My Connections
Not connected to anyone yet?
This answer contributed to Susan G. Komen for the Cure® What's this?
My answers support Susan G. Komen for the Cure® What's this?
DannyT8796:
5 months ago
I'm a True Christian Who believes in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. I read only from the bible and put it into practice.
Helpful
(5)
Fun
Thanks for voting
Comments (0)
Report as
You have reported this
Add a comment...
aporia99:
5 months ago
I'm agnostic, but if I knew that there was a god, I would be Christian.
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
how can you not know there is a God, there is so much evidence around.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
How is there any evidence whatsoever
Why are you trying to start a fight
Why are you trying to start a fight
Report as
You have reported this
hunterdude:
5 months ago
preppyboy, there are scientific explanations for the so called evidence, please dont start a fight.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
There's plenty of evidence working against god but none for him
Report as
You have reported this
DannyT8796:
5 months ago
Hey if you are looking for Evidence look up Noah's ark or Sodom and Gamora
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
no sure it does, and i'm not trying to fight, I asked an honest question, if there are all these religions out there, there must be a God, otherwise so many people wouldn't believe in it. and here is some of the evidence that points to God
Eucharistic miracles within the Catholic Church, there have been documented scientific test done by Atheists, who tested a piece of altar bread before it was consecrated and found normal bread, and then watched it get consecrated, they were able to see it the entire time, after it was consecrated, they tested it again, and while it maintained the appearance of bread, its entire molecular structure had changed to that of heart muscle, with human DNA, but no genetic code. and it indicated that the man it was from had been severely beaten. The Catholic church believes that this is the true presence, body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, and that proves it pretty irrevocably, and there isn't any scientific explanation for it, the test was done by known atheists, so they were impartial, and they could see it the entire time, the reason there is no genetic code is because God has no ancestors, and Jesus was also God, Jesus was beaten. so there is some pretty amazing evidence for you, if you want some more just ask.
Eucharistic miracles within the Catholic Church, there have been documented scientific test done by Atheists, who tested a piece of altar bread before it was consecrated and found normal bread, and then watched it get consecrated, they were able to see it the entire time, after it was consecrated, they tested it again, and while it maintained the appearance of bread, its entire molecular structure had changed to that of heart muscle, with human DNA, but no genetic code. and it indicated that the man it was from had been severely beaten. The Catholic church believes that this is the true presence, body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus Christ, and that proves it pretty irrevocably, and there isn't any scientific explanation for it, the test was done by known atheists, so they were impartial, and they could see it the entire time, the reason there is no genetic code is because God has no ancestors, and Jesus was also God, Jesus was beaten. so there is some pretty amazing evidence for you, if you want some more just ask.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Noah's ark really that's almost as unbelievable as Moses or jesus christs resurrection
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
But considering it is sitting on Mount Ararat under the protection of the Turkish Government, it obviously exists buddy
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
and the only explanation for Jesus' body not being in its grave three days after he was put there, was for him to be resurrected, because nobody but God could have gotten him out of there
First of all, the apostles were cowardly fishermen, secondly, the stone in front of the grave weighed approximately 1 ton, third, there were four battalions of four guards each, from Pontius pilate's personal guard, that's sixteen highly trained soldiers sitting there, nobody Is going to get past them, and they would not fall asleep on duty, otherwise they would be subject to immediate execution. finally, the roman seal was placed on the tomb, which essentially means, "if you open this, you will be found and killed"
First of all, the apostles were cowardly fishermen, secondly, the stone in front of the grave weighed approximately 1 ton, third, there were four battalions of four guards each, from Pontius pilate's personal guard, that's sixteen highly trained soldiers sitting there, nobody Is going to get past them, and they would not fall asleep on duty, otherwise they would be subject to immediate execution. finally, the roman seal was placed on the tomb, which essentially means, "if you open this, you will be found and killed"
Report as
You have reported this
hunterdude:
5 months ago
if i showed you an elmo book, would that be enough proof that elmo is real?
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
That's not scientific and the test on the bread post a link for me to read not just the summary that you gave earler
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
unfortunately my website for that specific one expired, I don't know why, but there was another test that was essentially the same in the documentary Science Tests Faith, and on this page, there is an account of several other Eucharistic miracles.
http://www.therealpresence.org/eucharst/mir/a3.html
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
What about evolution the bible is the direct opposite of science
Report as
You have reported this
Truthisobvious:
5 months ago
" there must be a God, otherwise so many people wouldn't believe in it. " this is a common logical fallacy called appeal to popularity.
If most of the population of earth thinks the earth is flat it does not make the earth flat.
If most of the population of earth thinks the earth is flat it does not make the earth flat.
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
no the bible and science go hand in hand, but evolution is absolutely wrong on several levels, it doesn't work, just because its taught as fact does not make it so, and evolution has basically zero valid evidence. even though they teach it as scientific fact in the public schools.
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
haha, i'm pretty much done here, I did my job, why don't you click on the link I posted above and check it out, it has that evidence I was talking about.
Report as
You have reported this
Truthisobvious:
5 months ago
"no the bible and science go hand in hand, but evolution is absolutely wrong on several levels, it doesn't work, just because its taught as fact does not make it so, and evolution has basically zero valid evidence. even though they teach it as scientific fact in the public schools."
Just laughable.
Just laughable.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Sorry aporia but preppy boy evolution has clear evidence however there is no evidence for god
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
oh yeah, I have shown you my evidence, which you apparently just disregarded, and I gave you a source, so where is yours.
Report as
You have reported this
Walt_OReagun:
5 months ago
preppyboy ... you need to work on your facts, if you want educated people to believe your arguments.
1 - Not all the disciples were "cowardly fishermen". At least two carried swords, and one was willing to fight to protect Jesus during his prayer time in the garden - against Roman soldiers. > Simon was a political zealot. Matthew was a tax collector.
2 - A "battalion" is a LOT bigger than 4 soldiers. The smallest unit the Romans had was a Contubernium = 8 soldiers led by a decanus (non-com officer).
1 - Not all the disciples were "cowardly fishermen". At least two carried swords, and one was willing to fight to protect Jesus during his prayer time in the garden - against Roman soldiers. > Simon was a political zealot. Matthew was a tax collector.
2 - A "battalion" is a LOT bigger than 4 soldiers. The smallest unit the Romans had was a Contubernium = 8 soldiers led by a decanus (non-com officer).
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Aporia asked that we don't spam her so I'm moving on to preppy boys comment for the rest of the conversation
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
walto, in regards to the soldiers as i said, they were Pontius' personal guard, their battalions were 4, not eight people, roman military order dictated a battalion half the size of a normal one when in the personal guard of an official
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
also, in the garden, they were soldiers of the Sanhedrin, not the highly trained roman guard, none of the disciples had the guts to go against the roman guard, they would fight the Sanhedrin though, because they were poorly trained
Report as
You have reported this
Walt_OReagun:
5 months ago
Even so, Preppy ... a battalion is a LOT more than 4 or 8 soldiers. If you want to use modern terms that would be a team.
(US Marines):
Team -> Squad -> Platoon -> Company/Battery -> BATTALION -> Regiment -> Division -> Corps (entire organization)
(US Marines):
Team -> Squad -> Platoon -> Company/Battery -> BATTALION -> Regiment -> Division -> Corps (entire organization)
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
but i'm not using modern day terms my friend, don't make that mistake with history, you have to think in terms of those people, and what the romans reffered to as a battalion was far different than what we refer to a battalion as today, a roman battalion could consist of anywhere from 4, to 16 soldiers. so what the Marine Corps considers to be a battalion today, has no relevance when you are talking about the Roman military in the year 33 A.D. the two things are totally different
Report as
You have reported this
Walt_OReagun:
5 months ago
You're the one using the wrong (modern) term.
The Romans did not have anything called a "battalion".
Here are the Roman unit types (infantry) during the time of Christ (after the re-organization in 107 BC):
Contubernium - The smallest organized unit of soldiers in the Roman Army. It was composed of eight legionaries led by a non-commissioned officer called a decanus. Ten contubernia formed a centuria.
Centuria - A centuria consisted of 80 men under the command of a Centurion and his Optio. Six centuria formed a cohort.
Cohors (Cohortes) - A cohort consisted of 480 men. The most senior ranking centurion of the six centuria commanded the entire cohort.
First Cohort (Cohors Prima) - The first cohort was a double strength cohort (consisting of five double-strength centuria) with a size of 800 men (excluding officers). The centurion of its first centuria, the Primus Pilus, commanded the first cohort and was also the most senior Centurion in the legion.
Legio (Imperial) - A legion was composed of nine cohorts and one first cohort. The legion's overall commander was the legatus legionis, assisted by the praefectus castrorum and other senior officers.
Vexillation - These were temporary task forces composed of one or multiple centuria detached from the legion for a specific purpose. Vexillations were under the command of an officer appointed by the Legatus.
----
So if you're talking a "half strength" unit of 4 soldiers, you need to use the term Contubernium. Not "battalion".
Though only the New American Standard Version seems to use the actual name. Matt 27:27 "Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole Roman cohort around Him."
Also ... Pilate did not send Roman guards to the tomb. Matt 27:65 - Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go, make it as secure as you know how.” And they went and made the grave secure, and along with the guard they set a seal on the stone.
The Romans did not have anything called a "battalion".
Here are the Roman unit types (infantry) during the time of Christ (after the re-organization in 107 BC):
Contubernium - The smallest organized unit of soldiers in the Roman Army. It was composed of eight legionaries led by a non-commissioned officer called a decanus. Ten contubernia formed a centuria.
Centuria - A centuria consisted of 80 men under the command of a Centurion and his Optio. Six centuria formed a cohort.
Cohors (Cohortes) - A cohort consisted of 480 men. The most senior ranking centurion of the six centuria commanded the entire cohort.
First Cohort (Cohors Prima) - The first cohort was a double strength cohort (consisting of five double-strength centuria) with a size of 800 men (excluding officers). The centurion of its first centuria, the Primus Pilus, commanded the first cohort and was also the most senior Centurion in the legion.
Legio (Imperial) - A legion was composed of nine cohorts and one first cohort. The legion's overall commander was the legatus legionis, assisted by the praefectus castrorum and other senior officers.
Vexillation - These were temporary task forces composed of one or multiple centuria detached from the legion for a specific purpose. Vexillations were under the command of an officer appointed by the Legatus.
----
So if you're talking a "half strength" unit of 4 soldiers, you need to use the term Contubernium. Not "battalion".
Though only the New American Standard Version seems to use the actual name. Matt 27:27 "Then the soldiers of the governor took Jesus into the Praetorium and gathered the whole Roman cohort around Him."
Also ... Pilate did not send Roman guards to the tomb. Matt 27:65 - Pilate said to them, “You have a guard; go, make it as secure as you know how.” And they went and made the grave secure, and along with the guard they set a seal on the stone.
Report as
You have reported this
Walt_OReagun:
5 months ago
All other translations use the phrases (Matt 27:27) ... "whole band" ... "whole garrison" ... "whole battalion" ... "whole company" ... "whole troop" ... "whole regiment". From the passage, it appears that COHORT is the correct Roman term.
Report as
You have reported this
Walt_OReagun:
5 months ago
So, from the Matt 27:65 passage, it appears the troops set were the (court) guards of the Sanhedrin ... not Roman soldiers.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
It's fun to debate Roman military terminology, but then let's not forget that there is no evidence that any of the Jesus story ever happened or that Jesus even existed in the first place.
Report as
You have reported this
Walt_OReagun:
5 months ago
If you want to have "fun" raven ... try this:
Zoroastrianism: The religion was founded by Zarathushtra in Persia -- modern-day Iran. It may have been the world's first monotheistic faith. It was once the religion of the Persian empire, but has since been reduced in numbers to fewer than 200,000 today. With the exception of religious conservatives, most religious historians believe the the Jewish, Christian and Muslim beliefs concerning God and Satan, the soul, heaven and hell, the virgin birth of the savior, the slaughter of the innocents, resurrection, the final judgment, etc. were all derived from Zoroastrianism.
Zoroastrianism: The religion was founded by Zarathushtra in Persia -- modern-day Iran. It may have been the world's first monotheistic faith. It was once the religion of the Persian empire, but has since been reduced in numbers to fewer than 200,000 today. With the exception of religious conservatives, most religious historians believe the the Jewish, Christian and Muslim beliefs concerning God and Satan, the soul, heaven and hell, the virgin birth of the savior, the slaughter of the innocents, resurrection, the final judgment, etc. were all derived from Zoroastrianism.
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
raven, the existence of Jesus of Nazareth, has been proven, he was counted in the Roman census records of the time, and Pontius Pilate definitely existed, and he described having an in depth conversation with this Jesus of Nazareth, on what truth is, and the nature of it, Jesus of Nazareth most certainly existed, whether he is the messiah or not is another matter entirely, I believe he is, you may choose to believe differently
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Preppyboy, that's laughably ridiculous, I am not speaking out of ignorance here; I have looked into the subject very thoroughly. Site your sources and references.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Here is an overview of most claimed evidence.
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Letters of Pontius Pilate
~
This would appear hilarious if not for the tragic results that can occur from believing in fiction: many faithful (especially on the internet) have a strong belief that Pontius Pilate actually wrote letters to Seneca in Rome where he mentions Jesus and his reported healing miracles.
~
Considering the lack of investigational temper of the religious mind, it might prove interesting to the critical reader that the main source for the letters of Pilate come from W. P. Crozier's 1928 book titled, "Letters of Pontius Pilate: Written During His Governorship of Judea to His Friend Seneca in Rome." The book cites Crozier as the editor as if he represented a scholar who edited Pilate's letters. Well, from the title, it certainly seems to indicate that Pilate wrote some letters doesn't it? However, unbeknownst or ignored by the uncritical faithful, this book represents Crozier's first novel, a fictionalized account of what he thought Pilate would have written.
~
This would appear hilarious if not for the tragic results that can occur from believing in fiction: many faithful (especially on the internet) have a strong belief that Pontius Pilate actually wrote letters to Seneca in Rome where he mentions Jesus and his reported healing miracles.
~
Considering the lack of investigational temper of the religious mind, it might prove interesting to the critical reader that the main source for the letters of Pilate come from W. P. Crozier's 1928 book titled, "Letters of Pontius Pilate: Written During His Governorship of Judea to His Friend Seneca in Rome." The book cites Crozier as the editor as if he represented a scholar who edited Pilate's letters. Well, from the title, it certainly seems to indicate that Pilate wrote some letters doesn't it? However, unbeknownst or ignored by the uncritical faithful, this book represents Crozier's first novel, a fictionalized account of what he thought Pilate would have written.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
During the first publication, no one believed this novel represented fact and reviews of the day reveal it as a work of fiction.
~
Crozier, a newspaper editor, went to Oxford University and retained an interest in Latin, Greek and the Bible. He wrote this novel as if it represented the actual letters of Pilate. Of course no scholar would cite this as evidence because no letters exist of Pilate to Seneca, and Seneca never mentions Jesus in any of his writings.
~
The belief in Pilate's letters represents one of the more amusing fad beliefs in evidential Jesus, however, it also reveals just how myths, fakes, and fictions can leak into religious thought. Hundreds of years from now, Crozier's fictionalized account may very well end up just as 'reliable' as the gospels.
~
Crozier, a newspaper editor, went to Oxford University and retained an interest in Latin, Greek and the Bible. He wrote this novel as if it represented the actual letters of Pilate. Of course no scholar would cite this as evidence because no letters exist of Pilate to Seneca, and Seneca never mentions Jesus in any of his writings.
~
The belief in Pilate's letters represents one of the more amusing fad beliefs in evidential Jesus, however, it also reveals just how myths, fakes, and fictions can leak into religious thought. Hundreds of years from now, Crozier's fictionalized account may very well end up just as 'reliable' as the gospels.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
^^^....^^^....^^^
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
Report as
You have reported this
guitarman1223:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Presbyterian (type of Christian)
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Athiest
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
"Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color". Just sayin'.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
That's a religious belief of religionists, and like everything else religionists believe in, it's not true.
Report as
You have reported this
hunterdude:
5 months ago
clara, athieism is not a religion, its more like a belief
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
A lack of faith is all that's required to be an atheist. Welcome to atheism, Labster!
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Yah, atheism isn't a religion.
Atheist are just "without" belief in any gods.
Atheist are just "without" belief in any gods.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Clara you coming after me is like batman vs superman were pretty much the same team
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Devin... no one is coming after you were just clarifying definitions.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
HunterDude, atheism isn't a belief either, it's a lack of belief.
Atheism has nothing to believe in.
Atheism has nothing to believe in.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
Correct, raven. There's no faith whatsoever involved in it. Attempting to associate it with any kind of faith is where the error lies.
Report as
You have reported this
akiel123:
5 months ago
Atheism do have belief. Most atheists believe there is no god, even though this can not be proved. Atheism is believing what you think is most probable, using facts and already proven knowledge. It does not take as much faith as most religions, since most religions fight topics which is proven already (such as christianity fighting evolution). Now, ofcause being wrong on one topic doesn't mean being wrong on all topics, but it does decrease your credability.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
I believe that the sky is blue--that doesn't make it a religion.
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
|
Last edited at 1:09PM on 12/3/2012
I am a Roman Catholic Christian.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Your "evidence" was one sided experiments performed by a church in a church "research" by a CHURCH of course there going to get it there way
Btw is it ok if we continue the conversation here so apporia99 won't get spammed
Btw is it ok if we continue the conversation here so apporia99 won't get spammed
Report as
You have reported this
IamJesus15:
5 months ago
Why are you getting mad at preppyboy for being a christian??
Report as
You have reported this
IamJesus15:
5 months ago
Oic you were on aporia's comment well anyway atheism is stupid because there obviously is a god and yeah im trying to make arguments but idc because i believe in god and i will argue to the ends of the earth for him so bye
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
No one is mad at anyone, it's a discussion of evidence and beliefs.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Im not mad At him for believing in god I'm not "mad" at all I'm just proving my point
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Iam...
... "atheism is stupid"...
..."because I believe in god"...
~
Now that's a convincing argument.
... "atheism is stupid"...
..."because I believe in god"...
~
Now that's a convincing argument.
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
okay, but evolution is all research done by atheists, in an atheist group, who have already determined the outcome of their research, so your evidence for evolution is just as one sided as my evidence for God is. I don't think there is a way to convince you my evidence is legitimate, because I don't really think you even want to believe in God. I think you are more content to say you don't know in order to remain, more or less, neutral.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Believe me I've tried to be the perfect christian society wanted me to be I read the bible it made no sense whatsoever and when compared to scientific evidence it seems like a kindergartener who had too much man dew
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
okay, and that's your problem, don't try to be perfect, its pointless, God doesn't expect that, and number two, and this is the problem I have with the 30,000 Christian religions besides Catholicism, the Bible is not meant to be read in terms of today, its not written to you and me, its written to specific people, of a specific time, with a much different understanding than us. and in order to read the Bible, we must understand this, and think in the terms of those people, not our modern day understanding. The Catholic Church knows this and teaches as such, but your average protestant minister will tell you that every bit of the Bible is "written directly to you" when in fact, it is not, there are certain aspects of the Bible that are comparable to today, but it is written to a people far different from you. if you know history, and you know the culture and basic understanding of the people those books were written to, the Bible makes much more sense, but if you don't, then understandably, it turns into gibberish.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
What about moses I don't think that just because it's out dated that they could assume that ocean splitting was logical
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
its not logical, its called a miracle, and its documented to have happened by the Egyptians as well, the Red sea splitting in half has multiple corroborations, not just from the Bible, but from Egyptian historical records.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Really so there is strict SCIENTIFIC evidence that an entire ocean just spread open like yo mamas legs.
Jk
Jk
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Jk about the leg thing but what about the rest
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
actually, yes there is, there are now large deposits on the shores of the Red sea, of chemicals only found at the bottom, the only explanation for this is a very sudden large turnover of the water, such as the ocean itself being split in half and held up, and then being brought crashing down once again. i think there are also waterlogged chariots at the bottom still, from pharaoh's men trying to catch the Israelites, and from what I've heard, the testing on them shows that they were destroyed by blunt force trauma, like a million pounds of water smashing it into the sea floor
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Couldnt a falling object raise water and then gravity would take it back Down like in the big bang
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
not to the degree which the water would have had to rise, it would have taken, essentially, a giant asteroid smashing into that sea in order to lift up that many gallons of water, at that exact moment, and bring them crashing back down again, in order to put those deposits there, and as there are no deposits of the dust found in asteroids in the Red Sea, that is essentially an impossibility. also, its hard to take out the accounts of pharaoh's surviving men, who said the sea became like a corridor, with one wall on the right, and one on the left. i might be able to find that book i read those in eventually, but it would take me a bit, you can probably research those on your own though.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
An asteroid is an impossibility but "god" is realistic
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
in this case, an asteroid actually is impossible, and an act of God really is the only possibility left.
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
whatever, just, whatever, this is quickly getting ridiculous
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
I ve been arguing about god all day it's kind of getting boring
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
all right, we can call it a day, i hope we both learned something
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
K all that I've realized is people will always have disagreements and theyll never end well
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Recently, the archeologists Israel Finkelstein (Tel Aviv University) and Neil Asher Silberman (director of historical interpretation, Ename Center for Public Archeology and Heritage Presentation, Belgium) summarized the archeological findings and latest corrections regarding the historical origins of the Jewish nation. In their words, "The process that we describe here is, in fact, the opposite of what we have in the Bible: the emergence of early Israel was an outcome of the collapse of the Canaanite culture, not its cause. And most of the Israelites did not come from outside Canaan - they emerged from within it. There was no mass exodus from Egypt. There was no violent conquest of Canaan" (3).
~Finkelstein and Silberman point out that there is still no evidence for the existence of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Lot, Moses, and Joshua. There is no evidence that Jewish people existed as an identified people that were enslaved in Egypt. There is no evidence that over 600,000 men (plus women and children - the number could have been over a million) had an exodus from Egypt and wandered in the desert for 40 years. According to the Bible, 38 of these 40 years were actually spent encamped at Kadesh-barnea. This area has been turned upside down for decades, looking for even a tiny piece of pottery from this supposed time. It is not likely that this many people would have lived here this long and not left archeological evidence.
http://www.concentric.net/~worgar/exodus.htm
~Finkelstein and Silberman point out that there is still no evidence for the existence of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Lot, Moses, and Joshua. There is no evidence that Jewish people existed as an identified people that were enslaved in Egypt. There is no evidence that over 600,000 men (plus women and children - the number could have been over a million) had an exodus from Egypt and wandered in the desert for 40 years. According to the Bible, 38 of these 40 years were actually spent encamped at Kadesh-barnea. This area has been turned upside down for decades, looking for even a tiny piece of pottery from this supposed time. It is not likely that this many people would have lived here this long and not left archeological evidence.
http://www.concentric.net/~worgar/exodus.htm
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
i'm kinda close to the same thing, but i also have learned that some will actually listen when you tell them something, and maybe they will even look it up later.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
The Bible is just plagiarized mythology, nothing more, get used to it.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Those two minutes of peace were nice you know no arguing or anger just Cohabilitation
Report as
You have reported this
preppyboy:
5 months ago
I know right? but oh well, someone will always be there to spoil it I suppose
Report as
You have reported this
Walt_OReagun:
5 months ago
Agnostic Theist
The more you study all religions ... the more it is obvious that they have one goal. To make people reach "enlightenment/salvation" by becoming a better person.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Well I'm an atheist and want to be true to the best of human nature.
You might like reading an article in the December, Discover magazine on The Cooperation Instinct, P.34
Also do an Internet search on the, "evolution of empathy".
You might like reading an article in the December, Discover magazine on The Cooperation Instinct, P.34
Also do an Internet search on the, "evolution of empathy".
Report as
You have reported this
mrblackop962:
5 months ago
well if i celebrate christmas that must mean im........
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
...a pagan of Hindu extraction celebrating the Festival of Lights.
Report as
You have reported this
lennstercat:
5 months ago
well lots of people that arent christian celebrate Christmas, but hey it be kind of dumb if i said YOUR ANYTHING BUT CHRISTIAN lol
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
Some Jews and Muslims celebrate Christmas.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
No it isn't. It's the ancient celebration of winter solstice that Christians put Jesus' name on.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
I know I know, an atheist.
Me and my atheist boy have fun pretending every Christmas.
Me and my atheist boy have fun pretending every Christmas.
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
Scientifically Jesus was born some time in the spring the three wise men wouldn't have gotten there until he was about three years old
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Scientifically, there is no evidence
Jesus ever existed.
Jesus ever existed.
Report as
You have reported this
lennstercat:
5 months ago
moraly, we shouldnt say others beliefs arent right
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Here is an historical explanation of the "three wise men" or "three kings" connected with winter solstice celebrations, like Christmas.
~
Orion's Belt or the Belt of Orion is an asterism in the constellation Orion. It consists of the three bright stars Alnitak, Alnilam and Mintaka.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion's_Belt
~
The winter solstice has been celebrated since ancient times. Throughout the centuries, the winter solstice has been celebrated with family gatherings, festivals, singing, dancing, and the burning of fires throughout this longest night of the year.This year, the winter solstice occurs precisely at 7:04 am on December 21. Look into the sky the night of the solstice, and you will see the three stars of Orion?s Belt aligned with the Sirius, the brightest star in the eastern sky, which points to where the Sun will rise in the morning.
http://www.farmersalmanac.com/astronomy/2008/12/15/winter-solstice-longest-night-of-the-year/
~
Orion's Belt or the Belt of Orion is an asterism in the constellation Orion. It consists of the three bright stars Alnitak, Alnilam and Mintaka.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion's_Belt
~
The winter solstice has been celebrated since ancient times. Throughout the centuries, the winter solstice has been celebrated with family gatherings, festivals, singing, dancing, and the burning of fires throughout this longest night of the year.This year, the winter solstice occurs precisely at 7:04 am on December 21. Look into the sky the night of the solstice, and you will see the three stars of Orion?s Belt aligned with the Sirius, the brightest star in the eastern sky, which points to where the Sun will rise in the morning.
http://www.farmersalmanac.com/astronomy/2008/12/15/winter-solstice-longest-night-of-the-year/
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
In other words
The stars point to where the
SUN/son is born.
The stars point to where the
SUN/son is born.
Report as
You have reported this
mrblackop962:
5 months ago
if i celebrate christmas and three kings day that must mean im......(thanks for reminding me about 3 kings day evan
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
mrb...
Historically, there is no evidence
Jesus ever existed.
Historically, there is no evidence
Jesus ever existed.
Report as
You have reported this
mrblackop962:
5 months ago
wow we all had an hour long talk guys/girls
Report as
You have reported this
DevinBialy:
5 months ago
We really just wasted an hour WOOOO HOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!
Report as
You have reported this
mrblackop962:
5 months ago
yay!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
None.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color. So you're wrong, Feller.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
Hehe--you tell yourself a lot of fairytales that you believe, I see. LOL
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
Your first posted response was that "atheist" is the answer to the question about which religion one believes in, when it's incorrect, and I cited the saying "Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color" to prove the point that your first comment is wrong. I gave the correct answer to a question about believing in a religion. I believe in no religion.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
The answer for an atheist is, nothing.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
"None" is more grammatically correct, though. ;)
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
To answer the question, "What kind of religion do you believe in?" The grammatically correct answer would be, "none".
But in answer to Feller's, "what do you believe in", I think the grammatically correct answer would be "nothing".
I will eagerly stand corrected if needed but that is my understanding.
But in answer to Feller's, "what do you believe in", I think the grammatically correct answer would be "nothing".
I will eagerly stand corrected if needed but that is my understanding.
Report as
You have reported this
Truthisobvious:
5 months ago
Evan- to believe in "nothing" is to be nihilist. Personally I think that title carries a lot darker of a connotation than it deserves.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
No, having no belief is not really nihilism.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
nihilism
noun
a revolutionary doctrine that advocates destruction of the social system for its own sake
the delusion that things (or everything, including the self) do not exist; a sense that everything is unreal
syn: nihilistic delusion
complete denial of all established authority and institutions
~
As I see it, nihilism is a belief system just as, if not more, ridiculous as any religion.
You seem to be confusing basing nothing on belief with belief there is nothing.
The thinking philosophy I advocate is modeled after the scientific method.
Scientist don't believe in gravity or believe in magnetism or believe in photons or believe in subatomic particles etc.
So it can accurately be said that scientists "believe" in nothing; scientists have no use for "belief".
My awareness of the natural world is based on experience, observation and experimentation which lead to probabilities.
noun
a revolutionary doctrine that advocates destruction of the social system for its own sake
the delusion that things (or everything, including the self) do not exist; a sense that everything is unreal
syn: nihilistic delusion
complete denial of all established authority and institutions
~
As I see it, nihilism is a belief system just as, if not more, ridiculous as any religion.
You seem to be confusing basing nothing on belief with belief there is nothing.
The thinking philosophy I advocate is modeled after the scientific method.
Scientist don't believe in gravity or believe in magnetism or believe in photons or believe in subatomic particles etc.
So it can accurately be said that scientists "believe" in nothing; scientists have no use for "belief".
My awareness of the natural world is based on experience, observation and experimentation which lead to probabilities.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
ravenevan, it's abundantly clear that you're the one who's confused. Non sequitur.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
The part about nihilism, I mean. Your last sentence is the only one that has pertinence.
Report as
You have reported this
Truthisobvious:
5 months ago
Evan- my understanding of nihilism was mistaken- thank you. I agree with you btw, I'm not sure why anyone feels they must advocate anything with belief- especially when concerning the obvious truth.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Truth...
Thanks very much for getting back to me on that. Sometimes it can seem like splitting hairs but I suspect it's the inadequacy of language more than the concepts to be understood.
Thanks very much for getting back to me on that. Sometimes it can seem like splitting hairs but I suspect it's the inadequacy of language more than the concepts to be understood.
Report as
You have reported this
Truthisobvious:
5 months ago
Well I think its important to split hairs on language- Imho, its the most formidable weapon on earth and deserves our respct.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
Split hairs enough times and you become without substance.
Report as
You have reported this
Truthisobvious:
5 months ago
Yes but we have to know what each word means because apologetics thrive on switching the meanings of words within a discussion to disguise their logical fallacy and false claims. I know that seems monotonous but its necessary for a person like me.
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
That's certainly true; and yet it can't be emphasized enough that semantic games are the best friends of the proponents of a "rightly divided word", among whom verbal hairsplitting has attained the level of an art form.
Report as
You have reported this
Calebfootball17:
5 months ago
I am a christian i goe to sandyville church of christ if you want more info about being a christian follow me.
Report as
You have reported this
deathedge:
5 months ago
Pastafarian
Report as
You have reported this
ClaraListensprechen:
5 months ago
Sub Genius checking in. What matters from my point of view is how much Slack there is in the Ramen.
Report as
You have reported this
ravenevan:
5 months ago
via iPhone
Slack?... Didn't you mean sauce.
Report as
You have reported this
Marebear5000:
5 months ago
im catholic :D go god :)
Report as
You have reported this
Lots_Of_Love:
5 months ago
Hi, I haven't talked to you like in forever!
Report as
You have reported this
Marebear5000:
5 months ago
nuthing much fighting with some kid that thinks he is my boy friend but isnt and its really annoying
Report as
You have reported this
Marebear5000:
5 months ago
he got mad because i kissed a guy on the cheek like who the hell does he think he is
Report as
You have reported this
condoviper:
5 months ago
Music, because music is believable and the most awesome
Report as
You have reported this
condoviper:
5 months ago
if you cant hear, see, feel, taste, or seem legit then no
Report as
You have reported this
thearchangelforlife:
5 months ago
ha that's not how it works i can't feel or see air, but we know it's there.
Report as
You have reported this
condoviper:
5 months ago
actually you can taste it, see it when there are dyes in the air, and you can feel the wind
Report as
You have reported this
thearchangelforlife:
5 months ago
well we're both allowed to have our own views :)
Report as
You have reported this
happygoluckyXD:
5 months ago
I'm a Christian :)
Report as
You have reported this
happygoluckyXD:
5 months ago
That's so cool ::::::::::::::)))))))))))))))))))
Report as
You have reported this
chelsea_brown:
5 months ago
Christian!(:
Report as
You have reported this
Skeptikitten:
5 months ago
I don't have a religion. I'm an atheist.
Report as
You have reported this
ErenraiofAzecara:
5 months ago
|
Last edited at 5:58PM on 12/3/2012
I am a Wiccan and a odinist...it is my true faith and I am rightly proud of it!
Report as
You have reported this
priest_of_Anubis:
5 months ago
Eclectic Wicca. Basically the old religion of Egypt (known as Kemeticism) mixed with Wicca with parts of Taoism mixed in.
Report as
You have reported this
scalipture:
5 months ago
if you want to chose a religion, i suggest collect information of every religion from its follower and with reading its holy book.
try to find the truth, and be sure you can find it. this is the only real religion.
I am a ...
its not important. my religion is mine and your religion is yours.
just search.
o.mehdipoor@yahoo.com
Report as
You have reported this
grenadierart:
5 months ago
pure and undefiled religion is this: to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction (paraphrasing) James 1:27
Report as
You have reported this
MarquisBlack:
5 months ago
Christian Humanist. The triumph of reason and science over superstition based on the rationale that if all was created by God, then Science is derived from God's work. Furthermore, the protection and defence of the weak and persecuted, and the promotion of liberty, equality, and justice for all.
Report as
You have reported this
anp1215:
5 months ago
We must be careful that the religion we choose is truly worshiping the true God, the Creator, and that this worship pleases Him.
In order to find the religion that pleases God we must base ourselves on the teachings found in the Bible. This religion should:
- help you get closer to God by helping you learn about him and everything he has done for us (Matthew 4:10; Psalm 83:18; James 4:8)
- base its teachings on the Bible (2 Timothy 3:16,17)
- not force us to pay for anything (2 Corinthians 9:7)
- be united around the world with others that share that same religion, in other words, that does not war between those of the same religion (John 13:35; 1 John 4:20,21)
- preach God's Kingdom as man's only hope (Matthew 24:14; Daniel 2:44)
- accept Jesus as God's means of salvation (Acts 4:12; John 3:36)
I found this religion, the Jehovah's Witnesses.
Report as
You have reported this
thearchangelforlife:
5 months ago
Christian, because God has lead me through every hard time in my life. he has blessed me beyond what i deserve. just looking out on a beautiful day is proof that there is a God.
Report as
You have reported this
MrNibbles:
5 months ago
i dont know. i believe God is real and i also think that after we die something happens.
I believe in after life and i also believe in God, and i believe in science as well. I guess i am just compatible with everything
Report as
You have reported this
papayagurl:
5 months ago
I don't believe in religion as much as a relationship with God. But if you wanted to know what I identify with the best, it's Baptist.
Report as
You have reported this
akiel123:
5 months ago
The only book i believe in is The Bro Code!
http://posterous.com/getfile/files.posterous.com/nubeals/Y5kzNNQAbwEgiCDLrR3AABZpv0aeatCb32IVNL7slpF4Qz1MuLzFqHONExLY/Bro_Code.pdf
Report as
You have reported this
lynnbracke:
5 months ago
I don't believe in religion. I believe in spirituality. I'm glad that religion is there for those people who need a defined path to their higher power, however, I have found my path to be quite genuine and unique and following someone else's path does not serve my highest awareness.
Report as
You have reported this
Cassiebells816:
5 months ago
|
Last edited at 12:08AM on 12/16/2012
Agnostic. Every time I start to actually believe, I'll just get these negative thoughts. Plus, I swear sometimes, so I don't think I'd ever fully be a christian. I think it's safe to say that in the end, I will never be a christian, but I wont be a atheist, either. Just agnostic. :l