The 12th Planet/Nibiru/ Zacharia Stitchen/ End Time/ The Gods of Eden & the Mayan Calender/Alternative Belifes

POSTED BY: piratejenny
UPDATED: Monday, June 5, 2006 10:46
VIEWED: 30595
PAGE 10 of 13

OK look first off... Bush is not a fundementalist Christian..he is a fundementalist Occultist. if you did some private research, instead of listening to the partisan rhetoric, you might know the difference.

secondly, i take offense to people attacking the word of God because such attacks are based out of close-minded intolerance and ignorance. i realize i too am a sinner and far from perfect, but i dont slander what i cant comprehend. i was once a skeptic, and didnt know any better, but now i feel i have a better grasp on what i didnt understand previously

im not solely using the Bible to prove the Bible. people who are simply unwilling to believe accuse Christians of acting on blind faith, when there is in fact a great deal of evidence that supports our belief. besides the literal treasure trove of political events unfolding that support a broader biblical scenario...the Bible has yet to be contradicted by ANY scientific evidence! in fact, there is more evidence that supports the Bible, then actually supports vital componants of the theory of Evolution. so logically, i would compare, or reference evidence or events to the Bible, as any scientist would a relevant theory.

you sound to me to be an athiest..since you sound intent on disproving a higher being. what evidence do you have that disproves the existence of a higher force? i suspect..like Darwins theory of macro-evolution..that you have no proof. i will admit..there is a degree of circular logic involved in referring back to the Bible, but it has been proven accurate historically, and has not been dis-proven scientifically. its quite a bit different from evolutionists, reffering to fossils as evidence that have never been found to exist.

but your contention that Christian beliefs are based entirely on faith is insulting, and ignores thousands of eye witness accounts and recorded historical certainties. but it can be expected..if you were told compelling evidence, would you even listen?? who really wants to submit their conscience to a more just authority..its a lot more appealing doing whatever you want willy nilly with no fear of reprocussions

now, i will apologize if you perceived me as coming off as holier than thou, but i dont recall insulting you, calling you a sinner, "devil spawn" or anything of the sort. nor did i try to force my belief on you. how can people claim christians are forcing their beliefs on us when: it is not taught in schools; it is not referenced in the media; it has been taken off government buildings; and that it has been thoroughly attacked by modern new age culture. who is forcing which belief on who??

i simply gave you an explanation that i have yet to see convincingly refuted, and that concisely unites the discrepencies between the religions of antiquity. i did not inted to attack your belief, nor do i force my belief on others, but people gladly quote Ghandi, or the Dali Lama, and IMO these are merely Men. the bible claims to be the word of the living God. it is proven, sound logic, and it speaks for itself. Jesus explicitly says:

"Do not judge, or you too will be judged. for in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you. why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brothers eye, and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? how can you say to your brother, 'let me take that speck out of your eye', when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? you hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brothers eye"

and as far as harming people:

"you have heard that it was said 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But i tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven...if you love those who love you, what reward will you get? are not even tax collectors doing that? and if you greet only your brothers, what are you dong more than others? do not even pagans do that? be perfect,

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SonofMan:
OK look first off... Bush is not a fundementalist Christian..he is a fundementalist Occultist. if you did some private research, instead of listening to the partisan rhetoric, you might know the difference.

---

I never said he was a Christian fundamentalist. All fundamentalists sound the same; they just used different names for what gives them the right to decide the fate of others.

If you'd actually read and comprehended my post you might of picked up on that.

Anyway when you have some credible evidence to back up your claims, instead of you know your partisan nut-job conspiracy theorist rhetoric get back to me. Though what you call evidence and what the rest of the Human race calls evidence I'm beginning to think are two very different things.

Quote:

---

secondly, i take offense to people attacking the word of God because such attacks are based out of close-minded intolerance and ignorance.

---

You attack atheists and scientist and secularism based on your own ignorance but no one can attack you? How about you practice what you preach, or did you skip that part of Christianity because it was inconvenient for you? I didn't attack Christians or the word of god, I said you have no right to tell others what to believe or think, I said theocracies, like a Christian run state, are seldom a good thing and secularism is infinitely better. Find that insulting? Well tough because I'm right and you're wrong on that point, and I've got the entire history of the human race to back me up.

Quote:

---

im not solely using the Bible to prove the Bible. people who are simply unwilling to believe accuse Christians of acting on blind faith, when there is in fact a great deal of evidence that supports our belief.

---

Yes you are, and no there isn't. I note you don't offer any of this evidence except to quote verse.

Quote:

---

the Bible has yet to be contradicted by ANY scientific evidence!

---

Yes it has and so? If I said "I'm god" you can't disprove that with scientific evidence, so I guess you better start worshipping me.

Anyway, you can't disprove a negative you twit, you can't disprove the existance of god irregardless of whether god exists or not.

Quote:

---

in fact, there is more evidence that supports the Bible, then actually supports vital componants of the theory of Evolution.

---

Prove it. Oh right you can't never mind.

Quote:

---

you sound to me to be an athiest..since you sound intent on disproving a higher being.

---

You have no idea of my beliefs, and I don't wish to discuss them with you. I'm not trying to disprove a higher being, I said Christianity is a faith, which it is. Science is based on facts and evidence, religion is based on faith. God exists because the Bible says so; all other evidence of god is at best circumstantial and is now nearly always also explained by natural processes which don't require an omnipotent being. There's nothing wrong believing something only on faith, it's a source of strength for many, but there's no empirical evidence to support your belief, which is why it requires FAITH.

You want to call Atheists a joke, well your a joke for thinking Christianity is a science, you can't believe in god on faith then your not a real Christian, I suggest you get over yourself and deal with it.

Funny how you attack science and everything it says but on the very few occasions where it converges with your beliefs and FAITH it's all gravy.

Quote:

---

but it can be expected..if you were told compelling evidence, would you even listen??

---

Christianity is a faith, only closed minded people think otherwise. Closed minded because they start off with the premise of the Bible as literal fact and everything must be proof of that, back to belief and faith again, back to closed thinking, unwillingness to accept that maybe the initial faith based premise is not entirely correct.

There's plenty of Religious Scientists, many of them Christian, they reconcile their beliefs by being open minded, you should try it som

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

alright, to avoid this cycle of name calling, how about a fresh start.

you tell me...if you were Christian, how is it possible to defend your belief? apparently we cannot quote any relevant scientific evidence, we cannot quote historical accuracies, or prophecies that were foretold by the bible, we are given NO credit for the deeds done out of genuiness and humility by people of faith, and apparently, all of historys oppression and violence is on behalf of religious fundementalists....so what do you propose??

i see no difference in referring to the Bible, or reffering to un-proven scientific theories..they are each a different means to an end. did i once attempt to convert you, or FORCE my belief on you? NO

for one..to accept Darwins theory of evolution, you must have evidence that supports both mIcro-evolution, and mAcro-evolution. there is plenty of evidence that supports mIcro-evolution...a Cat or Dog, over a span of generations can possibly evolve into another form of Cat or Dog-like species etc. the Bible supports this claim, since general species of animals have progressed, but remained members of the same species. when life was created, it was created from scratch, like humans..to remain within their own genetic bounderies...which is why you cant inter-breed a horse and a cow.

abiogenesis, the evolution of life from non-living matter, however, has yet to be proven! scientists have not been able to demonstrate how this metamorphasis takes place..besides a theory of billions of years of random atomic collisions. yet they have no physical, reproducable, or empirical scientific data that conludes, or even supports this assumption. Evolutionists used a diagram called the "tree of life", called the phylogenetic tree..a drawing with lines connecting different species-which is used as irrefutable evidence, despite an un-bridgable gap in the fossil record* that would support their claims!! so Evolutionists now use the "clado-gram", which is a different drawing, showing relationships between different species...yet still, no Fossil evidence to support their pictures. not only that, the "cladogram", the sole evidence for mAcro-evolution, or the metamorphasis of a plant, into an ape, into a human, directly contradicts Darwins OWN THEORY of natural selection! so dont tell me that science is cold and hard and factual..when there is the same degree of "FAITH" involved in accepting an un-proven, unsubstantiated theory, as in believing what can atleast be recognized as a historically* proven document such as the Bible

now, evolution tells us that the layers of the earth were deposited over millions and billions of years; older animal species would exist in lower, older layers...and so on. it turns out scientists use a "fossil index" to date these layers based on evolutions theories of a particular species existence! this is circular logic is it not, especially if there are no fossil records of these missing links that allegedly existed over millions of years. but besides that, what about older species found alongside species claimed to be from different eras?

if an animal dies in a field, like a squirrel or a pigeon..do its fossils immediately become covered in sediment and fossilized and preserved? this process takes eons..yet how do you reconcile that the majority of fossils are found in the same geological layers?? especially when we have no evidence of half barried trees or the like. and if that werent enough...the different methods to date rock, another method of determining a fossils age...all produce varied, and widely discrepent results ( For example, a rock in Nigeria dated 95 million years old with Potassium-Argon dating, and 750 million years old using Uranium-Helium dating measured only 30 million years old with fission track dating. There is one documented case where a single lump of tuff (a type of porous rock) contained components which individually dated at 1.87 million years, 25 million years, and 500 million years old ). its obvious you can attain your own results

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Khyron,

(three+ body solution)

Now that this thread has come back up, I realized I never did respond.

I too googled. But I couldn't come up with the right set of words to find exactly what I was looking for. So I apologize. I originally saw it in a magazine (Science News?) but no longer have it. And it doen't seem to be accessible with google.


Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

So much to respond to, so little time ...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SonofMan:
please understand, the reason the sumerians stories pre-date the bibles IS NOT because the bible stole, watered down and misinterpreted the ancient beliefs.

---

That's quite a claim. The Hindus, Autralian Aborigines, American Indians etc have myths different from each other and the Sumerians and the Bible. Are you claiming that two overlapping civilizations didn't share myths?

Quote:

---

ever wonder why, despite the acclaimed "break-throughs" in science ... the most basic, fundemental issues of our race, greed, bigotry, murder, diception, war...have been with us since the beginning???

---

Where to start? Science doen't address morals or ethics. The most fundamental issues of our race also include nurturing, trust and hope - if not, the race would have died out long ago. And too there's the occassional society without war or religion.

Quote:

---

what is more likely?? that the God of creation caused the flood to wipe out humanity, due to corruption, degeneration, and all the other immoral actions taken place during that time(thanks to the knowledge from the annunaki). or that the flood was cause.. as Sitchin claims...on the part of the annunnaki due to excessive human noisiness??

---

Or that none of this happened? I vote for number three.

Quote:

---

if we are merely evolved species, why do we have a conscience at all??

---

Well, it seems primates lie on purpose, chimp mothers seem to grieve their dead babies, dogs sure look guilty after stealing hot dogs. I don't know - why do any of these mere animals have human traits that we feel we recognize?

Quote:

---

...islam, catholicism, judiasm..those are religions, but christianity is not.

---

I challenge you to dispute this with a Bhuddist, Hindu, Moslem, Jew ...

Quote:

---

but someone can easily cliam to be christian in word, but be an evil person in deed. when you accept the word of Jesus, you change from the inside out...Bush can claim hes a christian, but his actions dont verify his position.

---

Hallelujah - we agree!

Quote:

---

if there were no religion, what standards would man have to conform his behavior too??

---

Oh, I don't know. Laws, ethics, some other religious strictures ...

Quote:

---

i know you athiests would rather not have restrictions in your lives..

---

Strange. I feel that in my life I have spent a lot of time and effort nurturing family, community and world. Does that make me unethical?

And the rest I'm afraid is a soapbox rant unworthy of reply.


Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SonofMan:
i take offense to people attacking the word of God

---

But I have the word of god!

Quote:

---

besides the literal treasure trove of political events unfolding ... there is more evidence that supports the Bible, then actually supports vital componants of the theory of Evolution.

---

Such as??

Quote:

---

the Bible ... has been proven accurate historically

---

Reference please ...

Quote:

---

i simply gave you an explanation that i have yet to see convincingly refuted

---

So much of what you said has been proven wrong, I'd like to you to specifically indicate WHICH explination you're referring to.

Quote:

---

would you be happy to know that you live, and ya die..and thats it??

---

It is more than enough for me.

Quote:

---

what moral fabric would exist among society, if it was learned that we are nothing more than evolved primates?

---

The moral fabric that would allow people to live in abundance, harmony and peace ON EARTH.

Quote:

---

i suspect that is a perversion, introduced through secularism, to condition people to act competitively against eachother, rather than as servants for eachothers benefit..as the Bible suggests.

---

Secularism doesn't teach perversion - capitalism does. As to being your brother's keeper, it sounds suspicously Marxist to me.


Nearly everything I know I learned by the grace of others.

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SonofMan:
alright, to avoid this cycle of name calling, how about a fresh start.

---

That's a good idea.

Quote:

---

you tell me...if you were Christian, how is it possible to defend your belief? apparently we cannot quote any relevant scientific evidence, we cannot quote historical accuracies, or prophecies that were foretold by the bible

---

You don't NEED to defend your belief, I'm not attacking your belief in Christianity. You don't NEED to prove your belief, really there isn't scientific proof of God, for Christianity or any other religion, but there doesn't NEED to be.

Historical accuracies are par for the course, the Bible is partially a historic record, we know there was a man named Jesus Christ, he was the son of a carpenter and he challenged the Jewish/Roman establishment and he was executed for blaspheme. The son of god part, that's the part that can't be proved, that's the part that requires faith.

I'm unaware of the prophecies you talk about, but from my experience with such things, such as Nostradamus, prophecies are like Astrology, if you want to make it fit it does.

Quote:

---

for one..to accept Darwins theory of evolution, you must have evidence that supports both mIcro-evolution, and mAcro-evolution. there is plenty of evidence that supports mIcro-evolution...a Cat or Dog, over a span of generations can possibly evolve into another form of Cat or Dog-like species etc. the Bible supports this claim, since general species of animals have progressed, but remained members of the same species. when life was created, it was created from scratch, like humans..to remain within their own genetic bounderies...which is why you cant inter-breed a horse and a cow.

---

Then why not make a further leap? Jesus spoke in metaphors all the time, God gave us free will, It seems disingenuous to me to then say that God would give us the answers in a document. Why can't the Bible be a metaphor? Why couldn't God of created the universe and its laws knowing exactly where it would lead?

I can write a computer program and hit go and it will do exactly what I expected, why can God not do the same, just on a much grander scale?

Quote:

---

abiogenesis, the evolution of life from non-living matter, however, has yet to be proven! scientists have not been able to demonstrate how this metamorphasis takes place..besides a theory of billions of years of random atomic collisions. yet they have no physical, reproducable, or empirical scientific data that concludes, or even supports this assumption.

---

That's kind of the point. With science that means it's a theory, and with the fact that too a degree aspects of it have been proven (proteins have been created from inanimate matter, and our building blocks are, indeed, inanimate) means that we accept it as the best theory we have. This is the strength of Science. One hundred years ago the universe was Newtonian, clock work, predictable. Now it is Einsteinian, because Einstein’s theories fit better. Ask any credible physicist if they think that's it, if they think that someday someone else won't come up with another theory that fits even better and they'll say no.

So it is with evolution, it's the best we've got, it's supported by more evidence than any other theory or belief we have, but someday I have faith that it will be surpassed. But like with all good working theories before it, it will be a component of what comes next.

Quote:

---

not only that, the "cladogram", the sole evidence for mAcro-evolution, or the metamorphasis of a plant, into an ape, into a human, directly contradicts Darwins OWN THEORY of natural selection!

---

I don't see this at all. I've never even heard the supposition that plants evolved into animals. It's my understanding that the split happened much earlier. One set of single celled organisms created their own food using energy from sunlight, another set fed on those. It's my understanding that this was the grounding where the animal and plant kingdoms come from.

Quote:

---

so dont

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME