Ancient Domains Of Mystery, forum overview / General / Religion god n all that jazz
| Online users ( Unknown) |
| Application object not working properly at the moment, no clue who is online... * Numbers in parentheses are the number of minutes since the user last loaded a page. Logged-in users time out after 40 minutes (unless they manually log out), lurkers and anonymous posters after 20. |
This thread is 4 pages long.
| Go to page 1 2 3 4 |
|
Iridia Moderator on this forum YASD Last page view: 3763 days, 14 hours, 49 minutes and 5 seconds ago. |
There's quite a lot of evidence for an old universe. It's when that evidence clashes with the evidence for a young earth that I don't really know what to believe. There is a Creationist scientist (and I don't yet understand his math, because I've only had calculus I) who says that God created the universe by "stretching out the Heavens" (that's a phrase found in one of the Psalms); kind of a Big Bang, but not quite the same, because it's got some sort of weird 4-D geometry which allows for a center and edges. For a point near the center, time passes much more slowly than for a point at the outside, especially if space itself is being stretched. So, from the Earth's perspective, Creation took six days; from the perspective of an observer at the edge of the universe, it took several billion years. (Read a book on black holes if you don't believe that's real science; it is.) That theory fits the facts, but it's a bit doubtful since there's no shattering evidence for it that doesn't back up the plain-vanilla Big Bang too. After all, no one can go "up" in 4-D to find out what shape our universe has, or whether it has a center. About original sin: Do you value freedom? If you're normal, you do--and so does God. He did not create angels and humans to be automatons who could only do what He wanted them to do. He gave angels a free choice, and a third of them chose to do evil. He gave Adam and Eve a free choice, and they chose to sin. The possibility had to be there for Adam and Eve and the angels, or they would have been just so many computers following God's programs. God could have created someone who would always have chosen to obey Him, but that would only have created the illusion of free will. God's not into illusions; so when He created Adam and Eve, he probably knew they would sin, but he probably also knew that creating them with a free will was the only way they would have freedom to choose Him, or not. Ever heard that verse that says something like, "to God, a second is like a thousand years" or something like that? Forget where it is, but that's the principle you have to remember when you think about God "waitin so long" to send Jesus. God doesn't view the boundaries of time like we do--after all, he created time. Jesus's sacrifice doesn't work within the bounds of time, either--those who believed that God would send a savior were just as much saved as those who saw Jesus, and those who today believe in Him. Even those who've never heard about Jesus can be saved by believing what they know about God, from His creation. If God had waited several thousand years to create a fix for sin, and condemned everyone who lived before that time, He would not be good. Die Gedanken sind Frei |
||
|
Madman Unregistered user |
My,My I've really started a hpt topic here. Carbon dating.Oh yea If memory serves 6C14 is a man made isotope right.Well this is off topic but how does it work. |
||
|
Tha Messiah Registered user Angel of Death Last page view: 7785 days, 4 hours, 7 minutes and 14 seconds ago. |
Madman a reply to your off topic question. Carbon 14 is formed in outer space by high energy cosmic radiations. Carbon Dating is based on half-life period.IIRC the half life of C14 is 5600 years and scientists study the decay of C14.Apply some basic logic and voila! IIRC you can also use Uranium 238 and Lead 206 THE MESSIAH,I'm here now,Worship me. |
||
|
Lazy Cal Unregistered user |
I'm going to break Original sin and Evolution ito their own threads. BTW, is there any chance we can keep responses to 20 lines or less? Breaking up our ideas? |
||
|
Lazy Cal Unregistered user |
Iridia: Interpretting the Bible (Biblical Chauvinism, etc.) You have a very good way of interpretting the Bible; one which I like. You seem to be interpretting it from the viewpoint of "How can I interpret this so that it seems morally right to me." I was deliberately giving interpretations that come up if you read the Bible with the desire to find "what seems wrong." I was hoping to show a connection -- how the same situation can occur when examining Islam (or any Religion) [Edited 2 times, last edit on 1/30/2002 at 13:21 (GMT -5) by its autor] |
||
|
Lazy Cal Unregistered user |
Surviving Persecution: As for my comment about Islam surviving persecution: I wasn't saying that Christians had it easy. They didn't, but that is irrelevant to my point. Perhaps I misunderstood your original comment -- I thought you were claiming that Christianity's survival, in spite of extreme persecution, was 'hard evidence' that it is correct. I was pointing out that that exact argument supports Islam, which I thought you were trying to discredit. |
||
|
Lazy Cal Unregistered user |
Corruption of the Word: I cannot prove that the original words of the apostles and, even more so, of Jesus were different than what is in the Bible, but I think it very likely. (I have faith that the spirit/meaning is still there, if you look for it) Two hundred years is a _long_ time, and everybody who recited or transcribed the writings likely put in their own two cents. People have found teachings that differ significantly from the New Testament. Have you heard of the gnostic gospels? The term is used much too broadly to cover all the writings found at Naj 'Hammádě. They were teachings that were suppressed by the burgeoning Church (The same ones who chose and translated what we have in the modern day bible) I do not necessarily agree with all of these 'Gnostic' gospels, and some I believe to be heretical. Still, several teachings that I consider valid and true are part of them. I brought up the Enron suicide as a dark joke, as an example of people dying for a lie. BTW, I do not think any of the apostles "saw" the birth of Jesus. Even his "close friends." [Edited 2 times, last edit on 1/30/2002 at 13:23 (GMT -5) by its autor] |
||
|
Lazy Cal Unregistered user |
Jan: re: going to heaven before Christ I had a similar concern to yours. My worry was not just about those who died before Christ, but also about those who have never had the opportunity to know Christ. For many centuries, and probably even today, several societies never even had the chance to hear about Jesus. It is hard to put the resolution I came up with into words, but I'll try. I think C.S.Lewis wrote something similar (and phrased it better) but I cannot remember which book. I believe that Jesus made it possible for those who have sinned to get to salvation -- He made forgiveness possible -- Since time and space should not be a hindrance to an all powerful being (God), this meant that anybody could be saved, regardless of when or where they lived. I think that anybody who lives or lived a just life -- who recogizes and repents their sins, etc. -- will be saved. Jesus' sacrifice made this possible. |
||
|
Iridia Moderator on this forum YASD Last page view: 3763 days, 14 hours, 49 minutes and 5 seconds ago. |
Christianity's survival: I was not trying to prove that Christianity is true just because it has survived persecution; that is true of nearly every religion, maybe every religion. The point I was making is that: IF the early Christians knew that Jesus was a fake, THEN they should not have been able to stand up against persecution; but they did. They showed a true belief, which was based on evidence they themselves saw. Thus, it is highly improbable that any part of the Gospels were made up by their writers. You said, "I do not think anyone 'saw' the birth of Jesus." Back to the Christmas story: The shepherds were told about it by the angels; Herod knew--his slaughter of infants in Bethlehem was recorded in history. There is no doubt that Jesus was indeed born in Bethlehem; in fact, two of his disciples were his half-brothers, and his mother was also one of his followers, so the location of his birth would be well-known. Die Gedanken sind Frei |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4705 days, 26 minutes and 35 seconds ago. |
Re: Martyrs: Ah, gotcha. Personally, I believe that the story of Jesus is true, but that belief is based on faith. The fact that people were willing to die for it does not prove that it is true, it simply implies that those who died believed that it was true. People are easily duped. Look at the U.S. About half of the people voted for Bush to be president -- presumably because they believed he was qualified. :-) [Edited 2 times, last edit on 2/1/2002 at 12:39 (GMT -5) by Caladriel] |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4705 days, 26 minutes and 35 seconds ago. |
Re: Jesus' Birth Well, since Mary was a virgin when Jesus was born (or so I believe) any of his half brothers would have had to be younger than him, and, thus, would not have seen him being born -- or were they Joseph's children by another wife? Which of the disciples were his half-brothers? BTW, remember to be careful about circular arguments: The Bible accurately describes Jesus' birth because the Shepherds saw it, but the Bible, itself, is what tells of that the shepherds saw it. Can you direct me to a historical source that talks about Herod slaughtering every child under 2? (Preferably a non religous source) I am rather sure that there is no record among Roman and Rabinical documents recounting such an act -- although they do recount many atrocities committed by Herod. [Edited 1 time, last edit on 2/1/2002 at 12:40 (GMT -5) by Caladriel] |
||
|
Iridia Moderator on this forum YASD Last page view: 3763 days, 14 hours, 49 minutes and 5 seconds ago. |
"People are easily duped." That's very true. With Christianity, however, the only person who could have possibly been doing the duping would have to be Jesus himself (since His disciples' belief was based on the hard evidence they saw--the prophecies, healings, etc.). From both the historical evidence (again, mostly Roman and Catholic history) and the Biblical records, it's pretty plain that Jesus was either a liar or he was insane--or he was who he said he was. But-- if he was lying, then why did he die, knowing he was lying? And if he was lying, how did he manage to come back from the dead? Then there is the possibility that He was a lunatic; after all, it is well-established that madmen will kill themselves for insane reasons. However, did He act like a lunatic? It seems to me that anyone who isn't quite right in the head would not have behaved as Jesus did. And again--if He was a lunatic, how did he manage to rise from the dead? Then, of course, there are the factors that Jesus would never have been able to arrange in advance-- the location of His birth; the manner of and events surrounding his death; the actions of those around him. Even those events he could have arranged would result in the existence of people who knew about his plans. If they were not His followers, they would have told the authorities, who soon after Jesus's death were killing His followers. If they were, such things would not have been kept secret if these people were captured and interrogated. Die Gedanken sind Frei |
||
|
Iridia Moderator on this forum YASD Last page view: 3763 days, 14 hours, 49 minutes and 5 seconds ago. |
BTW, I think Bush IS qualified... certainly better than a woman-chasing idiot who doesn't know what "is" means. James and John were Jesus's half-brothers. I assume they were Joseph and Mary's children, younger than Jesus. It's possible that they were Joseph's children, though; but since John lived until about 90 AD, he at least was probably Jesus's younger brother--possibly even only a teenager. There should be court records detailing Herod's orders; however, I have no idea if they've been kept or not. My main evidence for Herod's slaughter is a place called (I think) the Tomb of the Innocents, which contains the bones of many young children, located in Bethlehem. It's a spot many Christians visit when they go to the Holy Land. By the way... just before this happened, Joseph was warned and the family fled to Egypt, fulfilling yet another prophecy: "Out of Egypt have I called My son." Die Gedanken sind Frei |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4705 days, 26 minutes and 35 seconds ago. |
Re: Martyrs IMHO, this line of proof depends on whether you think people can believe in something so strongly that they will lie about it, and still be willing to die for it. It also depends on whether you think that later transcribers added in bits that were not in the originals. I don't think either of these points have been proven or disproven. |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4705 days, 26 minutes and 35 seconds ago. |
Re: Herod: There are no court records. There are no records of this at all. As for its existance, I do not know much about it. How many bones were there? How old were the children buried there? How old were the bones themselves? The only references I ever read simply said that people found a grave with many children's bones, so they named it after the Biblical story. The tomb did not have such a name since Herod's time (Herod Died in 4 B.C.) Thus, its name should not be used as evidence, since that would be circular. |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4705 days, 26 minutes and 35 seconds ago. |
Re: Egypt and prophesy Once again, this is stated by the Bible, and solely supported by the Bible. I believe it, but I don't think that this is true proof. |
||
|
Iridia Moderator on this forum YASD Last page view: 3763 days, 14 hours, 49 minutes and 5 seconds ago. |
You are absolutely correct when you say that any of the events in the Bible cannot be proven. However, this principle applies to any historical events. Let's try it-- I had a calculus class at eight this morning. Can you prove I attended? There's evidence, of course: My name is on the attendance sheet, my assignment was turned in, the teacher and class remember I was there. Still, if you wanted to say I didn't attend that class, you could correctly say that I could not prove I did. The assignment and attendance sheet could have been forged; the class and teacher could have been lying. Of course, this is far-fetched.... but now, take the question fifty, one hundred, or two thousand years into the future. The physical evidence is now gone--the attendance sheet long ago went into the Dumpster, and my classmates and teacher, as well as I myself, are probably all dead. It becomes even more impossible to prove that I attended that class. History is then more a science of probability than of evidence. What I have been posting--the miracles, the prophecies, the many witnesses who died for what they saw and believed--cannot ever "prove" that Jesus is the Messiah. However, the probability that He was who He said he was is so high as to render opposing arguments extremely improbable. There has always been a step of faith when one accepts Jesus as one's savior; but this step, with all the circumstantial evidence present, is extremely small. Die Gedanken sind Frei |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4705 days, 26 minutes and 35 seconds ago. |
I wasn't trying to shake your belief in Christ (Heaven forbid!). I was trying to shake your belief in your evidence. I guess the comment: ". . . One [the Bible] is right, the other [the Koran] is wrong . . ." got my hackles up. It was too matter-of-fact for my tastes, and I'm not even Muslim. Such matter of fact statements, to me, need hard evidence. Your point is well taken. It comes down to what one considers valid evidence. In all honesty, I found most of your proofs too circular, but that is just my opinion. The only evidence I have ever found, so far, that hold weight with me is how I feel and how my life has gone. For me, accepting evidence from the Bible requires that one already believe that the Bible is true, and accepting evidence from one's experience requires one to be willing to see God's hand in their life. Heh, and accepting evidence from my experience would require one to have lived my life! [Edited 4 times, last edit on 2/5/2002 at 11:49 (GMT -5) by Caladriel] |
||
|
Vallak Registered user The Nightmare Elf Last page view: 8077 days, 20 hours, 44 minutes and 16 seconds ago. |
I looked for evidence of Jesus in Roman historical documents. There was never any recording of a trial or crusifixion of anyone with the name Jesus or Immanuel. As far as the whole calculus class thing goes, that's a far different thing than Christianity. There are records made by the Romans of everything that happened within their empire all during the years Jesus was supposed to have been there. No one, not even the great philosophers of the time, so much as even mentions someone even remotely doing some of the things that have been atributed to Jesus. "But then I sigh, and with a piece of scripture, Tell them that God bids us do good for evil. And thus I clothe my naked villainy With odd old ends stolen forth of holy writ, And seem I a saint, when most I play the Devil." -William Shakespeare, King Richard III |
||
|
Iridia Moderator on this forum YASD Last page view: 3763 days, 14 hours, 49 minutes and 5 seconds ago. |
The "great philosophers" of that time don't mention Him--Christianity didn't get to Greece until about 40 AD or so, and there were precious few great philosophers in the first century AD anyway. Soon after Jesus's death, it was regarded as a Jewish sect; later, the great philosophers *were* Christians. A historian, Josephus, does mention Christianity, though. I remember he wrote about Masada, and that was about 70-90 AD (can't remember off the top of my head now). Anyway, he would have been able to talk to people who'd seen Jesus... and BTW, Josephus was not a Christian. That's evidence for His existence, anyway. Die Gedanken sind Frei |
||
|
Vallak Registered user The Nightmare Elf Last page view: 8077 days, 20 hours, 44 minutes and 16 seconds ago. |
This is an excerpt I got from the encyclopedia Britannica. Note the dates. Greek Philosophy, body of philosophical concepts developed by the Greeks, during the flowering of Greek civilization between 600 and 200 BC. Greek philosophy formed the basis of all later philosophical speculation in the Western world. The intuitive hypotheses of the ancient Greeks foreshadowed many theories of modern science, and many of the moral ideas of pagan Greek philosophers have been incorporated into Christian moral doctrine. How you can say "and there were precious few great philosophers in the first century AD anyway" is beyond me. Plato himself had an academy that was around well into the 2nd century AD. That's more than 400 years after his death. Yet, unlike Jesus, there is still evidence of Plato's existance, and he died more than 200 years before Jesus' supposed virginal birth. "But then I sigh, and with a piece of scripture, Tell them that God bids us do good for evil. And thus I clothe my naked villainy With odd old ends stolen forth of holy writ, And seem I a saint, when most I play the Devil." -William Shakespeare, King Richard III [Edited 1 time, last edit on 2/6/2002 at 01:50 (GMT -5) by Vallak] |
||
|
Vallak Registered user The Nightmare Elf Last page view: 8077 days, 20 hours, 44 minutes and 16 seconds ago. |
Just thought I'd add about Josephus. Most of his story has been debunked by Israeli archeologists. His is the only account that says there was a mass suicide at Masada. The Romans had no records of ever even trying to sac the stronghold. And of all the hundreds of bodies that should have been there, only 25 skeletons have been found within the entire area surrounding Masada. Even considering that the Romans never took the time to give proper burials, that still does not account for the other holes in Josephus' story. "But then I sigh, and with a piece of scripture, Tell them that God bids us do good for evil. And thus I clothe my naked villainy With odd old ends stolen forth of holy writ, And seem I a saint, when most I play the Devil." -William Shakespeare, King Richard III [Edited 1 time, last edit on 2/6/2002 at 02:06 (GMT -5) by Vallak] |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4705 days, 26 minutes and 35 seconds ago. |
Malak: I do not think the lack of historical data disproves the New Testament. As I understand it, Christianity was not all that big at the time of Jesus' death (By Christianity, I mean the following of Jesus' teachings) The Strength of Christianity, now-a-days, is misleading. "There are records made by the Romans of everything that happened within their empire [that survive until today]" is a very bold claim. Histories usually record prominent people in prominent places. Jesus preached in the countryside to people of low-estate. The only people who would have been recording what was happening would have been his followers. The only act that the Historians of the time might have noticed was when he entered the Temple in Jerusalem, and kicked everybody out. In fact, this is probably what brought him to the attention fo the Romans and got him killed. . . . BTW, I didn't understand your calculus reference. [Edited 1 time, last edit on 2/6/2002 at 12:27 (GMT -5) by Caladriel] |
||
|
Vallak Registered user The Nightmare Elf Last page view: 8077 days, 20 hours, 44 minutes and 16 seconds ago. |
Christianity wasn't around at the time of his death. It wasn't truly implemented until about 50 years afterwards. Yes, it is a bold claim that the Romans recorded everything, so let me rephrase. The Romans kept records of every trial that took place within their boundaries. Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor who supposedly acted as overseer of Jesus' trial, kept records of every case or trial he attended. Nowhere, in all of these records, is there mentioned anyone claiming to be Messiah. There were plenty of blasphemers who claimed to be God, but not so much as a passing reference to Jesus or his trial. Do I think this disproves the New Testament? The answer is no, I do not. Do I believe in the Bible? No, I do not. I've read it, both the King James version with the New Testament and the Jewish Torah, and I don't believe they hold water. Oh, and the calculus reference was to Iridia. Scroll up and read Iridia's post on the fourth and you'll understand. "But then I sigh, and with a piece of scripture, Tell them that God bids us do good for evil. And thus I clothe my naked villainy With odd old ends stolen forth of holy writ, And seem I a saint, when most I play the Devil." -William Shakespeare, King Richard III |
||
|
Iridia Moderator on this forum YASD Last page view: 3763 days, 14 hours, 49 minutes and 5 seconds ago. |
Are you sure they recorded EVERY trial? After all, Pilate must have been pretty ashamed of condemning an innocent man to death. He didn't even really condemn him--the only ruling he handed down, after he had Jesus whipped, was "do with him what you want". From what I understand, Pilate was already in trouble with Rome, having been assigned to a "backwater province" like Israel. Soon after, Pilate got in trouble again and was exiled. I'm sure the Romans kept very good records; but, let's see, there was the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D, a long occupation by Arab peoples, the Crusades... plenty of opportunities for things to be destroyed exist. Chances are all that survives of Pontius Pilate is little more than a day's worth of records. Vallak, you read the King James Version? I'm sure you're probably intelligent, but how fluent is any modern person in 1611 English? I know I'm not. If you really want to understand the Bible, try a translation into modern English. It's much less obscure. Die Gedanken sind Frei |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4705 days, 26 minutes and 35 seconds ago. |
Re: Christianity I always have this debate. How do you define Christianity. If you define it as believing Jesus to be the Messiah, or as following the teachings of Jesus, then Christianity existed as soon as Jesus believed he was the Messiah and/or started following his own teachings (unless you don't believe he even existed) You'll note that I qualified my definition of Christianity in my Post. Out of curiosity, how do you define Christianity? |
||
|
Caladriel Registered user ReGiStErEd UsEr Last page view: 4705 days, 26 minutes and 35 seconds ago. |
Re: Roman records I'm more curious than credulous. Where did you find these records? Are they listed in some database? How did you search them? (I would love to search them, myself) I do not think that Jesus was condemned by the Romans for claiming to be the Messiah; I doubt that that was a capital crime for them. He was probably handed over on a charge of insurrection or some such. Jerusalem had a lot of hot headed people who were not happy with the Roman occupation. It was a rebellion waiting to happen, especially during the Passover. Imagine how nervous an occupier would be in the U.S. during independence day. If the Romans thought Jesus was going to round up the people and try to lead them to glory, they would not tolerate it. [Edited 2 times, last edit on 2/6/2002 at 19:37 (GMT -5) by Caladriel] |
||
|
Iridia Moderator on this forum YASD Last page view: 3763 days, 14 hours, 49 minutes and 5 seconds ago. |
Unfortunately, the only reference I have to the history of Pontius Pilate's reign was in a magazine article about Biblical archaeology, and it was only a passing reference. I'll research it and get back to you. Jesus's death was quite a complicated thing, and the Romans weren't the people who started it. Here's what happened--Jesus ended up debating the Jewish Pharisees' legalism with them. Think of the Pharisees as religious hypocrites who had much prestige with the Jewish people because they were the teachers of the law. They had added so much to what God intended that it became impossible to follow the law. Jesus, who knew the Law quite well (he'd indirectly written it after all!) ended up getting in their hair by teaching that the law wasn't outward actions but an inward attitude; then he got them even more mad by exposing some of the things the Pharisees did as actually against the law (calling them "a brood of vipers" didn't help!). The last straw came when Jesus told them, "Before Abraham was, I am." That's not bad grammar-- the "I am" in Hebrew is one of the names for God--so in the Jews' eyes he had committed blasphemy, and they had an excuse for killing him. Die Gedanken sind Frei |
||
|
Iridia Moderator on this forum YASD Last page view: 3763 days, 14 hours, 49 minutes and 5 seconds ago. |
When Judas, one of His disciples, came to the Sanhedrin (Jewish court) and offered to snitch on Jesus, they had their opportunity. They didn't want to do it during the Passover, but after Jesus caused them to lose face in front of the large Passover crowds they went ahead anyway. They captured Jesus and mock-tried him before the Jewish court. The charge was blasphemy and Jesus was found guilty. The Sandhedrin did not have the authority to put someone to death, however; so they had to manufacture another charge, treason, to bring him before Pilate. The first time, Pilate (a Roman) said he didn't find anything wrong with Jesus and sent him to Herod, the local Jewish ruler. Herod just laughed at Jesus and sent him back to Pilate, who, knowing that if there was trouble and Rome heard about it he would be in hot water, finally told the Jews to do what they wanted with Jesus. Pilate didn't think Jesus was any threat to Rome; he did however feel pressure from the Jewish leaders, whom he wanted to stay on good terms with. The lynch mob shouting to Pilate to crucify Jesus didn't help any either. Die Gedanken sind Frei |
||
|
Vallak Registered user The Nightmare Elf Last page view: 8077 days, 20 hours, 44 minutes and 16 seconds ago. |
Most of what I read of Roman records was from the library at UMASS. The rest I found online through various search engines and meticulous studying. I love the Roman and Greek culture and was always enthralled with it, so I threw myself at every oppurtunity to learn more. The charges that Jesus faced were for sedition and blasphemy. I've heard every possible arguement for Christianity, and most of them against it. And like I said, none of them hold water. Do I believe in God/a God? Yes. Do I believe that humans are capable of knowing Her/Him/It? Yes, but most definitly not by merely believing that Jesus was the Son of God. "But then I sigh, and with a piece of scripture, Tell them that God bids us do good for evil. And thus I clothe my naked villainy With odd old ends stolen forth of holy writ, And seem I a saint, when most I play the Devil." -William Shakespeare, King Richard III |
| Go to page 1 2 3 4 |