“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#1186 May 12, 2013
The above explanation is more in tune with how astrologers would have thought. The whole bit about the 'star' physically leading them and then fixing itself over Bethlehem would fit in more with the kind of exaggerations that come from a story being retold many times.
Lincoln

United States

#1187 May 12, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
The above explanation is more in tune with how astrologers would have thought. The whole bit about the 'star' physically leading them and then fixing itself over Bethlehem would fit in more with the kind of exaggerations that come from a story being retold many times.
RC Church determined which books were in the Holy Bible.
Date first written not determined but not at time of Christ.
.... a story being retold many times and then translated has issues?
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

#1188 May 12, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
The above explanation is more in tune with how astrologers would have thought. The whole bit about the 'star' physically leading them and then fixing itself over Bethlehem would fit in more with the kind of exaggerations that come from a story being retold many times.
Christians have combined three separate and distinct prophecies into one big lie. They've combined the three wise men, the two visiting kings from the east and the west, and the kings bearing gifts. This story inherently makes no sense either. How would the kings know it was a sign of the birth of the king of the Jews? The star isn't even foretold in the bible, it's in one of the secret books that wasn't canonized. If the Kings came from the east, the star would've been in the west. And a star does not stand over a certain place, it's too high up in space. The star in the east did appear on Friday January 6, 1984, three kings day in Puerto Rico. Coincidence? Pres. Reagan and Zhao Zyoung of China were at a summit close by. They took it as a sign by the Christian story and drove down in a limo and the Messiah chased them away. This happened after the article in the newspaper was published worldwide.

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#1189 May 12, 2013
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>Christians have combined three separate and distinct prophecies into one big lie. They've combined the three wise men, the two visiting kings from the east and the west, and the kings bearing gifts. This story inherently makes no sense either. How would the kings know it was a sign of the birth of the king of the Jews? The star isn't even foretold in the bible, it's in one of the secret books that wasn't canonized. If the Kings came from the east, the star would've been in the west. And a star does not stand over a certain place, it's too high up in space. The star in the east did appear on Friday January 6, 1984, three kings day in Puerto Rico. Coincidence? Pres. Reagan and Zhao Zyoung of China were at a summit close by. They took it as a sign by the Christian story and drove down in a limo and the Messiah chased them away. This happened after the article in the newspaper was published worldwide.
Poe.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#1190 May 12, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Your question is nonsense, and illogically constructed.
Your "Universe B" assumes the antecedent - as in, universe with life and tress, etc. exists without a creating intelligence.
It offers, therefore, an impossible task - to show that one universe requires an intelligent creator when you already built the negation of that point into the question.
And you are assuming *your* conclusion by saying my universe B is impossible.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1191 May 12, 2013
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>There is some truth in all religions and what I practice is an
Who cares?(shrug)
susanblange wrote:
eclectic faith. When God comes to earth, she will establish all things and unite the righteous against the wicked. At least we will all be able to agree that the OT is the foundation of life on earth, we will know this because it will be fulfilled.
Right, so you have no evidence but promise us that your predictions are correct. Because that worked out so well for Ellen G White. I'm sure you will go down in history as being just as successful.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1192 May 12, 2013
Carchar king wrote:
<quoted text>
How about you disprove god.
Just as soon as you can disprove the FSM, IPU and Cosmic Sheep of Dimension Zog.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1193 May 12, 2013
Dude wrote:
And therein lies the problem. Jews say their interpretation is correct. Catholics say their interpretation is correct. Protestants say their interpretation is correct. Mormons say their interpretation is correct. Muslims say their interpretation is correct. You say your interpretation is correct.
Unfortunately none of you can prove it any more than the Hindu can prove Vishnu is the big daddy. When that's taken into account, what's left?
Ego.
Massive.
Monumental.
Human.
Ego.
So big it causes the Earth's axial tilt.
Buck Crick wrote:
No, your conclusion is not logical.
Even if ALL interpretations are INCORRECT, it does not necessarily and logically follow that no god exists.
If 12 people who have never met you give 12 different descriptions, they might all be wrong, but you still exist.
And what conclusion was that, Bucky? Did I state one? Did I make any **positive** claims of a **definitive** lack of God or Gods of any kind?

What's that you say? You're having reading comprehension problems? Ah, I thought as much.
Buck Crick wrote:
You, of course, will not take advantage of another opportunity I offer you to learn from me.
So you will remain ignorant.
Why?
Massive.
Monumental.
Human.
Ego.
Not really. Since from you there is very little to learn. EXCEPT perhaps how to expand on a monumentally massive fundie ego, since you got that one down pat. So I'll pass. Your brain holds very little of value.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1194 May 12, 2013
Prophet of peace wrote:
<quoted text>I think you miss the larger picture. Neither Universe A or B could exist without an extremely intelligent life-form (God). The level of complexity and order we see in this physical reality demands an explanation that science cannot give.
Ah, so you openly admit your position is god-of-the-gaps?

How is "complexity" measured in an objective manner via the scientific method?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1195 May 12, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Your list of tests seems less than exhaustive.
If the same standard were applied to scientific theory, few would have ever gained traction.
I'll give you a test:
What is the minimal evidence necessary to convert you to a theist?
Clearly, the list you provided is not it, unless you're stupid.
Would this test suffice:
A discovery of signature signs of intelligence in the DNA molecule.
Anthony Flew thought this evidence was significant. In fact it turned a lifelong atheist of revered intellect into a theist:
"The evidential situation of natural (as opposed to revealed) theology has been transformed in the more than fifty years since Watson and Crick won the Nobel Prize for their discovery of the double helix structure of DNA. It has become inordinately difficult even to begin to think about constructing a naturalistic theory of the evolution of that first reproducing organism".
-Anthony Flew, August 2004
As I mentioned, Flew's intellect as an atheist was revered, much more so than yours.
So what you're saying is that Flew's incredulity makes for a valid appeal to authority, but CAN'T actually provide the actual "signs of intelligence" in DNA, the mechanisms responsible nor evidence. But if science can't explain the origin then obviously the invisible wizard of the gaps "must" be the "answer."

And uh... Flew who?(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1196 May 12, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Your question is nonsense, and illogically constructed.
Your "Universe B" assumes the antecedent - as in, universe with life and tress, etc. exists without a creating intelligence.
It offers, therefore, an impossible task - to show that one universe requires an intelligent creator when you already built the negation of that point into the question.
Actually Buck you appear to be having basic reading comprehension problems again. His question provided BOTH scenarios - universe A WITH a God, and universe B WITHOUT a God. And what we CURRENTLY have is evidence of a universe. And nothing more. It's YOUR job to demonstrate that our universe IS universe A.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1197 May 12, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
That includes you.
In fact, you are worse than "mentally ill", by your own standard.
Not only do you not accept the definition of atheism (making you mentally ill), you attempt to lie to change it.
----------
"Atheism: a + theos, denying god" (Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology).
And a + theISM (which is more accurate) is denying BELIEF in (a) God(s). Pointed out to you a while back.
susanblange

Norfolk, VA

#1198 May 12, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
Who cares?(shrug)
<quoted text>
Right, so you have no evidence but promise us that your predictions are correct. Because that worked out so well for Ellen G White. I'm sure you will go down in history as being just as successful.
I've already gone down in history. I ended the cold war, restored pride to the military, and got the Jews out of Russia.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1199 May 12, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
How many times do I have to point out that this is NOT what thew BB theory says?
Can't he just lie instead?(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1200 May 12, 2013
KJV wrote:
And here I thought you were a YEC. My mistake.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1201 May 12, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
That is not only not reasonable, it is impossible.
Then God is impossible.

Hey, my assertion is just as good as yours.(shrug)
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1202 May 12, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Let's settle it - we can get together and you can watch me whoop your ass.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1203 May 12, 2013
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
Then show us how the "known laws of physics and chemistry" produced self-replicating life.
I say it doesn't work so well with "known laws".
Considering life exists and all life requires is physics and chemistry I'd say you were PROFOUNDLY ignorant.(shrug)
Buck Crick wrote:
And that's even letting you off the hook that the Big Bang Theory doesn't even coincide perfectly with "the known laws of physics and chemistry", as acknowledged by cosmological scientists.
What it does fit is a giant conspiracy of forces to produce the human mind.
No, it's a giant conspiracy of forces to produce the SQUIRREL mind.

Quite obviously the universe was designed especially for squirrels.

Only your anthropocentrism (read: EXTREME self-importance) claims otherwise.
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#1204 May 12, 2013
susanblange wrote:
<quoted text>I've already gone down in history. I ended the cold war, restored pride to the military, and got the Jews out of Russia.
Ah, I see. My mistake.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#1205 May 12, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you're saying is that Flew's incredulity makes for a valid appeal to authority, but CAN'T actually provide the actual "signs of intelligence" in DNA, the mechanisms responsible nor evidence. But if science can't explain the origin then obviously the invisible wizard of the gaps "must" be the "answer."
And uh... Flew who?(shrug)
Flew did not appeal to authority nor incredulity.

Learn to read, dumbass.

You are also wrong about evidence and DNA.

But you're the "Dude". So:

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 11 min New Age Spiritual... 237,807
News The Consequences of Atheism 16 min thetruth 1,276
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 20 min thetruth 18,544
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 32 min thetruth 2,017
News Confessions of a black atheist 34 min thetruth 343
News Why Atheism Will Replace Religion (Aug '12) 36 min thetruth 14,574
News Atheism 101: Does it take more faith to be an a... 3 hr geezerjock 1
More from around the web