Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Please also be so good as to answer the question I put to you, earlier in this thread.

 

Do you accept that that the big bang has been confirmed, just as your source (and Hawking) says?

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I saw a Rabbi trying to excuse the nonsensical structure of Genesis on youtube. He was basically saying that it's poetic writing and such, and the problem is with people who insist that it's written l

Let's get this straight. Mark was written before Matthew. Then Matthew and Luke were written. Most think Matthew then Luke. So there's no virgin birth in Mark. It shows up in Matthew, but the line fro

Posted Images

@LogicalFallacy - Harry Potter is fiction. The author never claimed it was true. The Bible is written by people who claim to be eyewitnesses of the teaching, miracles, and resurrection of Jesus. 


The virgin birth is clearly miraculous.

 

But with the Virgin Birth we can make sense of why the Genealogy of Jesus in Matthew's Gospel (Mat 1) is different from Luke's Gospel (Luke 3:23-28). The virgin birth makes it necessary that they be different.  The messiah must be a descendant of King David. Luke records the blood-line of David thru Mary. Matthew records the royal line of Kingship from David to Joseph. Under Jewish law Joseph's adopted son would be heir to David's throne.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@WalterP -- This is exChristian.net, I'm not here to discuss other religions. They may or may not advocate intelligent design, I don't know.

 

The Big Bang is a Theory. It has not been confirmed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Moderator
5 minutes ago, InamBerea said:

The Big Bang is a Theory. 

I have already suggested that you learn the difference in meaning of the term "Theory" as it is used by scientists versus its meaning when used in common speech.  If you cannot stop being ignorant, you can, at least, stop displaying it publicly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Moderator
1 hour ago, InamBerea said:

You'll find a consistent message in 66 books from 40+ authors, written over thousands of years.

You will find a more consistent message in the Dharma.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
57 minutes ago, InamBerea said:

The Big Bang is a Theory. It has not been confirmed.

 

:banghead:

 

Here we go again. "It's just a theory" *Looks at Walter with exasperated expression* You got this?

 

I'm starting to think of ways in which one can confirm the theory of gravity. Jumping off a building for instance. It's just a thheeeooorrrrryyyyyyyy. *splat*

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
1 hour ago, InamBerea said:

@LogicalFallacy - Harry Potter is fiction. The author never claimed it was true. The Bible is written by people who claim to be eyewitnesses of the teaching, miracles, and resurrection of Jesus. 

 

The Koran claims to be true. And it's consistent in its message.

 

There are also eye witness accounts of people seeing Elvis alive and being abducted by alien's. These often have a consistent message as well. Do you believe them?

 

1 hour ago, InamBerea said:

The virgin birth is clearly miraculous.

 

The virgin birth is an ad hoc claim based off a misunderstanding of Isaiah.  

1 hour ago, InamBerea said:

But with the Virgin Birth we can make sense of why the Genealogy of Jesus in Matthew's Gospel (Mat 1) is different from Luke's Gospel (Luke 3:23-28). The virgin birth makes it necessary that they be different.  The messiah must be a descendant of King David. Luke records the blood-line of David thru Mary. Matthew records the royal line of Kingship from David to Joseph. Under Jewish law Joseph's adopted son would be heir to David's throne.

 

More ad hoc reasoning. 

 

The entire virgin birth story is ad hoc reasoning and shoe horning misunderstood prophesies. Talk to a Jewish rabbi about it and get back to me when you've convinced them that you have the correct interpretation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Super Moderator
37 minutes ago, InamBerea said:

@TheRedneckProfessor - I guess I should have used 'Hypothesis' or 'Conjecture' to be precise. 

Neither of those terms would have been more precise, or even accurate.  Study, boy.  Study to shew thyself approved unto the Prof, a workman that needeth not be ashamed, rightly dividing the truth of the words.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
10 hours ago, InamBerea said:

@JoshPantera - GroupThink cuts both ways. General acceptance of the Big-Bang is not proof. 

 

Walter's questions are aimed at leading you into a deeper understanding of the issue at hand, BTW. Try and answer them and see where it leads. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
2 hours ago, InamBerea said:

The virgin birth is clearly miraculous.

 

But with the Virgin Birth we can make sense of why the Genealogy of Jesus in Matthew's Gospel (Mat 1) is different from Luke's Gospel (Luke 3:23-28). The virgin birth makes it necessary that they be different.  The messiah must be a descendant of King David. Luke records the blood-line of David thru Mary. Matthew records the royal line of Kingship from David to Joseph. Under Jewish law Joseph's adopted son would be heir to David's throne.

 

Let's get this straight. Mark was written before Matthew. Then Matthew and Luke were written. Most think Matthew then Luke. So there's no virgin birth in Mark. It shows up in Matthew, but the line from David runs through Joseph, and no blood line exists to jesus because he was not of the seed of Joseph. Then Luke comes along, first no virgin birth Mark, then a virgin birth that basically grasps at straws to try and connect jesus to king David through Joseph in Matthew, and then Luke changes it around to a blood-line of David thru Mary. This is being conjured up and built upon by humans over time, isn't it? 

 

That just looks like the obvious train of thought playing over time as myths are expanded upon. Very obvious to people who aren't biased into not being able to see it that way. This is part of why the jews never accepted these myths. The same reason that most christians don't accept mormon myths. They don't make clear sense and don't add up. They have tell tale signs of manipulation and personal religious biases. And they never passed with the jewish people as valid religious literature in their opinion. It's easy to see why, from an objective perspective. 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, InamBerea said:

@WalterP -- This is exChristian.net, I'm not here to discuss other religions. They may or may not advocate intelligent design, I don't know.

 

The Big Bang is a Theory. It has not been confirmed.

 

InamBerea,

 

If you don't know whether other religions advocate intelligent design or not, please go back and read the article I linked to.

 

This one.  http://www.naseeb.com/villages/journals/intelligent-design-islam-69908

 

Having read it, you will no longer be in a state of ignorance about Islam advocating intelligent design.

 

Then you will be able to answer the question, 'If both Christians and Muslims advocate intelligent design, who should we believe?'

 

 

Please pay close attention now, InamBerea!

 

I've said that you will be able to answer the question.  But that doesn't mean that you are willing to do so.  

 

So, are you refusing to answer?

 

 

 

Walter.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, InamBerea said:

@WalterP -- This is exChristian.net, I'm not here to discuss other religions. They may or may not advocate intelligent design, I don't know.

 

The Big Bang is a Theory. It has not been confirmed.

 

Please explain how a theory is confirmed, InamBerea.

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

:banghead:

 

Here we go again. "It's just a theory" *Looks at Walter with exasperated expression* You got this?

 

I'm starting to think of ways in which one can confirm the theory of gravity. Jumping off a building for instance. It's just a thheeeooorrrrryyyyyyyy. *splat*

 

It's ok LogicalFallacy, I'm not exasperated by what InamBerea has said.

 

Instead of using gravity, I think I'll use the Sun to show to him how a theory is confirmed.

 

A theory is confirmed if its predictions agree with what is observed.

 

 

In 1939 Hans Bethe predicted that the Sun's sustained thermonuclear reactions would give off neutrinos as a side product.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Bethe

 

In 2014 these solar neutrinos were unequivocally detected by the Borexino experiment.  

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borexino

 

This detection confirms the prediction.

 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Joshpantera - The need for (2) different lineages happened long before the NT, in the time of Jeremiah (Jer 22:24-30). A blood curse was placed on the descendants of Jeconiah (Coniah) to never sit on the throne of David, but the Royal line passed thru Jeconiah as listed in Matthew's Genealogy. 

 

Jesus was a blood-descendant of King David according to (Rom 1:3), and we see that Genealogy in Luke. It's necessary to both Matthew and Luke. If they were both the same Jesus could not be the messiah.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again InamBerea.

 

Please be so good as to respond to these two items, which I put to you yesterday.

 

 

If both Christians and Muslims advocate intelligent design, who are we to believe?

 

Please explain how a theory is confirmed.

 

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2020 at 8:59 AM, InamBerea said:

 

Jesus was a blood-descendant of King David according to (Rom 1:3), and we see that Genealogy in Luke. It's necessary to both Matthew and Luke. If they were both the same Jesus could not be the messiah.

     Except both come through Joseph so the claim to Mary doesn't really work.  There's nothing in the genealogy that allows us to assume this is the female's male lineage.

 

          mwc

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderator
On 8/10/2020 at 11:59 AM, InamBerea said:

@Joshpantera - The need for (2) different lineages happened long before the NT, in the time of Jeremiah (Jer 22:24-30). A blood curse was placed on the descendants of Jeconiah (Coniah) to never sit on the throne of David, but the Royal line passed thru Jeconiah as listed in Matthew's Genealogy. 

 

Jesus was a blood-descendant of King David according to (Rom 1:3), and we see that Genealogy in Luke. It's necessary to both Matthew and Luke. If they were both the same Jesus could not be the messiah.

 

So why didn't Matthew provide both lineages? Divine inspiration skipped over Matthew somehow to where the holy spirit needed to jump bodies into Luke in order to resolved the error? Why didn't the holy spirit set it straight once and for all with Matthew? Further, why didn't Mark know anything about a virgin birth or the lineage's?

 

Let's see how far down you'll dig this hole before realizing where it's headed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 8 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.