Semmelweis Reflex

[TheRedneckProfessor]

10 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

And someone did say shit up or put up. I guess that could be interpreted as telling him to shut up. 

Oops.  That was me, too.  But giving someone an option is not the same as giving someone a command.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

3 hours ago, SemmelweisReflex said:

Doctrinally Sound Christian? I kinda' like that. That's crazy enough to work. 

That is not even close to what you are. Earlier I provided you with one article and a pdf document concerning the flood of Noah. The article was from the Smithsonian Institute and the PDF was written by a secular geologist refuting the claims of the Flood Geologists that are only trying to find evidence to support the Bible. Kinda like Ron Wyatt was from an archeological standpoint. He only looked for proof of the Bible. He didn't give any credence to proof he may have found that would have contradicted the Bible. There have been many scientists, archeologists, and scholars that started out trying to prove the Bible, but as evidence came in, found the Bible to be inaccurate and eventually ceased to believe themselves. One such person is Bart Ehrman. Its for this reason that I respect his research as should you. I would also like to find a Joe Rogan podcast I watched, where he interviewed a geologist that studied core samples from the ice shelf. His findings were very enlightening when it comes to Flood myths and how they possibly came about. 

 

If you cared enough to study the information I gave you. Which is evidence that there was no world wide flood. You would have found that coastal regions extended 150 to 400 miles farther out into what is now ocean. According to where one was located around the world. Let me ask you this. In ancient times where did people live? Near water is the answer. It would have always been near a source of fresh water. But for costal peoples they would have used the ocean for food and trade. Therefore their towns would have been close to the ocean as well.

 

As the ocean rose. Sometimes quickly, from massive water flows from glacial lakes breaking their ice dams and flowing into the ocean. Whole civilizations would have ended up under water. Sometimes rather slowly, like a high tide that never stopped until it took the village, and other times violently, like when water from the ocean spilled into the area we now know as the black sea. It is very probable that in all these areas there were people. Actually its not only probable it is fact. They have discovered whole cities all around the world now claimed by the ocean.

 

Here is another article explaining how a massive glacial lake pouring into the ocean caused this flooding. Everywhere. This would have been a very traumatic event for people around the world. And much of the then populated world would have been in upheaval. 

 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/03/180322112713.htm

 

Now, truthfully, I have given you references for my claims that the biblical flood myth, as well as the epic of gilgamesh, were probably inspired by tales of these events passed down through the years. Genesis would have been written approximately 6000 years after the events in the above article. Plenty of time for reality to become legend. Again, People around the world trying to explain why God or The Gods flooded them. They did not know a massive glacial lake was the cause. For them it would have been whatever deity controlled the sea. Whether that was poseidon or the canaanite Thunder God EL that caused the flood. The article above is directly in relation to the Mediterranean sea level rising which would have been the source for the Bible myth, as canaan and isreal are costal regions in the Mediterranean. 

 

I Believe I have just provided you with enough "scientific evidence" to prove to you that there was no world wide flood and your bibles precious flood story is a fabricated myth resulting from massive localized flooding, due to sea level rise in the Mediterranean. 

 

I can do this with the story of Moses as well if you wish. Maybe we should delve into the tower of babel? The list goes on and on. The biblenis full of fanciful tales that never happened as depicted. 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

I had a lot of typos in that. I just edited it to get most of them out if anyone needs to reread. My apologies. Big ass thumbs lmao  

[freshstart]

 

4 hours ago, SemmelweisReflex said:

Quote

So, I'll ask again, what evidence do you suggest for determining which of the millions of supernatural claims are "truth?"

 

Define evidence, supernatural and truth for starters. 

 

Well since you have decided scientific evidence is not good enough to test whether the "supernatural" is real/truth, I think it is up to you to define what constitutes "evidence"  - for whatever it is you believe.  Is it a gut feeling?  Is it whatever you can observe with your 5 senses?  Or is it something else?

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

22 hours ago, SemmelweisReflex said:

Stop abusing science for your confirmation bias. Stop making vague statements about a scientific outcome that has never been done. 

 

I apologize for calling you an ignorant Fuck. I would like to request an apology for your above blatant assertion that I am a liar. As I have now provided you with three articles of evidence that the scientific research I asserted has in fact been done and a secular conclusion has been made based on the evidence attained in said research. which I had originally stated and this was your response.

[midniterider]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVtZkyBTabQ

 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

Mmmmm @SemmelweisReflex why the crickets?

 

*chirp chirp*

[Joshpantera]

On 6/9/2021 at 9:42 AM, SemmelweisReflex said:

Some of that is reflected in the video. You have to be extra careful with that sort of poor "scholarship." It may sound good and tell you what you want to hear, but look closer. El is a Hebrew word from a root word that means mighty. El and it's many variations are translated as god, gods, or with the definite article God. So Dagon, Molech, Baal, Tammuz, etc. are all el. Gods. Moses was a god, the judges of Israel were gods, Satan and all of the angels are gods. It simply means mighty. Saying El became Jehovah is nonsense. And, the Bible writers were not monotheistic or polytheistic. They were Henotheistic. They acknowledged multiple gods.

 

I couldn't watch the video because the quality was so poor. I've got this new laptop which I don't care much for. I gave my desktop to my dad. It had a 27 inch monitor with 5.1 surround sound. I don't know if it's just me, but I can't see the fucking thing. 

 

I don't know if it mentions the Jesus / Horus comparisons like many of that shit does, but all you have to do is research that stuff. Mythologist as well as careful theology can easily demonstrate that stuff to be nonsense. Jesus and Horus weren't born on December 25. Horus wasn't born from a virgin. Myths and truths intermingle over great periods of time. Saying they were both born on that day is like saying US presidents are only born on President's day. Jesus was born probably sometime during the first week of October. The Bible doesn't say directly but if you follow an accurate timeline, which the Bible does give, you can place it there. 

 

You didn't watch the video, but you disagree with it's content? 

 

It's only about basic knowledge coming from academic biblical research and archaeological findings. My comments about jesus have nothing to do with the video. I was just saying that jesus is extremely mythologized and influence by the near eastern pagan mythologies. If you want to go through citation and study the Horus - Jesus connection for yourself then get a copy of this book: 

 

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004LGTOCY/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

 

You can read through the specific issue of December 25th. It may help you understand the situation better.

 

It's not about 'real people or real birthdays', spoiler alert! It's about the Sun. And the Sun, mythologically, was considered born anew on the day after the winter solstice when it comes out of the three day visual stand still. Both the Horus and jesus myth's were playing around with the ancient solar mysteries. That's why the many citations that can be found link the two myths together under the common theme of "solar mythology." Jesus and John's birthdays are placed at the summer and winter solstice for mythological, not biological reasons....

 

As to the "pagan" issue, that was quite an aside you took off on. 

 

But if you didn't watch the video then you probably have no idea why your response was such an aside. Granted. 

[Joshpantera]

On 6/9/2021 at 1:24 PM, SemmelweisReflex said:

The creative days, each of which may have lasted thousands or even millions of years, and had taken place an indeterminate period of time after the creation was complete in verse one, are not indicative of any speculation regarding the age of the Earth and universe. The Bible simply doesn’t say.

Period 1 - Light; a division between night and day (Genesis 1:3-5)

Period 2 - The Expanse; a division between waters above and beneath. (Genesis 1:6-8)

Period 3 - Dry land and vegetation. (Genesis 1:9-13)

Period 4 - Heavenly luminaries become visible from Earth. (Genesis 1:14-19)

Period 5 - Aquatic and flying creatures. (Genesis 1:20-23)

Period 6 - Land animals and man. (Genesis 1:24-31)

 

At least you do understand the format and have already broken it into these 6 periods.

 

The first three days set up environments for things to exist within. The next three days place inhabitants into the first three environments in lock step order. The luminaries to heavens and light / darkness division. They are inhabitants of that region to inhabit the day and night. Then fish and birds to inhabit the water and skies. Then land animals and man to inhabit the dry land. 

 

The point being that this is creation mythology. There's no literal periods involved. Or do you suppose that billions of years were going by between period 1 and period 4 with no sun, moon, or stars yet made. Billions of years of day and night with no luminaries? If you think the luminaries already existed, but were not seen from earth, do you then suppose that vegetation arose with no visible light source. Especially billions of years of growing vegetation with the sun not visible from the earth? 

 

What that does is breaks the flow of the myth. It says that the luminaries are made on day 4 in order to begin the process of creating the sets of inhabitants to inhabit the first three environments. To try and claim that the luminaries already exists prior breaks the flow and starts you down a path of digging a deeper hole for yourself while trying to get out of the hole you start out in. 

 

A ) Period 1 Heavens (environment) > Period 4 Luminaries (inhabitants of the environment)

 

B ) Period 2 Sea and Air (environment) > Period 5 Fish and Birds (inhabitants of the environment) 

 

C ) Period 3 Dry land with vegetation (environment) > Period 6 Land Animals and Man (inhabitants of the environment) 

 

This is another situation where you haven't gone over it thoroughly enough yet to see what's going on. Like the last situation. You've figured out so much but then that's it. And people who are aware of what goes beyond your current stance can see where you're stuck at the moment. 

 

You say you enjoy debates. Well, these are the debate forums. Welcome aboard!

 

There's very little that comes through here which we haven't seen or heard before. Including your approach to Genesis 1. 

 

Do you care to try and reason your way through the logic that follows????

 

 

[Joshpantera]

8 hours ago, SemmelweisReflex said:

As a regular on Steve Well's Skeptic's Annotated Bible (SAB) he invited me to comment on his Dwindling In Unbelief because he wanted representation of an alternative perspective. I think I made one post and he advised everyone there to ignore me as he was going to ignore me. 

 

 

Contrary to being ignored here, instead you're on center stage with a big, big spot light. For all to see and consider. 

 

The only one who's subject to quietly step away will be you. Because I've already seen the extent of your knowledge and experience in these matters reading through the discussion. It's not possible for you to win or get the upper hand on any of this from where you're currently standing. You're starting from a faulty premise and it won't magically get better as you try and pile more on top of it. 

 

But you're welcome to keep trying.....

[Myrkhoos]

    It might seem Semm is getting the rough treatment all around.

.    

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

Here read this excerpt:

 

"This stands in contrast to those Jews who could expect a future resurrection. For them, the “soul” or “breath” that enlivens their body is taken away at death. But at the resurrection it will be returned, bringing the body back to life. That, however, would only come to those whose bodies have died but whose life force is restored. If the life force is destroyed as well, there will be no resurrection into God’s coming kingdom. There will only be death. God alone can destroy the life force. When he does so, the person is not just physically dead but completely dead—destroyed, exterminated out of existence."

 

It seems in this paragraph from heaven and hell a history of the afterlife written by Bart Ehrman. He is showing what Jesus taught and it actually aligns with what you have said this far concerning those that die without God. That they cease to exist. Hmmm are you sure you don't want to see what a scholar of academia has to say about the subject? 

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

20 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

    It might seem Semm is getting the rough treatment all around.

.    

 

According to his own words this forum reminds him of other athiest forums he has visited. So I guess he just likes it rough. 

[Myrkhoos]

2 hours ago, DarkBishop said:

Here read this excerpt:

 

"This stands in contrast to those Jews who could expect a future resurrection. For them, the “soul” or “breath” that enlivens their body is taken away at death. But at the resurrection it will be returned, bringing the body back to life. That, however, would only come to those whose bodies have died but whose life force is restored. If the life force is destroyed as well, there will be no resurrection into God’s coming kingdom. There will only be death. God alone can destroy the life force. When he does so, the person is not just physically dead but completely dead—destroyed, exterminated out of existence."

 

It seems in this paragraph from heaven and hell a history of the afterlife written by Bart Ehrman. He is showing what Jesus taught and it actually aligns with what you have said this far concerning those that die without God. That they cease to exist. Hmmm are you sure you don't want to see what a scholar of academia has to say about the subject? 

You know, one things still bugs me. There shouldn't be a need for guides or interpretation, me thinks, if this is the message everyone should understand in no uncertain terms for their survival.No need for theology university. Bible scholarship. It should come with the package like eyesight. Nobody teaches you to see. You just do it. Oh, you may perfect it through practice and care, but the basic thing is there. ( Yes, I know some people are born blind, that's irrelevant to my argument here) There should not be a need for debate about the existence and attributes of God. This alone makes me question a lot, too much, the abrahamic religions basic ideas.

[WalterP]

Hello again David.   

 

I was wondering if you had any comments to make about subjective vs objective evidence?

 

(please refer to my two posts from yesterday)

 

Thank you.

 

Walter.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

7 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

You know, one things still bugs me. There shouldn't be a need for guides or interpretation, me thinks, if this is the message everyone should understand in no uncertain terms for their survival.No need for theology university. Bible scholarship. It should come with the package like eyesight. Nobody teaches you to see. You just do it. Oh, you may perfect it through practice and care, but the basic thing is there. ( Yes, I know some people are born blind, that's irrelevant to my argument here) There should not be a need for debate about the existence and attributes of God. This alone makes me question a lot, too much, the abrahamic religions basic ideas.

 

This is only a small excerpt from his book. The way Christians understand heaven and hell today is completely different from the way even Jesus himself preached. It was an evolutionary process in the way Christians and even jews saw the afterlife. He starts by showing how the jews originally didn't believe in an after life at all. They believed that when you died that was it. Nothing else. You were gone. But as time progressed the jews began to think it was unfair that they suffered in life at the hands of the babylonians, Persians, Egyptians, and Roman's. This caused them to start believing in a resurrection of the righteous dead but those that were u righteous would not be resurrected. 

 

The excerpt I posted was after those and Jesus's teachings, but before the teachings of Paul who was the next most influential Christian leader after christ himself. He began teaching something different. I dont want to spoil to much. Its a really good book. 

 

But suffice it to say. The heaven and hell we know is not what Jesus taught. He was an apocalyptic jew according to Bart Ehrman. And didn't teach a punishment of eternal torment. Which is why I posted that excerpt as SF stated that he did not believe in eternal torment in Hell. 

[Myrkhoos]

1 hour ago, DarkBishop said:

 

This is only a small excerpt from his book. The way Christians understand heaven and hell today is completely different from the way even Jesus himself preached. It was an evolutionary process in the way Christians and even jews saw the afterlife. He starts by showing how the jews originally didn't believe in an after life at all. They believed that when you died that was it. Nothing else. You were gone. But as time progressed the jews began to think it was unfair that they suffered in life at the hands of the babylonians, Persians, Egyptians, and Roman's. This caused them to start believing in a resurrection of the righteous dead but those that were u righteous would not be resurrected. 

 

The excerpt I posted was after those and Jesus's teachings, but before the teachings of Paul who was the next most influential Christian leader after christ himself. He began teaching something different. I dont want to spoil to much. Its a really good book. 

 

But suffice it to say. The heaven and hell we know is not what Jesus taught. He was an apocalyptic jew according to Bart Ehrman. And didn't teach a punishment of eternal torment. Which is why I posted that excerpt as SF stated that he did not believe in eternal torment in Hell. 

I get that. I was commenting on a more general point. Bart Ehrman's is just one of the many interpretations. My point is that, if there was/is an omnimax God and a necessary urgent message for mankind, we should not need debate/interpretation. It should simple and clear for everyone to know, regardleds of age, sex, race, ethnicity, geographical location, etc. It should be so obvious as to not be able to refute.

[☆ DarkBishop ☆]

41 minutes ago, Myrkhoos said:

I get that. I was commenting on a more general point. Bart Ehrman's is just one of the many interpretations. My point is that, if there was/is an omnimax God and a necessary urgent message for mankind, we should not need debate/interpretation. It should simple and clear for everyone to know, regardleds of age, sex, race, ethnicity, geographical location, etc. It should be so obvious as to not be able to refute.

 

Oh yeah I completely agree. And all knowing God would have foreseen the confusion and made his instructions in such a way that there wouldn't be tens of thousands of interpretations. There would only be one interpretation and one church. But alas there is no such God and this is the cluster fuck that came to be. 

[TABA]

39 minutes ago, DarkBishop said:

And all knowing God would have foreseen the confusion and made his instructions in such a way that there wouldn't be tens of thousands of interpretations. There would only be one interpretation and one church. But alas there is no such God and this is the cluster fuck that came to be. 

The other day I listened to a podcast where they talked about the Evil God Hypothesis, the idea that if there is a god, it is more likely to be evil than good.  The idea of an omnipotent, good god is brought into question by the existence of so much evil, pain and suffering in the world.  
 

If there were an evil god it would explain why humans have received so many conflicting “messages from god”, which have led to all kinds of mayhem: a cluster fuck indeed. 
 

But then it was suggested that the existence of an evil god is called into question by the fact that there is also so much joy and good in life.  So the best conclusion is that there is likely  neither an evil god nor a good god. 

[Joshpantera]

1 hour ago, DarkBishop said:

 

Oh yeah I completely agree. And all knowing God would have foreseen the confusion and made his instructions in such a way that there wouldn't be tens of thousands of interpretations. There would only be one interpretation and one church. But alas there is no such God and this is the cluster fuck that came to be. 

 

An all knowing god would know dam well that by the 19th century some scholars would start realizing and writing about the massive lack of contemporary evidence for the life of jesus. Calling the entire historicity of the story into question and running forward into the 21st century with no possible resolve in sight. Due to the lack of evidence back then or lasting from then till now that could resolve the issue.

 

And simply make the evidence plain and irrefutable back then!!!

 

Make sure it lasts through time!!!

 

How about some contemporary jewish or roman court records that last???

 

Simple explanation, the stories are mostly if not complete myth and legend. No all-knowing god factors in at all, good or evil. And this is obvious when you consider that the bible starts out demonstrably false from the outset in Genesis 1....

[TheRedneckProfessor]

6 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

    It might seem Semm is getting the rough treatment all around.

.    

Meh, his pride is hurt more than his feelings.  He bragged about all these years of experience he has debating atheists online, even said some guy I've never heard of invited him onto his atheism show and then told all the other guests to ignore him.  With all that experience, he ought to have thick enough skin to handle a couple of Southern country boys getting rough on him... unless he was lying about having all of that experience. 

 

Moreover, I know that he took the time to familiarize himself with our forum rules and guidelines.  And, when BrotherMario was mentioned, Semi-Wise immediately caught the reference, which tells me that he's taken the time to comb through our history and past interactions with other believers.  In essence, he has studied his "enemy" and should know what he is in for with this crowd.

 

Still, somehow, even with all that history available to him, part of him still believed that with his impeccable intellect and interpretation, we would all be awestruck and immediately accept his message.  Now he knows it just ain't so.  I hope he's just taking a little time to lick his wounds and he'll come back with a renewed sense of purpose; and a better understanding of us.  But, after what he wrote on my feed yesterday, I'm afraid he's done got butt-hurt and r-u-n-n-o-f-t.

[TABA]

31 minutes ago, TheRedneckProfessor said:

Still, somehow, even with all that history available to him, part of him still believed that with his impeccable intellect and interpretation, we would all be awestruck and immediately accept his message.  Now he knows it just ain't so. 

Remember @pittsburghjoe?  I know, it seems like ages ago but it’s only been a few months.  Remember how he came here confident that he would show us the error of our ways?  And how could he not be confident: the Holy Spirit had given him the idea of the Dual Slit Experiment, the golden key to proving it all once and for all!  How could we possibly resist the divine light?  We’d all be won over and convert this site into a platform for the saving of souls via double slits.  Glory!!

 

And yet here we are, dealing with another one who will soon be forgotten.  

[alreadyGone]

13 minutes ago, TABA said:

Remember @pittsburghjoe?  I know, it seems like ages ago but it’s only been a few months.  Remember how he came here confident that he would show us the error of our ways?  ...

 

If I recall correctly, his comment was "this site has got to be shut down!".

 

[TABA]

40 minutes ago, alreadyGone said:

 

If I recall correctly, his comment was "this site has got to be shut down!".

 

Yeah, at first I thought he was going to call down fire and brimstone on our heads but then it became clear the Holy Spirit had given him the tools to win us over, so at that point the outcome was never in doubt. 

[florduh]

Without Semi-Wise how can we ever learn the Truth? Maybe I can manage without his wisdom somehow.

 

Funny how most of the Christians who come to enlighten us poor slobs have a bigger ego than L. Ron Hubbard. Especially the ones who insist that they are not really Christians.