounding 47 percent. Faith has a complicated history in China. The state is deeply skeptical of organized religion, which it has long considered a threat to its authority.

In the Taiping rebellion of the 19th century, a religious cult started a Chinese civil war that killed millions of people and left the country exposed to European powers. The official ideology of the Communist government scorned both “new” Western religions and more traditionally Chinese faiths, destroying countless temples and relics during the Cultural Revolution of 1967 to 1977. While today’s Chinese leaders do not seem to share Mao Zedong’s fervent belief that China’s rich religious history was holding it back from modernity, nor do they seem prepared to bring that history back.

Japan, where 31 percent call themselves atheist, is a little more complicated. While superficial religious observation is common – many weddings take place in churches – formal religious practice has never really recovered from the imperial era that culminated with World War Two.

For much of the 1920 through 1940s, Japan’s imperial government combined an extreme form of race-based nationalism with emperor-worship and traditional Shinto practice. Some symbols of that era still remain, such as the Yasukuni shrine, though they are deeply controversial and often associated with the country’s wartime abuses.

Like nationalism in Germany, a bit of a post-war taboo has developed around religion in Japan. Separately, there is an alarming trend in Japan of forced religious de-conversion, in which families may “kidnap” a loved one who as adopted a faith seen as too extreme, such as Jehovah’s Witnesses, and pressure them to give it up.

One of the most surprising datapoints here might be Saudi Arabia, where 5 percent say they’re atheist. Not a high number, to be sure, but higher than in many other countries, despite the extremely sensitive taboo against atheism in Saudi Arabia, which is also considered a serious crime. (In both Iraq and Afghanistan, for instance, less than 1 percent of respondents called themselves atheists.) We looked earlier at the surprisingly robust community of underground Saudi atheists.

In addition to Iraq and Afghanistan, religious sentiment is strong in Ghana, Nigeria, Armenia and Fiji, where more than nine in 10 people say they’re religious. WIN/Gallup notes that religiosity is highest among the poor and, to a lesser extent, among the less educated, which certainly correlates among the most religious countries. (Ghana’s GDP per capita, for instance, ranks 173rd worldwide.)

As for Italy, a stone’s throw from the Vatican chapel where Pope Francis spoke on Wednesday, the Catholic Church has little to fear. Despite a gradual slide in Catholic baptisms in Italy over the past several decades, nearly three-fourths of Italians consider themselves religious. That number has actually grown one percent since 2005, according to WIN/Gallup, bucking the trend toward weaker religious feeling seen elsewhere in the world.

Japan's suicide problem....in Christianity life is considered a gift from God and thus sacred

[djaggs]

When I was 27 years of age, Jesus came to me (in my room, not Church) and my life was changed forever. I didn’t know that I was a lost soul just wandering aimlessly, I did not know that I needed saving ( I didn’t even know that was possible ) but He opened His Word to me and spoke into my heart. That was like an atom bomb going off inside my soul. I was permanently changed forever

Did you have to close your eyes and suck his word out of a hose?

No, His Word is written in the Bible.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

but how is this becomes true to you, if you Muslim folks believe Jesus is the messiah or a true prophet as prophesied in the Jewish scriptures? the Jews thinks he was a false prophet and rejected him as such but islam totally disagree with them on that ,so why are you quoting from those who strongly disagree with your views on Jesus? just so you can make a point against those who views on Jesus you disagree with? what a crank!

I was just about to ask AdamB this.

[djaggs]

The Problem with the theory of evoloution

Taken from :
http://www.darwinspredictions.com/#_4_Design_of

Written by:
Cornelius G. Hunter is a graduate of the University of Illinois where he earned a Ph.D. in Biophysics and Computational Biology. He is Adjunct Professor at Biola University and author of the award-winning Darwin’s God: Evolution and the Problem of Evil. Hunter’s other books include Darwin’s Proof, and his newest book Science’s Blind Spot (Baker/Brazos Press).
Dr. Hunter's interest in the theory of evolution involves the historical and theological, as well as scientific, aspects of the theory.

Introduction
Biological designs have always fascinated thinkers even if those designs were not well understood. Even as late as the nineteenth century, when Darwin developed his theory of evolution, there was substantial ignorance of how biology worked. Before Darwin, William Paley had written of a “secret spring” to describe the complex designs he believed must exist within organisms. A complicated watch, like biological organisms, used energy to function. But watches did not obtain their own energy in the first place, or make new watches, as did biological organisms. [1] Organisms, reasoned Paley, must indeed have unseen complexities.

But Paley worked within the design perspective. With Darwin’s theory of evolution, that perspective dramatically shifted. Darwin speculated that life first might have arisen in a warm little pond where protein molecules happened to assemble to form the first living entity. [2] If organisms arose via such unguided, natural processes then one should hardly expect elegant designs or clever mechanisms. The fundamental unit of life, the cell, was typically characterized as a mere building block or as an elementary organism, rather than complex machine, [3] and evolutionists interpreted the biological world to be full of clumsy designs. [4]

Prediction
As evolutionary thinking took hold, organisms were increasingly viewed as clumsy and happenstance contraptions. In 1871 Darwin’s book The Descent of Man listed several structures in the human body he thought had become unimportant in the evolutionary process. Darwin argued that via the evolutionary process the appendix, for instance, had reduced in length and was now useless. This was the evolutionary expectation.

In 1888 the American evolutionist Joseph Le Conte added to this list of evolutionary leftovers he argued existed in various animals. The whale’s teeth and the embryonic development of fish, revealed the crude works of evolution.

In 1893 German anatomist Robert Wiedersheim added to Darwin’s list and found eighty-six organs he deemed to be evolutionary leftovers and of less physiological significance than they once were. Adenoids and tonsils, lymphatic tissues, the pineal, pituitary, thyroid and thymus glands, ear muscles, body hair and the three smallest toes all made Wiedersheim’s list of structures that were supposed to be losing their importance as the human body evolved. In later years Wiedersheim’s list grew and even was invoked in the famous Scopes Monkey Trial to argue that humans are “a veritable walking museum of antiquities.”

Darwin’s expectation that evolution would leave a trail of decaying structures continued in the twentieth century. As evolution was envisioned to produce new species and new designs, it was thought the path inevitably would be littered with leftover designs because life was assumed to be the product of unintelligent forces of nature.

All of this means that when new designs were first investigated they often were assumed to be rather simple. If the workings of new biological findings were confusing or not understood, then evolutionists typically would assume a minor function, if any at all. These expectations have consistently been wrong.

Falsification
The parts of the human body that evolutionists thought to be evolutionary relics have mostly turned out to be important and even contrary to the expected evolutionary trend. The importance of our toes, tonsils and most of Wiedersheim’s other eighty-four parts is now better understood, and comparative anatomy has not fulfilled the evolutionary expectation of decaying structures.

For instance, the pineal gland is now known to be part of the endocrine system that sends chemical messages (hormones) in the blood and interacts with the nervous system. Wiedersheim also claimed the coccyx, a short collection of vertebrate at the end of the spine, was an evolutionary leftover. But the coccyx is the attachment point for several important muscles and ligaments. The thyroid gland consists of two lobes on either side of the wind pipe and produces thyroxine which regulates cellular metabolism. It is important in cold temperatures and in child growth. The thyroid gland also produces calcitonin which helps regulate blood calcium levels. Its malfunction and enlargement—the disease known as goiter—is visible as a swelling of the front of the neck. Both the thymus gland and the appendix contribute to the body’s immune system. Our appendix was thought to be a shriveled-up remnant because it was shorter than that of the rabbit’s. But the appendix has since been found to be larger and more distinct than its counterpart in the other primates. [5]

Perhaps more important are the many findings of subtle and sophisticated designs in biology that consistently defy the evolutionist’s expectations. Consider, for example, the process of cell division which requires an exacting sequence of elaborate and complex steps to be followed, controlled by an array of biochemicals. [6] And after the contents of the cell have been duplicated, the cell quickly constructs a short-lived ring structure that contracts and splits the cell into the two daughter cells. [7]

Imagine an automobile duplicating all of its parts, and then splitting itself in two. One review summarized cell division as a remarkable process “during which cells undergo profound changes in their structure and physiology. These events are orchestrated with a precision that is worthy of a classical symphony, with different activities being switched on and off at precise times and locations throughout the cell.” [8]

As Bruce Alberts, an evolutionist and President of the National Academy of Sciences, once wrote, “

We have always underestimated cells. Undoubtedly we still do today. But at least we are no longer as naive as we were when I was a graduate student in the 1960s. Then, most of us viewed cells as containing a giant set of second-order reactions: molecules A and B were thought to diffuse freely, randomly colliding with each other to produce molecule AB—and likewise for the many other molecules that interact with each other inside a cell. This seemed reasonable because, as we had learned from studying physical chemistry, motions at the scale of molecules are incredibly rapid. … But, as it turns out, we can walk and we can talk because the chemistry that makes life possible is much more elaborate and sophisticated than anything we students had ever considered. Proteins make up most of the dry mass of a cell. But instead of a cell dominated by randomly colliding individual protein molecules, we now know that nearly every major process in a cell is carried out by assemblies of 10 or more protein molecules. And, as it carries out its biological functions, each of these protein assemblies interacts with several other large complexes of proteins. Indeed, the entire cell can be viewed as a factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines, each of which is composed of a set of large protein machines. […]

Why do we call the large protein assemblies that underlie cell function protein machines? Precisely because, like the machines invented by humans to deal efficiently with the macroscopic world, these protein assemblies contain highly coordinated moving parts. Within each protein assembly, intermolecular collisions are not only restricted to a small set of possibilities, but reaction C depends on reaction B, which in turn depends on reaction A—just as it would in a machine of our common experience. […]

We have also come to realize that protein assemblies can be enormously complex. … As the example of the spliceosome should make clear, the cartoons thus far used to depict protein machines (e.g., Figure 1) vastly underestimate the sophistication of many of these remarkable devices. [9]

Darwin’s theory predicts that we should find the leftovers of the evolutionary process, not sophisticated machines. But despite his ruminations of how these evolutionary expectations were unmet, Alberts continued to use evolution as his guide later in the article. And years later evolutionists continued to be astounded. As one researcher exclaimed a decade later, “It’s amazing to us. We thought the cell was so simple.” [10]

Evolution is not an intelligent process so evolutionists are amazed by what we find in biology. There is another reason why evolution expected cells to be relatively simple, and it stems from a fundamental tenet of evolutionary theory. A key premise of the theory is that genetic mutations are the main fuel for evolutionary change. That is, it has been a fundamental tenet of evolution that DNA gene mutations are an important source of the unguided biological variation upon which natural selection acts to morph one species into the next. Thus evolutionists focused narrowly on the genes in the DNA molecule. As one science writer put it, genes were at the center of the biological universe, much as ancient astronomers believed sun and stars revolved around the earth. [11]

Evolutionists compared genes across the different species to understand better their evolutionary relationships. For according to evolution, changes in those genes were the main cause of the origin of species. An obvious problem with this view arose when the human and chimp genes were found to be practically identical, with only minor differences between them. These differences could hardly explain the differences between the human and chimp, yet evolutionists ignored these obvious indications that genes play a less important role in determining the organism’s design. Indeed, evolutionists maintained the centrality of genes, and erroneously argued that the high genetic similarity between the human and chimp was powerful evidence for their common ancestry.

Now we know this picture to be substantially misguided. First, genes are far more varied and sophisticated than evolutionists expected. They can be edited in different ways and they even overlap on the same segment of DNA, like a sentence with a different message when read backwards.

And genes are only one part of a far more involved and complex story. Evolutionists were surprised when it was first discovered that genes comprise only a few percent of the DNA in higher organisms. If genes were so important, why did they comprise a tiny fraction of the genome? What was the role of all the non-genic DNA?

Such a large quantity of DNA must, it seemed, have a function. Yet some non-genic DNA varied substantially between even highly similar species. Evolution predicts that important DNA is preserved. It should be similar in similar species. In other words, similar species should not have DNA segments that are both substantially different and important.

The findings did not match evolutionary expectations and evolutionists could only guess at the role of all the non-genic DNA. A variety of minor functions were considered as well as the possibility that the majority of the genome was useless. Terms such as “junk,” “parasitic,” “selfish,” and “greedy” DNA were coined. [12] The genome increasingly was viewed as a motley collection of DNA, and this view fueled a new powerful argument for evolution, for only evolution would create such chaos.

Again the evolutionary expectations were substantially misleading. Not only have major, fundamental roles been discovered for much of the non-genic DNA, but its various functions are highly complex, far beyond anything evolutionists expected. One phenomenally complex example is the fine-tuned micro RNAs (MiRNAs) that perform a variety of regulatory jobs. [13]

Evolution did not expect this unseen complexity buried within the cell. As one evolutionist lamented, “The picture that’s emerging is so immensely more complicated than anyone imagined, it’s almost depressing,” [11]

Reaction
The reaction of evolutionists to the important functionality discovered in what were believed to be evolutionary leftovers, and to the profound complexity found in biology, has been to ascribe the new found functionality and designs to evolution. All findings are consistently ascribed to the workings of evolution. The new functions and high complexity, say evolutionists, answer questions about how evolution works, not whether evolution works. Indeed, evolutionists are adept at integrating revolutionary findings into the evolutionary narrative. In new studies the once hapless non-coding DNA is now found to be a crucial player in the evolutionary process itself. [14,15,16] “It’s funny,” observed one evolutionist, “how quickly the field is now evolving.” [15]

Second, all of these failed expectations have not deterred evolutionists from their view of biology as a hodge-podge. Where function is still uncertain, the evolution literature is rife with explanations of evolutionary leftovers and haphazard designs. This is not surprising as this expectation is fundamental to the theory.

Evolution’s falsifications and complications
The difference between these two examples is not so much in whether there were falsifications but in how the falsifications were accommodated. Both classical physics and geocentrism had their falsifications. But classical physics was understood to have limited domain of applicability whereas geocentrism became tremendously complex—to the point of seeming to be more of an exercise in fitting the data rather than explaining nature. One can always fit the data if one is willing to employ heroic mechanisms and explanations. [4]

This brings us to the issue of simplicity, or parsimony, in scientific theories. It has long been understood that elaborate explanations can always be contrived in order to explain observations. But why should we believe they are true? The backward motion of planets can be explained by a series of epicycles, designed specifically to fit the peculiar motion. But with heliocentrism no such adjustments are required—the backward planetary motion is a natural outcome.

So while complicated narratives are needed for bed-time stories and soap operas, parsimony is valued in science. Nature, and only nature, should be explained. Scientists become suspicious when a theory becomes increasingly complex to accommodate failed expectations—when particular explanations are needed to adjust to contradictory findings.

Falsifications can also be a sign of problems if they are common. If a theory makes predictions that are consistently wrong, then suspicion again arises. Regardless of how much complexity is needed to explain the contradictory findings, a steady stream of such findings, in itself, can indicate weakness.

Evolution has a long history of false predictions leading to rising complexity. The evolutionist’s claim that all of this is a sign of good science, of learning how evolution actually occurred, is not consistent with evolution’s many falsified predictions and complex adjustments. This document summarizes a representative set of such false predictions. Each prediction was a natural and fundamental expectation of the theory of evolution, and was held by leading, mainstream, evolutionists. Because these predictions were fundamental, their falsification required substantial increases in the complexity of the theory of evolution. In addition to summarizing each prediction and its falsification, this document includes the reactions of evolutionists showing how the contradictory findings were accommodated. Section 7 concludes with an examination of why evolutionists believe their theory is a fact and what this tells us about the theory.

Objections of evolutionists
This section examines various objections evolutionists make in defending their theory’s false predictions and added complexities.

We’ve fixed these false predictions
A proponent of a theory, given sufficient motivation, can explain all kinds of contradictory findings. [4] Evolutionists have accommodated its many false predictions. The problems have been “fixed,” but in the process the theory has grown tremendously complicated. Scientists are suspicious of theories that morph in many directions to fit the data.

Ad hominem
Criticism of evolution draws heated responses, and personal attacks are common. Such attacks, however, do not change the fact that evolution has, like geocentrism, generated many false predictions and as a consequence grown more complex.

The brush off
Evolutionists often ignore or deny the problem of unexpected findings and theory complexity. They attempt to discredit the facts, referring to them as “tired old arguments,” or fallacies. Rarely do evolutionists follow-up such criticisms with supporting details. Until such details are provided we cannot know if these criticisms are sound.

Falsificationism is flawed
It has been argued that in order to qualify as science, ideas and theories need to be falsifiable. Also, falsified predictions are sometimes used to argue a theory is false. Such naïve falsificationism is flawed [5] and not used here. Evolution’s many false predictions do not demonstrate that evolution is not science or that evolution is necessarily false. The question of evolution’s truth value is not simple, and beyond the scope of this document. Of course these fundamental false predictions would be considerations in such an assessment.

False predictions are valuable in judging the quality of a theory, and for improving our scientific understanding in general. Nonetheless, evolutionists sometimes reject any mention of their theory’s false predictions as mere naïve falsificationism. The failures of falsificationism do not give evolutionists a license to ignore substantial and fundamental failures of their theory.

Sometimes evolutionists simply point out that their theory has not been falsified. There may be many false predictions, but they do not prove evolution to be false. While this is true, it is not a sign of a healthy theory. First, evolutionists consider their theory to be a fact. Its immunity to scientific surprises reveals the degree to which the theory is protected. Second, evolution has become tremendously complicated as it has had to adjust to the scientific data.

If there are so many problems evolution would have been toppled
This objection falls under the category of naïve falsificationism. Science is a reactive process. New evidence is processed, and theories are adjusted accordingly. But science can also be a conservative process, sustaining substantial problems before reevaluating a theory. Therefore the reevaluation of a theory takes time. The fact that there are problems is no guarantee a theory will have been toppled. [1,6]

Those quoted believe in evolution
Many scientists doubt evolution, but they are not cited or quoted in this document. Only material from evolutionists is used to illustrate that even those who believe in the theory admit to the falsifications and complications. These people believe in evolution, but that does not mean the problems do not exist.

Could it be that the problems are inconsequential, since those quoted have not given up on evolution? No, not necessarily. Theory acceptance is complicated. There are many reasons why scientists continue to believe in weak or problematic theories, including conservativeness, financial factors, social and institutional pressures, and so forth. While these reasons may at times be important in the case of Darwin’s theory, another reason why evolutionists are undaunted is that they believe evolution is a fact, in spite of the many evidential problems. Section 7 examines why this is so.

These falsifications will be remedied in the future
As scientists, we need to evaluate scientific theories according to the currently available data. No one knows what future data may bring, and the claim that future data will rescue evolution is ultimately circular.

There is no better alternative
One way to evaluate a theory is to compare it to alternative explanations. There are, however, potential pitfalls to this approach. First, any such comparison will crucially depend on what alternative explanations are used in the comparison. If care is not taken good alternatives can be misrepresented or even omitted altogether. And of course there may be alternatives not yet conceived. [7,8]

Also, such comparisons can become a way to protect a theory by shifting attention away from its problems. Comparisons are interesting and important, but they do not eliminate a theory’s track record of performance. Nonetheless, comparisons to evolution’s alternatives have always been fundamental in evolutionary thought and are critical to understanding evolutionary thinking. Section 7 examines this in more detail.

No one believes these predictions anymore
Yes, this is the point. It is true that evolutionists have, for the most part, dropped many predictions that were once made by evolutionists or entailed by the theory. This suggests that the theory does not have a good track record.

God would never have created this world
Some arguments for evolution are theological or philosophical in nature. Many have concluded that God would never have created the biological world we observe. This includes Darwin as well as many thinkers before and after him. This conclusion suggested evolutionary theories, in one form or another. [9] Such arguments cannot be countered with scientific evidence so empirical problems, such as falsified predictions, often are less important to evolutionists. Section 7 examines this further.

What about all the successful predictions?
Evolutionists argue that evolution is a fact, and that we ought to focus on evolution’s successful predictions rather than its false predictions. The tendency to seek confirming evidence over contrary evidence is known as confirmation bias. [10] One consequence of confirmation bias can be that confirming evidence is viewed as correct and typical whereas disconfirming evidence is viewed as anomalous and rare. Not surprisingly the confirming evidence is more often retained and documented. Rarely are the many false predictions found in evolution texts. Confirmation bias can hinder scientific research, particularly when researchers believe they know the truth, as do evolutionists. They view the important predictions of evolution as predominantly true. False predictions, on the other hand, are usually not viewed as legitimate falsifications. Instead, these are interpreted, more positively, as open research questions which are yet to be resolved. Indeed, evolutionists often make the remarkable claim that there is no evidence that is contrary to evolution.

[bluefete]

^^Interesting argument that.