Can you handle the Truth?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I was being facetious.

Where are the bones of Caesar and Herrod?

Originally posted by Devil King
Where are the bones of Caesar and Herrod?

I thought you knew. In a tomb or grave somewhere.

Signing off now. Goodbye.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I thought you knew. In a tomb or grave somewhere.

So the lack of a known tomb implies they are here somewhere?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
So...what happened to the body of Jesus then?

If your rational is "Jesus' body was never found, therefore it must have resurrected and then flown into heaven". Then by same idiot-rational, Jimmy Hoffa resurrected and flew up into heaven too.

Edit: I see DevilKing posed the same retort with the Caesar and Herrod question, yet you play the fool and dance his question.

Originally posted by Robtard
If your rational is "Jesus' body was never found, therefore it must have resurrected and then flown into heaven". Then by same idiot-rational, Jimmy Hoffa resurrected and flew up into heaven too.

So, where is Jim's foreskin?

Originally posted by Devil King
So, where is Jim's foreskin?

Was he cut?

Originally posted by Robtard
Was he cut?

I dunno? Was he?

I found this post at this link. It is kind of amusing.

http://www.livescience.com/history/top10_intelligent_designs.html

LAUGHING AT THE WRONG PEOPLE? "A Myth-UnderstandIng"

From the first second of Creation FORWARD, scientist claim to possess "answers" to explain away the natural sciences behind the universe. They chuckle at "Creationist's" silly beliefs that a superior intelligence actually exists & took time build this reality virtually out of "nothing." And if you ask them something as simple as... "What existed '1 second' BEFORE Creation?" A glazed look appears in their eyes or they emotionally/vehemently write you off as a blasphemer or something equally silly.

So much for open-mindedness. Actually, it's an AWESOME question more people should be asking. Why? Because the answer is so terrifying & freakingly awesome... it'll blow one's narrow-mindedness away... and they might learn something new.

Face it... anything (created, produced, manufactured) in this reality of ours requires intelligence. I've never seen a cup 'evolve" from clay, have you? Normally, it's made by human hand or machine. And that's something simple... a universe would take a little more effort & intelligence to create... agree?

Well, like it or not... somebody DID figure it out. Somebody did create something out of nothing. Somebody a whole lot smarter than us DID figure out a way to build a perfectly balanced "Cup" out of nothing... gave it shape; added space to hold all sorts of really neat stuff like (energy, matter & time);gave it several dimensions; heated the whole thing up to get things cooking... and did it all using a "Super Science" beyond our comprehension to accomplish it. And to show off... they made the perfect recipe for a myriad of animal life forms and humanity.

But did it all really come from "Nothingness?" Depends, if we really were "Cooked" up on some super scientist's laboratory in another 'reality' -Hmmm, I'm sure he had a test tube of "space", "time", "energy" & "matter" to spare. Why is that so hard to believe? Because the scale of his experiment is universal in size? Consider this: If synthetic molecules or particles could created to think & feel... I am sure they'd have an equally hard time believing a "Human" intelligence existed to create them... but guess what?

Well, in this case, the scientist is God... the universe's greatest Super Scientist. Give credit where credit is due. And he built this wonderful reality for us to explore, learn, enjoy and be amazed with. Why? Why does any scientist, inventor or creator build? And what's so hard to believing you're his greatest masterpiece? Many resist that line of thinking... why? Could it be they find themselves on the wrong side of the argument? If so, relax.

God likes you...he's is a cool dude and understands humanity. And he wants you to seek and find him. That's why he left a universe full of scientific breadcrumbs to follow back to the source... (him). Why? The universe reflects his true nature... (i.e. a balanced-organized-chaos, breath-taking wonders, absolute / constant values like mathematics, universal constants & morality... and reasonable punishment for defying/breaking any natural; universal and/or supernatural law.

The problem isn't God... it's us. We can't control him like we can't control the universe or its laws. And what we cannot control or manipulate... it's just easier to ignore and deny. That can prove very dangerous and deadly. A better way to view this is by respecting that we cannot control... and finding a way to better understand and work with it. As a Christian... I don't always like God either. But like any other relationship, it takes patience, humor and an open-mind to appreciate the 'differences' and find a way to get along.

I love science and the scientific method... I mean, what's the real difference between Faith & Theory? I have a theory God created the universe. I observe natural law; universal law; the precarious balance of 'universal constants' required for life and then draw a conclusion. The only thing I cannot do is conduct/"repeat" experiments to gather hard-core facts for or against a Creator.

But consider this... many fascinating scientific theories meet this same fate. (i.e. Time travel; parallel universes; warp speed(?)...etc.) So, we are forced to add up what facts we can glean and move from the realm of "fact" to the realm of "probability." And knowing what we know about our universe... we must then ask ourselves a simple question: "What force is known for fanciful dreaming, unlikely designing and then building wondrously (impossible?) masterpieces up from nothing?" The Answer: "Intelligence"

Bottom Line: You've got a brain and a heart... use them both. If you are going to mock those who believe in Creationism... do it intelligently... not emotionally. And try it before you mock it... -they just might have it right.

Originally posted by Robtard
If your rational is "Jesus' body was never found, therefore it must have resurrected and then flown into heaven". Then by same idiot-rational, Jimmy Hoffa resurrected and flew up into heaven too.

Edit: I see DevilKing posed the same retort with the Caesar and Herrod question, yet you play the fool and dance his question.

I spent hours on this forum answering every question posed by various people and you accuse me of dancing?
I already knew where Devil King was going. I did not want to go there because I did not feel like quoting numerous Scriptures and other proofs that would have refuted what he had written. (I was tired).

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You gave me a link to Dr. Hugh Ross. He is a quack. 😆

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Computers don't evolve (in the sense that I meant it). So, you are wrong.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
That is not the crux of this discussion. The point is that regardless of educational attainment, IQ level, or how many d's that a person has behind their name, that does not presuppose that that individual somehow loses their respect for something that is complex (even if he/she understands its innerworkings).

Just because you understand it and can duplicate it doesn’t necessarily mean you loose respect or the complexity of it, but the mystical nature of it disappears. Just as I have said the mystical nature of a plane to a cave man. How is a plan this wonderful mystical thing, because they do not know what or how it works, plain and simple.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I have already established that scientists agree that the universe is expanding. This expansion had a starting point; hence, the universe had a beginning.

Originally posted by Tim Rout
I understand your conclusion that a lack of alternative explanations does not, in itself, constitute evidence for the existence of a designer. Just because science cannot presently explain the origins of life (for example), does not negate the possibility of future discoveries. Or does it?

Intelligent people often make judgments based on the preponderance of the evidence. While the failure of a secular origins theory does not constitute evidence, the failure of EVERY secular origins theory has to make us wonder.

Walter Bradley, famed PhD in materials science, and author of “Origins Of Life And Evolution Of The Biosphere”, said the following with regard to the plausibility of divine design:

“If there isn't a natural explanation, and there doesn't seem to be the potential of finding one, then I believe it is appropriate to look at a supernatural explanation. I think that's the most reasonable inference based on the evidence.” [“The Case For Faith”; Lee Strobel, p.151]

When one concludes, as Bradley has, that the spontaneous generation of life would require the suspension of known physical laws, then science has truly arrived at a dead end on this issue. Random Chance fails the probability test in that, even if secular Big Bangers are correct and the universe is some 14 billion years old, this is still insufficient time for life to have spontaneously erupted on earth. Chemical Affinity fails the actuality test, in that the sequencing of base proteins is unrelated to their theoretical attractions. Self-Ordering Non-equilibrium Thermodynamics fails the analogy test, in that non-biological processes do not translate into the extraordinary complexities of the biological sphere. The Space Seed theory – the idea that life was planted here by aliens, or fell from the sky in a comet or other cosmic body – lacks even the most marginal fiber of supporting evidence. The Ocean Vent theory fails the information test, since it does not answer the fundamental question “How did DNA information originate?” And of course, Life From Clay, as proposed by Scottish chemist A.G. Cairns-Smith was ultimately rejected (even by him) as utterly impossible, given that crystalline formations lack the requisite complexity of biological forms.

Barring the improbability of a scientific solution to the origins question, one must begin to ask if perhaps life began in some unique, unrepeatable way. Unfortunately, an unrepeatable occurrence would negate the possibility of scientific confirmation, since that which is not repeatable cannot be scientifically investigated.

But if there is likely no scientific solution waiting to be discovered, as Bradley suggests, and if science itself is incapable of dealing with the unrepeatable, then what is a rational person to do? Since scientific laws seem insufficient to the task, perhaps metaphysical laws might have more success. As Dr. William Lane Craig states in his landmark address on divine origins, the first law of metaphysics states: “Whatever begins to exist, has a cause.” Christians believe this cause is God.

http://www.leestrobel.com/videoserver/video.php?clip=strobelT1203

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Prove it.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
No, I am trying to see how you would define your interaction with them. Is it a religion or relationship that you have with them?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
That is why I use so much Scripture and scientific research.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
I spent hours on this forum answering every question posed by various people and you accuse me of dancing?
I already knew where Devil King was going. I did not want to go there because I did not feel like quoting numerous Scriptures and other proofs that would have refuted what he had written. (I was tired).

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive

You have the cart before the horse (what caused the purported gas cloud?).

On your previous post, your EXPLICITLY asking what caused that large star in the Heavens, the sun. I gave you the correct answer; the gravitational collapse of a gas cloud. In the creation of the sun, the gas cloud comes first before the sun. This is the proper sequence of events and is NOT a proper example of the idiomatic expression "putting a cart before a horse". Basically your trying to ungainly shift your question from the cause of the sun after i answered it and hopefully not appear get OWNED-again. Next time dont ask grade school level questions like star formation. The previous questions you pose deals with the sun which is why i limited my answers to that.

Anyway, let's just cut to the chase. The gas cloud could be traced back to the Big Bang. What you really want to ask me, for the nth time - i lost count, is what caused the Big Bang (or the quantum fluctuations that caused it)? And everytime, the answer stays the same: it is UNCAUSED. It goes like this. By definition, a cause comes BEFORE an event like the Big Bang and is therefore subject to time. Time however is part of spacetime which began to exists only after the Big Bang, which means there is NO TIME BEFORE the Big Bang. This in turn means that your so called "law of cause and effect" BREAKSDOWN/DOES NOT APPLY to the Big Bang . The Big Bang does not need a CAUSE for it to exist. So unless you could prove that time exists before the Big Bang, you would have just to accept the fact that the Big Bang is exempt from the chain of causality. There is actually empical evidence for the Big Bang hence it more likely to be the thing/event that is exempt from the chain of causality, unlike your unknown, supernatural god.

This reminds of an anecdote about St.Augustine. Somebody asked him, "What was God doing before he created the world?" Augustine answered, "Time itself being part of God's creation, there was simply NO BEFORE!"

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive

It is what it is: common sense (not to call into question your intelligence though). All I ask you to do is look at the facts. This universe and the earth can be studied with mathematic precision and shown to obey the laws of cause and effect. Everything in this universe is subject to definite laws not random, chance occurrence. The planet earth is a well-ordered, organized, system that has been observed and proven to be governed by predictable natural laws. This is the evidence that you seek. What do you know about DNA? Need I say more? The evidence for God's existence is overwhelming obvious. You wouldn't look at a newborn baby and conclude that child has no intelligent designer (i.e. parents) would you? You couldn't observe a rolex watch, diamond ring, or sports car and come to the deduction that no intelligent designer exists could you? How can you look at all of the sophistication and obvious proof that this universe with its laws and this planet with its complication has everything that insects, animals, and human beings need to exist, and somehow dismiss it as an accident? Accidents don't produce organized systems and definite, workable, calculable laws that govern advanced organisms, and sustains their very existence. Therefore, this universe and earth could not have come about apart from a powerful, all-wise Creator.

See above for any cause and effect-related counters.

And this *cut and paste* answer of mine from a previous post shows that accidents or random chance brought forth "definite, workable, calculable laws that govern advanced organisms, and sustains their very existence".

"The force laws (gravity, electromagnetic, electroweak, and strong) as exist in the Standard Model are represented as spontaneously broken symmetries, that is, symmetries that are broken randomly and without cause or design. In a more apt example, consider what happens when a ferromagnet cools below a certain critical temperature called the Curie point. The iron undergoes a change of phase and a magnetic field suddenly appears that points in a specific, though RANDOM, direction, breaking the original symmetry in which no direction was singled out ahead of time, none predictable by any known theory.

The forces of nature are akin to the magnetic field of a ferromagnet. The "direction" they point to after symmetry breaking was not determined ahead of time. The nature of the forces themselves was not pre-specified. They just happened to freeze out the way they did.

Now theists may argue that I am simply assuming the absence of divine causation and not proving it. I am not claiming to prove that such causation does not exist. Rather I am simply demonstrating that, based on current scientific knowledge, NONE IS NECESSARY."

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/stenger_intel.html

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive

That's fine that you believe that but you still have the cart before the horse. Where did the gas cloud come from?

See above and have i mentioned youve made improper use of the idiomatic expression "putting a cart before a horse"?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive

If everything is caused by a cloud of gas please explain the cause that produced the effect of cloud-gas mixture. Remember: everything in this universe is the result of a cause.

See above and have i mentioned that the Big Bang is exempt from the chain of causality due to the fact that there is no time before time?

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive

The evidence of God's existence is right before you but you cannot accept it. You can admit that a rolex watch has a designer but the universe and earth and all life which exceeds that watch in terms of complication had no designer, right? Wrong. This is an obvious double-standard of the highest order.

Paley's watchmaker analogy could be sum up in two words: Bad Analogy.

For one, it leaves the question who designed god? The baseless assumption that god is UNDESIGNED is a circular argument. It must first be shown that god - your christian god - exists BEFORE ANYTHING can be attributed to him or his "handiwork." In other words, we cannot assume that this god is NOT a product of design and then turn around and use that assumption to prove god's existence. Might as well say that the universe is UNDESIGNED and forget about baseless supernatural designers.

Second,i'll quote you a ruling from the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial. Ya know the court ruling that showed that Intelligent design is bullsh!t and should not be taught in school. It mainly talks about biological life but some of the arguments could be used to our debate about the design of the Universe.

"For human artifacts, we know the designer's identity, human, and the mechanism of design, as we have experience based upon empirical evidence that humans can make such things, as well as many other attributes including the designer's abilities, needs, and desires. With ID, proponents assert that they refuse to propose hypotheses on the designer's identity, do not propose a mechanism, and the designer, he/she/it/they, has never been seen. In that vein, defense expert Professor Minnich agreed that in the case of human artifacts and objects, we know the identity and capacities of the human designer, but we do not know any of those attributes for the designer of biological life. In addition, Professor Behe agreed that for the design of human artifacts, we know the designer and its attributes and we have a baseline for human design that does not exist for design of biological systems. Professor Behe's only response to these seemingly insurmountable points of disanalogy was that the inference still works in science fiction movies." — Ruling, Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, page 81

In the case of human artifacts and objects like watches, we know through credible and empirical means the identity and capacities of the human designer of the watch but we do not know through credible and empirical means, any of those attributes for the designer of the universe.

"Jesus never resurrected because he never died, simple as that."----da pittman

Do you mind my asking you if you are a Muslim, da pittman? Because according to my Arabic tutors, Muslims believe Jesus was a great prophet (one of their 5 great prophets) and that he was condemned to die, but God saved him at the last minute and took him to Heaven so Jesus never experienced death. Is this what you believe? If so, then you probably also believe their doctrine that Jesus' second coming is a sign of the end of the world, in which case you at least concede to the premise that Jesus was an amazing figure that greatly shaped our world and God had/has a definite plan for him to lead people spiritually.

Or are you saying something else?

Originally posted by willofthewisp
"Jesus never resurrected because he never died, simple as that."----da pittman

Do you mind my asking you if you are a Muslim, da pittman? Because according to my Arabic tutors, Muslims believe Jesus was a great prophet (one of their 5 great prophets) and that he was condemned to die, but God saved him at the last minute and took him to Heaven so Jesus never experienced death. Is this what you believe? If so, then you probably also believe their doctrine that Jesus' second coming is a sign of the end of the world, in which case you at least concede to the premise that Jesus was an amazing figure that greatly shaped our world and God had/has a definite plan for him to lead people spiritually.

Or are you saying something else?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
No I’m an atheist. I believe that Jesus was a man and with the limited medical knowledge of the time that they didn’t realize that he wasn’t dead. Even today with all of our advancements and knowledge people are still pronounced dead when they are not.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
When they pierced Christ's side, blood and water flowed from the wound. As in, the plasma and blood had already begun to separate. Furthermore, there would be no mistaking a half-dead Christ for what he was--unlike a risen Christ.

He probably got an ooc rez from a follower

Someone spun Jesus in a centrifuge beforehand?

Jesus ****ing Christ people, logic would dictate that Jesus did indeed die on the cross, as the Romans were efficient killers. The rest about Jesus having magic powers, coming back from the dead and the flying into heaven, well, that's embellishment to the story, which is common when a story is told and retold throughout the eons.

Edit: e.g. The story/myth of John Henry is less than 200 years old, look how embelished that is.

Originally posted by Tim Rout
You know Shaky, as much as I think you're a really great guy and a truly awesome musician, your off handed dismissal of scholars who support a biblical worldview is both unfortunate and unworthy of such a capable intellect. Those who "refute" Ross are by no means objective agents of truth. While Ross is not bias free, to be sure, the equally biased criticisms of secular evolutionists ultimately prove nothing. Those who base their life-paradigm on the factuality of evolution have much to lose if Ross is right. 🙂

No, this is not a reflection of a generalization on my part. This is a condemnation of one person who's work I have read up on.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
When they pierced Christ's side, blood and water flowed from the wound. As in, the plasma and blood had already begun to separate. Furthermore, there would be no mistaking a half-dead Christ for what he was--unlike a risen Christ.

While I know it seems retarded it holds logic to frame a point of view which you must have to form a conclusion. Where as I hold the logic that a man can not raise from the dead I must use that as my starting point, where as JIA is under the assumption that they can. The problem is that neither of us can verify our views because we do not have access to the “eyewitness” of the event though we all know that eyewitness accounts are extremely unreliable based on modern accounts where JIA holds them to be the absolute truth.

While I do agree that Jesus may or may not have dies on the cross which we can not verify as I have said to the people that saw him dead or years later, since we can not talk to those people or produce the body we will never know.