Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comment Thread for The Resurrection of Jesus - Apologiaphoenix vs Gary

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
    Sorry doesn't work. My God doesn't claim to be natural. In the natural world one thing leads to another - everything has a cause, Everything that happens is an effect. But sure you can pick no beginning and then you have an infinitely old universe which has no ultimate cause and your naturalism still dies a horrible death :). How can you talk about everything being natural when nothing has an ultimate cause? You are stuck (although you will never admit it). You end up with a supernatural thing and the theist ends up with a supernatural person but you both must invoke a supernatural or hide like you do from the reality. See? this is the kind of thing your skeptic sites can't handle which is why all they gave you to rebut with is "God did it" when thats not even the point at his juncture of the argument






    A supernatural must have been involved . We know this. You were given the two alternatives and you were unable to deny those ARE the only two alternatives. Its a fact which is why every scientist working on the issue ends up with ideas that for all intents and purposes are supernatural whether they care to admit it or not - a rose by any other name - multiverse, everything out of nothing etc etc. you are just running and hiding into the "god did it" canard every atheist runs to to hide from this. We are talking about the supernatural - beyond naturalism at this point - NOT identifying a god or a person. Thats another argument but its not the issue we are on.



    Yawn......you don't have a single solitary Bible verse NT or OT to back that up. Its all skeptic rhetoric. Ben Franklin and in fact most of the founders of Science were theist and none of them found their science incompatible with figuring out how God did things. IF Christians were all primitive and just said "god did it" as many foolish skeptics claim then why oh why were so many founders of science Christian?

    learn to think independently. Thats proof positive of the skeptics lies that "early primitive human" Christians before science said "God did it " and that was it. They invented many of the sciences. Why would they if "God did it " was all they thought? THINK!

    Yes they all believed God and his law was at the bottom of it but nothing in science has proven otherwise. When you can explain away laws of the universe then get back to me. This is a common silly myth propagated by the likes of Dawkins and Tyson trying to lump all religions together with Greek mythology. In the Bible we often have God saying he would destroy a nation. In almost every single case he used humans to do that. Still he says he does it because he controls the circumstances and the laws. Simple. Further the Jewish God rested on the seventh day. He maintains the natural order he created. He is not directly running around throwing lightning bolts....lol.....If so he could not be said to be at rest in regard to creation. Study some theology before you claim to know it. Does he take the credit for it...yes his law/word establishes it...Does that mean we cannot understand how it works? No more than understanding how a car works does away with the engineer that created it.




    lets stop trying to dodge because you can't handle the fact and point. IF God of the gaps is wrong then invoking that common sense and what we already know will go away with more discoveries is just as weak. we know the two options available and there will be the same two a million years from now. beginning or no beginning. either one leads to a supernatural premise. Like it or not - thats reality.
    "A supernatural must have been involved (in the creation of the universe) . We know this."

    Please quote any national scientific organization or society who agrees with this statement.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Gary View Post
      Rain storms, floods, fires, droughts, insect infestations, disease, fatal illness, epilepsy, thunder, lightning, to mention a few.

      Stop lying on Christianity and Judaism. Neither one of them teaches that all those things are always direct actions of God and none of them have been proven to be possible without God. To this day many diseases can be traced back to sin.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Gary View Post
        "A supernatural must have been involved (in the creation of the universe) . We know this."

        Please quote any national scientific organization or society who agrees with this statement.
        Already gave you examples. whether they call it supernatural or not its still an appeal to the something beyond our natural universe. Care to explain to the class how a multiverse (universes outside of our own) is not an appeal to what in essence is supernatural. You can try but you will fail miserably. Do ton loads of scientist appeal to the multiverse? Google is your friend.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
          Sorry doesn't work. My God doesn't claim to be natural. In the natural world one thing leads to another - everything has a cause, Everything that happens is an effect. But sure you can pick no beginning and then you have an infinitely old universe which has no ultimate cause and your naturalism still dies a horrible death :). How can you talk about everything being natural when nothing has an ultimate cause? You are stuck (although you will never admit it). You end up with a supernatural thing and the theist ends up with a supernatural person but you both must invoke a supernatural or hide like you do from the reality. See? this is the kind of thing your skeptic sites can't handle which is why all they gave you to rebut with is "God did it" when thats not even the point at his juncture of the argument




          A supernatural must have been involved . We know this. You were given the two alternatives and you were unable to deny those ARE the only two alternatives. Its a fact which is why every scientist working on the issue ends up with ideas that for all intents and purposes are supernatural whether they care to admit it or not - a rose by any other name - multiverse, everything out of nothing etc etc. you are just running and hiding into the "god did it" canard every atheist runs to to hide from this. We are talking about the supernatural - beyond naturalism at this point - NOT identifying a god or a person. Thats another argument but its not the issue we are on.



          Yawn......you don't have a single solitary Bible verse NT or OT to back that up. Its all skeptic rhetoric. Ben Franklin and in fact most of the founders of Science were theist and none of them found their science incompatible with figuring out how God did things. IF Christians were all primitive and just said "god did it" as many foolish skeptics claim then why oh why were so many founders of science Christian?

          learn to think independently. Thats proof positive of the skeptics lies that "early primitive human" Christians before science said "God did it " and that was it. They invented many of the sciences. Why would they if "God did it " was all they thought? THINK!

          Yes they all believed God and his law was at the bottom of it but nothing in science has proven otherwise. When you can explain away laws of the universe then get back to me. This is a common silly myth propagated by the likes of Dawkins and Tyson trying to lump all religions together with Greek mythology. In the Bible we often have God saying he would destroy a nation. In almost every single case he used humans to do that. Still he says he does it because he controls the circumstances and the laws. Simple. Further the Jewish God rested on the seventh day. He maintains the natural order he created. He is not directly running around throwing lightning bolts....lol.....If so he could not be said to be at rest in regard to creation. Study some theology before you claim to know it. Does he take the credit for it...yes his law/word establishes it...Does that mean we cannot understand how it works? No more than understanding how a car works does away with the engineer that created it.




          lets stop trying to dodge because you can't handle the fact and point. IF God of the gaps is wrong then invoking that common sense and what we already know will go away with more discoveries is just as weak. we know the two options available and there will be the same two a million years from now. beginning or no beginning. either one leads to a supernatural premise. Like it or not - thats reality.

          I said: That is exactly what primitive humans said about rain storms, floods, droughts, thunder and lightening. Some Christians were irate with Ben Franklin for his claim that lightning is just an electrical charge. It is not the result of a god having a temper tantrum.

          You said: Yawn......you don't have a single solitary Bible verse NT or OT to back that up. Its all skeptic rhetoric.

          -The cursing of the earth with thorns and weeds due to Adam's sin
          -The Great Flood
          -Fire and brimstone raining down on Sodom and Gomorrah
          -Insect swarms, hail, disease put upon the entire nation of Egypt for the behavior of one man, its leader.
          -the opening of a sea and subsequent closing of that sea to drown an entire army.
          -droughts as curses upon disobedient Israelites.
          -storms at sea caused by an angry god because one man didn't go to Ninevah.
          -three hours of darkness due to one man's death
          -earthquakes summoned by a god to announce the resurrection of his son
          -opening of the ground to yield the dead to roam the streets of a major city.
          -and on and on and on.

          Your holy book is riddled with examples of it's believers believing that the events of nature are acts of a god.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
            Already gave you examples. whether they call it supernatural or not its still an appeal to the something beyond our natural universe. Care to explain to the class how a multiverse (universes outside of our own) is not an appeal to what in essence is supernatural. You can try but you will fail miserably. Do ton loads of scientist appeal to the multiverse? Google is your friend.
            Please quote any national scientific organization or society who agrees with this statement.

            No. You did not. You did not give any examples of national scientific organizations/societies espousing the position that the most probable explanation for the origin of the universe is a supernatural cause. Please provide your source or admit that you are simply stating your opinion, not the majority opinion of scholars/experts on the subject.
            Last edited by Gary; 09-20-2015, 03:51 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Gary View Post
              I have never claimed that the supernatural does not exist.
              Yeah, you only mock the belief in it every chance you get. 6/1, half-dozen/the other.
              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
              sigpic
              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

              Comment


              • Originally posted by psstein View Post
                Correction: almost every scholar thinks Daniel is written after the fact (2nd century BC, probably). Daniel seems to be eerily accurate on events that happened before then, but gets it wrong afterward.
                the thing that is often missed with Daniel is that on the things he allegedly gets right we still have to skip many years in between so there is no conclusive way to claim what he got the wrong if he in fact may be skipping many years. Often times skeptics act like the rise of kings must be sequential when even the ones they accept are accurate (but written after the fact) are not sequential and skip ahead into the future at various places. As far canonicity. The gospels seem to have no issue with quoting him and its as clear as day that they did NOT consider everything Daniel wrote as to refer to the Greek empire.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                  Please provide your source or admit that you are simply stating your opinion, not the majority opinion of scholars/experts on the subject.
                  I've already provided my source - The COUNTLESS cosmologists and physicists that appeal to the multiverse. IF you wish to be either lazy or obtuse thats your problem. Its a widely known issue in the scientific community your ignorance not withstanding. I told you to google it so you could see how wide spread it is referenced. Thats all I need and you have nothing to counter the reality that they very much do appeal to it.

                  http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-really-exist/

                  http://www.space.com/18811-multiple-...-theories.html

                  http://www.technologyreview.com/view...ay-physicists/

                  the only way you can assail my point is to step forward and demonstrate how appealing to OTHER universes is not an appeal to the super (beyond) natural (our universe).

                  you will fail miserably but you can try I suppose. Your living in denial means little to me.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                    -The cursing of the earth with thorns and weeds due to Adam's sin
                    -The Great Flood
                    -Fire and brimstone raining down on Sodom and Gomorrah
                    -Insect swarms, hail, disease put upon the entire nation of Egypt for the behavior of one man, its leader.
                    -the opening of a sea and subsequent closing of that sea to drown an entire army.
                    -droughts as curses upon disobedient Israelites.
                    -storms at sea caused by an angry god because one man didn't go to Ninevah.
                    -three hours of darkness due to one man's death
                    -earthquakes summoned by a god to announce the resurrection of his son
                    -opening of the ground to yield the dead to roam the streets of a major city.
                    -and on and on and on.

                    Yawn and yawn....none of them ANYWHERE claim that God is directly doing them in all instances on the planet. Stop lying on the texts to save your weak point. you constantly lose focus of your own arguments. You claimed science has now proven that phenomenon claimed to be direct actions of God in the past have naturalistic explanations that rule out the supernatural.

                    Nowhere has science shown that fire and brimstone fell on Sodom and gomorrah naturally
                    Nowhere has science shown that a country can suffer ten plagues right after another naturally
                    Nowhere has science confirmed that the storm that affected Jonas was not of God's doing.
                    nowhere has any scientist confirmed that the actions in THOSE PARTICULAR INSTANCES were not actions of God
                    and Nowhere HAS SCIENCE proven that the laws that made some of them possible do not derive from God.

                    in order for your claim to hold any water you have to show where anyone in the Bible claims that a naturally occurring phenomenon always occurs as a result of direction from God. duh......The bible has miracles but it nowhere states that all the things we explain now by science were previously explained by miraculous intervention from God. Rain fell in the Bible without God creating new water. Insects bred without God creating new ones. Lightning fell without God throwing lightning bolts. Sure the Bible has some miraculous judgments. Who said otherwise?? But it DOES NOT SAY God always makes the rain fall by direct action, lightning is from God throwing lightning bolts or even earthquakes are always God stamping his feet. So science has not shown anything of what you claim because the claim itself was bogus.

                    Science studies natural phenomenon and no passage of scripture claims that rain only falls by direct action of god, or earthquakes only happen when god directly says so. its a nonsense claim on your and every skeptics part. Go to greek mythology for that - not Christianity. Again our God rested on the seventh day . He is not running around creating every bolt of lightning individually. He created the laws behind them so that he CAN claim responsibility but once the laws were in place he rested/ceased. Outside special circumstances the world chugs along merely obeying laws of the universe he set up and nothing science has proven contradicts that the world and universe operate according to laws.

                    Your holy book is riddled with examples of it's believers believing that the events of nature are acts of a god.
                    Nope my holy book covers thousands of years and cites only rarely over those years events direct attributable to God. It covers hundreds of years at a time where the world just chugged along with no miracle or even prophets. Rain fell, lightning thundered, earthquakes hit with not a peep from it about God doing it . If you have merely a Sunday school understanding of the Bible then you are confused. Shucks my holy book even chides disciples for thinking bad things happening are always the result of superior judgment from God and states some people are sick for reasons not to do with sin. You should pick it up and read it sometime
                    Last edited by Mikeenders; 09-20-2015, 05:21 PM.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                      I have no issue with believing things by faith, even supernatural things.
                      Ok.
                      My issue is when conservative Christians tell the rest of the world that conservative Christianity has non-faith based evidence . . . .
                      Who? Where?

                      All evidence, what ever type it may be. involves "faith," that is, as evidence to be believed.

                      The 5 known moons of Pluto requires faith on our part. Believing the pictures and believing the scientists that provided them. The 67 known moons of Jupiter, even more so. I have personally seen the 4 moons of Jupiter.
                      . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                      . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                      Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                        Yeah, you only mock the belief in it every chance you get. 6/1, half-dozen/the other.
                        Yes, I use mockery and sarcasm to point out that people should fear Yahweh just as much as they should fear Zeus, Jupiter, Baal, Ra, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. I cannot disprove that any of these beings exist, but I can point out how very, very, very improbable their existence is and therefore why there is no need for anyone to fear them.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mikeenders View Post
                          I've already provided my source - The COUNTLESS cosmologists and physicists that appeal to the multiverse. IF you wish to be either lazy or obtuse thats your problem. Its a widely known issue in the scientific community your ignorance not withstanding. I told you to google it so you could see how wide spread it is referenced. Thats all I need and you have nothing to counter the reality that they very much do appeal to it.

                          http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-really-exist/

                          http://www.space.com/18811-multiple-...-theories.html

                          http://www.technologyreview.com/view...ay-physicists/

                          the only way you can assail my point is to step forward and demonstrate how appealing to OTHER universes is not an appeal to the super (beyond) natural (our universe).

                          you will fail miserably but you can try I suppose. Your living in denial means little to me.
                          From the fist article you linked:

                          "The word “multiverse” has different meanings. Astronomers are able to see out to a distance of about 42 billion light-years, our cosmic visual horizon. We have no reason to suspect the universe stops there. Beyond it could be many—even infinitely many—domains much like the one we see. Each has a different initial distribution of matter, but the same laws of physics operate in all. Nearly all cosmologists today (including me) accept this type of multiverse, which Max Tegmark calls “level 1.” Yet some go further. They suggest completely different kinds of universes, with different physics, different histories, maybe different numbers of spatial dimensions. Most will be sterile, although some will be teeming with life. A chief proponent of this “level 2” multiverse is Alexander Vilenkin, who paints a dramatic picture of an infinite set of universes with an infinite number of galaxies, an infinite number of planets and an infinite number of people with your name who are reading this article."

                          I fail to see any endorsement of the supernatural or of an intelligent being as the creator in this article. I will look at the next one. You seem to be latching on to the statement that begins with "Yet some go further...". This is obviously a minority position. I asked for a majority consensus position of any national scientific organization or society, not the opinion of a few fringe cosmologists.
                          Last edited by Gary; 09-20-2015, 09:35 PM.

                          Comment


                          • I missed this distortion before. Lest you thought you had a point I will debunk it now

                            If all of that happened, I would very likely be a believer. However, the evidence for Christianity is not anything like the evidence you have presented in this analogy

                            Actually it is. I've told you before. Just because you don't know something doesn't mean no one else does.

                            .
                            For one thing, in your analogy I am told of the events prior to them happening. If the first gospel, Mark, was written after 70 AD and the fall of Jerusalem as most scholars say is very probable, then all the "prophecies" mentioned in the gospels are not prophecies but historical events written into stories as if the stories were written earlier.

                            Who cares about Mark for prophecies? Fall of Jerusalem is prophecied from back in Daniel 9 and for the careful reader in Zechariah. return of the jews to Israel is prophecied over a millenia before they returned in 1948. sorry no way you can claim all prophecies are written after the fact. my Grandma has english translations of the bible before 1948. No Hebrew scholar i know puts any passage in the OT as written in the common era.

                            another fail point.

                            You don't believe this happened, but you cannot prove it didn't and that is why your comparison with your analogy fails terribly
                            Yawn....assumption assumptions assumptions. I don't rely on a single prophecy that could have been written after the fact. Sorry.

                            We have already discussed how every Jewish scholar living today denies that any prophecy or text in the Hebrew Bible predicts the birth, life, or death of Jesus

                            repeating a lie again after its been corrected just makes it a bare faced lie. I have already given you a link to one Jewish scholar that accepts the Hebrew bible as referring to christ so claiming "every jewish scholar" denies the old testament prophecies refer to Jesus is just lying . Further I have informed you of the reality of messianic jews and a great many with rabbi scholars who accept the same. The problem with you is you like to refer to other peoples ideas rather than examine the actual data. IF i go to Israel look up and the sky is blue it would not matter how many Jews said it was not blue. It would still be blue because the facts are the facts. Your claim that truth is determined by race even as silly as it obviously was on its face has been further debunked by the fact that many Jews do now accept their messiah in Yeshua

                            sorry gary you have a very lazy intellectually unsound way of approaching issues. You never wish to look at evidence only point to someone else. Jews who reject jesus as messiah have no answer for Daniel 9. the stated purpose of the vision of Daniel 9 is to bring in everlasting righteousness

                            daniel 9:24
                            “Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place.


                            blather on endlessly about what anti missionary Jews say. Thats what the text says. Having debated this with Rabbis on this matter no anti Missionary Jew has any answer for that verse. Nothing happens in that time period to accomplish those goals besides the death of Jesus. Nothing of the Hasmonean dynasty has anything of that importance. Thats why messianic Jews are right and those who reject wrong. facts are not up for votes of popularity. They are what they are and any other rambling nonsense is unscientific thinking. I'll take any post trying to beg off the actual facts of the issue as just more running away from you

                            address yourself to actual data and evidence. saying Jews don't think the sky is blue so we can't know the sky is blue is just vast silliness.

                            What is the most consistent evidence of Messiah in the scriptures that all your anti christian Jewish sites leave out? The most repeated qualification is that messiah will be accepted by gentiles the world over. Isiah 11:10

                            "10 And it shall come to pass on that day, that the root of Jesse, which stands as a banner for peoples, to him shall the nations inquire, and his peace shall be [with] honor."

                            hmmmm I wonder why that piece you put on your site leaves that out? Could it be because you have one Jewish man arriving on the scene before the destruction of the second temple who the people all over the world look to??? Whose name is Jesus in English??? Deal with the facts or run away and those are just two passages without even going to Isaiah 53.

                            Sorry gary. you will have to come better with real data than some lazy racist argument that no one can tell what the hebrew scriptures say besides anti christian Jews....Stand and deliver not wave your hand and point to someone else.

                            P.S. The quote above IS a jewish translation Of Isaiah 11

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                              From the fist article you linked:

                              I fail to see any endorsement of the supernatural or of an intelligent being as the creator in this article. I will look at the next one. You seem to be latching on to the statement that begins with "Yet some go further...". This is obviously a minority position. I asked for a majority consensus position of any national scientific organization or society, not the opinion of a few fringe cosmologists.

                              Stop being so incredibly intellectually dishonest. there are literally thousands of results in a google search on the subject. that article says nothing about it being a"fringe". Multiverse theories are used by many atheistic scientists and is invoked frequently to answer the fine tuning issue of this universe . if you don't know something then go and learn it not accuse people of latching on to anything. When youare done then come back and explain to us all how appeal s to universe outside of our own are not super (beyond) natural (nature).

                              YOu fail to see because like you love accuse others of you are closing your eyes.
                              Last edited by Mikeenders; 09-20-2015, 09:59 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Gary View Post
                                From the fist article you linked:

                                "The word “multiverse” has different meanings. Astronomers are able to see out to a distance of about 42 billion light-years, our cosmic visual horizon. We have no reason to suspect the universe stops there. Beyond it could be many—even infinitely many—domains much like the one we see. Each has a different initial distribution of matter, but the same laws of physics operate in all. Nearly all cosmologists today (including me) accept this type of multiverse, which Max Tegmark calls “level 1.” Yet some go further. They suggest completely different kinds of universes, with different physics, different histories, maybe different numbers of spatial dimensions. Most will be sterile, although some will be teeming with life. A chief proponent of this “level 2” multiverse is Alexander Vilenkin, who paints a dramatic picture of an infinite set of universes with an infinite number of galaxies, an infinite number of planets and an infinite number of people with your name who are reading this article."

                                I fail to see any endorsement of the supernatural or of an intelligent being as the creator in this article. I will look at the next one. You seem to be latching on to the statement that begins with "Yet some go further...". This is obviously a minority position. I asked for a majority consensus position of any national scientific organization or society, not the opinion of a few fringe cosmologists.
                                From the second article you linked:

                                "Another idea that arises from string theory is the notion of "braneworlds" — parallel universes that hover just out of reach of our own, proposed by Princeton University's Paul Steinhardt and Neil Turok of the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Ontario, Canada. The idea comes from the possibility of many more dimensions to our world than the three of space and one of time that we know. In addition to our own three-dimensional "brane" of space, other three-dimensional branes may float in a higher-dimensional space."

                                Again, this article says nothing about multiuniverses as proof of the supernatural. The supernatural is outside the reach of scientific investigation by definition. Could it exist? Yes! But so could the invisible Flying Spaghetti Monster, unicorns, and leprechauns.

                                Do you have a degree in the sciences, Mike?

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X