Question for Christians

[SnakeLord]

LUKE 20:8
And Jesus said unto them, Neither tell I you by what authority I do these things.

Ah, more tosh.

While jesus doesn't have to tell anyone anything, and can't now because he's a corpse you should at least have the decency to support your claims.

Kindly tell me who estimated Adam's IQ and what methods they used to arrive at the conclusion.

Or were you just making it up?

 

[Godless]

No God allowed them all to happen.

Riiiiigghhhhhhtttt! the appropriate answer from ignorance. You don't know didly shit so you claim "god did it" and the rest of your post is pointless giberish as well. I don't take well to theistic rhetorical crap that you can't possibly back up with evidence!

So keep dreaming, and living in your delusional state, it's your mind anyways

 

[Smooth]

Thank everybody who replied to my thred so far.
Actually I was motivated to open this topic after reading on article from the book "Fat-Future Universe:Eschatology From Cosmic Perspective"
There is section "Humanity"(with 4 articles),and one of these article is "Eschatology: Cosmic Versus Human" and written by Owen Gingerich,professor of Astronomy
He states:
"I asked my friend Philip Morrison, an Institute Professor Emeritus at MIT and an astute observer of the scientific scene, about the prospects for Homo sapiens. "I would give it about 10 million years," he opined, and when I pressed him about the basis of his estimate, he replied that this was a typical lifetime for a complex species. I agreed that certainly the fossil record shows us that extinction is the name of the game, and there is no reasonable expectation that humankind would be exempt."
"to me it is unimaginable that Homo sapiens will still exist on earth ten million years from now, except perhaps by some remote chance in zoos or special preserves, a throwback much like Przewalski's horse. It is not astronomy that gives me this reading, nor even evolutionary biology and anthropology, but my reflections as a historian and philosopher of science. I believe it is neither pessimistic nor optimistic, but simply realistic. Our universe is going to go on for billions of years without us. Our temporal span is as fleeting as our spatial position is minuscule."
What is most interesting though,that Owen Gingerich is by no means atheist/agnostic.He is firm believer.

 

[Prince_James]

There is no point to existence without man. If man is to perish, all else must bear the sorrow of his passing. I suggest utter sterilization of the Earth if such becomes imminent, down to the smallest microrobe.

 

[TheVisitor]

Ah, more tosh.

While Jesus doesn't have to tell anyone anything, and can't now because he's a corpse you should at least have the decency to support your claims.

Kindly tell me who estimated Adam's IQ and what methods they used to arrive at the conclusion.

Or were you just making it up?

Actually I don't remember where I heard it.
Why is that so important to you?

You believe you have found something you can pick apart?
No you haven't because this statement is not in the least essential to the context of what I was saying.

 

[SnakeLord]

"I would give it about 10 million years," he opined, and when I pressed him about the basis of his estimate, he replied that this was a typical lifetime for a complex species. I agreed that certainly the fossil record shows us that extinction is the name of the game, and there is no reasonable expectation that humankind would be exempt."

Well, I think most people would agree that this planet will not be able to sustain human life in probably the next 1000 years let alone 10 million, but I think this person is making a vast mistake in thinking that humans will be extinct, or even be close to this planet.

2011 and NASA plan to send man to Mars. Add 10 million years to that and anyone that thinks we'd still be stuck on this planet is really not looking at the big picture. Looking at the fossil record is handy but does not take into account species that can travel to other planets. I know we look like a backward and useless species when you watch the news - watch how the religious kill themselves and everyone else for nothing, but we're not all like that. Behind those faults, that which has held us back since day 1, we have ability.

It's a shame we wont be here to see the extinction of that which has kept mankind a slave for so long.

 

[TheVisitor]

Well, I think most people would agree that this planet will not be able to sustain human life in probably the next 1000 years let alone 10 million, but I think this person is making a vast mistake in thinking that humans will be extinct, or even be close to this planet.

2011 and NASA plan to send man to Mars. Add 10 million years to that and anyone that thinks we'd still be stuck on this planet is really not looking at the big picture. Looking at the fossil record is handy but does not take into account species that can travel to other planets. I know we look like a backward and useless species when you watch the news - watch how the religious kill themselves and everyone else for nothing, but we're not all like that. Behind those faults, that which has held us back since day 1, we have ability.

It's a shame we wont be here to see the extinction of that which has kept mankind a slave for so long.

Are you who denies ancient technology ever existed, to destroy the world that was the other side of the flood, trying to claim religion is holding them back from doing it again?

It is God that has held them back for the last forty years.
When He came he set one foot on the Earth and one one the Sea, holding the two symbolic powers from coming together.....for a space of time.
That times about up.

Knowledge without the Character of God to contain it is satanic.
You think man will do anything but destroy Himself again with power apart from Godly character.

You will soon have your chance to see.

----------

You still hold to that "Stitchem" Babylonian version of man created as slaves for the gods?

Sounds like it here.

That story has some truth to it, as do all really good lies.
The more truth they contain the better they deceive.
But I've tried to tell you where it's off the mark, and you won't beleive it.
The Babylonian's veiwpoint was turned around....180 degrees from mine.
There were two races here.

Don't try to go back to what I understood years ago and think that's what I'm saying now though.
The revelation is progresive.
How about your's?

 

[SnakeLord]

Actually I don't remember where I heard it.
Why is that so important to you?

How dare you ask why, it should be plainly bloody obvious why.

Let's make this as easy for you as I can...

It is estimated that jesus is actually the devil there to fool mankind into following him instead of god.

Now, there are several ways to take this statement:

1) Agree with the statement regardless of it's truth or fiction (doing so would be foolishness)

2) Disagree with the statement regardless of it's truth or fiction (doing so would be foolishness)

3) Question the veracity of the statement. Get evidence to support or go against the claim.


All your personal protests mean absolutely diddly squat right now.. it's not about feeling, it's not about emotion - it's about what is and what isn't - and thus it relies 100% on what the evidence shows. I know and understand that regardless of this statement you will have problem. For some reason you would expect that evidence for any other claim ever made and yet for some reason think the same does not apply to you. I can guarantee you it does. If it didn't us atheists would not exist.

So where you deny other gods, (for example), we do the same with yours. We ask for evidence and for some bizarre and frankly insane reason you think we're asking too much. To quote Stephen Roberts;

"I contend that we are all atheists, I just believe in one less god than you. When you understand why you dismiss all the other gods you will understand why I dismiss yours"

Now, let's be clear... you made a claim - and a wild claim at that. Over 5 posts and two threads I have asked you to support that claim. You still fail to do so - damn, you don't even try. What do you expect from me? The minute you ask me for any less than I am doing, it shows that you are being dishonest with yourself, me and everyone else here and shows that you do not have one iota of courage in you.

If you take the time to look you will see that every time I make a post it is in direct response to another persons claims. I question the claims of others. Even in threads I've started myself, (other than ones where I simply provide a link to interesting news), you'll find I have a question.

You'll find I do not sit here and say; "Lenny the leprechaun is real and demands allegiance. Those of you that don't give him that allegiance or believe in him are ignorant and shall perish in flame".

If I did and you didn't question me on it I'd be seriously dissapointed in you.

The amusing thing is if I did say such a thing you'd dismiss it out of hand. You wouldn't even give me the time of day and yet here I sit giving you ample opportunity. Unlike you if the table was turned, I give you the ability to provide what is needed, what you yourself would expect. I ask you time and time again to provide the details and that is where you always fail, always crumble - and then have the fucking audacity to try and blame me for it.

This is not what man is, this is not reason, this is not intellect - this is a fucking circus act, a parade of clowns. What is wrong with you? "Why is that so important"... You should be ashamed.

You believe you have found something you can pick apart?
No you haven't because this statement is not in the least essential to the context of what I was saying.

It was just a question.. Clearly it's more important than you give it credit for.. it took you 2 threads and 5 posts just to even attempt an answer, (which was the most cowardly answer known to man). I caught you out and I would be far more impressed if you had the balls to face upto it. It doesn't make anyone a winner or loser, (which is the sad part of it). Your answer, (that is apparently of no importance) wouldn't have hurt you, your beliefs, your cause. Shit, all it would have done was brought into doubt whether Adam's claimed IQ was 2000 or not - and yet it brought you to your knees. You can and will dispute this, (and frankly I'm not interested because all the text in the world does not change exactly what is going through your head right now - and that is where it counts). I don't want to change you, hell - I don't even like you.. but what I do know is that everytime someone cringes away from giving an answer, that answer reverberates around that persons brain. "I don't have an answer, I made it up", is what's going through your head right now - and I guarantee that sting is far more potent than any sting you would have got from just being courageous and honest here.

I truly pity the man that has not got the courage of heart to question that which he believes, to question that which is believed, to question that which he wants to believe. Through none of that would you ever need to make a statement, ever need to express a belief.. It's always questions Visitor and that is what scares me about the religious - no questions whatsoever, just claimed answers. That really is not the way of the world.

 

[SnakeLord]

Are you who denies ancient technology ever existed

Given my last post I shall go about this the proper way. I would ask in advance that you show the courage and decency to answer:

Do you have any evidence to support your claim of "ancient technology"? Can we ascertain that "ancient technology" was ever employed to do harm to the planet?

You claim that nuclear weapons caused the earth to tilt that in turn caused it to flood the earth and kill all humans.

Can you substantiate that claim, yes or no? Please do not waste my time and effort with your personal feelings - I do not care about your personal feelings. Do you have anything of substance?

trying to claim religion is holding them back from doing it again

Do me a lemon, religion is not holding man back from destruction. If anything the evidence shows that religion is indeed leading man to it. Why I could pick up any newspaper from the past year to state my case. Religion is holding back the advancement of man. We could look at abortion - sure, it's a pretty nasty thing and the religious are unrelenting in their punishment of those that conduct abortion. How have they helped anything? Given time and learning abortion could be completely painless, harmless - something done with a pill you could buy over the counter. It is the religious mindset that holds it back - claiming it is barbaric while happily using 17th century techniques to kill a man. Do note that I do not intend or want this to turn into an abortion debate - I am on both sides of the coin - one as a man of reason and one as a parent. Let it be known that reason and emotion do conflict with each other quite violently.

How long has it taken for women to have the right to vote? How long has it taken slaves to have the right to freedom? How long has it taken the homosexual to have the right to show they love each other? Why is it that the religious are always the ones denying man their basic rights? It's simple.. You got told what to do an eon ago and nothing ever changes until we force it to. You'd call on your god to save you from it but he ain't home right now. For centuries you persecuted whoever stood against you. That was your time, the time when god called out in his holy voice to do away with all witches. Oh boy did you do a good job. You've got Hitler beat hands down. Eventually we stopped it. There are no such thing as witches, and - to quote Twain; "we don't know wether to laugh or cry". You guys keep listening to your god and everyone else suffers. You probably wouldn't care, after all - we're children of satan, but forgetting the inhumanity of it all, it is and has prevented man from being the best he can since time immemorial.

It is God that has held them back for the last forty years.

My point perhaps, although I strongly disagree with "forty years". Let's lay it out in the open.. your god wants destruction, nothing more. Since time, (to the religious), began he has excelled at nothing other than killing and destruction. His book, his grand old book is full of it. He is the biggest murderer in universal history. Every single human on the planet dead - and not by anything pleasant such as the click of a finger. Read it through, take the time. Look at the orders he gives in leviticus, look at the insanity in deuteronomy, look at how the smartest being in the universe could think of nothing better other than to have his child killed, (of which given that's it all to a plan is all his fault). You will find nothing but death there and you, his followers, have been emulating that ever since. The crusades, the inquisition, Salem and so on. Nowadays you think it's something new, something different. The christians have lost their voice and the muslims have taken over. More death, more destruction. You condemn them not because what they do is bad but because their god beat you to it.

"They have allah what do we have, Gorge Bush?"

However that's not the where the problem lies. As is generally the case the problem lies within. You guys cannot conduct battle without annihilating yourselves - and at this god has the biggest laugh of all. The sunnis kill the shiites, the protestants kill the catholics and so on. At the end of the day the only person left standing is the atheist.. we have no-one to kill, we simply ask of you something that you cannot give. The bonus to you, (and where we have your god beat), is that we don't kill you when you fail.

 

[TheVisitor]

SnakeLord,
For one you don't understand what you are talking about.
I'll give you one example.
He didn't have his child killed.

He was the child that came and died.
There is no Trinity, no Father, Son, Holy Ghost, three persons in one God.
Jesus is God, not His Son.
Son is a temporary title of an office, a work He fulfilled.
It describes when God appears in flesh.

This is the harvest of the world and the Lord has come with His mighty Angels to seperate the two.
Sorry you can't understand that.

You assume way too much, and use your own error to prove to yourself your own vindication.
I have answered your every question with the last 1600 posts.
Yet you refuse to believe.

My time is better spent answering people's questions who will listen.
Those who intentionally reject the truth are held in chains of darkness.
You are not my problem.
I have delivered my soul of you.
Believe what you will, call me what you will.

The bonus to you, (and where we have your god beat), is that we don't kill you when you fail.

Last time I checked it was atheists that created the bomb.

 

[SnakeLord]

SnakeLord..

Woah, before going any further would you mind answering my questions? (they're at the top of my last post).

There is no Trinity, no Father, Son, Holy Ghost, three persons in one God.
Jesus is God, not His Son.
Son is a temporary title of an office, a work He fulfilled.
It describes when God appears in flesh.

And how exactly do you intend to support you claims and show that every christian that believes in the trinity is wrong? How do you intend to show that Hebrews is also wrong, (given that it states jesus is a priest, not a god)?

I have answered your every question with the last 1600 posts.

Show me where you have answered any? The fact of the matter is that you keep spouting your nonsense without paying attention. I have heard your claims many times and am fully aware of what those claims entail. I'm more concerned with you supporting those claims than repeating them over and over.

You just can't do it can you?

My time is better spent answering people's questions who will listen.

Try not to write them in invisible ink next time.

Last time I checked it was atheists that created the bomb.

Science made it, a religious baptist used it.

 

[TheVisitor]

Woah, before going any further would you mind answering my questions? (they're at the top of my last post).

I have answered them in such detail you rattled off my own quotes a few posts ago.
You just refuse to accept the answer.
Because I answered your questions doesn't mean you're capable of comprehending the answers.
So you keep saying it's all nonsense...which is only your personal opinion.

-Do you have any evidence to support your claim of "ancient technology"?

What will you accept as evidence?
That which you can see with your eyes?
That would be foolish.....since that can be falsified.
I've given you real evidence in the past.
You expect me to do the work of posting it all again just so you can divide it up line by line and refute every word without a single speck of evidence to support your denials but personal disbelief?
Sorry...can't help you there, old friend.
You know what they say; "Fool me once....."

-Can we ascertain that "ancient technology" was ever employed to do harm to the planet?

Yes.

-You claim that nuclear weapons caused the earth to tilt that in turn caused it to flood the earth and kill all humans.

Yes.....but I didn't say all humans did I?
That is a perfect example of you're taking my answers out of context to try and "disprove" them..

Do you have anything of substance?

A real question.
But you won't like the answer.

Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Without it you can not even begin to comprehend reality.

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

 

[SnakeLord]

I have answered them in such detail you rattled off my own quotes a few posts ago.
You just refuse to accept the answer.

For the gazillionth time: I have read what you've written, (time and again), but nowhere in what you have written is any evidence, just you giving me what you think or believe. Tell me for instance where there is any evidence for anything in the following:

"He was the child that came and died.
There is no Trinity, no Father, Son, Holy Ghost, three persons in one God.
Jesus is God, not His Son."

Where is there any evidence of anything in that? Now try everything else you've written and you'll find the answer is the same. There is no evidence just your personal supposition.

And then when you finally build up some level of courage to answer questions posed look at what is the very best you can do:

"yes".

You think that is helpful how? You think that answers anything how? Although you could argue that my question didn't ask for more than that, it would be foolish to expect that to be the case. However I will take blame for it and now make the needed addition:

So, we can apparently ascertain that ancient technology was employed to do harm in the past. How can we ascertain that and what evidence to you have to support it?

A real question.
But you won't like the answer.

Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Without it you can not even begin to comprehend reality.

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

This isn't substance, it's supposition, and it doesn't begin to answer the questions I posed.

Whether fear of sky beings is the beginning of wisdom or not is irrelevant to whether you have evidence to support a claim that ancient people have nuclear weapons etc. Try again.

-------

What will you accept as evidence?

To support your claim of ancient technology it would require a little more than your say so and religious sermons.

What the hell, I'll answer my own damn questions..

Is there any evidence to support the claim of ancient technology?

Well, there is something you might call very 'loose' evidence - certain regions where the ground has fused together and a certain text that alludes to flying machines and weapons of mass destruction, but nothing of any real substance. If in 1000 years someone were to stumble upon a copy of The Time Machine, it would be a bit presumptuous to claim that time machines did indeed exist in the year 1895. While I will be the first to say that Well's stories were fascinating we cannot consider the existence of that story as 'evidence' to truth within it. As it stands the answer is generally a no.

What will I accept as evidence... Well, let me see what you've got and i'll look at it. Currently you're not even trying.

That which you can see with your eyes?

That's certainly a start.

 

[Smooth]

Ok,if let's run our imagination.Suppose we left this rock(pretty hard task by itself,I ' ll return to that later).
But to quote Gingerich once again: "If homo sapiens are still on earth 10 million years from now, it will be in zoos or special preserves, as throwbacks much like Przewalski's horse is today. Evolutionary biology and anthropology give me this reading, which is neither pessimistic nor optimistic, but realistic. Cosmological eschatology, with its timescale of many billions of years, is irrelevant when measured against any reasonable scenario of future human existence on earth or in the cosmos."
Martin Rees:
"Any creatures witnessing the Sun's demise 6 billion years hence won't be human — they'll be as different from us as we are from bacteria".
As for space colonization: too many difficulties.As I see the major problem - we,humans,evolved to live HERE.Our biological constitution is desidned for Mother Earth.And,to travel to Mars,Moon and Europa - it's completely different story than to travel outside of Sol.
We can:
To spread life using Directed Pansmermia method,or:
To create intelligent machines,create huge bio factories,and when machines reach proper planet - they will clone humans back.Such way described by most scientist as the most effecient.
Ok,and if we even find the way to send living humans outide of Sol,then - how many?I doubt, that more than a few thousand.
Next,it's pretty much likely that on other planet humans(while they are there) will undergo further changes/adaptation/evolution according to the planet athmosphere.