Halleluja, I have seen the light

[ronde_des_sylphes]

did you know that even the fact you have a name - means there's a God. 

Amazing logic. You just can't argue with that sort of drivel, so I'm not going to bother.

even if we started at da da - we have the ability because we DON't HAVE a HYOID bone under our tongue.  (probably keeping us from biting it - if we tried jumping around in the trees).

No comment on that either, I've decided to bite my tongue on this one.

[thalbergmad]

from what i hear - mr dawkins is in a world of his own.   it is THEORY.  all of it.  conjecture.  glad to hear you're ALL FOR REASON.  i, for one, cannot stand his lectures because it is pseudoscience.  let me go find an example - while you take your meds.  i don't have any to take.  you'll have to give me what's left over of yours.

the first mistake he makes:  'you're too intelligent and full of reason to need religion.'  to me, this is the biggest mistake he makes - because he is equating himself with God.  He is setting up himself as the 'source' of all knowledge because he knows more about science than most people.  thereby adding a few imaginary things and making it sound like it's science - when it is not.  it is theory.  he has THEORIES.

now, i'm not saying having theories is bad.  i'm saying - nixing God over a few theories is bad reason.

I would rather be in Mr Dawkins world than yours. At least he has theories, you have nothing.

Perhaps you do not like his lectures becuase he is taking apart the rubbish you are infested with.

I will buy the book tomorrow.

Thal

[cmg]

Now, dear pianistimo, take one step back and ten enormously deep breaths.  One after another.  There.  Isn't that better?  

This is a passionate topic for everyone.  The intriguing aspect of it is, in truth, there is no answer.  Well, not until "the Last Trumpet" (or, is that "strumpet"?  I never get that one straight.)  But, I digress -- this is all academic (and, therefore potentially fun) if we remember that everyone here engaged in this debate is no one's enemy.  As you certainly know, you can care deeply about people you totally disagree with.

We esteem you highly . . .  you and your Tunic of Tullahoma and your Tube Top of Toulouse.  With pearly scales and a talent for Mozart, how can you be other than valued?

Guten nacht.

 

[ahinton]

I cannot see how i have resorted to violence, that is pretty difficult on a forum and you thankfully are 4000 miles away from me.

The Church has often resorted to violence when its views have been challenged, but they cannot do this any more. Therefore, we now have an excellent opportunity to challenge what is written in the silly book without being burned to death or persecuted.

I have spent hundreds of hours reading about religious artefacts, so the subject is dear to me. That is why i get angry and frustrated when you jump back and fowards from wikipedia and latch onto anything that supports your views. You seem to be on a mission to prove that the Bible is correct via archeology and artefacts, but you are on a hiding to nothing. There is evidence of places and people, but not what happened and that is where faith comes in.

Your Bible is not the only religious work that has ever been written and much of it is not even unique. Your strength of faith is commendable, but your efforts to prove the Bible have been ill advised, unfounded and at times laughable.

You are obviously a lovely person and i hope you continue preaching the word and the love of God. I can only suggest that you read a little more widely on other "matters" and try to adopt a different posting style.

Your Bible is obviously a great comfort to you and is has been to me at times, but it will not stand up for you in a scientific debate.

Thal

Your post here is realistic, sensitive and thougthful, yet without pulling any punches; may I be permitted to applaud you for it?

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

Oh, Pole Dancers tramping around the Tube Top of Toulouse, have mercy.  Have mercy!!  

Are these among the ones that appealed to Toulouse-Lautrec?

Best,

Alistair

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Your post here is realistic, sensitive and thougthful, yet without pulling any punches; may I be permitted to applaud you for it?

Best,

Alistair

I could not agree more.
*applauds*

[thalbergmad]

Your post here is realistic, sensitive and thougthful, yet without pulling any punches; may I be permitted to applaud you for it?

Best,

Alistair

You must have missed the ones that followed then.

Thal

[cmg]

Are these among the ones that appealed to Toulouse-Lautrec?

Best,

Alistair

Indeed, they did!  In fact, in the early stages of the movement they were, well, to be frank, too loose for Lautrec who, as you know, was a notorious prig and anti-creationist.

But, hey!  That's Relig Biz!!

[ahinton]

This is a passionate topic for everyone.  The intriguing aspect of it is, in truth, there is no answer.  Well, not until "the Last Trumpet" (or, is that "strumpet"?  I never get that one straight.)

A strumpet is one of the genus trompetto piccolo - in other words, the trumpet in E flat (which is pitched a perfect fourth above the now standard trumpet in B flat) - "S" representing "Es" (i.e. E flat) in German. They are fast becoming obsolete in Suffolk these days - and that entirely tasteless remark is one for which I should hope to be forgiven but probably won't be and most certainly do not deserve to be...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

all of it.  conjecture. 

No different to your silly little book then

[ahinton]

You must have missed the ones that followed then.

Thal

No - I read and responded to that one as I found it and then read your later ones later. Hope that's OK...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

here's an older lecture:
www.thehumanist.org/humanist/articles/dawkins.html
let's talk.  first of all.  what does 'the humanist association' do?  what kind of association is this?  we're all humans.  are they more humane?  prove it!  do they show graciousness and not start wars?  are they being fair to those who have a religion.  proving them 'inhumane?' by illogical reasons of saying that wars are a result of religion.  wars are a result of greed.  not always started by religious people either.  unless we're talking middle east.  tell me how WWI and WWII started?  the balkans started WWI - right?  we have ethnicities that want land.  LAND.  not religion.  noone really cares THAT much to kill over religion (since the inquisition).

Please do not go back and add on to previous posts.

There is a chance i might miss out on something really funny.

Thanks

Thal

[thalbergmad]

go ahead.  make my day.  i don't care if you blow up everything in your house. 

Can we please tag this onto the pianistimo is always pleasant thread.

Thanks

Thal

[cmg]

A strumpet is one of the genus trompetto piccolo - in other words, the trumpet in E flat (which is pitched a perfect fourth above the now standard trumpet in B flat) - "S" representing "Es" (i.e. E flat) in German. They are fast becoming obsolete in Suffolk these days - and that entirely tasteless remark is one for which I should hope to be forgiven but probably won't be and most certainly do not deserve to be...

Best,

Alistair

Well, one can never learn enough -- or ask to be forgiven enough!  You see, I mistakenly thought the "stumpet" had evolved from the harletto (or, in Scotland, the "tartette".)  Forgive those of us in the Colonies.  Our histories are corrupted.  Alas.

[ahinton]

(or, in Scotland, the "tartette".)

"Tartelette", actually (if you'll pardon the minor correction); we Scots and those French are sworn mutual friends...

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

Its been a lovely evening but it is time for me to go to bed now.

If "Schizo Susan" our resident tambourine banger posts anything worth reading, please give me a ring and i will get up.

Probably gonna get a good nights sleep then.

See y'all tomorrow.

Thal

[pianistimo]

from what i hear - mr dawkins is in a world of his own.   it is THEORY.  all of it.  conjecture.  glad to hear you're ALL FOR REASON.  i, for one, cannot stand his lectures because it is pseudoscience.  let me go find an example - while you take your meds.  i don't have any to take.  you'll have to give me what's left over of yours.

the first mistake he makes:  'you're too intelligent and full of reason to need religion.'  to me, this is the biggest mistake he makes - because he is equating himself with God.  He is setting up himself as the 'source' of all knowledge because he knows more about science than most people.  thereby adding a few imaginary things and making it sound like it's science - when it is not.  it is theory.  he has THEORIES.

now, i'm not saying having theories is bad.  i'm saying - nixing God over a few theories is bad reason.

here's an older lecture:
www.thehumanist.org/humanist/articles/dawkins.html
let's talk.  first of all.  what does 'the humanist association' do?  what kind of association is this?  we're all humans.  are they more humane?  prove it!  do they show graciousness and not start wars?  are they being fair to those who have a religion.  proving them 'inhumane?' by illogical reasons of saying that wars are a result of religion.  wars are a result of greed.  not always started by religious people either.  unless we're talking middle east.  tell me how WWI and WWII started?  the balkans started WWI - right?  we have ethnicities that want land.  LAND.  not religion.  noone really cares THAT much to kill over religion (since the inquisition) unless it is specific ethnicities (like in iraq) that fight each other.  it leads to a genocide.  why?  because they want to take the other's land.

WWII:  hitler and the nazi's staged a polish attack on a minor german radio station in order to justify a german invasion of poland.  hitler declared war on september 1st, 1939 stating one of his reasons for the invasion was 'the attack by regular polish troops on the gleiwitz transmitter.'

i don't know if he ever HAD any religious reasons for starting the war.  i think he was into the occult.

[ahinton]

Its been a lovely evening but it is time for me to go to bed now.

If "Schizo Susan" our resident tambourine banger posts anything worth reading, please give me a ring and i will get up.

Probably gonna get a good nights sleep then.

See y'all tomorrow.

Thal

Do please leave the poor innocent tambourine alone; it's not its fault! And, thinking momentarily of the tambour de basque, perhaps the prospect of your imagining the omnipresent Susan in a basque may keep you awake after all...

I'm off to see if there's a gap between the sheets (that's to say cotton ones, not paper ones - still less cyber ones) that I can get into meself, now...

Best,

Alistair

[cmg]

To those of you across the pond -- and pushing into the wee hours of the morning -- adieu.  Those of us over here are donning black tie to celebrate the weekend.

(knock on door:  "Oh, dear Renee Fleming!  You dropped by.  And who is that with you?  Martha Argerich?  Come, ladies.  Manhattan awaits!!  Maybe we'll take the train to Philly if things get dull!)

[pianistimo]

you all say you want reason.  all you want is argument.

so does richard dawkins.  he is a provokatier.  'suppose that, at the moment of Christ's death, the news of it had started travelling at the maximum possible speed around the universe outwards from earth.'

well, i hate to tell you this mr dawkins - but it DID. there was a GREAT EARTHQUAKE.  i suppose mr dawkins is impervious to those.  who does he think he is?  and, if that isn't a call to war - i don't know what is.  he is NOT a PEACE LOVING MAN.  humanist.  baahhh.

he is a nazi in disguise.  he doesn't love anyone who doesn't hold his views.

btw, Christ taught us to love our neighbor and turn the other cheek.  what does mr. dawkins believe?  probably the 'fittest survive.'  how is this hopeful?  for world peace?

[ronde_des_sylphes]

you all say you want reason.  all you want is argument.

he is a nazi in disguise.  he doesn't love anyone who doesn't hold his views.

So satire's not dead then? I really hope you love Nazis (assuming you're not one yourself).
Gn all, this is hilarious.

[asyncopated]

you all say you want reason.  all you want is argument.

so does richard dawkins.  he is a provokatier.  'suppose that, at the moment of Christ's death, the news of it had started travelling at the maximum possible speed around the universe outwards from earth.'

well, i hate to tell you this mr dawkins - but it DID. there was a GREAT EARTHQUAKE.  i suppose mr dawkins is impervious to those.  who does he think he is?  and, if that isn't a call to war - i don't know what is.  he is NOT a PEACE LOVING MAN.  humanist.  baahhh.

he is a nazi in disguise.  he doesn't love anyone who doesn't hold his views.

btw, Christ taught us to love our neighbor and turn the other cheek.  what does mr. dawkins believe?  probably the 'fittest survive.'  how is this hopeful?  for world peace?

I have to say, I have heard him speak a number of times.  Dawkins is a peace loving man, and a  scientist at heart. 

His views and opinions are not invalid just because they are contradictory to yours.  On the contrary he is eloquent and gives sound arguments, with ample logical structure.  He does claim honestly that he does not know if god exist, but says that the possibility of it being true (given the evidence) is rediculously slim.  This is in fact largely correct, there is no more evidence for jesus christ than there is for zeus or aphrodite.

He takes the time to explain himself carefully, and to entertain rebuttles of all sorts, in the hope of convincing people.  He is always patient, never condescending or harsh. He always answers based on fact and readily admits if he does not know.  This is from  personal experience of what i've seen and heard.

I think that the resons why the recent spate of atheist opinion is due mainly to preachers (such is the idiot this thread was originally about) who have over stepped the line.  I think it is timely that dawkins made a stand.  I'm also glad it is he rather than someone else, who could be less on a mission to convince fairly and more on a mission to poison.  (Thal springs to mind... pretend i did not say that )

I do not believe that dawkins has an agenda, other than sharing what he and many others believes and making sure the society in general respects it.  And rightly so.   

For one who believes in god, you seem to judge dawkins and smite his person, what happend to love thy neighbour as thyself.  Or are you really not a believer and choose to adhere to the bible only when it suits you? 

BTW.  I think he does this to save christians from their own stupidity.

[pianistimo]

he hasn't explained the calendar at all.  BC or BCE (before what and common to what?)  suppose that he doesn't believe history. that is what he doesn't believe.

HE IS A REVISIONIST.  many history classes have been revised to say what people want to say to support a world view.   one WITHOUT religion.  without religious historical figures.  that supports an agenda.  a non-religious one.

of course, people who believe in God are angry.  but, are they making mission statements to provoke dawkins?  there have been no world wars started by christians.  this is a misnomer.  but, there have been many persecutions.  usually by world governments.  the bible has predicted the last one -- people are not going to recognize it as religious until it's too late.  then, they will understand what 'crazy' is.  people didn't understand that hitler was possessed.  by what?  satan.  of course.  this seems laughable to people today who think science proves that satan doesn't exist.  well, why does EVIL exist.  why do people want to kill others for no reason excepting taking land and controlling others. 

why did people hail hitler.  can anyone tell us why?  is it any different than worshipping?  it is a symbol of unity to a figure that is 'god-like.'  tell me hitler didn't expect absolute 'worship.'

i believe today we are having a 'showdown.'  not just in the middle-east - but throughout the entire world.  a showdown that is prophecied in revelations.  a world power coming into the fore - and people who resist a one-world government (losing freedoms) and decide to make a stand.  if we accept the idea that there is a literal 'mark of the beast'  and cannot buy or sell without it - then we know that this is a time of 'tribulation.'  and, that things are not going to be peachy for a period of a few years.  but, God promises to 'cut the time short' and that if it weren't 'no flesh would be saved.'  that implies a huge war.  one that could wipe out the entire world.  but, if God is for you - who can be against you.

mr dawkins is going to eat his words when He sees every word of the bible come true before his eyes.  and, when Jesus Christ comes on the clouds and when he sees the saints ressurrected.  he'll have MISSED his chance.  too bad for him...but we gave him notice.  it's like getting a water turn off notice.  you can neglect it for a while.  perhaps most of your life.  but, when you NEED the water - the Holy Spirit - you can't just go and buy it at the last minute.

not many people read past the excerpts in handel's messiah 'the kingdom of this world has become the kingdom of our Lord, and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever...and the nations were enraged, and Thy wrath came, and the time came for the dead to be judged, and the time to give their reward to Thy bond-servants the prophets and to the saints and to those who fear Thy name, the small and the great, and to destroy those who destroy the earth....'

[prometheus]

you all say you want reason.  all you want is argument.

so does richard dawkins.  he is a provokatier.  'suppose that, at the moment of Christ's death, the news of it had started travelling at the maximum possible speed around the universe outwards from earth.'

well, i hate to tell you this mr dawkins - but it DID. there was a GREAT EARTHQUAKE.  i suppose mr dawkins is impervious to those.  who does he think he is?  and, if that isn't a call to war - i don't know what is.  he is NOT a PEACE LOVING MAN.  humanist.  baahhh.

he is a nazi in disguise.  he doesn't love anyone who doesn't hold his views.

btw, Christ taught us to love our neighbor and turn the other cheek.  what does mr. dawkins believe?  probably the 'fittest survive.'  how is this hopeful?  for world peace?

Dawkins believe that 'love your neighbour' is one of the basic principles of human morality and that Jesus, or those people that made him up, stole this principle from rational people, philosophers, etc.

The way you talk now reveals your true nature. You were the one that thinks killing children, babies, infants, toddlers is ok 'if god wills it'. 'Dieu le veut!' That's what Pope Urban II said. And then we had the cannibalism of  Ma'arrat al-Numan where Christians ate the muslim woman and children to show that they thought God viewed muslims were lower than animals and to cause 'shock and awe'.

(also note how all these words ring with GW Bush, who is supposed to be totally ignorant about history. 'God told me to invade Iraq', he used the word 'crusade' just after 9/11 and the bombing of Bagdhad was called 'shock and awe'.)

You have no sense of right and wrong. To you what god wills is 'right' and it's opposite is 'wrong'. God needs to tell you what he 'wills' before you have an idea about what is right and wrong.

Also, the way you try to destroy the person of Dawkins. It just shows Dawkins his point. When Christians don't have any arguments, which happens quite often, then they don't just stop or give up. No they launch an attempt to destroy someone's person. It is just the inquisition all over. You would be a supporter or excecuter of a modern inquisition if there were one.

Pianistimo would kill children if 'god wils it'.

And why? Just because you fear god? Let me just blame everything on your parents or whoever force-fed you the idea of religion and ignore your hateful speech.

There is nothing to fear. If there is a god she will favour Dawkins and judge your misconduct. You will not be punished or burn in hell forever if you don't launch hateful speach at people like Dawkins.

Also, why don't you launch it at me? I agree with Dawkins on every point.

There needs to come an end to all the hate mail and threats atheists get for criticising religion. In London

You are only compassionate if god forces you using the concept of eternal endless punishment (both in time as in magnitude).

Dawkins is compassionate because he thinks it is the right thing to do. Dawkins should be more compassionate than you are if you both put in practice what you think.

I suggest that you go to youtube and listen to some interviews with Dawkins to figure out what he things.

He does not think living by 'survival of the fittest' is something that makes any sense. personally I think it is just as retarded to just off high buildings because of the theory of gravity.

It's like saying 'things fall, so we should all fall'. It is the same as saying 'evolution works through (natural) selection. Therefore we need to enforce selection'.

Let me just give a quote from one of his books:
"at the same time as I support Darwinism as a scientist, I am passionate anti-Darwinian when it comes to politics and how we should conduct our human affairs" -A Devil's Chaplain p. 10-11

This he wrote for the first time in an essay called: 'Rebelling Against Our Selfish Genes'


Both are retarded. No person on this earth has the theory of evolution as a basis for any morality or way of life. Hiter was a christian. He killed off the jews because of anti-semitism. And the origin of anti-semitism in the western world is the catholic church. Hitler said in his speechs:
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognised these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth!"

"Just as the Jew could once incite the mob of Jerusalem against Christ, so today he must succeed in inciting folk who have been duped into madness to attack those who, God's truth!"

Hitler's anti-semitism came from the idea that the Jews killed Jesus.


Also this whole thing is called the naturalistic fallacy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy

It's like saying that because the earth is a sphere we should no longer bake pancakes; only Dutch doughnuts/spherical donuts.

Because something is true does not mean it is 'good', 'more plesant' or 'desired'.

That evolution works through natural selection is a fact of this world. It is a given truth. If it would be desired is a whole different issue.

[thalbergmad]

so does richard dawkins.  he is a provokatier.  'suppose that, at the moment of Christ's death, the news of it had started travelling at the maximum possible speed around the universe outwards from earth.'

well, i hate to tell you this mr dawkins - but it DID. there was a GREAT EARTHQUAKE.  i suppose mr dawkins is impervious to those.  who does he think he is?  and, if that isn't a call to war - i don't know what is.  he is NOT a PEACE LOVING MAN.  humanist.  baahhh.

he is a nazi in disguise.  he doesn't love anyone who doesn't hold his views.

btw, Christ taught us to love our neighbor and turn the other cheek.  what does mr. dawkins believe?  probably the 'fittest survive.'  how is this hopeful?  for world peace?

A great earthquake around the world, is really funny, keep it up this is very amusing.

You are begining to show your true colours now, admit it, you would have him killed if you could, just like the pathetic tambourine bangers of the inquisition.

I have not read the book yet, but i assume you are angry because he is destroying the festering rubbish that you have been clinging to all of your life.

You say he does not love anyone that doesn't hold his views, but that is the same with you. You accuse him of being a Nazi when you are one yourself.

Thal

[prometheus]

The idea that vibrations in the ground are send out into space... I mean, they barely create some noise in the air. I have never heard an earthquake.

But space. There is no air in space. There is no medium at all.

[thalbergmad]

of course, people who believe in God are angry.

Yeh, but you can't stop him can you?

You can't stretch him on the rack until he recants his heresy as was the way of the church.

The clutch your ignorant religion has had over the population of the world for 2,000 years is being loosened.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

mr dawkins is going to eat his words when He sees every word of the bible come true before his eyes.  and, when Jesus Christ comes on the clouds and when he sees the saints ressurrected.  he'll have MISSED his chance.  too bad for him...but we gave him notice.  it's like getting a water turn off notice.  you can neglect it for a while.  perhaps most of your life. 

Every word of what Bible?

Do you mean the one that has been specially edited by the Church to give the meaning it wants?

Who do you think you are?, how dare you sit in judgement and say someone has missed his chance. Are you God?

How dare you come on here and post such rubbish. Perhaps it is you that has missed your chance.

Perhaps it is people like you who have shovelled your stupid book down peoples throats for the last 2,000 years that have missed their chance.

You make me sick.

[prometheus]

it is THEORY.  all of it.  conjecture.

[...]

 because it is pseudoscience.

...he is equating himself with God. 

it is theory.  he has THEORIES.



wars are a result of greed.  [...]  unless we're talking middle east. 

noone really cares THAT much to kill over religion (since the inquisition)

WWII:  hitler and the nazi's [...]

i don't know if he ever HAD any religious reasons for starting the war.  i think he was into the occult.

I had to laugh so hard, its sad. Good to see you don't even agree with yourself.


Oh, the fact that you will be able to read this message, at least in the hypothesis that you will actually try, it is 'just' a theory.

[timothy42b]

in hiroshima, victims had images of their faces seared onto glass.  radiation CAN do it.  or, if not radiation - something happened when Christ was ressurrected.

I can understand having faith.  To a certain extent I can even understand believing in impossible things that happen to be mentioned in the Bible, though I think the writers tried to make it pretty clear some things are intended as "just-so" stories. 

But the Shroud is not in the Bible, and no part of believing in it enhances either faith or theology.

I am forced to conclude that what is involved is not faith at all, but gullibility.  Apparently it is true that a type of literalist fundamentalistic Christian faith automatically produces gullibility that generalizes to other subjects.   This is part of what gives Christians a reputation for superstition and ignorance.  It's not about the religious doctrine, it's the other stuff that goes along with it. 

Have you LOOKED at the Shroud?  Not in person, of course;  it's in Turin and only exhibited every 20 years, and almost never exposed to research.  Strange as it may seem, there are Shroud study institutes all over the world, none of which have access to the shroud itself.

However, the photos are in the books.  I've read all the books the library has, and looked at the photos.  Where's the top of the head?  The shroud joins the front and back with no space for the top of the head - clearly impossible if it were wrapped foot to head to foot as alleged.  (Which all of us who've ever diapered a baby know wouldn't work anyway.) 

[pianistimo]

the shroud is  A PIECE OF LINEN - the same as was used to bury people in the first centuries.   there are many scriptures that mention how Jesus was buried.  the best, imo, are in John which corroborate that he was wrapped in linen and also, the linen was found ROLLED UP after Christ had been ressurrected and the disciples found it in the garden tomb (which, btw, noone else had been laid to rest in).  there is mention of the great haste that joseph of arimathea and nicodeumus had to have used to prepare jesus body.  also, how much linen was available to nicodemus would be an important point.  if they only had a certain amount available in the haste - they would use what they had accordingly.  also, they probably didn't worry about burying him in a tight egyptian fashion because they believed that he WOULD be ressurrected.  perhaps even Christ himself asked to just be covered.  i don't really know. they used about 100 lbs weight of a mixture of myrrh and aloes.  this should be evidenced somehow on the shroud, shouldn't it?

imo, if it is authentic - the shroud head piece would be separate from the body because john 20:7 mentions a 'face-cloth.'  ...and the face cloth, which had been on his head, not lying with the linen wrappings, but rolled up in a place by itself.'   so the linen wrappings and the face cloth were probably sewn together.  this is corroborated by the early findings of the face cloth used like a 'kerchief' and folded for viewing above the wrappings in the early days when it was taken out of jerusalem to another location. 


i have no knowledge beyond what i read of it.  i have neither seen it nor would know how to test it.  but, having modern laboraties study and make findings about it's age based on several different types of testing (including chemical analysis) would indicate that it is probaby authentic by SCIENTISTs.  you all only believe things that are found that prove your own points.  and i'm sure i don't even understand what you all do in terms of absolute science.

but, what i do understand is that you can USE science to corroborate the bible.  there is nothing UNPROVEN.  now what i want to find out is when the dates were for the death and ressurrection of CHRIST because there was a great earthquake when HE died and ANOTHER great earthquake when He was ressurrected.

we have the zirbes data file which records 4 million earthquakes since 2100BC.  it is kept by usgs.  also, we have the worldwide earthquake database kept by the national geophyiscial data center.  also,the biblical prophecies of severe earthquakes becoming a point of understanding the return of Christ and prophetic fulfillment to be true by the number of SEVERE earthquakes since 1980's.  they ARE increasing.  when Christ returns there is said to be another one.  a worldwide earthquake.  one that will cause the Mount of Olives to split in two.

[prometheus]

So when is Christ returning? If you have something to say about that then do. If you don't then don't waste webspace and bandwidth.

[thalbergmad]

but, what i do understand is that you can USE science to corroborate the bible.  there is nothing UNPROVEN.  now what i want to find out is when the dates were for the death and ressurrection of CHRIST because there was a great earthquake when HE died and ANOTHER great earthquake when He was ressurrected.

since 1980's.  they ARE increasing.  when Christ returns there is said to be another one.  a worldwide earthquake.  one that will cause the Mount of Olives to split in two.

What a ridiculous statement. Do you really think there is nothing unproven?

Well, what about the crucifixion. Where is your proof for that?

The only earthquake at the moment is the one that is occuring between your ears.

Your gullibility and ignorance defies belief.

Why don't you find a religious forum and go and spit your poison in there?

I agree with prometheus. You are wasting webspace.

Thal

[pianistimo]

Christ is returning when the world least expects it.  He is said to return like 'a thief in the night.'  that means that people will be going about doing whatever they always were.  'as in the days of noah' - when the flood suddenly came.'  many things that leads to Jesus return are mentioned in the book of Matthew (spoken by Christ himself) and the inspired books of Daniel and Revelations.  there is a sequence of events that occur.  one is a great earthquake before the direct return of Jesus Christ.  every mountain and hill will be made a plain.  rev 17:18 '...and there was a great earthquake, such as there had not been since man came to be upon the earth, so great an earthquake was it, and so mighty.  and the great city was split into three parts, and the cities of the nations fell...and every island fled away, and the mountains were not found....'

in terms of the history of the shroud - evidence for it being moved from place to place is here:
www.endtimeprophecy.org/Content/Articles/Article-Shrd/suderi-1.html

i have no idea, really, if the shroud is authentic or not.  but, it is interesting to me as a Christian that scientific labs have dated it as accurate to the first century.  i think science proves the bible correct in all instances.  and, that pollen from flowers in the region (that bloomed at passover) were found on the shroud.

[cmg]

Christ is returning when the world least expects it.  He is said to return like 'a thief in the night.' 

Odd, isn't it, that He would sneak in, "thieving" in, as it were, thus breaking one of the Ten Commandments?  Don't know whether I fancy that idea much.  Come to think of it, maybe that's who's rummaging about in my sock drawer, dividing left from right and right from left and leaving  all at six and sevens and asunder?

For It Has Been Written:  "He who knows not, knows not and knowing not will be knotted in unknowingness and short a sock!  Woe to those who know knots!"

-- Book of Whingeing, II:4.

[thalbergmad]

i have no idea, really, if the shroud is authentic or not.  but, it is interesting to me as a Christian that scientific labs have dated it as accurate to the first century.  i think science proves the bible correct in all instances.  and, that pollen from flowers in the region (that bloomed at passover) were found on the shroud.

I agree with you up to the end of the word idea.

The pollen tests have been discredited. They were originally carried out by a man who authenticated the Hitler diaries. The cloth might be 1st century, but you have NO evidence that the image is.

So, you think science proves the Bible right in all instances do you. Please provide scientific evidence for the following.

1. The creation as mentioned in Genises
2. The earth is only 6,000 years old.
3. The garden of Eden
4. Noahs Ark
5. Adam and Eve
6. Israelites in Egypt
7. The promised Land
8. Milk and honey from heaven
9. The burning bush
10. The slabs containing the10 commandments
11. Jacobs ladder
12. The walls of Jericho being destroyed by trumpets
13. The 7 plagues of Egypt
14. The Exodus
15. Joseph and his multi coloured coat
16. The virgin Birth
17. THE CRUCIFIXION
18.The famine of Egypt
19. The magic tricks performed by Moses.
20. The feeding of the 5,000
21. Sermon on the mount
22. Raising Lazarus from the dead
23. The resurrection
24. Earthquakes at the Crucifixion
25. Curing the blind and crippled
26. The golden calf
27.Samson bringing down the temple of the Philistines
28. Simon Peter cutting of a priests right ear.
29. The trial conducted by Pilate
30. Time for dinner

Hold on a mintue Thal, there is evidence for some of the above.

On second thoughts, please don't.

Join a religious forum and spout your nonesense on there.

[cmg]

31. Turning water into wine, thus becoming the ancient world's FIRST bootlegger.  Proof?  I want proof, please.

ps.  bootlegger, plus enabler, thus the creator of codependency.

[pianistimo]

well, you certainly know how to lighten the mood.  i think thal and i are somewhat stubborn and i certainly don't think that either of us will be unconvinced until we see proof.  i don't need Jesus Christ to return to prove it - but that will be the proof for most everyone who lives on the earth.  unfortunately, many evil things will lead up to the return of Christ.  that is why He says to 'pray that you be accounted worthy to escape all these things...'

now, if i didn't care about you- i wouldn't repeat God's own Words.

[thalbergmad]

well, you certainly know how to lighten the mood.  i think thal and i are somewhat stubborn and i certainly don't think that either of us will be unconvinced until we see proof.  i don't need Jesus Christ to return to prove it - but that will be the proof for most everyone who lives on the earth.  unfortunately, many evil things will lead up to the return of Christ.  that is why He says to 'pray that you be accounted worthy to escape all these things...'

now, if i didn't care about you- i wouldn't repeat God's own Words.

I am stubborn, you are ignorant.

The prediction of the return of the Messiah has been a nutters passtime for centuries.

[thalbergmad]

31. Turning water into wine, thus becoming the ancient world's FIRST bootlegger.  Proof?  I want proof, please.

ps.  bootlegger, plus enabler, thus the creator of codependency.

Excellent post.

Number 32 anyone?

Lets see if we can reach 100

Thal

[cmg]

32.  Resurrection in total bodily form, thus defying all laws of physics/biology and local hygiene statutes.  Furthermore, it has been said in Mammalian II:6(c) that "having seen his shadow, he returned to the tomb until spring," thus inspiring the Colonies' celebration of Groundhog Day.

33.  Walking on water.  Aquatic footwear of this type was not exant during this period.  So, proof?

[thalbergmad]

34. Moses floating down the river in a basket

Not even original.

Evidence??

[ahinton]

31. Turning water into wine, thus becoming the ancient world's FIRST bootlegger.  Proof?  I want proof, please.

Usually between around 12% and 15%; is that OK for you?

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

34. Moses floating down the river in a basket

Are you saying here that half of the subject of Schönberg's final unfinished opera was a basket case?...

Best,

Alistair

[ahinton]

34. Moses floating down the river in a basket

Moses' Journey down the Rhine! Wow!

Best,

Alistair

[thalbergmad]

The proof joke was a good one hinty.

Not sure about baskets though.

Thal

[thalbergmad]

35. The ages of the prophets. Utter rubbish. Proof

[pianistimo]

the evidence is that moses and the other ark - not his basket cradle - (the ark that was brought with the israelites) signified a significant portion of history.  i suppose you don't believe the israelites existed either.  where do the twelve tribes exist today?  do you know.  what if england and usa and many jews are direct descendants of these twelve tribes of JACOB.  how come so many of them carry the name JACOB (jacobites).  and the word 'saxon' comes from 'issac's sons.'  do you see very many arabic people with the name JACOB?  no.  but do you see similarities to the ISHMAELITE names- yes!  many.    gen 15:13 gives some:  nebaioth, kedar, adbeel, mibsam, mishma, dumah, massa, hadad, tem, jetur, naphish, kedemah - they were names and places!  villiages.   'these are the sons of ishmael and these are their names, by their villages, and by their camps; twelve princes according to their tribes.'

names are another proof of the existence of God.

there are so many proofs of God that you cannot number them.  they are infinite.  therefore, don't bother numbering yours.  for one, jacob's seed is said to be like grains of sand - NATIONS.  they are actual nations today. which ones?  the ones that have promoted the bible (originally separate scrolls) !  why- because they came originally out of egypt and carried it with them wherever they went.  mount sinai was the place where the ten commandments were given to moses.

i suppose you know where the ten commandments originated.  you say - not with moses.  well, with who.  if the christian population believes that moses actually wrote the first five books of the bible (the ones that you discredit) then maybe, just maybe-  you need to go around and destroy bibles, thal.

that is what hitler tried to do.  destroy evidence.  but, it always pops up again, doesn't it?

[pianistimo]

it is interesting around the time of christmas to contemplate that Jesus Christ came to save THE WORLD.  why else would be be born in nazareth - or naioth - or anciently nebaioth.  that is the name of an arabic place orginally!  a villiage of the ishmaelites in genesis 25:13-16.  a real village!  here's more about other arabic tribes and locations (historic, btw) www.balaams-ass.com/alhaj/twelvetribesofishmael.htm

Christ did not come to save only the jacobites, or the jews, or any one peoples.  He came to save the entire world. 

i think God knew about the peopling of the earth and told moses what to write, especially the first book (genesis) - probably combined with what other writing was extant of their history from the saints (as abraham surely knew how to write - as he lived at the same time as the egyptians).  gen 25:18 mentions the arabic peoples 'settled from havilah (around pishon - where the garden of eden was!) to shur which is east of egypt....'  today this area is called 'the middle east.'  east of what? egypt and  israel (issac)  they settled east of issac's sons. 

why are they and other populations (groups of people) spoken of the bible in the exact locations they are mentioned?  why, thal?

[cmg]

Usually between around 12% and 15%; is that OK for you?

Best,

Alistair

   Bingo!!