Why won't God do a miracle and heal amputees?

[wavelength]

memetic theory has mathematical models and predictive reliability.

As I said, part of it may be vaild. It however does not explain a human being (or his believe in God), it just attempts to describe certain scientific aspects. Everything else is inapplicable pseudo-philosophy.

Agreed on the last point. You really didnt make an argument in this response however.

I responded to yours.

[Oldschool Flip]

Exactly how does some Christians thinking AIDS is a punishment to homosexuals equate to things just happening, especially as it relates to curing diseases? You claimed that people just survive horrible maladies all the time. If that's the case, why do scientists have to develop medicine to treat symptons of AIDS (that certainly doesn't just "happen" on its own)?

Knowledgable, living, and sentient beings have to spend MILLIONS of dollars and BILLIONS of man-hours just to develop medicine to simply TREAT the symptoms of this dreaded disease.

AIDS came from Africa. If God wanted it to be punishment, there would NEVER been a way to stop it. The only people who die from it now lack medical attention.

If that's the case, maybe some atheists should go and spread their godless message to the downtrodden. Then again, considering how many of them tend to be a bit on the snobby, intellectually-"elite" side, that probably won't happen.

They'd still be downtrodden. Most are that way because of choices they made. Getting them to be an atheist won't change their position unless they want to do it.

That's the point. The word, "dinosaur" is an English word, make two centuries after the KJV was translated. So, of course, you're not going to see that word in the KJV.

Let me guess, the blanket word "beast" is your proof? Another way of making the Bible sound plausible to the discovery of dinosaurs. How about the Bible telling us how far we'll go intellectually as a species? Like time travel for example?

Con men of the era were often exposed and often PUT TO DEATH for such a fabrication.

Yep sounds like Jesus.

That, of course, doesn't help your argument, as you've yet to establish that such was the case with regards to the Bible, particularly the New Testament. Plus, there's the little matter of how EASILY Christianity could have exposed, had it been fabricated. Simply produce the body of Christ or get a confession out of the disciples that they fabricated the whole thing (a big stretch, since you claim they were so naive and ignorant), and the movement dies, before it really gets off the ground.

The only people that questioned it were the Romans. Everyone else was conned.

South America and China (as well as scores of other nations and cultures) just happen to have some documentation that, at some point in this planet's history, this planet was destroyed by a massive flood, with only a handful of people surviving by stating on a floating vessel. Again, coincidence? I don't think so.

There are many descriptions of the remarkable event [the Genesis Flood]. Some of these have come from Greek historians, some from the Babylonian records; others from the cuneiform tablets, and still others from the mythology and traditions of different nations, so that we may say that no event has occurred either in ancient or modern times about which there is better evidence or more numerous records, than this very one which is so beautifully but briefly described in the sacred Scriptures. It is one of the events which seems to be familiar to the most distant nations—in Australia, in India, in China, in Scandinavia, and in the various parts of America. It is true that many look upon the story as it is repeated in these distant regions, as either referring to local floods, or as the result of contact with civilized people, who have brought it from historic countries, and yet the similarity of the story is such as to make even this explanation unsatisfactory. - Stephen D. Peet, “The Story of the Deluge,” American Antiquarian, Vol. 27, No. 4, July–August 1905, p. 203

That was my point. If everyone died, how were there transcripts from China? The documents are from the same time the supposed totally flooding of the world happened. Dead people don't write documents. Science has a better explaination of what happened based on soil samples from different parts of the world on lands that were affected.

What info would that be?

That Jesus wasn't born on Dec 25th.

Try that again! Christianity spread to Africa, Asia, and other countries LONG before it ever got to Europe

Lol, Rome is in Europe. You're actually going to sit there and tell me that Christianity wasn't in Rome, but in China, South America, North America, India first?

Why don't you ask Christians in the Middle East, particularly ones who've had family members executed for converting to Christianity in MUSLIM countries? I recall one guy, cutting out his daughter's tongue and setting her on fire, because she ditched Islam for Christianity.

The Crusades are the main reason Muslims and other religions depise Christianity. Being FORCED by death to accept a religion was way worse than this.

As far as a living example goes, the son of a Hamas leader just did that not too long ago.

Son of Hamas Leader Turns Back on Islam and Embraces Christianity


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,402483,00.html

No explaination needed. See above.

It does go both ways. Your initial claim was that people were Christians, simply and primarily because they were raised in Christian households. That's not always the case. There are those who get raised in such houses who DON'T become or remain Christians. And, there are those were NOT raised in such homes who later become Christians. At the end of the day, it's a decision they have to make on their own.

Common sense tells you that if you went to a home and they had young kids, the kids were the denomination of the parents. The kids don't HAVE a choice. They do what they're told.

But, do those plagues come with the arrival of a member of that kingdom's slaves, who was once a ruler there? Do those plagues, a devastating one in particular, force a king to release a race of people, giving them a huge hunk of his wealth, in the process? NOPE!!!

Rameses had one child at the time and it was his first born, so that came about along the storyline. In fact, news of the skull of Rameses son had a depression showing fracture. This is forensic evidence and he may have acutally died from a blow to the head.

 If so, this is the skull of a man who the Hebrew Bible says was killed by the 10th of the horrible plagues God sent to convince pharaoh to free the Hebrew slaves. And if so, it contains an important new piece of forensic evidence: The skull has a depressed fracture on the left hand side which pathologists say clearly occurred at the time of death.
http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/12/03/ramses-ii-the-10th-plague.htm

And even Hebrews lost not only their first child, but others to the plagues. Lol, and what king gives up his money? This is another story you heard. Show proof that Rameses gave them his wealth. In fact again, no documentation showed Rameses released slaves, but the Bible which of course is a story book for Christians. Parting of the Red Sea, or rightfully the "Reed Sea".

[MCWAY]

AIDS came from Africa. If God wanted it to be punishment, there would NEVER been a way to stop it. The only people who die from it now lack medical attention.

Whether AIDS is a punishment from God or not, it STILL HASN'T been stopped. At best, the inevitable effects have merely been delayed. Plus, just to delay those effects, it takes medicine, that cost lots of money and billions of man-hours to develop, from knowledgable doctors and scientists. People don't just happen to recover from AIDS.

They'd still be downtrodden. Most are that way because of choices they made. Getting them to be an atheist won't change their position unless they want to do it.

The same goes for their becoming Christians. What's your point?

Let me guess, the blanket word "beast" is your proof? Another way of making the Bible sound plausible to the discovery of dinosaurs. How about the Bible telling us how far we'll go intellectually as a species? Like time travel for example?

You're the one, who needs to provide the proof, as you claimed that the people didn't know about "dinosaur" (and your evidence for that is simply that particular, coined in the 19th century, isn't mentioned).

Yep sounds like Jesus. The only people that questioned it were the Romans. Everyone else was conned.

Wrong again. Jesus was accused of blasphemy. Furthermore, his disciples were persecuted by OTHER Jewish people, including one who would eventually become a Christian himself (so much for "everyone else was conned").

That was my point. If everyone died, how were there transcripts from China? The documents are from the same time the supposed totally flooding of the world happened. Dead people don't write documents. Science has a better explaination of what happened based on soil samples from different parts of the world on lands that were affected.

Per the Biblical account, the flood lasted just over a year. The survivors, within the decades, presumably reproduced and dispersed. Of course, that still leaves you with the task of explaining how the Chinese (and several other cultures) ended up with the same notion that, at some point in this planet's history, it was destroyed by a massive flood with only a handful of people surviving.

Ironically enough, since you brought up China, the ancient word that translates into "boat" is made of three characters that literally read "eight-mouth-vessel" (with "mouth", meaning a mouth to feed). Guess how many people were in that Ark, according to Genesis.....EIGHT. Coincidence? I don't think so.

That Jesus wasn't born on Dec 25th.

Tell us something we don't know. That the date chosen to celebrate His birth. As the New Testament never claims that He was born 12/25, it's much ado about nothing.

Lol, Rome is in Europe. You're actually going to sit there and tell me that Christianity wasn't in Rome, but in China, South America, North America, India first?

I'm going to sit here and tell you that your claim of Christianity, not spreading until the Chrisitians left Europe is FALSE.

 The Crusades are the main reason Muslims and other religions depise Christianity. Being FORCED by death to accept a religion was way worse than this.
No explaination needed. See above.

Yet, guess what the Muslims do in their countries, if someone rejects Islam. Of course, that doesn't erase the fact that you asked "How can you be Christian if you didn't have that denomination? Show me an example. and got that example. Nor does your dismissing that example, because of the article coming from Fox News (as it's been shown on other news stations) change the fact that such occured.

Common sense tells you that if you went to a home and they had young kids, the kids were the denomination of the parents. The kids don't HAVE a choice. They do what they're told.

But, what happens once they leave that home? They must decide for themselves whether or not they will remain in the faith. That's' what you did or you wouldn't be an atheist. And the same applies for those who didn't grow in Christian homes but became Christians in their adult lives.

Rameses had one child at the time and it was his first born, so that came about along the storyline. In fact, news of the skull of Rameses son had a depression showing fracture. This is forensic evidence and he may have acutally died from a blow to the head.

 If so, this is the skull of a man who the Hebrew Bible says was killed by the 10th of the horrible plagues God sent to convince pharaoh to free the Hebrew slaves. And if so, it contains an important new piece of forensic evidence: The skull has a depressed fracture on the left hand side which pathologists say clearly occurred at the time of death.
http://atheism.about.com/b/2004/12/03/ramses-ii-the-10th-plague.htm

And even Hebrews lost not only their first child, but others to the plagues. Lol, and what king gives up his money? This is another story you heard. Show proof that Rameses gave them his wealth. In fact again, no documentation showed Rameses released slaves, but the Bible which of course is a story book for Christians. Parting of the Red Sea, or rightfully the "Reed Sea".

Make up your mind here. You claimed that the Hebrews weren't enslaved in Egypt; yet, you just stated that their children died from the plagues, too. Furthermore, why are they crossing the Red Sea or the "Reed Sea", if Pharoah didn't free them (then, there's the little matter of his motivation for freeing them, if his son and other firstborn weren't killed as a result of that last plague).

To refresh your memory, I already cited the extra-Biblical references to the Exodus. Josephus is one such source but he's hardly the only one.

In ancient times there happened a great plague in Egypt, and many ascribed the cause of it to God, who was offended with them because there were many strangers in the land, by whom foreign rites and ceremonies were employed in their worship of the deity. The Egyptians concluded; therefore, that unless all strangers were driven out of the country, they should never be freed from their miseries....Upon this, some writers tell us, the most eminent and enterprising of those foreigners who were in Egypt, and obliged to leave the country...who retired into the province now called Judea, which was not far from Egypt, and in those times uninhabited. These emigrants were led by Moses, who was superior to all in wisdom and prowess. He gave them laws, and ordained that they should have no images of the gods, because there was only one deity, the heaven, which surrounds all things, and is Lord of the whole. -Diodorus Silicus

As for Josephus....

It now remains that I debate with Manetho about Moses. Now the Egyptians acknowledge him to have been a wonderful and a divine person; nay, they would willingly lay claim to him themselves, though after a most abusive and incredible manner, and pretend that he was of Heliopolis, and one of the priests of that place, and was ejected out of it among the rest, on account of his leprosy; although it had been demonstrated out of their records that he lived five hundred and eighteen years earlier, and then brought our forefathers out of Egypt into the country that is now inhabited by us.

[Oldschool Flip]

Whether AIDS is a punishment from God or not, it STILL HASN'T been stopped. At best, the inevitable effects have merely been delayed. Plus, just to delay those effects, it takes medicine, that cost lots of money and billions of man-hours to develop, from knowledgable doctors and scientists. People don't just happen to recover from AIDS.

That WAS my point. Man shouldn't be able to undo what God wanted done. In words of many Christian religions, AIDS is punishment for homosexuality. But man has found a way....through science.

The same goes for their becoming Christians. What's your point?

Um you brought up about spreading atheism to them. I just responded.

You're the one, who needs to provide the proof, as you claimed that the people didn't know about "dinosaur" (and your evidence for that is simply that particular, coined in the 19th century, isn't mentioned).

There is NO PROOF in the Bible mentioning giant lizards or ferocious reptiles that lived before man. Can't prove to you something that's not mentioned. Can you prove it was?

Wrong again. Jesus was accused of blasphemy. Furthermore, his disciples were persecuted by OTHER Jewish people, including one who would eventually become a Christian himself (so much for "everyone else was conned").

Con man who died a martyr. People still thing Charles Manson and Hitler are great. They were leaders of cults too.

Per the Biblical account, the flood lasted just over a year. The survivors, within the decades, presumably reproduced and dispersed. Of course, that still leaves you with the task of explaining how the Chinese (and several other cultures) ended up with the same notion that, at some point in this planet's history, it was destroyed by a massive flood with only a handful of people surviving.

Lol, the documents were written at the same time of the flood, not after it receded. So that presumability is wrong.

Ironically enough, since you brought up China, the ancient word that translates into "boat" is made of three characters that literally read "eight-mouth-vessel" (with "mouth", meaning a mouth to feed). Guess how many people were in that Ark, according to Genesis.....EIGHT. Coincidence? I don't think so.

Show proof of that. Lol, and are you saying Noah wrote in Chinese?

Tell us something we don't know. That the date chosen to celebrate His birth. As the New Testament never claims that He was born 12/25, it's much ado about nothing.

Much like the Bible it's more story telling. If DNA testing was available back in that time, I'd bet dollars to donuts (jelly) that Jesus' father was Joseph.

I'm going to sit here and tell you that your claim of Christianity, not spreading until the Chrisitians left Europe is FALSE.

That's not what you said, you said:

Try that again! Christianity spread to Africa, Asia, and other countries LONG before it ever got to Europe.

How could that happen? Before it was divided into other countries Europe was just basically the Roman empire. And most continents outside of there weren't even discovered since no one actually sailed that far. Again, you must have some proof of this right? Dates will show if it happened or not.

Yet, guess what the Muslims do in their countries, if someone rejects Islam. Of course, that doesn't erase the fact that you asked "How can you be Christian if you didn't have that denomination? Show me an example. and got that example. Nor does your dismissing that example, because of the article coming from Fox News (as it's been shown on other news stations) change the fact that such occured.

Religions all around the world have there "rules". Break them and you suffer if you're a follower. If I say GOD DAMMIT in a church, I'd be ridiculed, but if I said it in a bar, most would ignore me.
People that hold religion dear to there hearts are some of the most hateful people. Step on their religion and they'll find a way to demean you, and in some cases like Islam, kill you. More wars are fought over religion daily, then over anything else.

But, what happens once they leave that home? They must decide for themselves whether or not they will remain in the faith. That's' what you did or you wouldn't be an atheist. And the same applies for those who didn't grow in Christian homes but became Christians in their adult lives.

My point was that children aren't aware of God until they were spoon fed it. I would bet that the number of non believers would be much higher after all children left home if they weren't subjected to it when they were young. But atheism is growing because science is slowly showing us more things like how our galaxy might have actually started by observing newer galaxies being formed now.

Make up your mind here. You claimed that the Hebrews weren't enslaved in Egypt; yet, you just stated that their children died from the plagues, too. Furthermore, why are they crossing the Red Sea or the "Reed Sea", if Pharoah didn't free them (then, there's the little matter of his motivation for freeing them, if his son and other firstborn weren't killed as a result of that last plague).

I mentioned that there might have been some Hebrew slaves in a previous post, but no where near a country full.
I brought up the "Reed Sea" because translations issues based on excerpts from Biblical accounts say Moses parted the Red Sea, when it was more likely he crossed the sea of reeds during a low tide. And the motivation you spoke of is only written in the Bible. Like I said there are no Egyptian documentations, or Egyptologists that verify that Exodus is true.

To refresh your memory, I already cited the extra-Biblical references to the Exodus. Josephus is one such source but he's hardly the only one.

In ancient times there happened a great plague in Egypt, and many ascribed the cause of it to God, who was offended with them because there were many strangers in the land, by whom foreign rites and ceremonies were employed in their worship of the deity. The Egyptians concluded; therefore, that unless all strangers were driven out of the country, they should never be freed from their miseries....Upon this, some writers tell us, the most eminent and enterprising of those foreigners who were in Egypt, and obliged to leave the country...who retired into the province now called Judea, which was not far from Egypt, and in those times uninhabited. These emigrants were led by Moses, who was superior to all in wisdom and prowess. He gave them laws, and ordained that they should have no images of the gods, because there was only one deity, the heaven, which surrounds all things, and is Lord of the whole. -Diodorus Silicus

As for Josephus....

It now remains that I debate with Manetho about Moses. Now the Egyptians acknowledge him to have been a wonderful and a divine person; nay, they would willingly lay claim to him themselves, though after a most abusive and incredible manner, and pretend that he was of Heliopolis, and one of the priests of that place, and was ejected out of it among the rest, on account of his leprosy; although it had been demonstrated out of their records that he lived five hundred and eighteen years earlier, and then brought our forefathers out of Egypt into the country that is now inhabited by us.

Again, this is a recount from what he HEARD. He wasn't alive when it happened. It's a story HE heard. If it happened in Egypt, then Egyptian history would have it and be more precise about it.
And the translations from Hebrew to Greek left room for some major screw ups. Look at the word virgin in Greek. Somehow that was translated from "young woman" in Hebrew. So in that instance, every young woman in Hebrew was a virgin in Greek. Which of course wasn't always true. Ever wonder where the term Virgin Mary came from?

[MCWAY]

That WAS my point. Man shouldn't be able to undo what God wanted done. In words of many Christian religions, AIDS is punishment for homosexuality. But man has found a way....through science.

My point was that certain Christians claiming that AIDS is a punishment from God and that actually being the case are two different issues. Furthermore, man hasn't "found a way", anyway. They still can't cure it. At best, they can treat the symptoms and delay the inevitable.

There is NO PROOF in the Bible mentioning giant lizards or ferocious reptiles that lived before man. Can't prove to you something that's not mentioned. Can you prove it was?

EXACTLY!!! It's a bit unclear if the critters we know as dinosaurs are referenced in the Bible. That has no bearing, however, on whether or not they (the ancient Hebrews) knew about such creatures.

Con man who died a martyr. People still thing Charles Manson and Hitler are great. They were leaders of cults too.

To quote a Christian scholar, "There's the simple question of the honesty of these men (Jesus' disciples). Why would they lie? What would they have to gain from it? Most of them, it cost them their lives to teach and preach this." - Father Francis Martin, John Paul II Institute.

So what was Paul's incentive for supposedly conning people, especially since he, at one time, persecuted those very same people. If you look at what happened to Paul (imprisonment, flogging, eventual execution).

Lol, the documents were written at the same time of the flood, not after it receded. So that presumability is wrong.

LOL.....The Chinese wrote a similar account about Earth's destruction by flood, with just a few people surviving, at the same time such an event was actually occuring? 

Show proof of that. Lol, and are you saying Noah wrote in Chinese?

Ship is comprised of the following components

 


 
boat + eight + mouth (family member) = Ship

 

The origin of this word becomes more meaningful after reading the following verse. Genesis 7:7 - And Noah and his sons [Ham, Shem, and Japheth] and his wife and his sons' wives with him, went into the ark, to escape the waters of the flood.

The word 'mouth' is often used to describe number of family members. For example, the phrase 'One family of four mouths' means a family with four members. Four couples in Noah's family have a total of eight members.

http://www.yutopian.com/religion/words/

Once again, how do the Chinese get a similar account of Earth's destruction by Flood, with just a few people survivng by building a floating vessel?

Much like the Bible it's more story telling. If DNA testing was available back in that time, I'd bet dollars to donuts (jelly) that Jesus' father was Joseph.

Were that the case, Joseph would not have considered divorcing Mary (as he was already married/bethroed at the time, having already paid the dowry for her). That has little to do with the Bible not prescribing December 25, as the date of Jesus' birth.

That's not what you said, you said: How could that happen? Before it was divided into other countries Europe was just basically the Roman empire. And most continents outside of there weren't even discovered since no one actually sailed that far. Again, you must have some proof of this right? Dates will show if it happened or not.

Asia was discovered long before Christ was even born. As were parts of Africa. In both of those areas, Christianity was spread. And, this occured while Romans were putting Christians to death. So, your claim that Christianity didn't spread, until Christians left Europe is still FALSE.

Religions all around the world have there "rules". Break them and you suffer if you're a follower. If I say GOD DAMMIT in a church, I'd be ridiculed, but if I said it in a bar, most would ignore me.

People that hold religion dear to there hearts are some of the most hateful people. Step on their religion and they'll find a way to demean you, and in some cases like Islam, kill you. More wars are fought over religion daily, then over anything else.

One: People who don't hold religion to their hearts are ALSO some of the most hateful people (check out some of the posts of certain non-believers here. Two:Wars are fought over power and weaith, whether religion is used as justification or not. Stalin killed more people in year than the Crusaders killed in a decade. And his regime had NOTHING to do with Christianity or Islam.

Three: You maintained that someone couldn't be a Christian, without the denomination. I showed you of an example of someone becoming a Christian in, perhaps, THE MOST HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT TO DO SO, a Muslim country. So, that claim of yours doesn't work.

My point was that children aren't aware of God until they were spoon fed it. I would bet that the number of non believers would be much higher after all children left home if they weren't subjected to it when they were young. But atheism is growing because science is slowly showing us more things like how our galaxy might have actually started by observing newer galaxies being formed now.

That's a bet you'd likely lose.

I mentioned that there might have been some Hebrew slaves in a previous post, but no where near a country full.

Initially, you claimed they weren't there at all.

I brought up the "Reed Sea" because translations issues based on excerpts from Biblical accounts say Moses parted the Red Sea, when it was more likely he crossed the sea of reeds during a low tide. And the motivation you spoke of is only written in the Bible. Like I said there are no Egyptian documentations, or Egyptologists that verify that Exodus is true.

Ummm....to use your words, what you said was that there was nothing outside the Bible that documented the Exodus, which is false.

Again, this is a recount from what he HEARD. He wasn't alive when it happened. It's a story HE heard. If it happened in Egypt, then Egyptian history would have it and be more precise about it.

He cites the sources (written sources) of where he got those accounts. And, it doesn't matter if he was alive or not. NEWS FLASH!!! Most of the history that you read are events that YOU DID NOT WITNESSS YOURSELF (neither did the authors of the history books from which you read about them).

In essence, that is but a feeble excuse to cover your initial claim that there are no extra-Biblical references to the Exodus.

And the translations from Hebrew to Greek left room for some major screw ups. Look at the word virgin in Greek. Somehow that was translated from "young woman" in Hebrew. So in that instance, every young woman in Hebrew was a virgin in Greek. Which of course wasn't always true. Ever wonder where the term Virgin Mary came from?

First, that leaves you with the task of pointing out those alleged screw-ups, as it relates to the writings of Josephus. Second, when the term is used in Scripture, the surrounding context makes it clear that the female is a virgin. Mary said, when told about her upcoming pregnancy, "How can this be, since I have not known man?"

Again, that's how we deal with history. Otherwise, you may as well chuck all of your history books, news papers, and encyclopedias IN THE TRASH. All of them have historical accounts and references about events, written by people WHO DID NOT WITNESS THE ACCOUNTS THEMSELVES.

[Oldschool Flip]

My point was that certain Christians claiming that AIDS is a punishment from God and that actually being the case are two different issues. Furthermore, man hasn't "found a way", anyway. They still can't cure it. At best, they can treat the symptoms and delay the inevitable.

Well you're wrong there. Having HIV is not the same as having AIDS. AIDS kills HIV doesn't. Drugs now prevent HIV from converting to AIDS. That's why people whom have access are still living years after contracting HIV and can live till old age or another reason takes their life.

EXACTLY!!! It's a bit unclear if the critters we know as dinosaurs are referenced in the Bible. That has no bearing, however, on whether or not they (the ancient Hebrews) knew about such creatures.

Creationists and other deciphers' of the Bible say that WAS already known, as well as much of the universe by vague writings. Beasts with a tale the size of a branch (the actual real translation, and not Oak or tree trunk as some Bibles are revised with) hardly signify that dinosaurs were known about. They could be talking an elephant or an ox here.

To quote a Christian scholar, "There's the simple question of the honesty of these men (Jesus' disciples). Why would they lie? What would they have to gain from it? Most of them, it cost them their lives to teach and preach this." - Father Francis Martin, John Paul II Institute.

I'm not saying they're lying, I'm saying they were conned and were conning other people based on what they believe is the truth.

So what was Paul's incentive for supposedly conning people, especially since he, at one time, persecuted those very same people. If you look at what happened to Paul (imprisonment, flogging, eventual execution).

No idea. I'm a former smoker and now ridicule smokers who smoke around me.

LOL.....The Chinese wrote a similar account about Earth's destruction by flood, with just a few people surviving, at the same time such an event was actually occuring? 

The Chinese, nor any other race was wiped out. That's the point I'm trying to make. You can't document real time events if you're dead.

Ship is comprised of the following components

 


 
boat + eight + mouth (family member) = Ship

 

The origin of this word becomes more meaningful after reading the following verse. Genesis 7:7 - And Noah and his sons [Ham, Shem, and Japheth] and his wife and his sons' wives with him, went into the ark, to escape the waters of the flood.

The word 'mouth' is often used to describe number of family members. For example, the phrase 'One family of four mouths' means a family with four members. Four couples in Noah's family have a total of eight members.

http://www.yutopian.com/religion/words/

Once again, how do the Chinese get a similar account of Earth's destruction by Flood, with just a few people survivng by building a floating vessel?

More translations that are adapted to fit Christian analogy. Mouth in Chinese means mouth. Family in Chinese means family.

Were that the case, Joseph would not have considered divorcing Mary (as he was already married/bethroed at the time, having already paid the dowry for her). That has little to do with the Bible not prescribing December 25, as the date of Jesus' birth.

Lol, you mean it was okay with God to have his son raised by an adulterer?

Asia was discovered long before Christ was even born. As were parts of Africa. In both of those areas, Christianity was spread. And, this occured while Romans were putting Christians to death. So, your claim that Christianity didn't spread, until Christians left Europe is still FALSE.

Uh wrong again Sherlock. Christianity spread after Christ DIED. Don't make up stuff you don't know about. Christianity was spread by Constantine of Rome. Not the way Jesus wanted of course.

http://www.jcrelations.net/en/?id=2134

One: People who don't hold religion to their hearts are ALSO some of the most hateful people (check out some of the posts of certain non-believers here.

I wouldn't count getbig as a reliable source when it comes to this.

Two:Wars are fought over power and weaith, whether religion is used as justification or not. Stalin killed more people in year than the Crusaders killed in a decade. And his regime had NOTHING to do with Christianity or Islam.

True about Stalin, but whether it's about wealth and power, which do agree with, religion is the claimed reasons. Israelis and Palestinians have been waring for thousands of years because of HOLY LAND. And Muslims do suicidal missions not for money but because they believe in their religion. Even the Pope and the Vatican use religion to keep their priests and nuns in check by not letting them marry.

Three: You maintained that someone couldn't be a Christian, without the denomination. I showed you of an example of someone becoming a Christian in, perhaps, THE MOST HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT TO DO SO, a Muslim country. So, that claim of yours doesn't work.

Duh once they became Christian they had gotten a denomination. You can't become a Christian by just saying, I'm a Christian. You study it, and get BAPTIZED. Whether it was Baptist, Eveangelical, etc. doesn't matter, you're now a Christian.

That's a bet you'd likely lose.

Based on your analogy I would. But then your analogy is wrong.

Initially, you claimed they weren't there at all.

Initially I claimed that there

Ummm....to use your words, what you said was that there was nothing outside the Bible that documented the Exodus, which is false.

He cites the sources (written sources) of where he got those accounts. And, it doesn't matter if he was alive or not. NEWS FLASH!!! Most of the history that you read are events that YOU DID NOT WITNESSS YOURSELF (neither did the authors of the history books from which you read about them).

In essence, that is but a feeble excuse to cover your initial claim that there are no extra-Biblical references to the Exodus.

First, that leaves you with the task of pointing out those alleged screw-ups, as it relates to the writings of Josephus. Second, when the term is used in Scripture, the surrounding context makes it clear that the female is a virgin. Mary said, when told about her upcoming pregnancy, "How can this be, since I have not known man?"

Again Josephus didn't live at that time and had no idea of what happened except from what he heard.

Again, that's how we deal with history. Otherwise, you may as well chuck all of your history books, news papers, and encyclopedias IN THE TRASH. All of them have historical accounts and references about events, written by people WHO DID NOT WITNESS THE ACCOUNTS THEMSELVES.

The difference between a historical document and the Bible is they have proof of existence. The pyramids prove that they were built for royal entombment. The writings talk of flashes in the sky, black moons and such, but today's science tells us that they were meteorites and eclipses now. What people saw back then was what they thought were truths. And witness accounts can be made up. You aren't naive to believe that people are abducted by aliens even though they witnessed it? Or that there are vortexes in Sedona because someone knows in their heart they witnessed it. Forensic science blows up many eyewitness testimony when recounted and it doesn't fit. Quit relying on just your faith and use common sense too.

You and I could debate this all day, but just answer this one question then if you can't answer the amputee question:

If a Christian, whom gave their life to God, contracted AIDS through a blood transfusion because of an operation ( and there were many in the 80's) why didn't God save them if they weren't being evil? And why would God save a criminal who accepted Jesus as a savior, but condemn to hell a do gooder who volunteered and gave away all their assets to help the poor, unfortunate or sick that didn't? Is God that narcisitic?

[Necrosis]

this simple argument is a especially potent argument against god and miracles. If god did exist a miracle would be preformed where everyone would have to accept it, a breach of physics would be very noticable. Insted he does it by causing remissions in diseases in which remission is possible. For example the placebo effect can account for remissions, nothing miraculous about it, until the religious get ahold of it. Just one leg growing back in history would convince me.

[loco]

Actually it's because the governments are corrupt and don't give a crap about it. And to be honest, I don't feel compelled to volunteer to help. I have my family that I care about and want to ensure my genes and family continue on down the cycle.
It doesn't make sense to take care of other countries when we can't take care of our own first. Why don't doctors, nurses and others whom volunteer just run free clinics here to the poor and unfortunate if that's their goal.
I'll help out friends and even organization locally because I feel it helps the community, but to do it because you think it's "saintly" is just a feel good act. Even if I did, I'd be condemned to hell anyway since I don't accept Jesus as any type of savior, according to you or any other Christian, so why bother doing just good deeds? According to your Bible it would be for naught.

What?  You are the one who brought up Christians and starving children in 3rd world countries.  Now you don't care about them?  Right.  Don't bring them up then.  That's why those children are still starving, because too many people in developed countries think like you do.

And who said those same volunteers who help children in 3rd world countries don't help people in need in the US too?  They do.  They treat patients for free if they can't pay.  Some even refuse to take medicaid or Medicare and treat them for free if that's all they have. 

And they are not the only Christians helping people in the US.  Ever heard of the Salvation Army?  And that's just to name one of many.

Here, take it from a fellow atheist of yours:


"We atheists have to accept that most believers are better human beings"

Roy Hattersley
Monday September 12, 2005

Guardian

Hurricane Katrina did not stay on the front pages for long. Yesterday's Red Cross appeal for an extra 40,000 volunteer workers was virtually ignored.

The disaster will return to the headlines when one sort of newspaper reports a particularly gruesome discovery or another finds additional evidence of President Bush's negligence. But month after month of unremitting suffering is not news. Nor is the monotonous performance of the unpleasant tasks that relieve the pain and anguish of the old, the sick and the homeless - the tasks in which the Salvation Army specialise.

The Salvation Army has been given a special status as provider-in-chief of American disaster relief. But its work is being augmented by all sorts of other groups. Almost all of them have a religious origin and character.

Notable by their absence are teams from rationalist societies, free thinkers' clubs and atheists' associations - the sort of people who not only scoff at religion's intellectual absurdity but also regard it as a positive force for evil.

The arguments against religion are well known and persuasive. Faith schools, as they are now called, have left sectarian scars on Northern Ireland. Stem-cell research is forbidden because an imaginary God - who is not enough of a philosopher to realise that the ingenuity of a scientist is just as natural as the instinct of Rousseau's noble savage - condemns what he does not understand and the churches that follow his teaching forbid their members to pursue cures for lethal diseases.

Yet men and women who believe that the Pope is the devil incarnate, or (conversely) regard his ex cathedra pronouncements as holy writ, are the people most likely to take the risks and make the sacrifices involved in helping others. Last week a middle-ranking officer of the Salvation Army, who gave up a well-paid job to devote his life to the poor, attempted to convince me that homosexuality is a mortal sin.

Late at night, on the streets of one of our great cities, that man offers friendship as well as help to the most degraded and (to those of a censorious turn of mind) degenerate human beings who exist just outside the boundaries of our society. And he does what he believes to be his Christian duty without the slightest suggestion of disapproval. Yet, for much of his time, he is meeting needs that result from conduct he regards as intrinsically wicked.

Civilised people do not believe that drug addiction and male prostitution offend against divine ordinance. But those who do are the men and women most willing to change the fetid bandages, replace the sodden sleeping bags and - probably most difficult of all - argue, without a trace of impatience, that the time has come for some serious medical treatment. Good works, John Wesley insisted, are no guarantee of a place in heaven. But they are most likely to be performed by people who believe that heaven exists.

The correlation is so clear that it is impossible to doubt that faith and charity go hand in hand. The close relationship may have something to do with the belief that we are all God's children, or it may be the result of a primitive conviction that, although helping others is no guarantee of salvation, it is prudent to be recorded in a book of gold, like James Leigh Hunt's Abu Ben Adam, as "one who loves his fellow men". Whatever the reason, believers answer the call, and not just the Salvation Army. When I was a local councillor, the Little Sisters of the Poor - right at the other end of the theological spectrum - did the weekly washing for women in back-to-back houses who were too ill to scrub for themselves.

It ought to be possible to live a Christian life without being a Christian or, better still, to take Christianity à la carte. The Bible is so full of contradictions that we can accept or reject its moral advice according to taste. Yet men and women who, like me, cannot accept the mysteries and the miracles do not go out with the Salvation Army at night.

The only possible conclusion is that faith comes with a packet of moral imperatives that, while they do not condition the attitude of all believers, influence enough of them to make them morally superior to atheists like me. The truth may make us free. But it has not made us as admirable as the average captain in the Salvation Army.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5283079-103390,00.html

[Oldschool Flip]

What?  You are the one who brought up Christians and starving children in 3rd world countries.  Now you don't care about them?  Right.  Don't bring them up then.  That's why those children are still starving, because too many people in developed countries think like you do.

And who said those same volunteers who help children in 3rd world countries don't help people in need in the US too?  They do.  They treat patients for free if they can't pay.  Some even refuse to take medicaid or Medicare and treat them for free if that's all they have. 

And they are not the only Christians helping people in the US.  Ever heard of the Salvation Army?  And that's just to name one of many.

Here, take it from a fellow atheist of yours:


"We atheists have to accept that most believers are better human beings"

Roy Hattersley
Monday September 12, 2005

Guardian

Hurricane Katrina did not stay on the front pages for long. Yesterday's Red Cross appeal for an extra 40,000 volunteer workers was virtually ignored.

The disaster will return to the headlines when one sort of newspaper reports a particularly gruesome discovery or another finds additional evidence of President Bush's negligence. But month after month of unremitting suffering is not news. Nor is the monotonous performance of the unpleasant tasks that relieve the pain and anguish of the old, the sick and the homeless - the tasks in which the Salvation Army specialise.

The Salvation Army has been given a special status as provider-in-chief of American disaster relief. But its work is being augmented by all sorts of other groups. Almost all of them have a religious origin and character.

Notable by their absence are teams from rationalist societies, free thinkers' clubs and atheists' associations - the sort of people who not only scoff at religion's intellectual absurdity but also regard it as a positive force for evil.

The arguments against religion are well known and persuasive. Faith schools, as they are now called, have left sectarian scars on Northern Ireland. Stem-cell research is forbidden because an imaginary God - who is not enough of a philosopher to realise that the ingenuity of a scientist is just as natural as the instinct of Rousseau's noble savage - condemns what he does not understand and the churches that follow his teaching forbid their members to pursue cures for lethal diseases.

Yet men and women who believe that the Pope is the devil incarnate, or (conversely) regard his ex cathedra pronouncements as holy writ, are the people most likely to take the risks and make the sacrifices involved in helping others. Last week a middle-ranking officer of the Salvation Army, who gave up a well-paid job to devote his life to the poor, attempted to convince me that homosexuality is a mortal sin.

Late at night, on the streets of one of our great cities, that man offers friendship as well as help to the most degraded and (to those of a censorious turn of mind) degenerate human beings who exist just outside the boundaries of our society. And he does what he believes to be his Christian duty without the slightest suggestion of disapproval. Yet, for much of his time, he is meeting needs that result from conduct he regards as intrinsically wicked.

Civilised people do not believe that drug addiction and male prostitution offend against divine ordinance. But those who do are the men and women most willing to change the fetid bandages, replace the sodden sleeping bags and - probably most difficult of all - argue, without a trace of impatience, that the time has come for some serious medical treatment. Good works, John Wesley insisted, are no guarantee of a place in heaven. But they are most likely to be performed by people who believe that heaven exists.

The correlation is so clear that it is impossible to doubt that faith and charity go hand in hand. The close relationship may have something to do with the belief that we are all God's children, or it may be the result of a primitive conviction that, although helping others is no guarantee of salvation, it is prudent to be recorded in a book of gold, like James Leigh Hunt's Abu Ben Adam, as "one who loves his fellow men". Whatever the reason, believers answer the call, and not just the Salvation Army. When I was a local councillor, the Little Sisters of the Poor - right at the other end of the theological spectrum - did the weekly washing for women in back-to-back houses who were too ill to scrub for themselves.

It ought to be possible to live a Christian life without being a Christian or, better still, to take Christianity à la carte. The Bible is so full of contradictions that we can accept or reject its moral advice according to taste. Yet men and women who, like me, cannot accept the mysteries and the miracles do not go out with the Salvation Army at night.

The only possible conclusion is that faith comes with a packet of moral imperatives that, while they do not condition the attitude of all believers, influence enough of them to make them morally superior to atheists like me. The truth may make us free. But it has not made us as admirable as the average captain in the Salvation Army.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5283079-103390,00.html

Hey let God take care of them since he's Almighty. Remember all you Christians have to do is pray and it will turn out all right for all those starving kids. I brought up starving kids because if God did care they wouldn't be starving. It's not within my power or means to save them, so I CHOOSE to take care of my own. Nothing wrong with that as others is all countries, rich or poor do the same.

[loco]

Hey let God take care of them since he's Almighty. Remember all you Christians have to do is pray and it will turn out all right for all those starving kids. I brought up starving kids because if God did care they wouldn't be starving. It's not within my power or means to save them, so I CHOOSE to take care of my own. Nothing wrong with that as others is all countries, rich or poor do the same.

And since you don't believe in God, you are pretty much saying "screw those children in 3rd world countries.  Let them starve to death."  Very nice!  I'm glad not all secular people think like you.  I'm glad Christian volunteers in the US don't think like you.

[Necrosis]

And since you don't believe in God, you are pretty much saying "screw those children in 3rd world countries.  Let them starve to death."  Very nice!  I'm glad not all secular people think like you.  I'm glad Christian volunteers in the US don't think like you.

your god created the condition since he can see the future he knew what would occur. How do you counter this?


how can your god be all good if evil exists? since he created all, and everything is his creation?

i would hope christian volunteers would help in 3rd world coundtries since their god created the situation.

[loco]

your god created the condition since he can see the future he knew what would occur. How do you counter this?


how can your god be all good if evil exists? since he created all, and everything is his creation?

i would hope christian volunteers would help in 3rd world coundtries since their god created the situation.

Sure, God created the situation.  It's all God's fault, oh and it's Bush's fault too, and the USA's fault, and the Jews' fault, and Israel's fault too.   

Why don't you look in the mirror and stop blaming others and pointing fingers?

We created the situation, not God.

[Necrosis]

Sure, God created the situation.  It's all God's fault, oh and it's Bush's fault too, and the USA's fault, and the Jews' fault, and Israel's fault too.   

Why don't you look in the mirror and stop blaming others and pointing fingers?

We created the situation, not God.

wrong, does god not know the future? answer this question. Your right we did create the situation because there is no god. Please answer the first question.

[Oldschool Flip]

And since you don't believe in God, you are pretty much saying "screw those children in 3rd world countries.  Let them starve to death."  Very nice!  I'm glad not all secular people think like you.  I'm glad Christian volunteers in the US don't think like you.

Way to twist words. Like I said, I don't have the means. Can squeeze blood from a turnip. If I was a billionaire, I would definitely have a food program to help, so maybe if you pray for me to win the lottery or something, that would help.

[loco]

wrong, does god not know the future? answer this question. Your right we did create the situation because there is no god. Please answer the first question.

If there is no God, then why do you blame him for the situation?  What are you doing for starving children in 3rd world countries?

[loco]

Way to twist words. Like I said, I don't have the means. Can squeeze blood from a turnip. If I was a billionaire, I would definitely have a food program to help, so maybe if you pray for me to win the lottery or something, that would help.

Wrong.  Lots of the volunteers who go with these doctors are middle class people with very humble incomes.  All they would need from you is your time and your muscles.  Money is not an issue, and the lack thereof it's not an excuse.

[Necrosis]

If there is no God, then why do you blame him for the situation?  What are you doing for starving children in 3rd world countries?

you are avoiding the question, at least answer your question, are you afraid of the implications of your answer?

[MCWAY]

Well you're wrong there. Having HIV is not the same as having AIDS. AIDS kills HIV doesn't. Drugs now prevent HIV from converting to AIDS. That's why people whom have access are still living years after contracting HIV and can live till old age or another reason takes their life.

I never claimed that having HIV was the same as having AIDS. There's no cure for AIDS, as I stated before. Once you've got it (barring a miracle or a subsequent cure down the road), GAME OVER!!!

Creationists and other deciphers' of the Bible say that WAS already known, as well as much of the universe by vague writings. Beasts with a tale the size of a branch (the actual real translation, and not Oak or tree trunk as some Bibles are revised with) hardly signify that dinosaurs were known about. They could be talking an elephant or an ox here.

Oxen are mentioned by name in the Bible. Were they mentioning elephants? That I can't tell. Regardless, that does little to support your claim that dinosaus were unknown at that time period.

I'm not saying they're lying, I'm saying they were conned and were conning other people based on what they believe is the truth.

You cannot demonstrate that they were conned. The disciples claimed that Jesus rose from the dead. They saw Jesus beaten and crucified; and, He was pierced in His side, to confirm that He was dead. Pilate had an official of his CONFIRM Jesus' death, before releasing custody of Judas' body to Joseph of Arimathea. And, to top it all off, the Pharisees asked that the tomb be sealed and guarded to keep the disciples from stealing Jesus' body and claiming that He'd been resurrected.

Now, you get to explain how the disciples were "conned" into thinking He rose from that tomb. More importantly, who is this alleged con artist and what were his motives for all this?

The Chinese, nor any other race was wiped out. That's the point I'm trying to make. You can't document real time events if you're dead.

You still can't explain how the Chinese got the same (or similar) account. Their account has the planet being destroyed, with only a few (eight) people surviving, by building a floating structure.

More translations that are adapted to fit Christian analogy. Mouth in Chinese means mouth. Family in Chinese means family.

More like wishful thinking on your part.

Lol, you mean it was okay with God to have his son raised by an adulterer?

Mary didn't commit adultery, or Joseph would have (at least) divorced Mary or (at most) had her put to death. He did neither.

Uh wrong again Sherlock. Christianity spread after Christ DIED. Don't make up stuff you don't know about. Christianity was spread by Constantine of Rome. Not the way Jesus wanted of course.

You're one to talk!!! Christianity spread shortly after Christ's death and ressurection and BEFORE Constantine's time. It spread while Romans were persecuting Christians, which happened LONG before Constantine was even born. Constantine's adoption of Christianity as a state religion helped lead to its being spread MORE. But, its initial outreach began much earlier.

I wouldn't count getbig as a reliable source when it comes to this.

It's WAY beyong GetBig, to which I can attest firsthand.

True about Stalin, but whether it's about wealth and power, which do agree with, religion is the claimed reasons. Israelis and Palestinians have been waring for thousands of years because of HOLY LAND. And Muslims do suicidal missions not for money but because they believe in their religion. Even the Pope and the Vatican use religion to keep their priests and nuns in check by not letting them marry.

It's still about wealth and power. It's true about Stalin, the Muslims, and others. The difference simply is that one used religion as a medium and the other(s) did not. You also forget that, in the case of Muslim terrorists, the families of suicide bomobers often get paid for the bombers' service.

As for the Pope and the Vatican, whatever their reasoning for not allowing priests and nuns to go unmarry, it is categorically UNBIBLICAL. Nowhere in Scripture is being unmarried MANDATED for priests.

Duh once they became Christian they had gotten a denomination. You can't become a Christian by just saying, I'm a Christian. You study it, and get BAPTIZED. Whether it was Baptist, Eveangelical, etc. doesn't matter, you're now a Christian.

You forget that there are non-denominational Christians as well.

Again Josephus didn't live at that time and had no idea of what happened except from what he heard.

Wrong again! Josephus references some of his sources. Once again, if you read a history book or even a newspaper about certain accounts and the authors/writer did NOT witness those events themselves, you are relying on SECONDHAND acocunts, period.

You didn't live during the Civil War; does that meant that the events about which you read were just something the author(s) of your American History book(s) just heard? There's a reason we have these things called HISTORIANS.

The difference between a historical document and the Bible is they have proof of existence. The pyramids prove that they were built for royal entombment. The writings talk of flashes in the sky, black moons and such, but today's science tells us that they were meteorites and eclipses now. What people saw back then was what they thought were truths. And witness accounts can be made up. You aren't naive to believe that people are abducted by aliens even though they witnessed it? Or that there are vortexes in Sedona because someone knows in their heart they witnessed it. Forensic science blows up many eyewitness testimony when recounted and it doesn't fit. Quit relying on just your faith and use common sense too.

I have used common sense, which is why dismantling your claims is as easy as it is. First, you claimed that there was no documentation of the Exodus outside the Bible. When that got shown to be false, you make up excuses about people being "conned" and the extra-Biblical sources being "just what he heard". Of course, as is often the case, that standard isn't applied to other historical accounts.

Furthermore, you've presented no "forensic science" (or any other, for that matter) that "blows up" the account of the Exodus. On the contrary, archaeological discoveries have (time and time again) verified accounts and events that, at one point, were documented solely in Scripture. That's part of the reason why I can easily cite at least two extra-Biblical accounts of the Exodus.

You and I could debate this all day, but just answer this one question then if you can't answer the amputee question:

If a Christian, whom gave their life to God, contracted AIDS through a blood transfusion because of an operation ( and there were many in the 80's) why didn't God save them if they weren't being evil? And why would God save a criminal who accepted Jesus as a savior, but condemn to hell a do gooder who volunteered and gave away all their assets to help the poor, unfortunate or sick that didn't? Is God that narcisitic?

One, who says that God hasn't healed such cases? We already seen you try to marginalize or discredit the words of the man, who claim God healed him of Chron's disease. If someone were to say something similar about AIDS, you'd give the same excuses.

Besides, you state (on the one hand) that people "just happen" to get cured of diseases alll the time; yet, (on the other hand) you brag about medicine, which had to be developed with countless man-hours and millions of dollars, has delayed the effects of AIDS on people.

As far as saving criminals and condeming do-gooders, though, this was answered earlier. Man see the OUTWARD apperance; but the Lord sees the heart. He knows why people do what they do.

Paul mentions that such actions (giving away possessions) are still no guarantee to the kingdom, "And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing." 1 Cor. 13:3.

Yes, God has forgiven people who've done horrible things; but that doesn't mean they go unpunished (from an earthly perspective for their deeds). King David comes to mind, as does the repentant thief on the cross.

[loco]

you are avoiding the question, at least answer your question, are you afraid of the implications of your answer?

Necrosis,
Are you new to this board?  What is this?  Are you quizzing me on my faith?  You are going to play a game of words with me to try to make me question my faith?  LOL   

Many others before you have played this game with me on this board.  If you are bored and want to know my answer to all your questions, just browse the hundreds of threads on these board.  Just search "loco" or simply browse. 

Smarter and far more educated people then you and I out there believe in God, some of them are former atheists. 

Now, if you have a legitimate question, then I will try to answer it.  But I don't have time to play your game, again, right this moment.

[Necrosis]

Necrosis,
Are you new to this board?  What is this?  Are you quizzing me on my faith?  You are going to play a game of words with me to try to make me question my faith?  LOL   

Many others before you have played this game with me on this board.  If you are bored and want to know my answer to all your questions, just browse the hundreds of threads on these board.  Just search "loco" or simply browse. 

Smarter and far more educate people then you and I out there believe in God, some of them are former atheists. 

Now, if you have a legitimate question, then I will try to answer it.  But I don't have time to play your game, again, right this moment.

no quzzing im interested if god knows the future, you wont answer this question for some reason. Does the christian god know the future?

appeal to authority is a fallacy.

I will leave you alone, i like you

continue your argument with oldschool, i wont interrupt anymore

[loco]

no quzzing im interested if god knows the future, you wont answer this question for some reason. Does the christian god know the future?

appeal to authority is a fallacy.

I will leave you alone, i like you

continue your argument with oldschool, i wont interrupt anymore

No, don't leave me alone.  The board is for discussing/debating.  You are not interrupting.

If you really are interested, then yes, of course I believe that God knows the future.  You know I believe this, and I know you'll follow this with another question.  Your turn.   

[loco]

LOL.....The Chinese wrote a similar account about Earth's destruction by flood, with just a few people surviving, at the same time such an event was actually occuring? 

Ship is comprised of the following components

 


 
boat + eight + mouth (family member) = Ship

More translations that are adapted to fit Christian analogy. Mouth in Chinese means mouth. Family in Chinese means family.

I don't know, Oldschool Flip.  A Chinese woman, my physics professor at the time, told me this same thing about 12 years ago.  She said that the word has its origin in an ancient story of the ark and the flood.  Christians didn't just make this one up to "fit Christian analogy".

[Oldschool Flip]

I never claimed that having HIV was the same as having AIDS. There's no cure for AIDS, as I stated before. Once you've got it (barring a miracle or a subsequent cure down the road), GAME OVER!!!

Okay, I agree with you here.

Oxen are mentioned by name in the Bible. Were they mentioning elephants? That I can't tell. Regardless, that does little to support your claim that dinosaus were unknown at that time period.

No mention of bones the size of a cart? Or animals that preceeded the size of a couple of houses? Surely if they knew that would be historical enough to include in the Bible.

You cannot demonstrate that they were conned. The disciples claimed that Jesus rose from the dead. They saw Jesus beaten and crucified; and, He was pierced in His side, to confirm that He was dead. Pilate had an official of his CONFIRM Jesus' death, before releasing custody of Judas' body to Joseph of Arimathea. And, to top it all off, the Pharisees asked that the tomb be sealed and guarded to keep the disciples from stealing Jesus' body and claiming that He'd been resurrected.

You can't demonstrate they weren't. Hearsay, doesn't prove it. Why not just show up in front of Pilate 3 days later? If they didn't continue with their "story" then no one would follow. Once discovered a farce, why would anyone believe?

Now, you get to explain how the disciples were "conned" into thinking He rose from that tomb. More importantly, who is this alleged con artist and what were his motives for all this?

Just did. If what they preached didn't come true, no one would believe anything they said afterward. That's a good enough reason. People have done it since man came to earth. Which BTW, was Adam a Cromagnan Man or Neanderthal? We have proof they existed and if Adam was neither, then that already refutes Genesis.

You still can't explain how the Chinese got the same (or similar) account. Their account has the planet being destroyed, with only a few (eight) people surviving, by building a floating structure.

Hope this helps:

This flood story apparently comes from the United States, not China. We have traced it back to Nelson's The Deluge Story in Stone (1931, 181-182). Nelson says that, according to the Hihking, Fuhi "escaped the waters of a deluge, and reappeared as the first man at the reproduction of a renovated world, accompanied by his wife, his three sons and three daughters." There is no mention of a boat. The temple illustration is a separate account which Nelson attributes to Gutzlaff, presumably Karl Gützlaff, a Lutheran missionary in China around 1825. Gutzlaff reports it as a picture of Noah, not Fuhi. There are no further references to allow either account to be checked.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CG/CG202_2.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_flood#Hebrew

More like wishful thinking on your part.

Not really. The Bible has all sorts of scriptures of a beast with 7 seven heads, etc. then priests, pastors, whomever, make their own conclusions of what they think it really means.

Mary didn't commit adultery, or Joseph would have (at least) divorced Mary or (at most) had her put to death. He did neither.

Wait you said Joseph was already married so hooking up with Mary is not being faithful. Am I wrong here?

You're one to talk!!! Christianity spread shortly after Christ's death and ressurection and BEFORE Constantine's time. It spread while Romans were persecuting Christians, which happened LONG before Constantine was even born. Constantine's adoption of Christianity as a state religion helped lead to its being spread MORE. But, its initial outreach began much earlier.

Christianity was named after Christ. That should be a hint. It wasn't called Christianity in the Old Testament. The Romans were killing people who followed Christ's teachings. It had to start with HIM where he lived, which was in old Roman Empire. The Empire didn't divide to east and west until Jesus death. So unless Jesus could teleport to Asian countries (and there's no mention of that) then his teachings were in Europe before it went East.

http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/christrome.htm

It's WAY beyong GetBig, to which I can attest firsthand.

While it goes both ways, for people whom are taught "Love thy neighbor", you see few that truly follow it. And if you aren't following it, then how can you be a follower of God? Would you love someone whom murdered someone in your family? Doubt it. But that's what you're COMMANDED to do. Atheists don't feel that way. If someone did that to anyone in my family, I feel they deserve death. No if's, ands or buts. I not conflicted with what's the "right" thing to do. If you chose the murderer should die, then you're in the wrong according to your religion.

It's still about wealth and power. It's true about Stalin, the Muslims, and others. The difference simply is that one used religion as a medium and the other(s) did not. You also forget that, in the case of Muslim terrorists, the families of suicide bomobers often get paid for the bombers' service.

But using religion is preying on those whom are religious and probably wouldn't think about doing it until they are abashed with their duty to their God. Once they hear that their religious belief might be at stake, it's easy for them to abide even if they are unwilling because they think it's for a greater good.

As for the Pope and the Vatican, whatever their reasoning for not allowing priests and nuns to go unmarry, it is categorically UNBIBLICAL. Nowhere in Scripture is being unmarried MANDATED for priests.

Agreed, part of the reason I left Catholicism. They make up the rules as they go along.

You forget that there are non-denominational Christians as well.

So the denomination is a non-denominational Christian. In other words they are still labeled just like a Lutheran, Catholic, etc. Just not a "named" Christian of faith.

Wrong again! Josephus references some of his sources. Once again, if you read a history book or even a newspaper about certain accounts and the authors/writer did NOT witness those events themselves, you are relying on SECONDHAND acocunts, period.

But these authors are held to evidence at hand. If they wrote anything that didn't coincide with what happened historically, their writings would be scrutinized and be fabled myth. Stories of Rome conquering countries, though not by original authors, can be proven. Buildings are still around from that era showing the dominance the Romans had. The Bible can't be proven to be a "book from God".

You didn't live during the Civil War; does that meant that the events about which you read were just something the author(s) of your American History book(s) just heard? There's a reason we have these things called HISTORIANS.

We have guns, ammo, flags, antique clothing, forts. This is proof.

I have used common sense, which is why dismantling your claims is as easy as it is. First, you claimed that there was no documentation of the Exodus outside the Bible. When that got shown to be false, you make up excuses about people being "conned" and the extra-Biblical sources being "just what he heard". Of course, as is often the case, that standard isn't applied to other historical accounts.

Please, you reference Christian and other pro Christian sites as your proof of Exodus outside of the Bible. How about something from the Incas, China, or other thousand year old countries that have history of the beginning of the world? Would I believe China's account of how the world started too? Nope. The Incas either. Point being, they are all in the same boat. Before science they gave what they could perceive as the beginning of life. Of course science has shown that dinosaurs came before man, millions of years before. And you can't deny it because we have proof. If I saw limbs grow out of an amputee miraculously without any medical help, then I'd probably believe there was a God.

Furthermore, you've presented no "forensic science" (or any other, for that matter) that "blows up" the account of the Exodus. On the contrary, archaeological discoveries have (time and time again) verified accounts and events that, at one point, were documented solely in Scripture. That's part of the reason why I can easily cite at least two extra-Biblical accounts of the Exodus.

What? How do explain animals that are only native to Australia, and being many can't swim from Mt. Ararat to Australia, not anywhere else in the world? They are secluded because when continents separated, which took millions of years (remember that San Diego is inching towards San Francisco, this is proven), they had no where but Australia to live. Based on the blueprints in the Bible, there is NO WAY that every species alive today would have fit on the Ark, plus you had to have millions of pounds of food to have them survive, and ample room for waste. There is an estimated 40 millions species on Earth. Even if you divided by 2 that would be 20 million separate dwellings. Um science and COMMON SENSE knows that isn't possible with the measurements given. Lol, or did God shrink every animal down to insect size first? Siting "scripture" isn't truth. Even others have disbeliefs of the Ark ever really existing based on physics of boats and ships made solely of wood.

http://www.genesisfiles.com/NoahsArk.htm

One, who says that God hasn't healed such cases? We already seen you try to marginalize or discredit the words of the man, who claim God healed him of Chron's disease. If someone were to say something similar about AIDS, you'd give the same excuses.

Didn't marginalize it. It happens daily.

Besides, you state (on the one hand) that people "just happen" to get cured of diseases alll the time; yet, (on the other hand) you brag about medicine, which had to be developed with countless man-hours and millions of dollars, has delayed the effects of AIDS on people.

Yes. Sometimes medicine works and sometimes people heal holistically. There's proof of that on paper.

As far as saving criminals and condeming do-gooders, though, this was answered earlier. Man see the OUTWARD apperance; but the Lord sees the heart. He knows why people do what they do.

And it doesn't make sense. Someone who steals and hurts people, but accepts Jesus and a person that volunteers their life to helping others but doesn't, is CHOSEN by God because the thief regardless of how harmful he's been, and how good and loving the latter was, pay homage. Lol, this is why I wouldn't participate in heaven, even if it was true (although it's not). Sounds like a dictatorship.

Paul mentions that such actions (giving away possessions) are still no guarantee to the kingdom, "And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing." 1 Cor. 13:3.

And Jesus did command you give EVERYTHING away and follow him. You've done that already right? Wait, you have a computer and land line though.

Yes, God has forgiven people who've done horrible things; but that doesn't mean they go unpunished (from an earthly perspective for their deeds). King David comes to mind, as does the repentant thief on the cross.

Mercy for the cruel, but not for starving non believing children. Makes total sense.

[Oldschool Flip]

Furthermore, you've presented no "forensic science" (or any other, for that matter) that "blows up" the account of the Exodus. On the contrary, archaeological discoveries have (time and time again) verified accounts and events that, at one point, were documented solely in Scripture. That's part of the reason why I can easily cite at least two extra-Biblical accounts of the Exodus.

My bad. I was so wrapped up in Genesis, I responded wrong to you. My apology. But you can't have forensic evidence of an event that in didn't seem to occur in the first place. What archaeological discoveries? Don't say the pyramids are proof. We know why they are there. Show me.

Here's more on the story of Exodus outside of what the Bible teaches:

"Jews" did not became slaves in Egypt, as there were no "Jews" existent at the time. "Jews" is a misnomer for the Hebrew Children of Israel, or the Hebrews. Initially, the first "Jews;" so-called, consisted of only the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin who remained as the remnant of Abraham, after the secession of the ten tribes who moved to Samaria, and created the "Divided Monarchy" [circa 735 B.C.E.]. The Biblical Books of Genesis and Exodus provide the answer to the question of how the Hebrews became slaves in Egypt.. A famine was coming to the land in which the descendents of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob had settled. Joseph, son of Jacob, had been sold into slavery in Egypt due, in part, to the jealousy of his brothers. Though his early days there were filled with trouble, Jacob consistently found favor with the Egyptians, leading up to the day where he interpreted a dream that the Pharaoh of that day had; the dream indicated 7 years of bountiful harvests, followed by 7 years of famine. Joseph proposed a plan that would save not only Egypt, but the surrounding areas, from the full hardship of the famine. During the famine, Jacob sent his sons to Egypt. After some tests (what some would call cruel games), Joseph and his family were reunited, and were invited by Pharaoh to stay in the land.

Years passed, and the descendents of Jacob grew greatly in number. After several hundred years, the Pharaoh of Moses' day saw the Hebrews as a threat, rather than guests honored by his ancestor. In an attempt to subdue the threat, Pharaoh enslaved the Hebrews, even going so far as to order the death of all male Hebrew babies. One that was saved by his mother and sister was Moses, who became Pharaoh's adopted son, the succeeding Pharaoh's adopted brother, and the savior of the Hebrew people.

**************************************...

Actually, if you study the actual documented history Egypt there is serious doubt that there were the massive flux of Hebrew slaves as depicted in the bible. Assuming that the enslavement and exodus occurred during the Middle Kingdom, as thought by certain biblical references including the building of two cities for Ramses, there is a plethora of information from that period. None of said information refers to massive amounts of Hebrew slaves or to a mass exodus. Certainly, there is no literature from that time that points to the plagues that supposedly rained down on Egypt that were described in the bible.

The Middle Kingdom of Egypt was a vibrant time in Egyptian culture with many foreign peoples populating the land. Egypt had just recently reclaimed its society from being controlled by foreigners and thus were suspicious. Therefore, they assessed many more taxes on foreigners than on native Egyptians. During this period many cultures relocated, peacefully and staggered. Not in the mass exodus described in the bible. Also, recent evidence suggests that the "slaves" who built the cities and temples were respected artisans and workers. Of course, there were slaves in Egypt, as in most cultures of the time, but not the massive numbers portrayed in the bible. And most certainly not all hebrew.

It is suprising that an empire with such a rich and well documented history would be completely silent on such events as described in the bible. These chapters in the bible were written much later by hebrew priests attempting to make a great and powerful history for their small nomadic tribe. This tale ended with the Hebrews conquering the land of Israel thus giving rise to the myth of a Jewish holy land. This is obviously a story meant to give hope and spirit to people, to show that though they were outnumbered their God would save them. Unfortunately, the tiny Judah nation found out that these stories were just parables when they were conquered by the Romans.

http://www.answers.com/topic/the-exodus

and another:

http://www.aish.com/societyWork/sciencenature/Archaeology_and_the_Exodus.asp

[Oldschool Flip]

Wrong.  Lots of the volunteers who go with these doctors are middle class people with very humble incomes.  All they would need from you is your time and your muscles.  Money is not an issue, and the lack thereof it's not an excuse.

Lol, like many other "Christians" who live in the United States and don't do the same, I CHOOSE to live a good life here and not to endanger myself or my family on a quest that can't be solved unless the governments of Africa take care of their people first. You can make all the claims you want, but you're not over there volunteering either. Hypocrisy at it's best. Like you said money is not an issue and lack of it is no excuse, so what's yours? It's amazing how you ridicule what I am supposed to do, yet it's okay if you're not doing it. Pot meet kettle.