New Book - The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator

[Anita Meyer]

There are well established scientific methods for determining the dates of things. The same methods, by the way, that archeologists use to determine the dates of artifacts found in Israel.

The egg shells are petrified rock!

Once living things or creatures that have become petrified rock contain no carbon. So how do they date these things? They date these things by what’s called a “geologic time table” of the earths “ASSUMED” history, which is based upon approximately 100 years of leading professionals with the “evolutionist understanding” that living things have evolved for billions of years. In effect when they find bones (or in this case egg shells), they identify that those bones must be at least million of years before humans were here with the indoctrination in mind that it took a long stretch of time for reptiles to evolve into mammals, then primates, and then into humans. So their whole format of dating things depends on their whole premise of evolutionism, NOT CARBON OR RADIOISOTOBE DATING!

That is why you fail - Yoda

 

[spidergoat]

They were not fossils, they found the actual shells.

 

[Anita Meyer]

Don't act stupid... we have world leaders for that (like Obama).

 

[spidergoat]

I'm not acting stupid, I'm telling the truth, the first evidence for symbolic language is about 60,000 years old. My source is a peer reviewed scientific paper, not religious mythology. Why are you here if you don't acknowledge established scientific methods? Why resort to ad hominem attacks?

 

[Anita Meyer]

I'm not acting stupid, I'm telling the truth, the first evidence for symbolic language is about 60,000 years old. My source is a peer reviewed scientific paper, not religious mythology. Why are you here if you don't acknowledge established scientific methods? Why resort to ad hominem attacks?

Oh I see, so now you are switching from the proof of the eggshells being petrified rock, and working on the aspect of symbolic language being dated to 60,000 years old.

Where is your proof? No linguistic scholar will tell you with any confidence what language predated that of another. BTW if you didn’t already know, things can petrify rather quickly and it doesn’t take a process of thousands of years to do so. Those pictures on the eggshells are merely just people being artistic. At max I give it the age of 6,000 years.

 

[spidergoat]

The only person who said they were fossils is you. No other article said they were fossils. Besides, they were found in a cave, and the layers of earth can be dated using non-radiological methods, such as analysis of pollen and seeds.

These symbols were without a doubt older than any Middle Eastern civilization.

 

[Cifo]

Cifo, thank you for exhibiting the Hebrew, ... but in all truth you basically were saying the same thing and just authenticating what I wrote.

Once again, no. In Hebrew, “anochi” means “I [am]” — and not “i am the lord your g-d”, as Meyer claims. The Hebrew words that transliterate as "Yahweh Elohina" mean "the LORD your God" and have nothing to do with the word "anochi".

Here’s a good example. If I write in Hebrew: “anochi Cifo”, it would mean “I [am] Cifo”, and not “I am the Lord your God Cifo”. An elementary schoolchild can understand this, so hopefully Meyer will too.

As a Christian, I have for years read The Interlinear Bible, 2nd Edition by Jay P. Green, Sr. And as a Christian, I do not distort the word of God.

you tell us that the Chinese word for Cat is also Mao… so not only is it Hebrew and Egyptian, but its also Chinese.

Yes, it’s called being “echoic”. Maybe this word is new to Meyer; maybe she knows it as “onomatopoeic”. Maybe not.

I can assure you that all written and even spoken languages were the predecessor of Hebrew.

Meyer seems to have mistakenly turned around her intended meaning because here she says that all written/spoken languages preceded Hebrew.

predecessor
1 : one that precedes; especially : a person who has previously occupied a position or office to which another has succeeded
2 archaic : ancestor

from Merriam-Webster

 

[Cifo]

If you want evidence of “writing” that predates 4000 BCE, consider paleolithic tally sticks such as the Ishango Bone, the Lebombo Bone and the Wolf Bone.

From another thread:

In reply to the OP, a few ancient “tally sticks” — the Ishango Bone (dated ~20,000 YA from the Congo), the Lebombo Bone (dated ~35,000 YA from Swaziland), and the Wolf Bone (dated ~30,000 YA from the Czech Republic) — are historic items. They show a surprising knowledge of mathematics (not just counting), which suggests the development of spoken languages at those times.

Also consider the 9,000-year-old bullae and token system of stewardship used in the Fertile Crescent.

 

[Anita Meyer]

The only person who said they were fossils is you. No other article said they were fossils. Besides, they were found in a cave, and the layers of earth can be dated using non-radiological methods, such as analysis of pollen and seeds.

These symbols were without a doubt older than any Middle Eastern civilization.

Spidergoat, your fossil comment is as worthless as a male nipple! I never referred to the “eggshells” as fossils - ever!

Now as far as the radiological dating on the pollen and seeds goes, carbon 14 only has a half life that is equal to roughly 5,700 years. But your article did not specify, nor can I find it anywhere else on the Internet that if even pollen and seed testing were used. Additionally, I will also tell you that all carbon dating results that range over the 6,000 year mark can be refuted. As much study as I’ve done in this field... for every result there are always several other explanations. Additionally I will flat out tell you that carbon dating is an imperfect science! There are several good reasons for why things are dated with exaggerating dates.

Firstly, geologist know that the ENTIRE earth was once completely covered by “marine flood sedimentation” (salt water from the sea) consisting of marine fossils which are found in all rock strata (whether you want to believe this water came from the beginning of earths creation or from Noah‘s Great Flood). This being the case, rocks that are exposed to water for a length of time can cause the elements to leak out do to solubility. Such as salts of uranium and other radioactive elements which are quite capable of dissolving in water, making all the age measurements flat-out USELESS!

The geologists also know that there WAS oxygen in the early atmosphere (much higher levels almost twice as much) because they find this evidence in rocks. We also know that the early earth had lots more trees and plants, which obviously produced more oxygen. This high concentration most likely contained enormous amounts of carbon. Furthermore, when insects and animals eat trees and plants even more carbon is released into the air and eventually the ground. Thus rendering inaccurate carbon dating results making the science null and void with anything past the 5,700 mark.

Once again, no. In Hebrew, “anochi” means “I [am]” — and not “i am the lord your g-d”, as Meyer claims. The Hebrew words that transliterate as "Yahweh Elohina" mean "the LORD your God" and have nothing to do with the word "anochi".

Here’s a good example. If I write in Hebrew: “anochi Cifo”, it would mean “I [am] Cifo”, and not “I am the Lord your God Cifo”. An elementary schoolchild can understand this, so hopefully Meyer will too.

As a Christian, I have for years read The Interlinear Bible, 2nd Edition by Jay P. Green, Sr. And as a Christian, I do not distort the word of God.

Cifo, lets get this straightened out. This is what I had originally said:

The Hebrew word Torah (which is the Hebrew Bible - 5 books), comes from the root of the word “Horaah” which means “instruction“. The Torah states this concept in the following way: The first word of the Ten Commandments in the Hebrew letters (Exodus 20:2) is “Anochi” which means “I am the Lord your G-d”. Thus G-d “compressed” Himself into the words of the Torah. Therefore, when a person studies Torah in this world they have a direct link and connection with G-d.

Now this is what you replied back:

Look here to see for yourself. My interlinear Bible in Hebrew, Greek, and English translates אָנֹכִי “anochi” as “I [am]”, followed by יְהוָה “yahweh” as “Jehovah” (typically translated as “LORD”). Following the word for “Jehovah”, is the word אֱלֹהֶיךָ “elohina” (a variation of “elohim”) meaning “your God”. So the phrase transliterates as “anochi yahweh elohim” meaning “I [am] Jehovah your God” or “I [am] the LORD your God”.

And so... I did not include the other Hebrew words proceeding the word “Anochi”, if I had it would still say “I am the Lord your G-d”. What is the big deal here? You know some people are smart enough to read through the lines for themselves, obviously you knew what I meant. To go to the limits of making that point is really foolhardy! What I wrote is close enough for one to understand and get the message here, and the message that I was sending was the concept of G-d compressing Himself into the words of the Torah so that when a person studies/reads Torah they have a direct line with G-d. That was my message and you do not need to go to the lengths of complicating it.

If you want winning points from me… if you spell Anita Meyer in Scrabble, you win. Forever.

“ Originally Posted by Anita Meyer
you tell us that the Chinese word for Cat is also Mao… so not only is it Hebrew and Egyptian, but its also Chinese. ”

Yes, it’s called being “echoic”. Maybe this word is new to Meyer; maybe she knows it as “onomatopoeic”. Maybe not.

“ Originally Posted by Anita Meyer
I can assure you that all written and even spoken languages were the predecessor of Hebrew. ”

Meyer seems to have mistakenly turned around her intended meaning because here she says that all written/spoken languages preceded Hebrew.

predecessor
1 : one that precedes; especially : a person who has previously occupied a position or office to which another has succeeded
2 archaic : ancestor

from Merriam-Webster

Your at losing ends here Cifo. Using fancy words like “echoic and onomatopoeic” are not going to save your case. The bottom line here is that the word for Cat has a lineage that can be traced back to ancient Egypt, and as I‘ve revealed in my previous post here, Egypt’s is of Enochian ancestor ship. Enoch believed in the same G-d as Moses.

If you want evidence of “writing” that predates 4000 BCE, consider paleolithic tally sticks such as the Ishango Bone, the Lebombo Bone and the Wolf Bone.

From another thread:
“ Originally Posted by Cifo
In reply to the OP, a few ancient “tally sticks” — the Ishango Bone (dated ~20,000 YA from the Congo), the Lebombo Bone (dated ~35,000 YA from Swaziland), and the Wolf Bone (dated ~30,000 YA from the Czech Republic) — are historic items. They show a surprising knowledge of mathematics (not just counting), which suggests the development of spoken languages at those times. ”

Also consider the 9,000-year-old bullae and token system of stewardship used in the Fertile Crescent.

Well if the bones are petrified, or over the 5,700 year mark, it makes dating null and void. Additionally, paleo marks are not much proof either. Again, what you have here is all just guesswork as I‘ve explained earlier.

 

[IamJoseph]

If you want evidence of “writing” that predates 4000 BCE, consider paleolithic tally sticks such as the Ishango Bone, the Lebombo Bone and the Wolf Bone.

the Ishango bone is a bone tool, dated to the Upper Paleolithic era, about 18,000 to 20,000 BC. It is a dark brown length of bone, the fibula of a baboon, It has a series of tally marks carved in three columns running the length of the tool.[1]
The Lebombo bone is a a baboon's fibula with 29 distinct notches, discovered within the Border Cave in the Lebombo Mountains of Swaziland. The number of notches suggests that the bone was used to mark the days of a lunar or menstrual calendar. It has been dated to about 35,000 years ago in the excavation report of 1973.[unreliable source?] [2]
The so-called Wolf bone is a prehistoric artefact discovered in 1937 in Czechoslovakia during excavations at Vestonice, Moravia, led by Karl Absolon. Dated to the Aurignacian, approximately 30,000 years ago, the bone is marked with 55 tally marks. The head of an ivory Venus figurine was excavated close to the bone.[3]

No, this is not proof of writings. Look carefully and such would also be found on the moon and mars. These are manipulated conclusions to foster a pre-determined agenda - the reason you will find no follow-up dots in the thread. Or you can do some basic math and work out the estimated population and mental prowess grads of that 35,000 year figure. The factor of human speech is too important to be flaunted without serious examination and demands for actual proof - as is seen in the Genesis version: we should have millions of names before 6000. One will do!

 

[arfa brane]

And what you have is all guesswork. There is evidence that seashells were traded as early as 100,000 years ago, based on radiocarbon dating techniques and standard archeology.

Neither of which you seem to be able to do more than make guesses about. You haven't made any guesses yet that look all that close.

 

[IamJoseph]

Well if the bones are petrified, or over the 5,700 year mark, it makes dating null and void.

Correct. And C14 dating can only be applied to biological life, itself not accurate to small dating margins. Conclusion: if there are no surrounding grads of imprints in the thread - it must be rejected.

 

[IamJoseph]

ANO CHI.

This means I AM in the ancient Egyptian language. The Hebrew bible marks the first tranliteration of ancient egyptian writings in Hebrew.

This is also seen with the Aramaic language, whereby the Hebrew passover liturgy contains actual passages in Aramaic transliterated into Hebrew: it describes the words the Hebrews spoke when describing the way they spoke to the Egyptians who could understand Aramaic but not Hebrew, while the Jews spoke both those languages. This is an amazing zoom into real ancient history, making the Hebrew as remarkably credible, authentic and contemporary to the exacting space-times it is describing.

 

[IamJoseph]

the layers of earth can be dated using non-radiological methods, such as analysis of pollen and seeds.

No sir - using the dates of natural resources like pollen and cave stones do not reflect the age of what those items may be attached to. This sort of bogus science is rampant and can be manipulated to conclude in any pre-determined agenda. Like the Australian natives being 60K years old by virtue of the caves - not the scratching marks on them.

Better, you look for surrounding factors which align with those conclusions - like population and mental prowess factors - which we know has evidential ratios seen in factual history.

 

[IamJoseph]

My source is a peer reviewed scientific paper, not religious mythology. Why are you here if you don't acknowledge established scientific methods? Why resort to ad hominem attacks?

This is a selective response. Scientific scholars [archeologists] once said King David was a myth. They have never recovered from their shame after the Tel Dan find.It is encumbent to pursue what anyone says by examining their proof criteria.

Chess champs make poor war generals too.

 

[AlphaNumeric]

Here’s the thing Alphanumeric, you can say I lie and whatnot and you can additionally continue to lead this forum with only your nostril hairs by asserting that “I” don’t know what I’m talking about, but people are beginning to see through your cockeyed nonsense. They are beginning to reason and understand the things that I am putting forth.

Who precisely is in this set of people you're referring to? No one here who has any knowledge of science has agreed with you. You are, once again, asserting things which have no evidence.

You see, because I AM providing evidence unlike you!

You haven't provided any evidence for the existence of any deity, let alone the Abrahamic one. You haven't provided any evidence thermodynamics contradicts evolution, which is hardly surprising given you are down right wrong about that.

The majority of the rest of your post is in red, which means you're quoting the bible. You can't use the bible to prove the bible, no matter how many passages you quote or 'interpret'. You labour under the false notion that finding something in the bible consistent with reality does not prove it. There's things in every holy book of every religion which are consistent with reality but it doesn't prove they are right.

The bible has no authority in my eyes because I have not seen any evidence to make me believe its the work of a deity and not just a bunch of iron age nuts from the Middle East. Demonstrate a deity exists and then that the bible is its 'message' to us and then I'll accept bible quotes as justification but until you do that you're using circular logic.

As such I will not reply to anything in future posts which is marked in red or which is based on any quote from the bible and I'll ignore most of them in this reply. If god is really doing all that you seem to think he's doing then you should be able to demonstrate he exists without needing to resort to the bible. What evidence do you have which doesn't need interpretation? What evidence do you have which cannot be the work of men, in that the bible is a book and people can write books. Give me something only a deity could do and provide evidence that such a phenomenon is real.

And this speak more volumes than anything you have said thus far in this thread. All you’ve done is continue to refute with dreck.

You have trotted out standard creationist talking points. Every single one of them is refuted and people can see the scientific justification for that by going to places like www.talkorigins.org as it provides copious citations to peer reviewed scientific work when retorting creationist nonsense.

You have yet to provide a single citation outside the bible. If I'm wrong about this provide a link to a post of yours where you provide something which isn't a bible quote or the result of someone using the bible.

Not only archeological evidence but in point of fact a piece of historical evidence..... [massive wall of red text]

I asked for references, you quoted more of the bible. You have made claims about thermodynamics, abiogenesis, DNA, cells and evolution. As all of these fall under the heading 'science' you should be able to provide citations to peer reviewed scientific work which justify your claims. You just say "Oh its been done..." and then spew out more bible quotes.

Such as the mountain name (Mount Ararat) in which Noah’s ark is mentioned to have landed is in the Bible and found to be a real mountain still in existence. Genesis 8:4 - And on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. This also goes for many other Mountains mentioned in the Bible. They appear to all be there (and noted today by their same names) just as the Bible calls them.

How in any way does that support it? The fact the people living in the middle east at that time knew the local geography doesn't support the notion the bible is right about a deity.

The bible mentions places and events, some of which are known to be actual places and events. That doesn't mean its right about everything. The fact the bible mentions real places doesn't mean the events it claims to have occured there are true. Greek mythology talks about Mount Olympus, which is a real place but you don't believe in Zeus. Crete is a real place but the story of the Minotaur isn't true.

There is even evidence of the apostle Paul’s journeys traveling in the eastern Roman empire. The record of Paul’s travels are found in the book of Acts and are found to be astonishingly accurate with Roman records even down to the nautical evidence mentioned in Acts 27:12 - 28:1.

So Paul goes for some travelling, records his journey and this proves god because....?

To use the example the host of The Atheist Experience likes to use, New York is a real place but that doesn't make Spider-man real.

The simple fact the bible who wrote the bible knew the names of some locations (because they lived that) and knew about a few events like wars or the like (because they were current events) means your quotes do nothing to support your argument.

They back-up with amazing accuracy the same accounts that are written in the Bible.

None of them back up or provide justification for the claims of miracles, they only demonstrate the authors knew names of places and heard about major events.

There is further archaeological evidence

You can't provide 'further' evidence if you haven't provided any up to this point.

Additionally, the field of Abram in Hebron is mentioned by the Pharaoh Shishak of Egypt inscribed on the walls of his temple at Karnak, proving that Abraham was known in Palestine - the land the Bible places him in.

I don't deny the possibility people like Abraham or Jesus existed but even if you could provide irrefutable evidence they did that is not the same as proving a deity exists. Jesus may have simply been 'some guy' with lots of interesting ideas or just a wandering nut. Some guy going to particular places and meeting certain people in no way justifies the claims of supernatural events.

The conclusion in all of this archeological evidence is that recent discoveries have tended to confirm the accuracy of many background details in the Bible narratives. These discoveries clearly reveal to us that they are certainly there endorsing the true status of the Bible.

Ignoring the fact you have had to make a lot of leaps of faith or assumptions about what the things you mention refer to (such as assuming the people appearing during a famine were Isaac and Jacob), the fact the bible is not inconsistent with some parts of history doesn't prove its right about everything. Just because someone says one true thing doesn't mean they never lie.

They support historical reliability and are based on the testimony of eye-witnesses.

Doesn't provide a jot of evidence for the testimony about miracles.

Alphanumeric, I’m not just talking about the Bible Code as you surmise with 9/11 and the Kennedy assassinations. Now I’m talking about actual written prophesy within the Old and New Testament. Prophesies like… How is it that Jesus conspired the time and place where He was to be born in Bethlehem (approximately 700 years beforehand) so that He could ride into Jerusalem at exactly the right time of Daniels prophecy? For that date in history to be contrived by Jesus beforehand is impossible! This was Palm Sunday the spring of 33AD, which was exactly 173,880 days from Daniels prophecy.

The new testament was written after Jesus, if he existed, died by people who weren't eye witnesses. Its easy to 'ret-con' stories to make them seem more fantastic or to try to convince others to join your religion. If the people writing the N.T. wanted to get more people to join Christianity then altering the stories is not out of the question, so as to make it all seem like there's divine work at hand.

Do you have evidence Jesus existed and that he do as you claim precisely when you claim? Evidence which isn't the bible? Do you have evidence Daniel existed? Evidence he made precisely that prophecy? Evidence which isn't the bible?

No, you don't. You are simply using the bible to 'prove' the bible. Muslims use the quran to 'prove' the quran too, its not something special to Christianity. Before quotes from a holy book can be used you have to first demonstrate the holy book is an accurate representation of what happened (everything, not just "There's a place in the Middle East called Mount Ararat", which any traveller at the time would know) and an accurate representation of the views of a deity, whose existence you'd also need to demonstrate. The bible only stands up as evidence after you've proven a god exists and the bible is his 'word', which would mean you'd not need to use the bible at all as you'd have done what you are attempting to do by using the bible.

We also know from scripture (according to John’s Gospel in the New Testament) that 6 days before, Jesus rode into Jerusalem on a Donkey presenting Himself as the Messiah on March 30th 33 AD, He went to Bethany to visit Lazarus whom He had raised from the dead.

Emphasis mine.

Using scripture to prove scripture is circular. How many times do I need to say it? If your only argument is "The bible says...." or "According to the bible..." then you have no argument. The quran says a lot about 'magical' things but you don't accept it, just as I don't accept the bible's claims of miracles.

It was G-d’s whole agenda to make the Bible a masterpiece of “PROPHETIC KNOWLEDGE” that allows it to authenticate itself.

Except that there's no evidence the events ever occurred. Its not too difficult to write a story of fiction where things mentioned at the beginning of the story end up happening towards the end. What reason do we have to think that the prophecies were even made? What evidence do we have that the events mentioned in said prophecies occurred? Why are things like the dead getting out of their graves and walking into a large populated area to greet people not get mentioned anywhere outside the bible? Zombies are something which would get people talking! We have a lot of information about that time period from sources outside the bible and none of them mention Jesus or zombies!

And all of this is ignoring the alterations, additions, subtractions and ret-cons done in the centuries which followed. Some people don't even realise that the King James version was not the original version of the bible!!

No other religion or text (religious or non-religious) in the history of humankind is of this underlining nature.

Muslims say exactly the same about the quran, that its such a beautiful work of literary genius and so 'accurate' about things (including science) that 'obviously' its the work of Allah. Likewise for plenty of other religions. They all have to think that if they think their deity is all knowing and all powerful, because such a deity wouldn't make a mistake and write crap.

And this is what makes it a compelling piece of standing and lasting scientific evidence!

You have not provided anything which isn't circular. Its easy to come up with 'consistent' logic which is circular but that doesn't make it true. For instance consider the two logical axioms 1. I am always right. 2. I am all knowing. How do I know I'm all knowing? Because I'm always right and I know everything. This is internally consistent but its based on unproven premises. "The bible is right because it says its right" is the same.

Of course even if the bible can't be used to prove itself it wouldn't mean its wrong automatically. Too bad we know its wrong about plenty of things, such as the origins of the Earth, life or the value of pi (Kings 7:23).

What we find is that Jesus DID INDEED put the prophecies to the test

You must first demonstrate he existed before you can claim things about his actions. In this instance and all others a bible quote is not acceptable.

Along with this analysis we also have Daniels prophesy

You must first prove his existence before you can make claims about his actions.

that foretells of the antichrist with remarkable prophetic foresight (corresponding to this day and age)

You must first prove his existence before you can make claims about his actions.

thus serving as another piece of flawless and undeniable evidence (as you will read).

I deny* that they existed and that the antichrist exists. Can you provide evidence for their existence?

* Actually I have the neutral stance that I don't feel there's enough (or any) evidence to believe they existed, rather than the positive stand that they didn't exist but I wanted to use 'deny' as you'd said 'undeniable'.

Firstly please read Daniels prophesy concerning the antichrist.

Provide evidence Daniel existed and said the things you claim he did.

These 10 horns which we read about are also in essence the 10 kings - hence the 10 toes… and it is these 10 horns, 10 kings, and 10 toes that are actually the 10 “nations” listed below.

Western Europe (Brittan, France, Germany, Spain and Italy)
Middle East (Greece, Egypt, Turkey, Iraq, and Iran)

Not evidence. He could (if he indeed existed and made such a statement) have given any number and you'd just list that many countries on each side. The Middle East and Europe have dozens of countries in them and plenty of them have changed hands, been restructured or even destroyed in the last few millennia (hell, the last century!) so the fact you can randomly list 10 countries, 5 in each region, is irrelevant.

Quoting the bible and then plucking a random interpretation out of your arse doesn't an argument make.

These historical facts are DOCUMENTED and VERIFIABLE!

None of which supports your assertion the bible is the word of god or that god even exists.

What really irks me is that history buffs (completely blinded by these facts) cannot make the connection to things mentioned in the Bible simply because they are blinded by a godless worldview.

What irks me is you are wilfully ignorant and dishonest and you swindle people into buying books of your nonsense. Besides, I don't think you should be people misunderstand history when you misrepresent evolution, thermodynamics and just about everything else in science. You trotted out the "OMG what about thermodynamics!!" without even bothering to find out what thermodynamics actually says.

Ha ha you have probably read Zecharia Sitchins book that predates the epic of Gilgamesh as something older than what it truly was.

No, I haven't. The fact remains that the bible is not the oldest book or the first 'epic' in literary history.

Now as for the Sumerian writing, FYI, it is the same exact thing as the Hebrew letters, and cuneiform is also the same thing as the Hebrew letters written sideways with arrows/dash marks. All we are doing is dabbling with the same writing, WHICH IS HEBREW.

Please provide evidence for this, such as peer reviewed articles in an archaeology journal.

Its not sad, actually its quite LIBERATING to say that WE ALREADY KNOW, because the Bible has told us so!

Its liberating to close your mind to the universe? How sad. If god made us in his image and gave us intelligence and put us in this huge universe surely you should be using these 'gifts' as much as possible, to think for yourself and to explore and understand the world around us. Religious people often say "Look at the birds, look at the trees", as if the universe is so wonderful and complex that its a marvel and a clear sign of god. Yet they don't look at the birds or the trees or anything else, they don't actually think about the marvellous complexity of the world, all they really do is look at the bible so they can be told what to think. If god made all this for us then to not explore it and examine it and think about it is to throw that back in his face, yet its often the more religious who refuses to acknowledge the world around us.

Yes, and you’ve learned absolutely NOTHING in the true reality of the full scheme of things!

And you want to believe you've got some special insight, something no one else has (hence the book and its agenda), so you can feel better about yourself. Doesn't just happen in religion, there's plenty of hacks who claim they have a 'theory of everything' who clearly want to convince themselves more than anyone else.

Bullpucky you haven’t read it! You are just in denial, because you cannot drum up any logical explanation for it!

I know you want to think you're 'special' (in the good way, not the "I'm sorry my son is eating glue, he's a bit special" way) and that you're shaking people's view of the world but you're not. You are in denial about me being in denial. Hacks always say as you do, as if they believe I'm desperate to spend my time reading their work and thus if I don't mention it then I must be scared they're right. Nope, in actuality I couldn't give a toss. If someone cannot justify their position in a back and forth conversation like this thread then why would they do any better doing a long monologue in book form?

I've asked repeatedly for scientific evidence or reasoned logic and all you can do is throw bible quotes at me, having expended your list of creationist talking points, all of which are and were easily retorted. You aren't special, you're just another religious nut. The only thing which makes you stand out more than most is you're particularly nutty.

Tell you what, you provide one piece of clear evidence which doesn't involve bible quotes or interpretations or here-say or circular logic or any logical fallacy or appeals to emotion that Jesus actually existed and I'll read your book demo. If you can't then there's no point in me reading it as it'll just be more bible quotes and dubious interpretations of yours.

 

[Anita Meyer]

I don’t have to worry about providing evidences of G-d since I’ve already done a superior job at that all through this entire thread. This can be substantiated quite well by just reading through all my posts in this thread. See, your gamming on the premises that most people don’t go back and read through things, and that you can sway them (or reroute them) with your current posting into your secular world view.

I have debunked everything that you brought to the table, including why the law of thermodynamics defies the “Evolution Theory”. When we take into account the whole Universe (and this includes everything within it) as a whole is experiencing decreased entropy, and will inevitably die out as the sun uses up all its energy. This is based on the scientific knowledge that the overall amount of gas in the entire Universe is dissipating, which makes our Universe a closed looped system in which entropy will eventually win in the end and the solar system (indeed, the whole universe) will die a death at maximum entropy. Everything is a “closed system”, there is no such thing as an open system! No human ingenuity or technology is going to outsmart the “second law“ which is in absolute control of all natural processes!

Life on earth is a temporary blip in the process of universal down winding. It is an ILLUSION that things in life are “reversing“ and can temporarily produce small areas of organization for the so called “Evolution Theory” to have occured.

Here is the original posting for new readers:

http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2608984&postcount=806

Let me also reiterate…
1. Mathematical possibility of evolution = 0
2. Fossil proof of evolution = 0
3. Laboratory observation of evolution = 0
4. Laws of physics supporting evolution = 0
Conclusion = G-d!

As always, it is theory, so caveat emptor!

Of course even if the bible can't be used to prove itself it wouldn't mean its wrong automatically. Too bad we know its wrong about plenty of things, such as the origins of the Earth, life or the value of pi (Kings 7:23).

Firstly let me deal with 1 Kings 7:23 - He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim (diameter = 10) and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it (circumference = 30). Below the rim, gourds encircled it—ten to a cubit. The gourds were cast in two rows in one piece with the Sea.

circumference = Pi * diameter
30 = Pi * 10
Pi = 3

There are those like yourself Alphanumeric that look at this verse and conclude that Pi = 3. But it clearly does not!

This is because the word used for circumference (line) has two letters in Hebrew, but this one was written with a third letter. Hebrew has no digits, (all letters do double-duty as numbers). When one uses the ratio formed by the numeric values, you get:

(5 + 6 + 100) / (6 + 100)
111 / 106
1.047169811

Now, multiply this by the false number given for Pi:

3 * 1.047169811 = 3.141509434

Now I know that Pi is approximately 3.141592654, giving us an error of .00264896181%, which is slightly off the mark, but it is probably more than accurate enough for the measurement tools of that time. Additionally, when I am measuring something with a ruler, I usually round off to the nearest unit. This would be particularly true if I were measuring a sea of molten metal.

Pi is an irrational number. Remember what I said some time back… G-d does not care about our mathematical difficulties; He integrates empirically. ~Albert Einstein

Secondly, how is the Bible wrong about the Earth or life? The Bible uses the term... as above so below.

This assumption comes when we begin to expand our view to an even higher realm of understanding, it can be apprehended that the Earth from a lofty scale can be viewed as an organ within the solar system. On a majestic scale we can view galaxies as molecules - and even in a humbling but grandiose sense we can view planets as atoms.

To peer even deeper, the basic building block of all matter is the atom. The center of an atom is made up of a nucleus that consists of neutrons and protons. Electrons orbit the nucleus much the same way the planets orbit the sun.

Even the human cell itself and its nucleus.

It can certainly be said that the earth can be seen as a hierarchy to our human body, just as G-d is the totality in progression of all hierarchies. If we are to understand this correctly, our bodies are built of atoms coalescing into molecules that are grouped and assembled together into cells, which then form organs and eventually unite and function together to perform the great feat in the act of operating as one working organism. Each cell is itself a conscious life responding in an individual way and having its own distinctive disposition. The organs too have their own awareness and reflect on the cells that built them. But there is a governing awareness and ingredient that informs the whole bodily structure of its totality, and it is from this grand perspective, like peas in a pod, that everything in the universe may also be a many layered being. A conscious individual entity expressing itself on various invisible levels and surrounded by innumerable various stages of development in concert with the interconnectedness of all things. At last we notice G-d!

And on behalf of the very cells in our body that serve us, so in turn do we serve something greater, perhaps unsuspectingly a G-d. A giant integrated system of systems - A subsystem of life inside of life inside of life. The full epiphany (sudden realization) of a G-d in a nutshell! An unallocated force capable of acting through, and on all things (people and objects). In view of this aspect, it can certainly be said that G-d has (in every way) full control of the whole system of systems. He is omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful), omnipresent (always present everywhere). G-d is the master brain and we are the “emulations“.

Its usually the atheists who need proof of G-d before believing. They continually argue that there is no proof of His existence. They fall victim to disbelief and therefore disconnecting themselves from G-d. In doing so, one is therefore “separate” in a spiritual sense. Perhaps it would be best to say that from this standpoint, it is caused from ones lacking inability and refusal to acknowledge and conform to the “workings of nature” and therefore is not in cooperation with the processes demanded by the organism to which we all belong, and therefore such a individual that does not operate in a manner that is in consonance with the intentions of its creator will be IGNORED. G-d is very real to the logical mind of those who seek. The evidence is out there and all around us, but one must learn how to integrate that evidence on their own. No one can do it for you Alphanumeric, since the topic is the eventual source of all.

Except that there's no evidence the events ever occurred. Its not too difficult to write a story of fiction where things mentioned at the beginning of the story end up happening towards the end. What reason do we have to think that the prophecies were even made? What evidence do we have that the events mentioned in said prophecies occurred? Why are things like the dead getting out of their graves and walking into a large populated area to greet people not get mentioned anywhere outside the bible? Zombies are something which would get people talking! We have a lot of information about that time period from sources outside the bible and none of them mention Jesus or zombies!

Tell you what, you provide one piece of clear evidence which doesn't involve bible quotes or interpretations or here-say or circular logic or any logical fallacy or appeals to emotion that Jesus actually existed and I'll read your book demo. If you can't then there's no point in me reading it as it'll just be more bible quotes and dubious interpretations of yours.

Ok, but firstly let me say that “proof is an idol before whom the atheist tortures himself!”

Now, there are many sources found outside the Bible that document (for instance) the existence of Jesus. Aside from the New Testament disciples that recorded the story of Jesus, we also have recorded documents by other known historians, writers and philosophers who lived during or not long after the time of Jesus (33AD) that supply us with a document of evidence. One of these historians is a person by the name of Cornelius Tacitus who lived after Jesus from 55AD to 120AD. He was a senator and Roman historian. He writes about a man called Chrestus (a common connotation of Christ) who was executed by Pilate the Roman official of Judea during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberias. Ironically, Tacitus was hostile toward Christianity, therefore it would not have been in his interest to record that Jesus existed, but he did anyways because it would have been disloyal to the historical record to not do so. Another Greek writer named Lucian of Samosata who is recorded to have lived within two hundred years of Jesus additionally made reference to Jesus. Another Roman historian and court official was a man by the name of Suetonius. He refers to the expelling of Jews from Rome on account of their activities on behalf of Jesus (called Chrestus again). Another governor by the name of Pliny in 112AD was responsible for executing Christians for not worshipping or bowing down to a statue of the Roman emperor. Another philosopher by the name of Mara Bar-Serapion who lived some time after 70 AD wrote a letter to his son describing how the Jews executed their King. But perhaps the most famous of all, happens to be a Jewish historian named Josephus who was born 4 years after the crucifixion of Jesus in 37AD. He wrote the Jewish Antiquities describing Jesus as a wise man who did wonderful works and calling Him the Messiah. Josephus also affirmed that Jesus was executed by Pilate and had shortly after, rose from the dead.

There is also two other ancient historians of indisputable origins… One was named Thallus and the other Phlegon. Both confirmed the biblical account of an earthquake and an eclipse of the sun when Jesus took His last breath and gave up His spirit on the cross and died. We find a record of this in the New Testament of Luke 23:45 - And the sun was darkened, and the veil of the temple was rent in the midst. And also in Matthew 27:51 - At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook and the rocks split. And additionally in Mark 15:38 - The curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. However, the Roman historian Thallus wrote in his journals in 52AD (before the disciples wrote the New Testament, which was said to be in 70AD) - On the whole world, there pressed a most fearful darkness, and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. Thallus also writes - As appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. Additionally, the Roman historian Phlegon born in 80AD records in 140AD - That, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth - manifestly that one of which we speak. Phlegon also writes -The darkness that occurred in the 4th year of the 202nd Olympiad (corresponding to 32/33 A.D), There was the greatest eclipse of the sun. It became as night in the sixth hour of the day (noon) so that the stars even appeared in the heavens. There was a great earthquake in Bithynia and many things were overturned in Nicaea. The evidence of a recorded earthquake in history clearly shows that this event occurred on a date and time that agrees with the scriptures, which makes a strong case for Jesus‘ authenticity which includes a supernatural happening.

But perhaps the most powerful evidence yet, is astronomical (an eclipse that took place). The gospels recount that the sun was darkened on the day of the crucifixion from noon until 3:00pm in the afternoon. Ancient non-Biblical sources also confirm this. As aforementioned, Phlegon Trallianus records in his history of 32-33AD - A failure of the Sun took place greater than any previously known, and night came on at the sixth hour of the day (noon), so that stars actually appeared in the sky; and a great earthquake took place in Bithynia and overthrew the greater part of Niceaea. But the evidence does not stop here… Amazingly to correlate with this, a final modern day discovery answers the questionable date of the crucifixion with precision. In today’s scientific advancements in astronomy we can determine exactly when historical eclipses occurred. This was found with special computer software that can pier back into the past to look below the horizon and see Earths shadow begin the eclipse. When they did this, scientists had discovered that only one Passover lunar eclipse was visible from Jerusalem while Pilate was in office. And it occurred on April 3rd, 33 AD at precisely 3:00pm in the evening (calculated using the modern day calendar). The New Testament gospels also tell the order of events. Nails were spiked through Jesus’ hand and feet into the cross at 9:00am. as He was raised up. At noon and for 3 hours the sky was darkened. In the holy Temple in Jerusalem, a double lined curtain excluded men from the holy of holies. At the end of the crucifixion (Jesus‘ last breath when He gave up the spirit), the veil in the holy temple was torn apart from top to bottom, as a earthquake split rocks and broke open tombs. Jesus was recorded (in the New Testament) to have died at 3:00pm. After that His body was removed from the cross before nightfall to observe the approaching Passover. Mark 15 - And straightway in the morning the chief priests held a consultation with the elders and scribes and the whole council, and bound Jesus, and carried him away, and delivered him to Pilate. Mark 15:25 - And it was the third hour, and they crucified him. Mark 15:33-39 - And when the sixth hour was come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour. And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, saying, Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani? which is, being interpreted, My G-d, my G-d, why hast thou forsaken me? And some of them that stood by, when they heard it, said, Behold, he calleth Elijah. And one ran and filled a sponge full of vinegar, and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink, saying, Let alone; let us see whether Elias will come to take him down. And Jesus cried with a loud voice, and gave up the ghost. And the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom. And when the centurion, which stood over against him, saw that he so cried out, and gave up the ghost, he said, Truly this man was the Son of G-d.

Book demo:

http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltruthpublisher.com/files/Pictures_and_explanation.pdf

Mathematics are well and good but nature keeps dragging us around by the nose. ~Albert Einstein

 

[IamJoseph]

You haven't provided any evidence for the existence of any deity,

From a scientific pov, there is no alternative to a universe maker of the universe. Maybe you know of one?

let alone the Abrahamic one.

This refers to monotheism. There is no mathematical alternative to a monotheistic view based on a universe maker. Maybe you know of another alternative to the MONO premise?

I don't deny the possibility people like Abraham or Jesus existed.

From a science pov, Abraham introduced monotheism, from which were derived science and laws for humanity. The premise exists today - whether or not Abraham existed. BTW, we have loads of circumstantial evidence for Abraham and Moses - we have no such evidence Jesus existed or gave humanity any actionable message.

 

[spidergoat]

From a scientific point of view, a creator requires it's own explanation and so isn't an explanation for anything.

 

[IamJoseph]

From a scientific point of view, a creator requires it's own explanation and so isn't an explanation for anything.

Agreed this requires its own explanation. Disagreed it does not answer anything: there is no alternative to it. Understand I am not taking a theological view here - it is the empirical premise which impacts my view. It is equally encumbent for science not to discard the creator premise based on a lack of scientific alternatives and that there cannot be an alternative in the future.

If we have to allow the premise of infinite, it cannot apply to anything in the universe - because a finite realm cannot contain an infinite. This allows only a transcendent factor outside and precedent of this universe as an infinite: here, a para- or multi-universe cannot apply, at least not if it contains anything already contained in this universe - that would violate this universe's finite factor. See my point?