question about Noah's ark.............

[d spike]

OMG I don't believe you don't even know what you are writing. this information is far from the truth. I will not even attempt to school you on this, believe what you want, but in scholarly studies as you know if something is not referenced then it cannot be credible. you sir are furthest from being credible

I have wasted a lot of time writing a response to this, only to erase each one completely, due to the abrasive and detrimental language that I used to clarify my point. This will be my fifth write-up - and hopefully, my last. I need to be very calm to deal with this brash and pompous person.

To begin:
Because you have never come across the information that I have presented, means that it doesn't exist? Before you ask me where I get my information from, you simply assume I have to be making it up? This is your "mature" response? And you talk of "scholarly studies"? You, young sir, even have the temerity to speak of "attempting to school" me? You don't even have the desire to learn to be a proper student!!

The world, my youngling, is a lot older than your Sunday school teacher...

If I were to ask you of Josephus, or Tertullian... have you read their work? Have you even read of them? Or do you have to Google their names? Or hope Wikipedia mentions them?

If your idea of doing research is to refer to a pulpit-thumping pastor (whose world-bubble is the same size as yours, just older) or to check Google... then you are sadly mistaken as far as what "research" means.
Google is only as good as the young 'uns who post material on the Internet - same thing I said when queried about some ancient info I posted on the "Local History" thread. But the guy asked me what my sources were... HE DIDN'T ACCUSE ME OF MAKING IT UP!!!!

Of all the immature, wet-behind-the-ears, upstartish, damp-drawer'd things to say... sheesh...

Even the best encyclopaedia (e.g. Colliers, Britannica) re-edited their work in the 70's to make room for more current events and information, leaving out ‘lesser’ items that a set from the 50’s or earlier would contain, such as lovely articles about the Early Church and the figures that populated these times. So if you were really interested in the goings-on of such times, you would have either acquired a set, or located a set in a library that appreciated such tomes – or was too poorly funded to upgrade, lol.
But would you read such books? Or would you echo the words of the Caliph in response to the Muslim general who took Alexandria, Egypt, and asked what to do with the countless books in that great library: “If they agree with the Koran, they are superfluous; if they disagree, they are blasphemous. Burn them.â€

[DFC]

lol d spike, yuh like...... totally own him there...

ppl get real emo when anyone questions their beliefs.
But shouldnt YOU question something before you believe it?
if you just take it as it is dished out then its BLIND belief...and there is NO WAY that will lead you to the truth.

God today is not for worshipping...God is for convenience.

sigh... its pointless dealing with you block head religious fanatics.

The truth is for the deserving....

[larafan]

jjjjaaaaaaahhhhhh rastaforawhiilleeeeeeeeee

[d spike]

^^ God wrote the ten commandments himself on stone tablets that was placed in the ark of the covenant so that their could be no arguement of human error.

except when 11-15 fell down and shattered.

People have nothing better to do than to create this sh!t....A Mockery i say!
I does feel sorry for those people, if they only knew
If only you knew! Mel Brooks was a Jew - you need to understand Jewish humour (and their relationship with their God) before you make empty comments like this.

Tuner member asked if Jesus is even real?
Isn't this a legit question?

You want a lil proof padna?.....The muslim's book (The Quran) talks about Jesus and they are not ROMANS
They don't believe Jesus is the Son of God, but they see him as a prophet....point is, a non believer of Christ talks about him in their Holy Books other than the ROMAN's Bible
Unfortunately, this isn't proof. The muslims based their knowledge of Jesus on a priest's teachings (the same ROMAN bible you spoke of)

[d spike]

ppl get real emo when anyone questions their beliefs.
But shouldnt YOU question something before you believe it?
if you just take it as it is dished out then its BLIND belief...and there is NO WAY that will lead you to the truth.

God today is not for worshipping...God is for convenience.

sigh... its pointless dealing with you block head religious fanatics.

The truth is for the deserving....

[d spike]

Yes, faith is believing in what can't be proven... and it is a wonderful gift... but it is meant to be used... you are expected to build on it... help it grow...

If you are given a pen, you are expected to use it,so write something - don't use it to decorate your desk. Combine your ability to believe in what others aren't sure about with your ability to identify that which can be used to show/demonstrate (your intelligence) to further explain to yourself and others... this process will serve to deepen your faith. So too does questioning and doubt.

When a cynic asks "why", he is looking to discard, not for an answer.
When someone who wants to know asks "why", he is looking for an answer to help him on his way.

A 4 year-old looks at the stars and marvels at the God who put the "angels" shining brightly overhead.
A man who looks at the stars and knows them to be massive balls of stuff burning brightly for eons, giving light and heat, thus life, across the universe, marvels at the handiwork of whoever made them.
A man who looks at the stars in this day and age, and prefers to think of them as the "angels" shining brightly overhead, is either a retard or a fool for deliberately ignoring the gift of intelligence - and possibly doesn't deserve it.

[civic SIR]

OMG I don't believe you don't even know what you are writing. this information is far from the truth. I will not even attempt to school you on this, believe what you want, but in scholarly studies as you know if something is not referenced then it cannot be credible. you sir are furthest from being credible

To begin:
Because you have never come across the information that I have presented, means that it doesn't exist?

No read carefully what I said quote your sources and not interrpert as you see fiT

The world, my youngling, is a lot older than your Sunday school teacher...

Do you even know the orgin of Sunday worship? We'll talk about that later

If I were to ask you of Josephus, or Tertullian... have you read their work?

I could ask you the same of William Tyndale, John Wycliffe, Calvin Miller, Ellen White, Huss or Martin Luther King? What these men and woman did was tested the words of the bible against other teachings. I've said it before, but it seems as though you really don't read properly ( I' expand on this a little more later), the bible is the standard that everything else should be measured by firslty and not measured lastly by everyone who thinks he had a great revelation. Martin luther questioned his beliefs and found answers in the bible testing against everything he believed and finding fault, are you saying that Martin Luther was a fanatic because he believed or that you are greater than him?

Because Wycliffe the greatest English scholar at his time tried to translate the bible and caused the start of heretic burning do you consider him wrong and the thousands who persihed at the stake for the same cause did they attack the Emperor's daughter as you account claims? Do yourself a favor and research again, the very first Christians were attacked and stoned because they believed in Christ, remember Paul's occupation before he was met by Jesus in Damascus (hint hint wink wink)? whilst he studied under the master Gamieal he did not study Jesus. Do you even know why Constantine in 350AD accepted Christ? or what was his position before his predecessor Nero's decree was?

[b]Since you seem to be familiar with Tertullian maybe this my help " you may kill us, torture us, condemm us...... your injustice is the proof that we are innocent. the oftener we are mown down by you, the more in number we grow: the blood of christians is seed" Apology para 50 so please don't try to humour me with the root cause of Venus and Emperor...please man you are supposed to be more intelligent than me right?

tell me how Constantine gained "christians" to enter into his church? can you connect it to the dark ages?

Perhaps it is you that need google? or wikipedia?

But the guy asked me what my sources were... HE DIDN'T ACCUSE ME OF MAKING IT UP!!!! ok apologies, your sources are wrong

Your problem is that you measure the bible against other teachings unlike what those ambassadors did. they studied the bible and took consuel in "study to show thyself approved a workman that need not be ashamed"[/b]
[b]Every question that you have asked about the bible shows me your lack of understanding. For instance:

you asked which come first plants or humans? the very first two chapters of the bible. A 10 year old [b]"Sunday Schooler"[/b] could have made the difference but not you, you are much to intelligent.
you asked about rain before Noah's time when it specifically talked in Genesis 2 of no rain again fundamentals, fundamentals, remember I said you don't read properly or is it understanding you lack?

You asked about the Noah's disobedience in bringing one pair instead of seven or two unclean? perhaps pronoun trouble.....

you asked where did Noah preach the message and why did these people had not the opportunity of Jesus Christ? when they clearly rejected GOd and his plan of redemption seeing Eden in front of their faces. A six year old can tell you anyone who does God will spreads his message of hope and repentance as was reinforced by Jesus before he ascended into heaven and you ask about Noah?

I can go on and on but please the validity of the Noah's account was made perfect by many witnesses, Jesus, Peter, Paul, Moses and the bible legitimacy enforced by Jesus as stated in Luke 24:27 which says [b]"and begining at Moses and all the prophets (Jonah Included), he (Jesus) expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself" [/b]

he even gives us counsel to [b]"search the scriptures; for in them ye think you have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me"[/b] Jh 5:39

and commands that [b]" the grass withereth; the flower fadeth; but the word of God shall stand forever" Is 8;20[/b]

Are you aware that the Quran is synomous with the bible in the account of Abraham the father of all nations and Ishmael the brother of Issac? or the accounts of Jonah or Jesus were repeated in the quran? is the Quran also false because it agrees with the bible? MG man what about you?

you say that the bible " does not promote truth," well I will not answer but quote the following people (perhaps you know them):

Gladstone " if i am asked what is the remedy of the sorrows of the heart, what a man should cheifly look to in his progress through life as the power that is to sustain him under trials, and enavle him manfully to confront his afflictions I must point to the old book, the greatest and best gift ever given to mankind"

William Garrison who did mor than any man to sweep away the curse of american slavery said " take away the bible from us, and our warfare against intemperance and umpurity and oppression and infidelity and crime is at an end. We have no authority to speak or courage to act"

Daniel Webster, the great american orator said " if we abide by the principles taught in the bible, our country will go on prospering and to prosper; bu tif we and our posterity negelct it instructions and authority, no man can tell how sudden a catastrophe may overwhelm us amd bury our glory in profound obsturity"

I dare you to unlearn your thinking as Martin Luther when he said " how difficlut it is to lay aside the scruples which one had imbibed from a chid... though i had the scriputres on my side, TO JUSTIFY IT TO MYSELF AND THAT I SHOULD DARE TO MAKE A STAND ALONE........" or are you greater than him too?

the bible is the test that by which we know God, the book of Psalms states" thy word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path" If we hold up anything before the bible we will be in utter darkness such as you seem to be despite you accquired knowledge.

You need to balance your leanings (a good thing, no doubt) with an acquisition of knowledge (which by your writings, you need) to gain wisdom (of which there is a seeming and perceptible lack). I would say that you need to unlearn yours

There is quite a lot of information easily available about the Roman Empire and the doings of their Emperors. Go read a book, for goodness’ sake, GO READ A BOOK!!!! I say to you GO READ THE BIBLE EARNESTLY

Please, if you want me to answer this tread after this answer my questions in this tread and the last, because i took the time to answer yours...........

Finally if some missed the original question posed by MG man here it is again :
Q.The Ark was not big enough to hold all those animals.
Ans. A very real possibility was that the animals Noah put in the Ark were not full grown. It would not take as much food for young samples of each species. According to calculations in The Genesis Flood, by Whitcomb and Morris, 1961, page 69, the Ark could hold the equivalent of 522 standard two-decked railroad stock cars. To carry the no more than 35,000 estimated individual vertebrate animals, the average size being that of a sheep, would require no more than 146 such railroad cars.

[Duane 3NE 2NR]

^ don't forget the 3 different living species of elephants and there had to be a pair of mammoths as well since there is proof that the last mammoths lived to just before 2000BC and the great flood occurring some time before that.

Noah took 2 pairs each of unclean animals and 7 pairs of clean animals
by "clean" I assume they mean fit to eat?
if we can't eat elephant then that's 12 elephants and 4 mammoths

if we can eat elephants then thats we KNOW humans ate mammoths up till extinction so thats 42 elephants and 14 mammoths.

thats alot of weight!
great for ballast though

on the other hand there are 9 sub species of the genus Bos, also known as bovine or cattle or cows as we say.
Thats 7 pairs of each of the 9 sub species!
then each of the 9 may have a further sub species, maybe 3 or 4 each depending on the geographic location.

thats alot of beef!

luckily blue whales can swim though cause that would have been a logistical nightmare!

[Wizard]

ok duane

take a win

that was funny

[d spike]

All this, but you have completely avoided dealing with my response. Your last post discarded quite rudely and entirely what I had written. To come now and pretend that this isn't so, and to continue as though all is well, means you either do not know how to cope with an intellectual discussion where your opinion is not held as sacrosanct, or you are just plain rude.

[quote="civic SIR"][quote="d spike"]



Because you have never come across the information that I have presented, means that it doesn't exist?

No read carefully what I said quote your sources and not interrpert as you see fiT
Pay close attention to what you wrote: "OMG I don't believe you don't even know what you are writing. this information is far from the truth." You are obviously under the mistaken impression that I can't read very well.

The world, my youngling, is a lot older than your Sunday school teacher...

Do you even know the orgin of Sunday worship? We'll talk about that laterNice avoidance. You know quite well what I meant by this remark. You have been spoon-fed structured information - and you attempt to speak of "research"? First Darwin, now Sunday worship. Leave your red herrings at the door next time.

If I were to ask you of Josephus, or Tertullian... have you read their work?

I could ask you the same of William Tyndale, John Wycliffe, Calvin Miller, Ellen White, Huss or Martin Luther King? What these men and woman did was tested the words of the bible against other teachings.
I'll take that as a No.

Martin luther questioned his beliefs and found answers in the bible testing against everything he believed and finding fault, are you saying that Martin Luther was a fanatic because he believed or that you are greater than him?
What does this and all the rest of your post have to do with my response to your rude dismissal?
I will not even attempt to school you on this, believe what you want, but in scholarly studies as you know if something is not referenced then it cannot be credible. you sir are furthest from being credibleYou didn't ask me to state my source, you just cast it out because it didn't suit your fancy.

please don't try to humour me with the root cause of Venus and Emperor.. What was this supposed to mean? You must really think the people who read this thread are not capable of rational thought.

.please man you are supposed to be more intelligent than me right?
Don't tempt me, stripling.

But the guy asked me what my sources were... HE DIDN'T ACCUSE ME OF MAKING IT UP!!!! ok apologies, your sources are wrong
1. An apology is not offered as an aside - your manners are as lacking as your researching ability;
2. your lack of historical knowledge renders you unable to disqualify my sources.

Your problem is that you measure the bible against other teachings
Oh please. The bible was written. So too were things called "other books" afterwards. Surprise yourself and try reading them.

Every question that you have asked about the bible shows me your lack of understanding.
You silly, little, blinkered amateur. You haven't realised as yet that those questions were asked, not due to the need for answers, but rather to encourage input from literalists?

I can go on and on and you will, without ever dealing with what I was talking about. This is called Avoidance. And while you are at it, have you found a theologian to study yet?

Are you aware that the Quran is synomous with the bible in the account of Abraham the father of all nations and Ishmael the brother of Issac? or the accounts of Jonah or Jesus were repeated in the quran? is the Quran also false because it agrees with the bible?
Are you aware that anyone reading all this will simply realise that you are avoiding what I spoke about.
You need to do research. You speak of the Koran. It is well documented where its source of Christian information came from. Furthermore, I never said the bible was false.

you say that the bible " does not promote truth," You illiterate fool! For the second time, I clearly said this was a criticism of the bible - I never said I agreed with such criticism. This explains why you refuse to read - you can't!

There is quite a lot of information easily available about the Roman Empire and the doings of their Emperors. Go read a book, for goodness’ sake, GO READ A BOOK!!!! I say to you GO READ THE BIBLE EARNESTLY
I really don't know which supercedes the other - your impertinence, or your ignorance. The information referred to about the Roman Empire took place after the events in the new testament. How could it be in the bible?

Please, if you want me to answer this tread after this answer my questions in this tread and the last, because i took the time to answer yours........... Firstly, you have avoided dealing with my response, so your remark "because i took the time to answer yours" is laughable;
also, after viewing your uncouth response and your obvious avoidance, I have lost patience and am not interested in your "answers". You spoke of "honour" and "courage", yet I find no semblance of either in your recent posts. I started taking part in this thread out of amusement, but thanks to your blinkered prattle, I now respond out of rage - rage that I could have been so easily misled that I was speaking with someone who was capable of rational operations, critical and analytical thought. I make it a rule to never waste energy attempting to have a healthy discussion with those who are incapable of doing so. I am sorry I even attempted this. Make no mistake, I am not of your ilk - and though this statement may be prideful, it certainly is accurate. And pride in not being ignorant is not shameful.

Having shaken the dust from my sandals, I can only hope that one day you grow up, tire of the resonance of your own words in your head, and learn to learn. You use the wrong tools to do the right thing. Respect your intellect... and try to show respect for that of others.

[/b]

[gt4tified]

Allyuh ever stopped to think that Noah may have built a barge? We does only hear about the Ark but all the excess could have been tugged by the Ark.

[Chimera]

I still say Noah put each animal on a 16gb Flashdrive.

[Razkal]

^

Duane, that was mighty funny yo

[kiamotors]

OMG I don't believe you don't even know what you are writing. this information is far from the truth. I will not even attempt to school you on this, believe what you want, but in scholarly studies as you know if something is not referenced then it cannot be credible. you sir are furthest from being credible

I have wasted a lot of time writing a response to this, only to erase each one completely, due to the abrasive and detrimental language that I used to clarify my point. This will be my fifth write-up - and hopefully, my last. I need to be very calm to deal with this brash and pompous person.

To begin:
Because you have never come across the information that I have presented, means that it doesn't exist? Before you ask me where I get my information from, you simply assume I have to be making it up? This is your "mature" response? And you talk of "scholarly studies"? You, young sir, even have the temerity to speak of "attempting to school" me? You don't even have the desire to learn to be a proper student!!

The world, my youngling, is a lot older than your Sunday school teacher...

If I were to ask you of Josephus, or Tertullian... have you read their work? Have you even read of them? Or do you have to Google their names? Or hope Wikipedia mentions them?

If your idea of doing research is to refer to a pulpit-thumping pastor (whose world-bubble is the same size as yours, just older) or to check Google... then you are sadly mistaken as far as what "research" means.
Google is only as good as the young 'uns who post material on the Internet - same thing I said when queried about some ancient info I posted on the "Local History" thread. But the guy asked me what my sources were... HE DIDN'T ACCUSE ME OF MAKING IT UP!!!!

Of all the immature, wet-behind-the-ears, upstartish, damp-drawer'd things to say... sheesh...

Even the best encyclopaedia (e.g. Colliers, Britannica) re-edited their work in the 70's to make room for more current events and information, leaving out ‘lesser’ items that a set from the 50’s or earlier would contain, such as lovely articles about the Early Church and the figures that populated these times. So if you were really interested in the goings-on of such times, you would have either acquired a set, or located a set in a library that appreciated such tomes – or was too poorly funded to upgrade, lol.
But would you read such books? Or would you echo the words of the Caliph in response to the Muslim general who took Alexandria, Egypt, and asked what to do with the countless books in that great library: “If they agree with the Koran, they are superfluous; if they disagree, they are blasphemous. Burn them.â€

[jc_demetri]

animals were much smaller back then

ole days nuh

hahahahahha nah dread i cyah stop laughin at dis one...

i dunno, but most of the animal species we have now have evolved from preexisting ones, ykno based on mutations due to location>feeding habits and what not so there mightve been a good bit less species back then that eventually evolved into the myriads we have now.

ehhh that still doh add up, i like that they were smaller rotfl

[Q]

Kindly check out this website created by and supported by scientists (some of whom were formerly atheists and agnostics)...

http://www.creationevidence.org/index.p ... ch&Itemid=

Also see...

http://www.leestrobel.com/
http://crossexamined.org/turek-hitchens-debate.asp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDUBfRSf ... re=channel

P.S.: I was a former agnostic. And I do agree with statements such as, we need to question the things we believe in, I totally agree. Even the Bible agrees with this, 1st Thessalonians 5:21 says to prove all things.

And btw, every time we use BC and AD we testify to the existence of Jesus Christ. Everytime we write the year, for example 2009, we testify that Jesus walked the earth. Before responding, kindly check out the links and the statements, in other words, prove all things, not some things, but all things.

Thank you for you time.

[Q]

Also, if a man truly seeks the truth, he would explore both avenues of creationism and evolution, not just one. Are the "so-called" atheists and "so-called" Christians willing to take that challenge upon themselves?

[MG Man]

Kindly check out this website created by and supported by scientists (some of whom were formerly atheists and agnostics)...

http://www.creationevidence.org/index.p ... ch&Itemid=

Also see...

http://www.leestrobel.com/
http://crossexamined.org/turek-hitchens-debate.asp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cDUBfRSf ... re=channel

P.S.: I was a former agnostic. And I do agree with statements such as, we need to question the things we believe in, I totally agree. Even the Bible agrees with this, 1st Thessalonians 5:21 says to prove all things.

And btw, every time we use BC and AD we testify to the existence of Jesus Christ. Everytime we write the year, for example 2009, we testify that Jesus walked the earth. Before responding, kindly check out the links and the statements, in other words, prove all things, not some things, but all things.

Thank you for you time.

no, we just following a point of reference.....spread throughout history through propaganda, fear, lies and war

[RASC]

^ don't forget the 3 different living species of elephants and there had to be a pair of mammoths as well since there is proof that the last mammoths lived to just before 2000BC and the great flood occurring some time before that.

Noah took 2 pairs each of unclean animals and 7 pairs of clean animals
by "clean" I assume they mean fit to eat?
if we can't eat elephant then that's 12 elephants and 4 mammoths

if we can eat elephants then thats we KNOW humans ate mammoths up till extinction so thats 42 elephants and 14 mammoths.

thats alot of weight!
great for ballast though

on the other hand there are 9 sub species of the genus Bos, also known as bovine or cattle or cows as we say.
Thats 7 pairs of each of the 9 sub species!
then each of the 9 may have a further sub species, maybe 3 or 4 each depending on the geographic location.

thats alot of beef!

luckily blue whales can swim though cause that would have been a logistical nightmare!

[buzz]

^ don't forget the 3 different living species of elephants and there had to be a pair of mammoths as well since there is proof that the last mammoths lived to just before 2000BC and the great flood occurring some time before that.

Noah took 2 pairs each of unclean animals and 7 pairs of clean animals
by "clean" I assume they mean fit to eat?
if we can't eat elephant then that's 12 elephants and 4 mammoths

if we can eat elephants then thats we KNOW humans ate mammoths up till extinction so thats 42 elephants and 14 mammoths.

thats alot of weight!
great for ballast though

on the other hand there are 9 sub species of the genus Bos, also known as bovine or cattle or cows as we say.
Thats 7 pairs of each of the 9 sub species!
then each of the 9 may have a further sub species, maybe 3 or 4 each depending on the geographic location.

thats alot of beef!

luckily blue whales can swim though cause that would have been a logistical nightmare!

SO IS EVOLVE YUH SAYIN DEM SPECIES EVOLVE DE????

[Jonathan]

A global flood would have produced evidence contrary to the evidence we see.

How do you explain the relative ages of mountains? For example, why weren't the Sierra Nevadas eroded as much as the Appalachians during the Flood?

Why is there no evidence of a flood in ice core series? Ice cores from Greenland have been dated back more than 40,000 years by counting annual layers. A worldwide flood would be expected to leave a layer of sediments, noticeable changes in salinity and oxygen isotope ratios, fractures from buoyancy and thermal stresses, a hiatus in trapped air bubbles, and probably other evidence. Why doesn't such evidence show up?

How are the polar ice caps even possible? Such a mass of water as the Flood would have provided sufficient buoyancy to float the polar caps off their beds and break them up. They wouldn't regrow quickly. In fact, the Greenland ice cap would not regrow under modern (last 10000 years) climatic conditions.

Why did the Flood not leave traces on the sea floors? A year long flood should be recognizable in sea bottom cores by

(1) an uncharacteristic amount of terrestrial detritus,
(2) different grain size distributions in the sediment,
(3) a shift in oxygen isotope ratios (rain has a different isotopic composition from seawater),
(4) a massive extinction, and (n) other characters.

Why do none of these show up?

Why is there no evidence of a flood in tree ring dating? Tree ring records go back more than 10,000 years, with no evidence of a catastrophe during that time.

[djaggs]

The problem with Christians was their claim of being right while all else was wrong. The very first Christians to be slaughtered by the Romans were a group that attacked (is that too strong a word?) a religious procession in the honour of Venus, in which the niece of the Emperor was taking part. They threw over statues and pulled down garlands with cries of "Woe!" and "Repent!",

Kind sir, can you tell me the source of this information? As well as who it was written by?

From my understanding, and as far as i know, ancient writings, the early Christians were persecuted because they refused to bow down to Caesar.

In fact much of what the apostles wrote was written in defiance of Rome.
e.g. The scripture that says Jesus is Lord of Lords and King of Kings, is a direct reference to the Roman claim of Caesar being Lord of Lords. They deliberately set Jesus as higher than Caesar.

.....Another statue of Caesar was placed in the temple of Quirinus with the inscription "To the Invincible God." Quirinus, to the Roman people, was the deified likeness of the city's founder and first King, Romulus. This act clearly identified Caesar not only on equal terms with the divine, but with the kings as well. More outrageous, and even more clearly identifying Caesar with the kings, was yet a third statue. This statue was erected on the capitol alongside those of the seven Roman Kings, and with that of Lucius Junius Brutus, the man who led the revolt to expel the Kings in the first place. In yet more scandalous behavior, Caesar had coins minted bearing his likeness. This was the first time in Roman history that a living Roman was featured on a coin, clearly placing him above the Roman state, and tradition....


When the apostle says,.....That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

again this was confrontational doctrine. These letters were being read to the Church all over Rome.

When Christians prayed and declared "in the name of Jesus" this was an affront to Caesar because Caesar's declarations or laws were enforced by apostles (messengers) who went out into the empire and declared his rulings by saying ...."in the name of Caesar".....before making his proclamations, usually in the market square.


There is also the following incident that occurred at Lystra:

Acts 14:8 And there sat a certain man at Lystra, impotent in his feet, being a cripple from his mother's womb, who never had walked:
The same heard Paul speak: who stedfastly beholding him, and perceiving that he had faith to be healed,
Said with a loud voice, Stand upright on thy feet. And he leaped and walked.
And when the people saw what Paul had done, they lifted up their voices, saying in the speech of Lycaonia, The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men.
And they called Barnabas, Jupiter; and Paul, Mercurius, because he was the chief speaker.
Then the priest of Jupiter, which was before their city, brought oxen and garlands unto the gates, and would have done sacrifice with the people.
Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out,
And saying, Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein:
Who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways.
Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness.
And with these sayings scarce restrained they the people, that they had not done sacrifice unto them.
And there came thither certain Jews from Antioch and Iconium, who persuaded the people, and, having stoned Paul, drew him out of the city, supposing he had been dead.
Howbeit, as the disciples stood round about him, he rose up, and came into the city: and the next day he departed with Barnabas to Derbe.
Acts 14:21 And when they had preached the gospel to that city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and Antioch,


Because of the conversion of thousands of Romans who saw the true power of God, influential people in the society like priests, sought to persecute the Christians because they were losing followers and were turning them away from their religious traditions.

Early Christians were actually despised by those in society, they were looked down upon because they were ususually poor and considered social outcasts....

Corinthians I 4:9 For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men.
We are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye are honourable, but we are despised.
Even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwellingplace;
And labour, working with our own hands: being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it:
Corinthians I 4:13 Being defamed, we entreat: we are made as the filth of the world, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day.

Do not make the mistake of taking what is palmed off as Christianity today as a reflection of what it was originally when it was first planted by the Apostles.
If Paul saw the Church today he would not recognise it and would probably cry.

Christians lived a chaste and simple lifestyle, contrary to the loose and lascivious lifestyle that was the norm in Roman society. Everything about them was different to what was considered acceptable in Roman society. They were scorned and despised.

Early Christians had to hide and practice their religion in secret.

CHAPTER V: THE MARTYRS OF LYONS AND VIENNE (AD 177)

Many other martyrs suffered in various parts of the empire under the reign of Marcus Aurelius. Among the most famous of these are the martyrs of Lyons and Vienne, in the south of France (or Gaul, as it was then called), where a company of missionaries from Asia Minor had settled with a bishop named Pothinus at their head. The persecution at Lyons and Vienne was begun by the mob of those towns, who insulted the Christians in the streets, broke into their houses, and committed other such outrages against them. Then a great number of Christians were seized, and imprisoned in horrid dungeons, where many died from want of food, or from the bad and unwholesome air. The bishop, Pothinus, who was ninety years of age, and had long been very ill, was carried before the governor, and was asked, "Who is the God of Christians?" Pothinus saw that the governor did not put this question from any good feeling; so he answered, "If thou be worthy, thou shalt know." The bishop, old and feeble as he was, was then dragged about by soldiers, and such of the mob as could reach him gave him blows and kicks, while others, who were further off, threw anything which came to hand at him; and, after this cruel usage, he was put into prison, where he died within two days.

The other prisoners were tortured for six days together in a variety of horrible ways. Their limbs were stretched on the rack; they were cruelly scourged; some had hot plates of iron applied to them, and some were made to sit in a red-hot iron chair. The firmness with which they bore these dreadful trials gave courage to some of their brethren, who at first had agreed to sacrifice, so that these now again declared themseves Christians, and joined the others in suffering. As all the tortures were of no effect, the prisoners were at length put to death. Some were thrown to wild beasts; but those who were citizens of Rome were beheaded: for it was not lawful to give a Roman citizen up to wild beasts, just as we know from St. Paul's case at Philippi that it was not lawful to scourge a citizen (Acts xvi 37).

Among the martyrs was a boy from Asia, only fifteen years old, who was taken every day to see the tortures of the rest in the hope that he might be frightened into denying his Saviour; but he was not shaken by the terrible sights, and for his constancy he was cruelly put to death on the last day. The greatest cruelties of all, however, were borne by a young woman named Blandina. She was slave to a Christian lady; and, although the Christians regarded their slaves with a kindness very unlike the usual feeling of heathen masters towards them, this lady seems yet to have thought that a slave was not likely to endure tortures so courageously as a free person; and she was the more afraid because Blandina was not strong in body. But the poor slave's faith was not to be overcome. Day after day she bravely bore every cruelty that the persecutors could think of; and all that they could wring out from her was, "I am a Christian, and nothing wrong is done among us!"

The heathen were not content with putting the martyrs to death with tortures, or allowing them to die in prison. They cast their dead bodies to the dogs, and caused them to be watched day and night, lest the other Christians should give them burial; and after this, they burnt the bones, and threw the ashes of them into the river Rhone, by way of mocking at the notion of a resurrection. For, as St. Paul had found at Athens (Acts xvii 32), and elsewhere, there was no part of the Gospel which the heathen in general thought so hard to believe as the doctrine that that which is "sown in corruption" shall hereafter be "raised in incorruption;" that that which "is sown a natural body" will one day be "raised a spiritual body" (1 Cor xv. 42-44).

[djaggs]

And for the person who asked about proof of Jesus' s existence outside the bible....

Josephus Flavius, ancient historian...

Flavius Josephus (37 - 100 AD), a Jewish general and member of the priestly aristocracy of the Jews, turned to the side of the Roman Empire in the great Jewish revolt of 66-70 AD. Josephus spent the rest of his life in or around Rome as an advisor and historian to three emperors, Vespasian, Titus and Domitian. For centuries, the works of Josephus were more widely read in Europe than any book other than the Bible. They are invaluable sources of eyewitness testimony to the development of Western civilization, including the foundation and growth of Christianity in the 1st Century.

Remarkably, Flavius Josephus mentions New Testament events and people in some of his works. For me, this was some of the most significant evidence against the legend theories that plagued my view of early Christianity. Here are some excerpts I found fascinating:



At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders. 1

***

After the death of the procurator Festus, when Albinus was about to succeed him, the high-priest Ananius considered it a favorable opportunity to assemble the Sanhedrin. He therefore caused James the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, and several others, to appear before this hastily assembled council, and pronounced upon them the sentence of death by stoning. All the wise men and strict observers of the law who were at Jerusalem expressed their disapprobation of this act...Some even went to Albinus himself, who had departed to Alexandria, to bring this breach of the law under his observation, and to inform him that Ananius had acted illegally in assembling the Sanhedrin without the Roman authority. 2

***

Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. 3

These three quotes from "Josephus" really speak for themselves! Professor Shlomo Pines, a well known Israeli scholar, discusses the fact of Jesus' historicity and the references to Jesus by Flavius Josephus:


In fact, as far as probabilities go, no believing Christian could have produced such a neutral text: for him the only significant point about it could have been its attesting the historical evidence of Jesus. But the fact is that until modern times this particular hare (i.e. claiming Jesus is a hoax) was never started. Even the most bitter opponents of Christianity never expressed any doubt as to Jesus having really lived. 4

[MG Man]

so there's an account of a wandering preacherman named jesus.....what does that prove?

[RBphoto]

so there's an account of a wandering preacherman named jesus.....what does that prove?

It proves that people selectively use an iota of obscure historical evidence to prove their point, while ignoring the vast amount of data which shows that they are talking crock.

Kinda like these idiots who belive that that the EVO better than a WRX STI Imprezza cause they see ah EVO leave out ah riceup TS on the highway.

These zealots eh....

[djaggs]

so there's an account of a wandering preacherman named jesus.....what does that prove?

It proved that he really lived, 2000 years from now....what proof would we find that YOU really lived ???

BTW, an STI IS better than an EVO, any other statement is heresy.

[MG Man]

so there's an account of a wandering preacherman named jesus.....what does that prove?

It proved that he really lived, 2000 years from now....what proof would we find that YOU really lived ???

BTW, an STI IS better than an EVO, any other statement is heresy.

we can prove many people lived 2000 years ago and before.....what does that signify?

[wagonrunner]

so there's an account of a wandering preacherman named jesus.....what does that prove?

that the fella who did not copyright the name (Hay'soos) lost out on a huge legacy

[d spike]

The problem with Christians was their claim of being right while all else was wrong. The very first Christians to be slaughtered by the Romans were a group that attacked (is that too strong a word?) a religious procession in the honour of Venus, in which the niece of the Emperor was taking part. They threw over statues and pulled down garlands with cries of "Woe!" and "Repent!",

Kind sir, can you tell me the source of this information? As well as who it was written by?

From my understanding, and as far as i know, ancient writings, the early Christians were persecuted because they refused to bow down to Caesar.

In fact much of what the apostles wrote was written in defiance of Rome.

I have no idea of what good reason I could have for posting a serious response on this thread. I must be a glutton for embarrassment – or just love bumping gum (knew that one already).
There was a time, not too long ago, when I would have gone through my library, found the two writers who referred to that incident, and given you their names.
After attempting a discussion on this thread with someone who thought that the little he knew was more than enough - a sure sign of a fundamentalist – and then seeing my posts elsewhere being discredited (“If it’s true...â€

[djaggs]

d spike, the reason I asked you for the source of the quote you used is because there are many ancient documents that are proven fakes. They were written at much later dates by people who were trying to contradict or discredit the Church. If you cannot prove the authenticity of your quote then your argument could be based on a lie.

Whenever you read a book it is important to check the bibliography for the source documents. Documents written 4 and 500 years after the birth of the Church cannot be authentic and many people quote such documents to deceive others into believing a false argument.

Also, the incident involving Caesar which I wrote about above, took place around 45BC. The practice of elevating Caesar to being on par with God was prevalent long before the Church or even Jesus was born. Some more of the text preceding my quote follows below:

Caesar returned to Italy in September, 45 BC, and among his first tasks was to file his will, naming Octavian as his heir. That out of the way, he returned to Rome approximately October 1. While away, the Senate had already begun heaping honors on Caesar. Whether Caesar started this process through his own supporters, or others did so trying to gain Caesar's favor is unknown, but there the Senate went along with nearly every recommended honor. Even though Caesar didn't proscribe his enemies, and in fact pardoned nearly every one of them, there seemed to be little open resistance to the great conqueror, at least publicly.
Word of Caesar's victory in Spain reached Rome in late April, and games celebrating this event were to be held on April 21. Caesar apparently began to act with little deference towards the Roman state, and his ego began to alienate the Senate. Along with the games, Caesar was honored with the right to wear triumphal clothing, including a purple robe (reminiscent of the Kings) and laurel crown, on all public occasions. A large estate was being built at Rome's expense, and on state property, for Caesar's exclusive use. The title Imperator also became a legal title that he could use before his name for the rest of his life. An ivory statue in the likeness of Caesar was to be carried at all public religious processions. Another statue of Caesar was placed in the temple of Quirinus with the inscription "To the Invincible God."

we can prove many people lived 2000 years ago and before.....what does that signify?

Well, how many of those people started off from such a lowly insignificant social position and changed the entire world to the extent that our modern western civilization has its basis upon the words he spoke. How many of those people were able to influence hundreds of millions of people to prefer to go to their deaths rather than deny him?
He only had a few followers during his lifetime but his life changed the world.

Jesus said:

Luke 6:47 Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and doeth them, I will show you to whom he is like:
He is like a man which built an house, and digged deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.
But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that without a foundation built an house upon the earth; against which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it fell; and the ruin of that house was great.

Jesus also says to Christians..
Luke 10:16 He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth you despiseth me; and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.