The Religion Discussion

[Habit7]

^^^the point that you and others were wrong on your judgement of me?



The miracles of Jesus were organic, not psychosomatic and verifiable. Many who are ignorant to scripture would like to anachronistically think that ppl back then were easily deceived. But something like leprosy (any skin disease) to claim to be cured required immense scrutiny (Leviticus 14). Jesus cured leprosy, blindness, paraplegia, deadness and others. Miracles in the 1500 years of the Bible chronology are relatively few and far between, but they cluster around ppl who bring new revelation from God so as to authenticate them (Moses/Aaron, Elijah/Elisha, Jesus/Apostles).

Those who call themselves faith healers today are relatively new to in Christianity. They all flow out of the 1906 Asusa St. Revial which is the birth of Pentecostalism. These charlatans cannot produce healings that are like those of the New Testament. There is no need for new revelation thus need for miracles. They have been condemned, like those of the Prosperity Gospel movement, for many years. But they are the ones that grab the headlines and many non-Christians tend to believe that they are emblematic of the church. They are not.

[crock101]

Habit.. you do realize that these "charlatans" as you rightly call them would say that you are the one that is ignorant of the gospels and are denying the power of their God ,which is your God.

It is rather hypocritical of you to point out how silly they are while sharing most of their silly beliefs.

[Slartibartfast]

You state that the people in a fictional book aren't gullible and yet you are the one gullible enough to take the writings in the book as a fact.

[Habit7]

^^^dont you take Krauss book as fact and it is peer reviewed as false?

Habit.. you do realize that these "charlatans" as you rightly call them would say that you are the one that is ignorant of the gospels and are denying the power of their God ,which is your God.

It is rather hypocritical of you to point out how silly they are while sharing most of their silly beliefs.

Well you might be ignorant, but they all very well know that none of their signs and wonders are genuine. Furthermore, they would have read Jesus' Sermon on the Mount were Jesus directly condemns them:

“Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they? So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. So then, you will know them by their fruits.

“Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’ Matthew 7:15-23

The power of God is not in throwing you jacket on someone or feeling scores of ppl with the swoop of your hand https://youtu.be/QdMd54YzYAU The power of God is in the preaching of his word, which to you sadly appears to be "silly beliefs", confirming what the Bible says about you (1 Corinthians 1:18).

But what is also silly is spontaneous generation, a failed scientific theory popularised up until the 19th century. You however go one step beyond that and believe that something can naturally come from nothing.

[Slartibartfast]

^^^dont you take Krauss book as fact and it is peer reviewed as false?

Nope, I take it as the best explanation that we have at our disposal at the moment subject to future revision, update or disproof. But nice try anyway.

Also, the proof that he bases his work on can be independently observed (if you have the correct equipment) and/or derived using mathematics.

What proof is there that god created the world again... I mean besides the fact that we are here?

[desifemlove]

people stupid to realise how the Bible was doctored by Romans...like Constantine the Great and by medival Catholics.

if religion is true, then what makes ISIS's interpretation of the Koran worse than liberal Muslims'?

[crock101]

Habit ...here you go again misrepresenting my statements,I say that krauss offers an explanation that might be true , you claim that I said that it is true.
This "untruthfulness" is really becoming a "habit"of yours.

[Habit7]

Habit ...here you go again misrepresenting my statements,I say that krauss offers an explanation that might be true , you claim that I said that it is true.
This "untruthfulness" is really becoming a "habit"of yours.

I know you might be relatively new to tuner but most times than not when a post starts with this (^^^) it is referring to the post above it, I was not addressing you. Slarti was preaching the Gospel of Krauss long before you and like you was unable to explain how something can come from nothing without employing the ploy of Krauss by redefining what nothing is.

[Slartibartfast]

Habit ...here you go again misrepresenting my statements,I say that krauss offers an explanation that might be true , you claim that I said that it is true.
This "untruthfulness" is really becoming a "habit"of yours.

Crock's words represent my view as well. Feel free to reply directly to it. You can pretend that I said those words if it makes it easier for you.

[Habit7]

Well it all comes down to belief in which book is fact. Nothing in the Bible has been proven to be factually wrong, yet Krauss' Universe from Nothing which you hold out as an explanation for universe self-creating has factual inconsistencies viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&p=9081416#p9081416

However you call believers in the Bible gullible yet you believe in an explanation you cannot articulate and has many holes in it.

Also saying that he bases his views on proof is not sufficient. Spontaneous generation, continental drift and bloodletting were all based on proof but summarily wrong. You have faith in his explanation but something coming from nothing has not been proven.

[Slartibartfast]

Nothing in the Bible has been proven to be factually wrong,

Willful ignorance is your argument then. I've proven many times that you don't need to look further than the first page of the bible to see examples of where the bible has been proven wrong.

Why do you keep circling back to your same old disproven arguments. It's almost as though reality has no bearing on you.

[Habit7]

No you haven't. You once brought up that the Genesis creation account doesn't agree with the theory of the Big Bang, which is not a fact. Nevertheless I showed the consistency of the Genesis account with science. But then again you said don't have time to research the biblical answers to your questions.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&p=9002563#p9003043

[crock101]

The bible proves itself wrong.
At one point it says that Adam is created,does some stuff,names the animals etc. then eve gets created.


The book claims a bit later that Adam and eve are created simultaneously.

These are two very different creation stories . The bible starts of by contradicting itself , both stories can't be true, therefore the bible has to be wrong about at least one.

[Habit7]

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&p=6881177#p6881177

[Slartibartfast]

No you haven't. You once brought up that the Genesis creation account doesn't agree with the theory of the Big Bang, which is not a fact. Nevertheless I showed the consistency of the Genesis account with science. But then again you said don't have time to research the biblical answers to your questions.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&p=9002563#p9003043

You are yet to offer any contradictory proof of the big bang. Forget Krauss for a second as he only focuses on the first fractions of a second.

I'll break it down reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel simple like for you.

Prove to me that the earth was created before the sun and other stars in the sky. I am saying that it is a fact that the earth is younger that the sun and a lot of other stars in the sky. Genesis says that the earth is the oldest celestial body. Here it is clear that the bible is wrong. This was never directly addressed.

[Slartibartfast]

http://www.trinituner.com/v3/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=267363&p=6881177#p6881177

My God! the cognitive dissonance in this post of yours is making me dizzy.

[Habit7]

The Big Bang is a scientific theory, based off of the scientific theory of uniformitarianism, it is not a fact but you accept it by faith.
Taking the theory of uniformitarianism out of the picture we have no factual basis to prove the age of any celestial body other than relative ages.
The creation week of Genesis 1 is something I accept by faith because it is a question of history, not science primarily.

So back to your original claim: you have not proven many times anything and you are yet to show where the Bible is wrong on an issue of fact.

Speaking of cognitive dissonance:

My God!

[meccalli]

[rspann]

Crock, Slartifartbast,Naresheep go read Psalm 14:1.

[abducted]

Crock, Slartifartbast,Naresheep go read Psalm 14:1.

haha that is an argument?

That like quoting from Harry Potter books to warn humankind against the sinister snares of Voldemort
The Bible calling people fools for not believing in God. Is that an example to set?
The bible is trying to give its believers moral superiority while threatening everyone else.
Great going Bible!

[Slartibartfast]

The Big Bang is a scientific theory, based off of the scientific theory of uniformitarianism, it is not a fact but you accept it by faith.
Taking the theory of uniformitarianism out of the picture we have no factual basis to prove the age of any celestial body other than relative ages.
The creation week of Genesis 1 is something I accept by faith because it is a question of history, not science primarily.

So back to your original claim: you have not proven many times anything and you are yet to show where the Bible is wrong on an issue of fact.

Uniformitarianism is one of the theories that the big bang theory is based on. Also, taking the theory out of the picture because you don't like it does not count as a disproof. What proof is there against it? This is also incredibly vague. Some things change uniformly over time, some things change catastrophically at once. I don't want to get to sidetracked though so back to the core argument.

Seeing that you are having problems forming a coherent argument, allow me to lay out your counter argument for you. If you can do this it will completely disprove me.

Prove that the earth was created before the sun.
Prove that the sun was the first star to be created.
Prove that it is impossible for a star to be older than the earth (btw... how old do you think the earth is again?
Prove that man was the first animal to roam the earth

You know what, I'm feeling really generous today. Just directly offer positive proof of any one of those and I will consider myself defeated.

I know that it is impossible to disprove the existence of something so I gave you arguments that need only positive proof. This should be a walk in the park for you.

Speaking of cognitive dissonance:

My God!

An exclamation of disbelief by calling reference to something as pointless to believe in as your logic. Funnily enough, God is the only thing that fits that criteria.

"My pink unicorn!" just doesn't have the same ring to it. With the amount of things flying over your head you better change your location to Piarco.

[Slartibartfast]

Crock, Slartifartbast,Naresheep go read Psalm 14:1.

I did... now what?

It sounds like sh!tty advice to justify discrimination against people just because they don't hold your belief. Did you read it? Do you really believe that it is not possible for an atheist to do anything good or anything of value?

[Habit7]

Slarti you are one getting sidetracked.

1. I said the Bible gets nothing wrong factually.
2. You claimed that many times you have proven the Bible wrong factually.
3. I can only cite one attempt and it was not factual.
4. The Big Bang and Uniformitarianism are not factual.
5. No celestial body has a tag telling its date of creation, at best in science we have models and theories based on fact, but the explanations derived from them are not fact
6. You are using your theoretical presupposition in the order of creation.
7. I am using my historical presupposition in the order of creation.
8. You are yet to name any of the many times you proved the Bible to be nonfactual.
9. You are yet to prove that you know the Bible (you said before you thought purgatory was in the Bible)
10. Please provide a fact to invalidate #1.

[abducted]

Slarti you are one getting sidetracked.

1. I said the Bible gets nothing wrong factually.
2. You claimed that many times you have proven the Bible wrong factually.
3. I can only cite one attempt and it was not factual.
4. The Big Bang and Uniformitarianism are not factual.
5. No celestial body has a tag telling its date of creation, at best in science we have models and theories based on fact, but the explanations derived from them are not fact
6. You are using your theoretical presupposition in the order of creation.
7. I am using my historical presupposition in the order of creation.
8. You are yet to name any of the many times you proved the Bible to be nonfactual.
9. You are yet to prove that you know the Bible (you said before you thought purgatory was in the Bible)
10. Please provide a fact to invalidate #1.

Leviticus 11:20-21

"'All flying insectsthat walk on all fours are to be regarded as unclean by you."

"There are, however, some flying insects that walk on all fours that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground."

The bible also got the value of Pi wrong.

Revelation 8:10
"And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters;"

The Bible makes it seem that stars are tiny objects in the sky that will fall down when Jesus comes back.

Nothing wrong factually my foot.

[Slartibartfast]

I see reasoning is lost on you so I will attempt to be short and direct. Please provide direct factual answers to the following questions. No need to provide your reasoning behind it. Just a straight answer is fine.

Was the earth created before the sun? Yes or no
How old is the earth? Number in earth years
Was the sun the first star to he created? Yes or no
Was man the first animal to exist? Yes or no

Three

[Habit7]

Leviticus 11:21-23 ‘All the winged insects that walk on all fours are detestable to you. Yet these you may eat among all the winged insects which walk on all fours: those which have above their feet jointed legs with which to jump on the earth. These of them you may eat: the locust in its kinds, and the devastating locust in its kinds, and the cricket in its kinds, and the grasshopper in its kinds. But all other winged insects which are four-footed are detestable to you.

4 walking legs + 2 hind hopping legs = 6 total legs
Grasshoppers, locust (migratory grasshoppers) and "cricket" (actual Hebrew word is some leaping thing we not too sure of) all have 4 walking legs in the front in which the walking and climb on, but the hindmost legs are for jumping.
These were civil laws for country, it serves no practicality if there were laws for 8 legged dogs or flying worms. They understood the laws, you apparently don't.

1 Kings 7:23 Now he made the sea of cast metal ten cubits from brim to brim, circular in form, and its height was five cubits, and thirty cubits in circumference.

Pi is 3.14159265359..., in high school we estimate it down to 3.14. In the above verse it is estimated down to 3.0 in addition to a cubit also being an estimation for a hand breath all to create above a basin that has a rim that flares out like a flour. This is no centrifugal weight, it's just an estimation.


And your conclusion of Revelation 8:10 is nothing but your eisegesis. If you exegete the text you will see earlier in verse 8, it recounts a similar preceding occurrence where it is described as "something like a great mountain burning with fire" not as you said "tiny objects."



Try and google search harder, because I doubt your read these all yourself otherwise you would know the context. But when you do google search, search for the answers which are just as accessible.

[Slartibartfast]

Habit do you know how big stars are. Our planet isn't thay big as far as planets are concerned. Our sun is a pretty average size star as well. A star the size of a "great mountain" is extremely tiny as far as stars go.

Also, given the size (and weight) difference, it's a lot more likely that the earth will fall into the sun than the sun fall into the earth.

Also, I doubt they waould refer to our sun as just "a great star". Do they know how far away we are from our closest star? Do they know the probability of our solar system colliding with a star. It's far more likely that we are engulfed by our sun as it dies out.

But anyway... I await your straightforward answers to my very simple questions.

[Gaijjin]

If everyone has a different ideology on the topic then what really is truth ,who did we believe as one who is telling the truth to one who is telling a lie or a story ? Beliefs are different and personal views relating to the topic so personally it all comes down to an individual who chose to believe or not believe. Then again humans have a desire to always lean on the blind side of ignorance abhorring and suppressing the mind to think beyond personal ignorance. In this country no one has an open mind we're still enslaved by a system we see everyday that do not see............

[crock101]

Habit .. I must ask.... do you believe that anything can be achieved through prayer?
If so, please pray for my ssd hard drive to fail or better yet, pray for my Nokia phone to break, either one would make your god seem really impressive.

[Habit7]

crock...your arguments have been poor, contradictory and biblically uninformed. From trying to prove that something can come from nothing to misunderstandings of the Bible. You seemed to have run out of steam now. Please do some proper research and don't try to represent an argument from rationalwiki that you clearly over you head on.