Evidence that God is real

[Neddy Bate]

You have not misunderstood.
All I can think is I saw some other relationship and got carried away but I can only see that I was wrong.

Okay, I just wanted to make sure that you weren't calling some other group of stars "the cross". The constellations of the zodiac are all around the ecliptic, which is the path that the sun appears to travel throughout the year. The southern cross (Crux) is very much south of the ecliptic at all times.

However dont blame the vid as I dont think they day that...In anyevent thanks for your input I certainly do appteciate you considering the matter rather than ignoring it as most others seem to choose.

I think it was also in the video you posted, although I only watched it back when you posted it, and now I'm not sure where the link is located. If I recall correctly, another thing they did in the video was to use the word "sun" as if it was obviously pronounced the same as the word "son," and thereby some kind of code word. But surely that could only work in the English language, and very few other languages if any. I don't think the original scriptures were written in English, probably more like Hebrew, Greek, etc. although I am certainly not a biblical scholar.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I think it was also in the video you posted

Tell you what I will do if I find the time which is unlikely for a while...
I will look at the vid and take the case for the defendant and list the flaws in the case for the prosecution ☺.

One must recognise that most vids on utube can be convincing...heck I have seen ones where I start to question my view that Atlantis was a myth...you have to sift through...anyways the vid will have things that dont add up I expect...however it does seem ancients looked to the heavens for meaning and the astrology link is not a difficult notion to embrace.

If I recall correctly, another thing they did in the video was to use the word "sun" as if it was obviously pronounced the same as the word "son," and thereby some kind of code word. But surely that only applies in the English language, and very few other languages if any. I don't think the original scriptures were written in English, probably more like Hebrew, Greek, etc.

I think you may be correct.

Probably the best place to look at this aspect would be the Egyptian usage...but I also thought the same thing.

And to say such is not inconsistent with trying to build a case. ..but laying it on thicker than need be.

Thanks again..great input from you.
Alex

 

[davewhite04]

What God are you talking about?

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

What God are you talking about?

All the human gods...or and those taking their attributes from the Sun.
Alex

 

[davewhite04]

All the human gods...or and those taking their attributes from the Sun.
Alex

I mis-read the thread title.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I mis-read the thread title.

No you are ok on that...I thought you were referring to the human gods in the recent chat.
So for clues read the op.
Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

I will look at the vid and take the case for the defendant and list the flaws in the case for the prosecution

Here is a similar vid with a intro from George Carlin☺
The Sun and cross are referred to but jist says the Sun is in the vicinity...anyways there is little to argue with...although I was doing something else and not really concentrating.

Alex

 

[davewhite04]

Well there is no evidence to debate.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Well there is no evidence to debate.

This place has not had a debate for a long time ...see the debate section.
Did you watch the vid?
What are your impressions?
Alex

 

[Neddy Bate]

The Sun and cross are referred to but jist says the Sun is in the vicinity...anyways there is little to argue with...although I was doing something else and not really concentrating.

Yes, at 10:53 the narrator says, "...and during this three day pause, the Sun resides in the vicinity of the southern cross, or Crux constellation."

Here is a screenshot of a planetarium showing the sun rising at approximately 6:30am on Dec. 25 as viewed from Egypt:

https://theskylive.com/planetarium

Note that the sun is rising in the east-southeast, and Crux is setting in the south. They are not near each other. I guess what the video is trying to say is that during the three day pause, the sun is as far to the south as it ever goes, (which puts it in a 'southern vicinity'), and that Crux is a southern constellation which happens to be visible around that same time.

 

[Neddy Bate]

Here is a screenshot of the "Three Kings" (Orion's belt) pointing to where the Sun will rise:

https://theskylive.com/planetarium

This happens around 10:00pm during the night though, not right before sunrise. The stars which are visible in this area right before sunrise can be seen in the previous image I posted.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Here is a screenshot of a planetarium

That is wonderful and thank you for taking the time to make your excellent contribution.
Alex

 

[Acitnoids]

Does it matter?

You are the one that brought it up. Does the Jewish rejection of JC based on the Hebrew text matter for the Christian acceptance which is based on the Greek translation of the Hebrew text? There is a reason the Jews rejected JC based on the text.

You seem reluctant to acknowledge the proposition that JC was just one of many following the astrology story and the only conclusion one can draw therefrom.
Moreover knowing the history must convince you to change your agnostic position to atheist if not my suspicion about you expressed earlier can only be correct.

So let me get this straight. I have used the textual bases of a mythology which you reject because it is not based on Astrology? So by your own logic accusing me of be theist, should I conclude you believe in Astrology? Is that your argument against the mythological text?

This is completely off topic at this point. I didn't even want to reply but hey, I'm a Scorpio. What's your sign (not that it means anything)?

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Possessing faith is evidence of God.

Tail chasing.

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

This is completely off topic at this point.

There is no need for anything more than your comment on the history that tells us JC is a fake and just one of many human gods based on astrology.



There is no need to get upset or attempt to make a mockery ... all you need do is just simply address the history and either accept it or offer a rejection that JC was not just another human god based on astrology of a common type in ancient times.

Your attempt to reduce any of this to my belief in astrology is entirely transparent and suggestive that you are indeed a theist using the guise of an calm and rational agnostic to slowly build a case for your undisclosed theistic views.

Where have I said that I beleive in astrology?

Astrology is not the issue...the issue is that in ancient times there were many human gods based on astrology and that JC was just another and thus reasonably considered to be just another fake.

Its much like Elvis impersonators... not withstanding that they are all entertaining we know that they are all fake and copying the original.


However in the interest of keeping on topic and if you insist on being a casual unbiased obsever then perhaps, as I suggested some time back, you could list your evidence for the no god side that presumably you hold in the undecided box of your opinion.

We already have your statistical approach for the evidence of god side and although my offerrings on the fake human god con does not seem to excite you I ask what can you offer on the no god side that makes up your undecided position.

In the interest of balance ... something that holds you back from jumping off the fence into the theists garden.

There must be something that has you thinking that perhaps god is not actually real or have your agnostic investigations failed to offer any suggestion that god is not indeed real☺.
Alex

 

[Michael 345]

Possessing faith is evidence of God.

Possessing faith is the same as trying to step over a 2 metres gap in two steps

You really need faith to manage that

But you might do it with a leap

 

[Acitnoids]

There is no need for anything more than your comment on the history that tells us JC is a fake and just one of many human gods based on astrology.

... all you need do is just simply address the history and either accept it or offer a rejection that JC was not just another human god based on astrology of a common type in ancient times.

Are you on crack? Which is it? My history tells us JC is a myth or I haven't addressed the history which you just claimed to prove astrology is correct? Heh, Humm

Your attempt to reduce any of this to my belief in astrology is entirely transparent and suggestive that you are indeed a theist using the guise of an calm and rational agnostic to slowly build a case for your undisclosed theistic views.

Where have I said that I beleive in astrology?

Umm ... right there but that is not the only spot.

Astrology is not the issue...the issue is that in ancient times there were many human gods based on astrology and that JC was just another and thus reasonably considered to be just another fake.

I don't know what your fascination with JC. I can't say if he was a real person. This has been a hotly debated idea for over a thousand years. It goes back to before what you and I know as Christianity. I personally believe JC is the construction of Paul. He convicted the followers of John the Baptist that the Christ died for our sins based on a vision he had..... I'd be happy to go into detail and give footnotes but I don't think you care about having an actual conversation based on the text that has been handed down to us.

However in the interest of keeping on topic and if you insist on being a casual unbiased obsever then perhaps, as I suggested some time back, you could list your evidence for the no god side that presumably you hold in the undecided box of your opinion.

I would love to but you don't seem to care about the text. You only seem to care about astrology simply because you say so. Then challenge others to counter your idea, which is based on nothing, simply because you like astronomy and ergo.... all must be based on your interest. This would be called Astrology in the times we are speaking of. I base my argument (not belief) on actual text. What it is you base your argument on?

We already have your statistical approach for the evidence of god side...

This as been addressed by me. You failed to explain why it wasn't fit to answer this particular question. In case you missed it, it is a subjective question. It's like asking if cats or dogs make better pets. The wisdom of the crowds is not the correct tool to analyze that kind of data.

...and although my offerrings on the fake human god con does not seem to excite you I ask what can you offer on the no god side that makes up your undecided position.

Once again, I don't know why you are so obsessed with JC. That is religion and I have said many times that religion is a man made concept. Just because JC was a human or didn't even exist (according to the text) doesn't automatically mean a god does not exist. I tend to lean towards there being nothing but there is no evidence one way or the other to make a definite conclusion.

In the interest of balance ... something that holds you back from jumping off the fence into the theists garden.

This shows your bias more than mine

There must be something that has you thinking that perhaps god is not actually real or have your agnostic investigations failed to offer any suggestion that god is not indeed real☺.
Alex

Is that how you form your hypothesis? You start with a conclusion and then demand evidence to prove your assumption wrong? That is not how logic and reason works.

 

[davewhite04]

I don't know what your fascination with JC. I can't say if he was a real person. This has been a hotly debated idea for over a thousand years. It goes back to before what you and I know as Christianity. I personally believe JC is the construction of Paul. He convicted the followers of John the Baptist that the Christ died for our sins based on a vision he had..... I'd be happy to go into detail and give footnotes but I don't think you care about having an actual conversation based on the text that has been handed down to us.

It doesn't add up. Why would someone like Paul construct a character, which would require Shakespeare story construction, for little to no money and end up getting decapitated(as well as doing a stint in jail) by the Romans. None of it makes sense. I don't know if any miracles were involved but why write a book so well just to die horrifically. See what I mean? If anything was made up it's the Koran.

If Jesus was made up then why not Paul? The New Testament story is pretty epic, so who wrote it? Who made up this Jesus character?

 

[sideshowbob]

It doesn't add up. Why would someone like Paul construct a character, which would require Shakespeare story construction, for little to no money...

Same reason as Shakespeare?

... and end up getting decapitated(as well as doing a stint in jail) by the Romans.

Well, he didn't anticipate being decapitated. You might as well ask why JFK went to Dallas just to be assassinated.

 

[gmilam]

It doesn't add up. Why would someone like Paul construct a character, which would require Shakespeare story construction, for little to no money and end up getting decapitated(as well as doing a stint in jail) by the Romans.

Seems like Paul became very influential among the Greeks he associated with. I'm sure he was rewarded in many ways, before the authorities caught up with him.