Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.

Status
Not open for further replies.
You know... after 4200+ posts and 107 pages, I think we need to take good old Brother Sam's advice when dealing with DOC, KK, Radrook, Stone Island, Plumjam, etc...

 
DOC said:
And the current mainstream scientific theory on the beginning of the universe is much more God friendly than the old steady state theory that didn't believe the universe had a beginning.
Click to expand...

six7s said:
More lies for your messiah?

Its obvious that you are plucking this crap from your arse...

Why DOC? Why do you persist in telling silly lies?
Click to expand...

Of course my statement is not a lie, it is just common sense that a theory where the universe has a beginning is closer to the Genesis story than a theory like the steady state where there is no beginning. I even quoted a scientist in another thread that made this basic claim.

You really lose credibility when you throw the word liar around at the drop of a hat, especially in this incidence. But you most likely will continue to do so in the future. The sad part is these type posts takes up space and add nothing to the thread.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
Of course my statement is not a lie, it is just common sense that a theory where the universe has a beginning is closer to the Genesis story than a theory like the steady state where there is no beginning.
Click to expand...
Yes, but it is also common sense to say that a story which claims that the stars are placed into a firmament in the sky is the furthest thing from reality. E.g., wrong.
 
Hokulele said:
Hmm, maybe I should offer another challenge. I will read and comment on a website or book of your choice if you agree to read and comment on Simon Singh's Big Bang. If you agree, I will start another thread for this.
Click to expand...
I'm getting a strange sensation of deja vu here. Haven't we done this before?

ETA: Oh yeah - that was Kathy.
 
DOC said:
Actually it's not an argument from incredulity when you compare "two" points of view. If one argument seems more absurd than another, than it is logical to believe that the less absurd sounding point of view is more likely to be correct than the more absurd one.
Click to expand...

No, DOC, when you read two absurd arguments, you're supposed to understand that both are absurd, chuck them both, and go back to the evidence you have for a different conclusion. If you're drawn back to one of the absurd arguments, then you can consider it as possibly having some truth. You're unlikely to come up with both absurd arguments when they're contradictory.
 
Hokulele said:
Claiming that I have cannibals as ancestors or that I am of Jewish descent comes to my mind.
Click to expand...

I recall DOC making a similar statement in which he assumed that Joobz was Jewish. There was just something about the way he wrote it, as though it somehow invalidated Joobz's argument.
 
DOC said:
Of course my statement is not a lie, it is just common sense that a theory where the universe has a beginning is closer to the Genesis story than a theory like the steady state where there is no beginning. I even quoted a scientist in another thread that made this basic claim.
Click to expand...
How is a theory that posits that the Universe is 13.7 billion years old, and removes any need for a creator, in any way close to the Genesis account, or any other part of the bible?

At least with the steady state theory the Universe could have been brought into existence as is, and it fits the biblical description of an unchanging sky, set above by God.

The bible says that everything is fixed, but the Big Bang theory says that nothing is fixed.

So, um, no.
 
wollery said:
DOC said:
Of course my statement is not a lie, it is just common sense that a theory where the universe has a beginning is closer to the Genesis story than a theory like the steady state where there is no beginning. I even quoted a scientist in another thread that made this basic claim.
Click to expand...
How is a theory that posits that the Universe is 13.7 billion years old, and removes any need for a creator, in any way close to the Genesis account, or any other part of the bible?

At least with the steady state theory the Universe could have been brought into existence as is, and it fits the biblical description of an unchanging sky, set above by God.

The bible says that everything is fixed, but the Big Bang theory says that nothing is fixed.

So, um, no.
Click to expand...

Thanks wollery! Its so refreshing to know that there are so many people who value the truth enough to deal with the smelly crap

Nominated :)
 
paximperium said:
Reading your post is all the explanation that is necessary. You either have no idea what you are talking about or are making things up. So are you just ignorant or a liar?
Click to expand...


Now, now, that's a false dilemma. He could be ignorant and a liar.
 
Foster Zygote said:
I recall DOC making a similar statement in which he assumed that Joobz was Jewish. There was just something about the way he wrote it, as though it somehow invalidated Joobz's argument.
Click to expand...
Yes. I forgot about that.
Here is the exchange:
DOC said:
joobz said:
hey thanks!
Hilter (a christian) is in the top three. I think that helps show the point I was making. It's the person not the religion (or lack there of)

Now, if we could only find some incans to see if they would like to say anything about the benevolence of the christians.
Click to expand...
Aren't some Jews taught at a very early age that Hitler was a Christian. Were you brought up Jewish.
Click to expand...
DOC seems to ask the question as though it holds some special significance to him.
 
DOC said:
But (in science) the first female organism must have come from the side of something that wasn't female,
Click to expand...

Huh ? How so ? Why would it have to come from the "side" of anything ?

How about males ? Why wouldn't it be males that come from the "side" of something else ?
 
DOC:
"Aren't some Jews taught at a very early age that Hitler was a Christian. Were you brought up Jewish."

I have lurked on this thread for a while. I must have missed this one. DOC, admitting that you are Anti-Semitic isn't going to help your "cause." You might want to read Mein Kampf wherein Hitler discusses his Christianity. Apparently, it is some Christians that are being taught at an early age the lies that Hitler was an Atheist and/or an Odinist. What follows is an excerpt from a post of mine debating Christians on another forum:

"But the historical record is very clear. He grew up as a Catholic in Vienna. During his early adult life he lapsed somewhat as a regular churchgoer but never actually stopped "believing." During his rise to power he leaned more towards Lutheran theology.

He never believed in Odinism despite the fact that some of his upper echelon promoted it. Hitler actually mocked Atheists. He believed Jesus was an Aryan and tried to promote this idea too. His anti-semitism was a traditional part of European Christianity at the time; though he inflamed it, as had many in previous pogroms who used it for their own purposes. And he even states that modern Jews were Atheistic as a means of reviling them.

A quote from Hitler:

"The best characterization is provided by the product of this religious education, the Jew himself. His life is only of this world, and his spirit is inwardly as alien to true Christianity as his nature two thousand years previous was to the great founder of the new doctrine. Of course, the latter made no secret of his attitude toward the Jewish people, and when necessary he even took the whip to drive from the temple of the Lord this adversary of all humanity, who then as always saw in religion nothing but an instrument for his business existence. In return, Christ was nailed to the cross, while our present-day party Christians debase themselves to begging for Jewish votes at elections and later try to arrange political swindles with atheistic Jewish parties-- and this against their own nation."

This quote is from Mein Kampf, Hitler's manifesto, which makes clear many of his religious beliefs that I have laid out and is the best source on the subject."


Also DOC, as many people have posted over and over and over again, you don't have a clue as to what actually constitutes evidence. Evidence is something that can be verified and tested. All you have is a Book and an Opinion. A couple of pages back you plaintively query whether your 800+ posts (on which threads?? Holy Crap) provide us with at least an iota of evidence. Clearly the answer is NO! You have not offered a single scrap of anything approaching testable evidence.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised you don't have a clue about biology, as your comments about females coming out of the side of something suggests. I might have possibly given you a pass on your comparing the Big Bang to Creation a few decades ago when many scientists had yet to posit that the Big Bang must have come from somewhere. But these days most scientists do think that something existed before the Big Bang.

I am always amazed when some Christians try to argue the science of "creation." Frankly, I have more respect for the "God can do anything" argument, at least that's internally consistent and no-one can prove or disprove that. But of course once you make that argument you have to admit that you are arguing purely from Faith alone.
 
Last edited:
DOC said:
Of course my statement is not a lie, it is just common sense that a theory where the universe has a beginning is closer to the Genesis story than a theory like the steady state where there is no beginning. I even quoted a scientist in another thread that made this basic claim.
Click to expand...
Yes, the Big Bang and Genesis both have words.

So What.

Paul

:) :) :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom