Ok, but where did god come from? You don't seem to want to answer this question. This is his point. And you can't just say that he is and always has been. No to that.
YES, you CAN say that "he is and always has been." And that's *precisely* what the Bible says. You know, the whole Alpha and Omega bit. C'mon, people, we're supposed to be intelligent here!
Um, yes, if you read the Bible, you'll find that religion (particularly the Pentateuch) very clearly accounts for the ultimate origin of *everything*. (See the first several chapters of Genesis.) As for the origins of God, the Bible also clearly states that God has no origins; he has simply always been. You don't have to agree with it, but it *is* there. You make yourself look foolish by saying otherwise.
So, of the water/sewer systems with which you are so intimately familiar, how many are reliant on computers?
Sorry, but I couldn't help making fun of this comment. Maybe if you somehow established your authority in this field, I could lend you a bit of credibility.:)
"Whether or not we should do this" is inherently a normative question that implies values, standards, dare I say... "morals." Whether or not you want to ask religious leaders is beside the point. Each and every religious leader represents a certain worldview that carries with it a distinct set of values; and whether or not that worldview is tied to a religion is irrelevant.
If you are wary of the opinions of religious leaders, why should you be any less wary of anyone's value-laden judgement on this question? I find the fact that scientists are claiming to seek religious guidance on this question supremely laughable. "We have discredited your Bible in each and every area of significance to which it lays claim; your God did not do what men claimed he did; all your judgements rely on disproved bunk. However, we would like to humor you and ask your opinion on this Very Important Question." Please!
For years, scientists have claimed that the question of the supernatural is outside the realm of science, and therefore, not their problem. Fine. Then don't consult a religious person for a religious perspective, because the answer you will receive is antithetical to the pursuit of science. Instead, they should consult their peers for a contrived (and I don't mean that in a derogatory way) and secular standard by which to judge their work. Keep religion out of it.
Well, this is rather late in the game, and I'm sure no one will read this, but:
I never said it was proof. I understand that someone who refuses to believe that a prophecy is fulfilled will continue to not believe, no matter what evidence they are provided with.
The previous poster asked for a prophecy that referenced the crucifixion. I provided one that is by-and-large considered such. Whether or not you choose to accept it is your decision.
Basically, you can choose to accept the biblical record...or you can choose not to. I also have no proof that Napolean ever existed, or Shakespeare, or Socrates, or any number of people before my time. They could all be manufactured lies. However, the large amount of archaelogical evidence that supports biblical events is so overwhelming that I'm led to believe that it is not a fictional account.
As for the prophecy that foretells Jesus' crucifixion, here you go:
"I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels. My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death. For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me. They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. But be not thou far from me, O LORD: O my strength, haste thee to help me."Psalm 22: 14-18
Sounds like a rather convincing description of a crucifixion, don't you think? You should try reading the Bible some time. There's a reason it's referred to as 'the Good News!':)
Now consider this: the men who wrote the gospels were men. Men with fallible memories, and men with agendas to further.
Those that like to use "fulfillment of prophesy" as evidence for the verity of the gospels overlook the fact that the men who wrote the gospels were involved in creating a movement. They were trying to establish themselves as leaders, missionaries, and religious revolutionaries. They were establishing churches, creating underground cells, safe houses - all the various sorts of activities taken by subversives of any type.
Oh, and don't forget that they were willing to be killed for their beliefs. We all know how easy it is to die for something that you just "made up out of thin air."
Small wonder that the gospels detail so many prophesies being fulfilled - how better to justify their claim that Christ was the Messiah? Small wonder too that, as the gospel writers didn't get to compare notes very often, that the various gospels differ and contradict themselves so much.
Are you implying that the apostles maneuvered and manipulated events in such a way as to make prophesies become fulfilled? They caused Jesus to be born in Bethlehem? They caused him to be crucified? Ludicrous. Rather, you're probably suggesting that the whole story is made-up rubbish--again, one that the creators were willing to die for. After all, the New Testament is so old, how could it possibly be reliable? I'm sure it's much more comforting to just regard the whole thing as a fairy tale.
And please, give references on which Gospel passages contradict each other. That idea is bandied about so much it makes my head spin. I don't doubt that you'll be able to come up with a few passages, and I also don't doubt that your misunderstanding of those passages is the foundation of the "contradictions."
>>The new Bond flick was pretty good, though I think some of the conventions are starting to get a bit too cliche.
You think Bond is "starting to get a bit too cliche?" Come on now. This is like the 17th movie. The conventions started being cliche a long time ago, and if you don't know what you're getting when you walk into a Bond movie, well...don't bother.
Death, taxes, and James Bond cliches. Love 'em or leave 'em.
What? Why is he the world's youngest software executive? From the qualifications they described in the article, I think he sounds more like the world's youngest secretary, er, I mean administrative assistant.
Although this report is a little sensational, the point is quite valid. No, not all MP3 sites are infested with tons of porn and porn links, but I know for a fact that a lot of the sites I browse for MP3s are far too risque to be on my computer at work...not that I search for MP3s at work, of course.:) Just one example would be www.mp3sounds.com, which appears to be down at the moment. This site has animated GIFs that would make Larry Flynt blush--plus tons of links to FTP sites full of MP3s. Again, not all MP3 sites are like this, but there are many. I don't know why the connection exists (actually I do, but I'm too lazy to expound on it), but it's there.
>I am EXTREMELY purturbed by those who try to >inflict their own warped views upon the rest of >us.
However, we are all very thankful that you inflicted your warped view on us. Oh, wait a second...views are only "warped" when they disagree with yours, right? Okay, NOW I get it!
Slashdot Mirror
YES, you CAN say that "he is and always has been." And that's *precisely* what the Bible says. You know, the whole Alpha and Omega bit. C'mon, people, we're supposed to be intelligent here!
Um, yes, if you read the Bible, you'll find that religion (particularly the Pentateuch) very clearly accounts for the ultimate origin of *everything*. (See the first several chapters of Genesis.) As for the origins of God, the Bible also clearly states that God has no origins; he has simply always been. You don't have to agree with it, but it *is* there. You make yourself look foolish by saying otherwise.
Sorry, but I couldn't help making fun of this comment. Maybe if you somehow established your authority in this field, I could lend you a bit of credibility. :)
Maybe tomorrow.
If you are wary of the opinions of religious leaders, why should you be any less wary of anyone's value-laden judgement on this question? I find the fact that scientists are claiming to seek religious guidance on this question supremely laughable. "We have discredited your Bible in each and every area of significance to which it lays claim; your God did not do what men claimed he did; all your judgements rely on disproved bunk. However, we would like to humor you and ask your opinion on this Very Important Question." Please!
For years, scientists have claimed that the question of the supernatural is outside the realm of science, and therefore, not their problem. Fine. Then don't consult a religious person for a religious perspective, because the answer you will receive is antithetical to the pursuit of science. Instead, they should consult their peers for a contrived (and I don't mean that in a derogatory way) and secular standard by which to judge their work. Keep religion out of it.
Right?
I never said it was proof. I understand that someone who refuses to believe that a prophecy is fulfilled will continue to not believe, no matter what evidence they are provided with.
The previous poster asked for a prophecy that referenced the crucifixion. I provided one that is by-and-large considered such. Whether or not you choose to accept it is your decision.
As for the prophecy that foretells Jesus' crucifixion, here you go:
"I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels. My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death. For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet. I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me. They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture. But be not thou far from me, O LORD: O my strength, haste thee to help me."Psalm 22: 14-18
Sounds like a rather convincing description of a crucifixion, don't you think? You should try reading the Bible some time. There's a reason it's referred to as 'the Good News!' :)
Now consider this: the men who wrote the gospels were men. Men with fallible memories, and men with agendas to further.
Those that like to use "fulfillment of prophesy" as evidence for the verity of the gospels overlook the fact that the men who wrote the gospels were involved in creating a movement. They were trying to establish themselves as leaders, missionaries, and religious revolutionaries. They were establishing churches, creating underground cells, safe houses - all the various sorts of activities taken by subversives of any type.
Oh, and don't forget that they were willing to be killed for their beliefs. We all know how easy it is to die for something that you just "made up out of thin air."
Small wonder that the gospels detail so many prophesies being fulfilled - how better to justify their claim that Christ was the Messiah? Small wonder too that, as the gospel writers didn't get to compare notes very often, that the various gospels differ and contradict themselves so much.
Are you implying that the apostles maneuvered and manipulated events in such a way as to make prophesies become fulfilled? They caused Jesus to be born in Bethlehem? They caused him to be crucified? Ludicrous. Rather, you're probably suggesting that the whole story is made-up rubbish--again, one that the creators were willing to die for. After all, the New Testament is so old, how could it possibly be reliable? I'm sure it's much more comforting to just regard the whole thing as a fairy tale.
And please, give references on which Gospel passages contradict each other. That idea is bandied about so much it makes my head spin. I don't doubt that you'll be able to come up with a few passages, and I also don't doubt that your misunderstanding of those passages is the foundation of the "contradictions."
>>The new Bond flick was pretty good, though I think some of the conventions are starting to get a bit too cliche.
You think Bond is "starting to get a bit too cliche?" Come on now. This is like the 17th movie. The conventions started being cliche a long time ago, and if you don't know what you're getting when you walk into a Bond movie, well...don't bother.
Death, taxes, and James Bond cliches. Love 'em or leave 'em.
What? Why is he the world's youngest software executive? From the qualifications they described in the article, I think he sounds more like the world's youngest secretary, er, I mean administrative assistant.
Although this report is a little sensational, the point is quite valid. No, not all MP3 sites are infested with tons of porn and porn links, but I know for a fact that a lot of the sites I browse for MP3s are far too risque to be on my computer at work...not that I search for MP3s at work, of course. :) Just one example would be www.mp3sounds.com, which appears to be down at the moment. This site has animated GIFs that would make Larry Flynt blush--plus tons of links to FTP sites full of MP3s. Again, not all MP3 sites are like this, but there are many. I don't know why the connection exists (actually I do, but I'm too lazy to expound on it), but it's there.
Do us all a favor and wake up on the OTHER side of the bed tomorrow morning.
>I am EXTREMELY purturbed by those who try to >inflict their own warped views upon the rest of >us.
However, we are all very thankful that you inflicted your warped view on us. Oh, wait a second...views are only "warped" when they disagree with yours, right? Okay, NOW I get it!