Notices
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 101 to 155 of 155
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: The Purpose of Life

  1. #101  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Brighton UK
    Posts
    114
    Please don’t get me wrong Epignosis I know 100% this is a creation, it was your quote … “The real purpose of life is to get to know God, and serve him with a whole heart, with accuracy and truth” … that queered my pitch
    There is a B’zillion crucifix’s on this planet and not one person has a clue to its meaning, including the Vatican.
    I know what you mean about getting banned, if you don’t say what they want to hear’ you’re out … and likewise’ if I vanish you know what’s happened
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #102  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Ball View Post
    Please don’t get me wrong Epignosis I know 100% this is a creation, it was your quote … “The real purpose of life is to get to know God, and serve him with a whole heart, with accuracy and truth” … that queered my pitch
    There is a B’zillion crucifix’s on this planet and not one person has a clue to its meaning, including the Vatican.
    I know what you mean about getting banned, if you don’t say what they want to hear’ you’re out … and likewise’ if I vanish you know what’s happened
    Yes my post it did disappear, is this only way scientists can keep their stories alive?
    This is basically what I said
    The history on the cross, comes from the Gauls. They worshiped the sun. They used a a symbol of a circle with crossed lines inside of it. Over time they removed the circle and used the crossed lines only. In the time of Constantine, he wanted unite his empire,( Romans) with were both pagan and Christian. So he forced the pagan symbols on the Christians . So the cross is from pagan religions. The Romans used a pole to hang criminals, on. They did not use a cross.
    The other thing is that the idea of venerating the instrument of torture and death of Jesus was abhorrent.
    If you lost a son by murder and a gun was used. Would you worship the gun that killed him?
    The cross is a pagan symbol, and is a symbol of false religion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #103  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,812
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Ball View Post
    Understanding pebbles tells us how the pyramids were built
    She had a strong boyfriend in that little Bam-Bam so perhaps there's some validity to this point. I should have listened more closely.

    Benjamin Button would love this.

    I've not found any reviews or testimonials, pro or con, on your book. I think in the interest of the theory you're espousing that people should be allowed to read a free copy of the book before deciding to purchase it or not.
    Last edited by zinjanthropos; October 2nd, 2011 at 11:01 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #104  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,812
    Epi.....it's quite obvious your purpose in life is to preserve the Bible, it's stories and messages, sublime or real, and that you consider this mission as serving God.. Would you contend that there is not one mistake in the Bible?....or.... If one is found then is the Bible true, credible, believable or trustworthy? Should God's word contain errors?

    Now it's still possible, even if the Bible contains errors, that you are serving a god. Not the one you believe in but one that wants the truth told. This god doesn't care to communicate or get involved directly with his creations via any manmade media but through our penchant for discovery and exploring the unknown. I have just as much proof of this god as you have of yours. So take the time to listen what science is saying, if anything they're figuring out how god did it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #105  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos View Post
    Epi.....it's quite obvious your purpose in life is to preserve the Bible, it's stories and messages, sublime or real, and that you consider this mission as serving God.. Would you contend that there is not one mistake in the Bible?....or.... If one is found then is the Bible true, credible, believable or trustworthy? Should God's word contain errors?

    Now it's still possible, even if the Bible contains errors, that you are serving a god. Not the one you believe in but one that wants the truth told. This god doesn't care to communicate or get involved directly with his creations via any manmade media but through our penchant for discovery and exploring the unknown. I have just as much proof of this god as you have of yours. So take the time to listen what science is saying, if anything they're figuring out how god did it.
    I have not found any ' mistakes' in the bible . I do know that there are many 'contradictions' on the internet. I have been asked in the past about these. I have answered many of them. At this point all that I have been asked I was able to answer.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #106  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,309
    here is probably no greater unknown aspect of human life than the "purpose of life"
    We know the answer....though many people don't like it: It's between your legs.

    Any more than that is what you decide to make of yourself.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #107  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Brighton UK
    Posts
    114
    The purpose of life is to 'enjoy'
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #108  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    here is probably no greater unknown aspect of human life than the "purpose of life"
    We know the answer....though many people don't like it: It's between your legs.

    Any more than that is what you decide to make of yourself.
    That, and money are today's God for many people.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #109  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    i've taken the liberty of moving all dating-related posts to a thread of their own in earth sciences
    after all, they had precious little to do with the purpose of life
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #110  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Ball View Post
    The purpose of life is to 'enjoy'
    There is nothing wrong with enjoying life . If you can. And if you don't live in a refuge camp, starving to death. Even people in privileged countries like the US , have to deal with crime, making a living, illness, and old age and death. The idea just to have fun, only last for so long. Buying things gives you a little high , then you need to buy more. Your wife could leave you your kids could hate you. Things don't mean much then. Learning things is enjoyable , you can become an expert, in some field. Then you die. Some people are so worried about the death , they will freeze themselves, or invent an after life. Or try to leave a legacy, so they are not forgotten. If you kept busy enough not to think about things too much, you maybe can get through OK. But a lot don't. Where is a purpose in that?
    Everything about a human tells you there has to be more than just this.
    The purpose is to serve God, what that does, is tie you to every other person. If you all have same standards, the same God, then you would be able to trust everyone, in all aspects of life. That is the only way things could work. But there are many people that don't want to be part of that. So you see how that turns out. So when do the people that want that kind of life, get that chance? We have had mans rule for 6,000 years , nothing has really worked very well.
    So the real purpose of life comes from serving God, because he promises to clean this mess up. Scientists will never be able to do it. People vote for governments because they want change, so every 4 or so years they want someone else in power.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #111  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,812
    If I create a bowl using the potter's wheel and clay then the purpose of the bowl is to serve me as a container for popcorn, because that's about all I ever use a bowl for. I would create it out of necessity because otherwise I would be eating popcorn from wherever it lands once its popped. I would make the bowl because I don't have the wherewithal or means to gather all my popcorn together so I can eat it casually. I haven't got the power to just make casual popcorn eating happen. However if I were God then I wouldn't be needing to create a bowl to eat my popcorn the way I like to. It just happens. Then again why would I need popcorn?

    God makes life, and humans along with it, because he can or what? He doesn't need life or us or anything, does He? Whatever for? There can be no real purpose to life in God's estimation unless He needs it, except He's all everything. One then can only conclude that if life has a purpose then only God knows what it is. The only purpose God might have for life then is to do something He can't do or to use as a tool for something He can't do without. So what can we do that God can't? Whatever it is then that's our purpose.
    Last edited by zinjanthropos; October 5th, 2011 at 01:38 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #112  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos View Post
    If I create a bowl using the potter's wheel and clay then the purpose of the bowl is to serve me as a container for popcorn, because that's about all I ever use a bowl for. I would create it out of necessity because otherwise I would be eating popcorn from wherever it lands once its popped. I would make the bowl because I don't have the wherewithal or means to gather all my popcorn together so I can eat it casually. I haven't got the power to just make casual popcorn eating happen. However if I were God then I wouldn't be needing to create a bowl to eat my popcorn the way I like to. It just happens. Then again why would I need popcorn?

    God makes life, and humans along with it, because he can or what? He doesn't need life or us or anything, does He? Whatever for? There can be no real purpose to life in God's estimation unless He needs it, except He's all everything. One then can only conclude that if life has a purpose then only God knows what it is. The only purpose God might have for life then is to do something He can't do or to use as a tool for something He can't do without. So what can we do that God can't? Whatever it is then that's our purpose.
    This is a good question. The bible tells us alot about God, how he deals with things and from the creation what his qualities are.
    Now, God can create , why would he not use that ability? The bible tells us that man was created with the likeness of God. ( we can do things like he does)
    Now God can created life that can, converse with God have a relationship. Would not that be interesting? Much more than eating popcorn.
    Humans are not like a container. Used for a purpose then discarded. We can think and interact, we can create also, we understand many 'deep' things. Man is not a robot of God's, he made us with the same qualities he has. We also create children, many people find that interesting.
    Besides God's, purpose for man was to fill the earth and make it a paradise, and man would be in a perfect state.. That has not changed. This was to be accomplished, at the end of the rest day. Nothing has changed,just as God said it would , that's what the state man and the earth will be in.
    The purpose for man was to serve God, and if they did this will work out for them also. So it is our choice, do we want to serve God or not? Do you want to be part of that or not?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #113  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,812
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    The purpose for man was to serve God
    Is that what God can't do, serve himself? I'm thinking a God who is capable of anything doesn't really need me, you and the rest of the universe. To say otherwise would mean God has needs. What can He possibly need, what can He possibly learn, what emotion can He not understand? If my purpose is to serve a God who doesn't really need me one iota is nonsensical, it makes no sense to serve that which doesn't require serving..... it is purposeless.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #114  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    The purpose for man was to serve God
    Is that what God can't do, serve himself? I'm thinking a God who is capable of anything doesn't really need me, you and the rest of the universe. To say otherwise would mean God has needs. What can He possibly need, what can He possibly learn, what emotion can He not understand? If my purpose is to serve a God who doesn't really need me one iota is nonsensical, it makes no sense to serve that which doesn't require serving..... it is purposeless.
    It is more a want not a need.
    God wanted to create. He didn't have too. He wasn't going to be unhappy not too. But he wanted too.
    The other part is that he did not need man to worship him. ( otherwise he would just, make robot humans, with no choice) But it was a requirement of man. ( because that is the only way man, could live in perfection.) He wants all men to meet that requirement, but he doesn't need them to do it.
    Satan's actions with Eve was about loyalty. (God said they would die,if they ate. Satan said they wouldn't) Adam knew and had dealings directly with God ( he didn't need a mediator) Adam named many animals for God, and Adam knew what death was, he saw animals die. Adam knew about God but knew nothing about Satan. So Adam sided with his wife and Satan, rather than God. It was about loyalty.
    That is why the purpose of man is to serve God ( stay loyal to God). This isn't about Gods need ( he doesn't have one) it is about mans need.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #115  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,812
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    It is more a want not a need.
    God wanted to create. He didn't have too. He wasn't going to be unhappy not too. But he wanted too. It was about loyalty. That is why the purpose of man is to serve God ( stay loyal to God).

    This isn't about Gods need ( he doesn't have one) it is about mans need.
    Let me get this straight, serving God is our purpose even though God doesn't need it. Man is subject to becoming an unneeded but desired servant who displays a loyalty to God who doesn't need it but wants it.

    I'm realizing that there is no way you can describe man's purpose as serving God and make it sound sensible. Language barriers make no difference, it can't be done. It's at this juncture that the inane somehow seems to make sense . Incredible as it sounds, the more unbelievable God is, the more believable He becomes to a lot of people. Even I'm doing it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #116  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    It is more a want not a need.
    God wanted to create. He didn't have too. He wasn't going to be unhappy not too. But he wanted too. It was about loyalty. That is why the purpose of man is to serve God ( stay loyal to God).

    This isn't about Gods need ( he doesn't have one) it is about mans need.
    Let me get this straight, serving God is our purpose even though God doesn't need it. Man is subject to becoming an unneeded but desired servant who displays a loyalty to God who doesn't need it but wants it.

    I'm realizing that there is no way you can describe man's purpose as serving God and make it sound sensible. Language barriers make no difference, it can't be done. It's at this juncture that the inane somehow seems to make sense . Incredible as it sounds, the more unbelievable God is, the more believable He becomes to a lot of people. Even I'm doing it.
    This is easy to understand. Just unwind your spring.
    Man is wanted, by God. God is needed by man.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #117  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    God is needed by man.
    how do you know ?
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #118  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    God is needed by man.
    how do you know ?
    Revelation 4:11

    21st Century King James Version (KJ21)


    11"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power; for Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are, and were created."

    This tells us God wanted to, create man.




    Proverbs 9:10

    Amplified Bible (AMP)

    10The reverent and worshipful fear of the Lord is the beginning (the chief and choice part) of Wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight and understanding.

    This is why we need God.




    John 3:16

    Amplified Bible (AMP)

    16For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten ([a]unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life.

    To gain back the everlasting live God gave mankind , we have to be a follower of his Son Jesus.

    This also, is why we need God.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #119  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    and what if i disagree with the bible ?
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #120  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR View Post
    and what if i disagree with the bible ?
    Then your not supporting God. People have the free choice to choose.
    But there is a bigger picture here. What about all the people that have lived and died, and may of those never had the chance, to know the bible or God. What about them?
    The bible says, the wages of sin is death. What that means is when you die you have paid the price for sin. ( there is no roasting and toasting in hell like many religions say.) Because you have paid that price the sin is forgive you, and you will be resurrected, to the earth. ( The was the whole point of Jesus death)
    It is the one alive at the time of Armageddon ( time of the end), that will have to be on God's side , to survive. That is exactly, foreshadowed by Noah's time . You were either on the ark and help build it, or you were not.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #121  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,564
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR View Post
    and what if i disagree with the bible ?
    Then your not supporting God. People have the free choice to choose.
    But there is a bigger picture here. What about all the people that have lived and died, and may of those never had the chance, to know the bible or God. What about them?
    The bible says, the wages of sin is death. What that means is when you die you have paid the price for sin. ( there is no roasting and toasting in hell like many religions say.) Because you have paid that price the sin is forgive you, and you will be resurrected, to the earth. ( The was the whole point of Jesus death)
    It is the one alive at the time of Armageddon ( time of the end), that will have to be on God's side , to survive. That is exactly, foreshadowed by Noah's time . You were either on the ark and help build it, or you were not.
    Written history directly disproves the truth of the Noah story. Natural records also disprove the Noah story.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #122  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR View Post
    and what if i disagree with the bible ?
    Then your not supporting God. People have the free choice to choose.
    But there is a bigger picture here. What about all the people that have lived and died, and may of those never had the chance, to know the bible or God. What about them?
    The bible says, the wages of sin is death. What that means is when you die you have paid the price for sin. ( there is no roasting and toasting in hell like many religions say.) Because you have paid that price the sin is forgive you, and you will be resurrected, to the earth. ( The was the whole point of Jesus death)
    It is the one alive at the time of Armageddon ( time of the end), that will have to be on God's side , to survive. That is exactly, foreshadowed by Noah's time . You were either on the ark and help build it, or you were not.
    Written history directly disproves the truth of the Noah story. Natural records also disprove the Noah story.
    Actually there is plenty of evidence of a global flood.

    Here are some examples I've collected


    Some scienitsts teach that the surface of the earth has been shaped in many places by powerful glaciers during a series of ice ages. But some evidence of glacial activity can sometimes be the result of water action. Very likely, then, some of the evidence for the Flood is being misread as evidence of an ice age.

    Similar mistakes have been made. Concerning the time when scientists were developing their theory of ice ages, we read: “They were finding ice ages at every stage of the geologic history, in keeping with the philosophy of uniformity. Careful reexamination of the evidence in recent years, however, has rejected many of these ice ages; formations once identified as glacial moraines have been reinterpreted as beds laid down by mudflows, submarine landslides and turbidity currents: avalanches of turbid water that carry silt, sand and gravel out over the deep-ocean floor.”
    Scientific American, May 1960, p. 71.



    Another evidence for the Flood appears to exist in the fossil record. At one time, according to this record, great saber-toothed tigers stalked their prey in Europe, horses larger than any now living roamed North America, and mammoths foraged in Siberia. Then, all around the world, species of mammals became extinct. At the same time, there was a sudden change of climate. Tens of thousands of mammoths were killed and quick-frozen in Siberia. Alfred Wallace, the well-known contemporary of Charles Darwin, considered that such a widespread destruction must have been caused by some exceptional worldwide event. There were tropical plants and sea life on mountain tips found. Many have argued that this event was the Flood.

    Planet Earth—Ice Ages, by Windsor Chorlton, 1983, pp. 54, 55, 57.





    An editorial in the magazine Biblical Archaeologist observed: “It is important to remember that the story of a great flood is one of the most widespread traditions in human culture . . . Nevertheless behind the oldest traditions found in Near Eastern sources, there may well be an actual flood of gigantic proportions dating from one of the pluvial periods . . . many thousands of years ago.”
    Biblical Archaeologist, December 1977, p. 134.


    The pluvial periods were times when the surface of the earth was much wetter than now. Freshwater lakes around the world were much larger. It is theorized that the wetness was caused by heavy rains associated with the end of the ice ages. But some have suggested that on one occasion the extreme wetness of the earth’s surface was a result of the Flood.
    Geology professor John McCampbell wrote: “The essential differences between Biblical catastrophism [the Flood] and evolutionary uniformitarianism are not over the factual data of geology but over the interpretations of those data. The interpretation preferred will depend largely upon the background and presuppositions of the individual student.”
    The Genesis Flood, by John C. Whitcomb, Jr. and Henry M. Morris, 1967, p. xvii.


    Also that the Flood did happen is seen in the fact that mankind never forgot it. All around the world, in locations as far apart as Alaska and the South Sea Islands, there are ancient stories about it. Native, pre-Columbian civilizations of America, as well as Aborigines of Australia, all have stories about the Flood. While some of the accounts differ in detail, the basic fact that the earth was flooded and only a few humans were saved in a man-made vessel comes through in nearly all versions. The only explanation for such a widespread acceptance is that the Flood was a historical event.

    Thus, in essential features the Bible is in harmony with modern science. Where there is a conflict between the two, the scientists’ evidence is questionable. Where they agree, the Bible is often so accurate that we have to believe it got its information from a superhuman intelligence. Indeed, the Bible’s agreement with proved science provides further evidence that it is God’s word, not man’s.



    Other possible evidence of a drastic change: Remains of mammoths and rhinoceroses have been found in different parts of the earth. Some of these were found in Siberian cliffs; others were preserved in Siberian and Alaskan ice. In fact, some were found with food undigested in their stomachs or still unchewed in their teeth, indicating that they died suddenly. It is estimated, from the trade in ivory tusks, that bones of tens of thousands of such mammoths have been found. The fossil remains of many other animals, such as lions, tigers, bears, and elk, have been found in common strata, which may indicate that all of these were destroyed simultaneously. Some have pointed to such finds as definite physical proof of a rapid change in climate and sudden destruction caused by a universal flood.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #123  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,564
    So your evidence is to cherry pic nearly half century old publications and pop culture publications as your refutation of the entirety of modern geologic literature?
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #124  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,564
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Actually there is plenty of evidence of a global flood.

    Here are some examples I've collected


    Some scientists teach that the surface of the earth has been shaped in many places by powerful glaciers during a series of ice ages. But some evidence of glacial activity can sometimes be the result of water action. Very likely, then, some of the evidence for the Flood is being misread as evidence of an ice age.
    What are the similarities between the two processes, and why are is the flood possibility outweighing the glacial activity possibility.
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Similar mistakes have been made. Concerning the time when scientists were developing their theory of ice ages, we read: “They were finding ice ages at every stage of the geologic history, in keeping with the philosophy of uniformity. Careful reexamination of the evidence in recent years, however, has rejected many of these ice ages; formations once identified as glacial moraines have been reinterpreted as beds laid down by mudflows, submarine landslides and turbidity currents: avalanches of turbid water that carry silt, sand and gravel out over the deep-ocean floor.”
    Scientific American, May 1960, p. 71.
    This is a 50 year old popular science publication, do you have a current publication that makes this assertion?

    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Another evidence for the Flood appears to exist in the fossil record. At one time, according to this record, great saber-toothed tigers stalked their prey in Europe, horses larger than any now living roamed North America, and mammoths foraged in Siberia. Then, all around the world, species of mammals became extinct. At the same time, there was a sudden change of climate. Tens of thousands of mammoths were killed and quick-frozen in Siberia. Alfred Wallace, the well-known contemporary of Charles Darwin, considered that such a widespread destruction must have been caused by some exceptional worldwide event. There were tropical plants and sea life on mountain tips found. Many have argued that this event was the Flood.

    Planet Earth—Ice Ages, by Windsor Chorlton, 1983, pp. 54, 55, 57.
    Other then the assertions being made by Chorlton not being backed with specifics, the taphonomic evidence that the change in climate 10,000 years ago was due to an ice age is not mistakable as a flood. in Washington state the soil composition south of Olympia is consistent with land not covered at any point with a continental ice sheet while the are from Olympia north is. This could not be caused by a global flood.

    What a 150 year old contemporary of Darwin said is not applicable as the dataset we are working with has been greatly increased since then.


    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    An editorial in the magazine Biblical Archaeologist observed: “It is important to remember that the story of a great flood is one of the most widespread traditions in human culture . . . Nevertheless behind the oldest traditions found in Near Eastern sources, there may well be an actual flood of gigantic proportions dating from one of the pluvial periods . . . many thousands of years ago.”
    Biblical Archaeologist, December 1977, p. 134.
    Biased source, and the flood stories predate the bible, having roots in the story of Gilgamesh, and in many places are very close to being the exact same wording.


    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    The pluvial periods were times when the surface of the earth was much wetter than now. Freshwater lakes around the world were much larger. It is theorized that the wetness was caused by heavy rains associated with the end of the ice ages. But some have suggested that on one occasion the extreme wetness of the earth’s surface was a result of the Flood.
    Geology professor John McCampbell wrote: “The essential differences between Biblical catastrophism [the Flood] and evolutionary uniformitarianism are not over the factual data of geology but over the interpretations of those data. The interpretation preferred will depend largely upon the background and presuppositions of the individual student.”
    The Genesis Flood, by John C. Whitcomb, Jr. and Henry M. Morris, 1967, p. xvii.
    Again why is this considerd a reliable source? especially considering its nearly 50 year old now?


    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Also that the Flood did happen is seen in the fact that mankind never forgot it. All around the world, in locations as far apart as Alaska and the South Sea Islands, there are ancient stories about it. Native, pre-Columbian civilizations of America, as well as Aborigines of Australia, all have stories about the Flood. While some of the accounts differ in detail, the basic fact that the earth was flooded and only a few humans were saved in a man-made vessel comes through in nearly all versions. The only explanation for such a widespread acceptance is that the Flood was a historical event.
    Did you stop to consider that most tribal groups make their homes near water courses and thus are likely to at some point have experienced a severe flood of that watercourse, which will then be integrated into the oral history of the group? Why assume they all are talking of the same Natural law breaking superflood from your religion?

    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Thus, in essential features the Bible is in harmony with modern science. Where there is a conflict between the two, the scientists’ evidence is questionable. Where they agree, the Bible is often so accurate that we have to believe it got its information from a superhuman intelligence. Indeed, the Bible’s agreement with proved science provides further evidence that it is God’s word, not man’s.
    Thus the bible is in flagrant conflict with modern natural science if it is interpreted in the literalist perspective that was popularized in the 1890s.

    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Other possible evidence of a drastic change: Remains of mammoths and rhinoceroses have been found in different parts of the earth. Some of these were found in Siberian cliffs; others were preserved in Siberian and Alaskan ice. In fact, some were found with food undigested in their stomachs or still unchewed in their teeth, indicating that they died suddenly. It is estimated, from the trade in ivory tusks, that bones of tens of thousands of such mammoths have been found. The fossil remains of many other animals, such as lions, tigers, bears, and elk, have been found in common strata, which may indicate that all of these were destroyed simultaneously. Some have pointed to such finds as definite physical proof of a rapid change in climate and sudden destruction caused by a universal flood.
    If that was the case why have we not found bunnies in the Cambrian or trilobites and dinosaurs with the mammoths and giant sloths?
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #125  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Then your not supporting God.
    it might also indicate that, contrary to your assertions, i don't need god
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #126  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    So your evidence is to cherry pic nearly half century old publications and pop culture publications as your refutation of the entirety of modern geologic literature?
    The event happen thousands of years ago. the 1970's is pretty modern. If the scientists stay true to form, today's scientists will be over turned many times. Just think of the scientists today as the old outdated ones 30 years from now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #127  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Some scienitsts teach that the surface of the earth has been shaped in many places by powerful glaciers during a series of ice ages. But some evidence of glacial activity can sometimes be the result of water action. Very likely, then, some of the evidence for the Flood is being misread as evidence of an ice age.
    ok, let's talk specifics : how do you explain a U-shaped valley through the action of water, as postulated by you, versus that of glaciers, as observed in the here and now ?
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #128  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    [QUOTE=marnixR;286772]
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Then your not supporting God./QUOTE]

    it might also indicate that, contrary to your assertions, i don't need god
    Many people today say that. And look at the world. It is a world alienated from God.
    In fairness, when do the people that want to live in peace and under Gods rule get that chance? Because they are a minority to the rest of the world. And the world left to their own thinking will totally ruin everything include themselves.
    It's time to switch the leadership of the world. Man has proven he can't do it.

    John 14:30

    Amplified Bible (AMP)

    30I will not talk with you much more, for the prince (evil genius, ruler) of the world is coming. And he has no claim on Me. [He has nothing in common with Me; there is nothing in Me that belongs to him, and he has no power over Me.]


    This Jesus talking. He calls Satan the ruler of the world.

    Satan is going to ousted as ruler of the earth. It has to be.

    Ecclesiastes 8:9

    Darby Translation (DARBY)

    9All this have I seen, and applied my heart unto every work that is done under the sun: there is a time when man ruleth man to his hurt.

    Is this not true? Everyone wants to get rid of their ruler. it's been thousands of years and that is still true. This is a fulfillment of this scirpture.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #129  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Some scienitsts teach that the surface of the earth has been shaped in many places by powerful glaciers during a series of ice ages. But some evidence of glacial activity can sometimes be the result of water action. Very likely, then, some of the evidence for the Flood is being misread as evidence of an ice age.
    ok, let's talk specifics : how do you explain a U-shaped valley through the action of water, as postulated by you, versus that of glaciers, as observed in the here and now ?
    This was not postulated by me. It came from, Scientific American, May 1960, p. 71.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #130  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    This was not postulated by me. It came from, Scientific American, May 1960, p. 71.
    you're going to start losing all credibility if you're going to quote 50-year old popular science sources as evidence in favour of a flood
    besides, the wording is rather weak isn't it? "SOME evidence of glacial activity can SOMETIMES be the result of water action"

    so you're trying to use a bit of hand waving of potential confusion between water and ice action to push aside masses of evidence for glaciation ?
    especially since much of that evidence can still be seen at work nowadays - remember, we're still living in an ice age, just a slightly warmer interlude than most of the last 2 million years
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #131  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,812
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    God is needed by man.
    how do you know ?
    Revelation 4:11

    21st Century King James Version (KJ21)


    11"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power; for Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are, and were created."

    This tells us God wanted to, create man.




    Proverbs 9:10

    Amplified Bible (AMP)

    10The reverent and worshipful fear of the Lord is the beginning (the chief and choice part) of Wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight and understanding.

    This is why we need God.




    John 3:16

    Amplified Bible (AMP)

    16For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten ([a]unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life.

    To gain back the everlasting live God gave mankind , we have to be a follower of his Son Jesus.

    This also, is why we need God.
    Not one of those quotes is directly attributable to God. The quotes are not God's but someone else's. That's the trouble with being a theist, there's so much more you have to believe before you can start believing God is, who they say He is.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #132  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    16
    The only purpose of life and to live life is to know what you are and do what you want.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #133  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Brighton UK
    Posts
    114
    The purpose of life, apart from enjoy yourself, is to collectively build heaven on earth, which includes free energy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #134  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,812
    Quote Originally Posted by mentor View Post
    The only purpose of life and to live life is to know what you are and do what you want.
    Does being permanently disabled mean you've failed?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #135  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by marnixR View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    God is needed by man.
    how do you know ?
    Revelation 4:11

    21st Century King James Version (KJ21)


    11"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power; for Thou hast created all things, and for Thy pleasure they are, and were created."

    This tells us God wanted to, create man.




    Proverbs 9:10

    Amplified Bible (AMP)

    10The reverent and worshipful fear of the Lord is the beginning (the chief and choice part) of Wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight and understanding.

    This is why we need God.




    John 3:16

    Amplified Bible (AMP)

    16For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten ([a]unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life.

    To gain back the everlasting live God gave mankind , we have to be a follower of his Son Jesus.

    This also, is why we need God.
    Not one of those quotes is directly attributable to God. The quotes are not God's but someone else's. That's the trouble with being a theist, there's so much more you have to believe before you can start believing God is, who they say He is.
    Yes you have to to show the bible is correct many ways before accepting what it says as accurate. I have no problem with that.
    It is the same with anything that you put trust in. Even with scientists you check things out.

    2 Peter 1:20-21

    Amplified Bible (AMP)

    20[Yet] first [you must] understand this, that no prophecy of Scripture is [a matter] of any personal or private or special interpretation (loosening, solving).

    21For no prophecy ever originated because some man willed it [to do so--it never came by human impulse], but men spoke from God who were borne along (moved and impelled) by the Holy Spirit.


    So when these words were written by man they were inspired to say what they did. So the scriptures I quoted, were both talking about God.
    So God tells us why he created and what our purpose in life is.
    So those scriptures are directly attributable to God.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #136  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by mentor View Post
    The only purpose of life and to live life is to know what you are and do what you want.
    This what most people do and think. We see the result today.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #137  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Ball View Post
    The purpose of life, apart from enjoy yourself, is to collectively build heaven on earth, which includes free energy.
    In heaven the rulership is Gods. On earth it is Satan's. That why the earth earth and mankind) is the way it is now and for 6,000 years.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #138  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,812
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    So when these words were written by man they were inspired to say what they did. So the scriptures I quoted, were both talking about God.
    So God tells us why he created and what our purpose in life is.
    So those scriptures are directly attributable to God.
    So a bat is a bird and at night the Sun races around to the other side of the Earth? Interesting. Next you'll be telling me to bash babies' heads in and then how to make cakes from cow shit.

    Actually I really think you don't believe a word of what you're saying. Besides you're interpreting, something you just said isn't worth the effort.

    Yes you have to to show the bible is correct many ways before accepting what it says as accurate
    Many ways is unacceptable, even you know that. It's the Bible, no errors or omissions at all. Basically, you've just said that there are some scriptural errors and they're attributable to God.

    Perhaps the purpose of life is not to waste it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #139  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Brighton UK
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Ball View Post
    The purpose of life, apart from enjoy yourself, is to collectively build heaven on earth, which includes free energy.
    In heaven the rulership is Gods. On earth it is Satan's. That why the earth earth and mankind) is the way it is now and for 6,000 years.
    Wow! … No such thing as a satan or a devil, you are living in a developing heaven. Your satans are a figment of Man’s imagination when he doesn’t understand the crap. The crucifix means sacrifices have to be made to get us to where we are going
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #140  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,564
    What book are you reading from??
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #141  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    So when these words were written by man they were inspired to say what they did. So the scriptures I quoted, were both talking about God.
    So God tells us why he created and what our purpose in life is.
    So those scriptures are directly attributable to God.
    So a bat is a bird and at night the Sun races around to the other side of the Earth? Interesting. Next you'll be telling me to bash babies' heads in and then how to make cakes from cow shit.

    Actually I really think you don't believe a word of what you're saying. Besides you're interpreting, something you just said isn't worth the effort.

    Yes you have to to show the bible is correct many ways before accepting what it says as accurate
    Many ways is unacceptable, even you know that. It's the Bible, no errors or omissions at all. Basically, you've just said that there are some scriptural errors and they're attributable to God.

    Perhaps the purpose of life is not to waste it.
    The correct translation of these scripture about things that fly. Check out the foot note. It is talking about things that fly. That is a better translating of the words used.
    The bible call the bat a bird.

    Leviticus 11:13-20 (English Standard Version)

    Page Options

    Add parallel


    Show resources

    Leviticus 11:13-20

    English Standard Version (ESV)

    13"And these you shall detest among the birds;[a] they shall not be eaten; they are detestable: the eagle,[b] the bearded vulture, the black vulture, 14the kite, the falcon of any kind, 15every raven of any kind, 16the ostrich, the nighthawk, the sea gull, the hawk of any kind, 17the little owl, the cormorant, the short-eared owl, 18the barn owl, the tawny owl, the carrion vulture, 19the stork, the heron of any kind, the hoopoe, and the bat.
    20"All winged insects that go on all fours are detestable to you.
    Footnotes:
    1. Leviticus 11:13 Or things that fly; compare Genesis 1:20
    2. Leviticus 11:13 The identity of many of these birds is uncertain


    Genesis 1:20

    English Standard Version (ESV)

    20And God said, "Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds[a] fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens."

    Footnotes:
    1. Genesis 1:20 Or flying things; see Leviticus 11:19-20








    I wouldn't say science is a worthless effort. Even though the scientists can't seem to get their facts correct. The bible is much more accurate and reliable than the scientists have ever been. The facts about the bat here,are an example of that.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #142  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    zinjanthropos wrote
    Perhaps the purpose of life is not to waste it.
    Everyone should not waste their lives.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #143  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Ball View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Ball View Post
    The purpose of life, apart from enjoy yourself, is to collectively build heaven on earth, which includes free energy.
    In heaven the rulership is Gods. On earth it is Satan's. That why the earth earth and mankind) is the way it is now and for 6,000 years.
    Wow! … No such thing as a satan or a devil, you are living in a developing heaven. Your satans are a figment of Man’s imagination when he doesn’t understand the crap. The crucifix means sacrifices have to be made to get us to where we are going
    I think I said this before but the cross is a a pagan symbol.
    It came from Roman pagan worship.( Gauls)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #144  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Brighton UK
    Posts
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    What book are you reading from??
    Try Amazon Books ... Reverse Theory
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #145  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Brighton UK
    Posts
    114
    I wouldn't say science is a worthless effort. Even though the scientists can't seem to get their facts correct. The bible is much more accurate and reliable than the scientists have ever been. The facts about the bat here,are an example of that.
    You are right but only because science is so so so wrong … timewise
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #146  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Christopher Ball View Post
    I wouldn't say science is a worthless effort. Even though the scientists can't seem to get their facts correct. The bible is much more accurate and reliable than the scientists have ever been. The facts about the bat here,are an example of that.
    You are right but only because science is so so so wrong … timewise
    If you will notice I said the scientists. Science is always correct, it is fact. It's the scientists, you have to watch out for.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #147  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,564
    Please source the assertion that pagans worshiped a very painful torture devise.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #148  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    3,812
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    I wouldn't say science is a worthless effort. Even though the scientists can't seem to get their facts correct. The bible is much more accurate and reliable than the scientists have ever been. The facts about the bat here,are an example of that.
    I'm convinced more than ever now that you don't believe a word of what you're spouting on about. You might get CB to bite but not this kid. I'm not even sure if he is biting, maybe he's dangling a carrot for you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #149  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,760
    Quote Originally Posted by epignosis View Post
    I wouldn't say science is a worthless effort. Even though the scientists can't seem to get their facts correct. The bible is much more accurate and reliable than the scientists have ever been. The facts about the bat here,are an example of that.
    sounds a bit like double standards to me : if scientists are so useless, how come they have built up something that happens to be useful
    or are you cherry-picking the bits that YOU find useful

    as for the bible being more accurate and reliable than scientists, if ever i happen to have a serious illness, i'll trust modern scientific medicine over the bible, thank you very much
    then again, if your standard of accuracy is a match with the bible, then obviously the bible would have the closest match
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #150  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    Please source the assertion that pagans worshiped a very painful torture devise.

    In the book The Non-Christian Cross, by John Denham Parsons, states: “There is not a single sentence in any of the numerous writings forming the New Testament, which, in the original Greek, bears even indirect evidence to the effect that the stauros used in the case of Jesus was other than an ordinary stauros; much less to the effect that it consisted, not of one piece of timber, but of two pieces nailed together in the form of a cross. . . . it is not a little misleading upon the part of our teachers to translate the word stauros as ‘cross’ when rendering the Greek documents of the Church into our native tongue, and to support that action by putting ‘cross’ in our lexicons as the meaning of stauros without carefully explaining that that was at any rate not the primary meaning of the word in the days of the Apostles, did not become its primary signification till long afterwards, and became so then, if at all, only because, despite the absence of corroborative evidence, it was for some reason or other assumed that the particular stauros upon which Jesus was executed had that particular shape.”—London, 1896, pp. 23, 24.
    When he says long after word, he is talking about Constantine in about 300 CE.


    Stau‧ros′ in both the classical Greek and Koine carries no thought of a “cross” made of two timbers. It means only an upright stake, pale, pile, or pole, as might be used for a fence, stockade, or palisade. Says Douglas’ New Bible Dictionary of 1985 under “Cross,” page 253: “The Gk. word for ‘cross’ (stauros; verb stauroo . . . ) means primarily an upright stake or beam, and secondarily a stake used as an instrument for punishment and execution.”
    The fact that Luke, Peter, and Paul also used xy′lon as a synonym for stau‧ros′ gives added evidence that Jesus was impaled on an upright stake without a crossbeam, for that is what xy′lon in this special sense means. (Ac 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Ga 3:13; 1Pe 2:24) Xy′lon also occurs in the Greek Septuagint at Ezra 6:11, where it speaks of a single beam or timber on which a lawbreaker was to be impaled.

    Acts 5:30

    Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

    30The God of our fathers hath raised up Jesus, whom you put to death, hanging him upon a tree.

    Acts 5:30

    English Standard Version (ESV)

    30 The God of our fathers raised Jesus, whom you killed by hanging him on a tree.


    Acts 10:39

    English Standard Version (ESV)

    39And we are witnesses of all that he did both in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They put him to death by hanging him on a tree,


    Galatians 3:13

    English Standard Version (ESV)

    13Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree"—





    Over the years because of Christendom the meaning of the word stauros, was translated as a cross. But that is not correct. It was a tree or a pole.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #151  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,564
    That is NOT what I asked you to source!

    You specifically claimed that cross worship originated within pagan rituals.

    source the claim.

    edit:
    Also you may want to do a little more research on what you just posted, as it is incorrect too!

    "In Koine Greek, the form of Greek used between about 300 BC and AD 300, the word σταυρός was already used to refer to a cross. It was used[4] to refer to the instrument of execution by crucifixion, which at that time involved binding the victim with outstretched arms to a crossbeam, or nailing him firmly to it through the wrists; the crossbeam was then raised against an upright shaft and made fast to it about 3 metres from the ground, and the feet were tightly bound or nailed to the upright shaft.[5]The Liddell and Scott Lexicon reports that in the writings of the 1st-century BC. Diodorus Siculus and in later writers, such as Plutarch and Lucian, the word stauros refers to a cross.[1]
    In A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to The English and Greek New Testament (1877), E.W. Bullinger, in contrast to other authorities, stated: "The "σταυρός" (stauros) was simply an upright pale or stake to which Romans nailed those who were thus said to be crucified, σταυρόω, merely means to drive stakes. It never means two pieces of wood joining at any angle. Even the Latin word crux means a mere stake. The initial letter Χ, (chi) of Χριστός, (Christ) was anciently used for His name, until it was displayed by the T, the initial letter of the Pagan God Tammuz, about the end of cent. iv."[6] Bullinger's 1877 statement, written well before the discovery of thousands of manuscripts in Koine Greek at Oxyrhyncus in Egypt revolutionised understanding of the language of the New Testament, conflicts with the documented fact that, long before the end of the 4th century, the Epistle of Barnabas, which was certainly earlier than 135,[7] and may have been of the 1st century AD.,[8] the time when the gospel accounts of the death of Jesus were written, likened the σταυρός to the letter T (the Greek letter tau, which had the numeric value of 300),[9] and to the position assumed byMoses in Exodus 17:11-12.[10] The shape of the σταυρός is likened to that of the letter T also in the final words of Trial in the Court of Vowels among the works of 2nd-century Lucian, and other 2nd-century witnesses to the fact that at that time the σταυρός was envisaged as being cross-shaped and not in the form of a simple pole are given in Dispute about Jesus' execution method."
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #152  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    That is NOT what I asked you to source!

    You specifically claimed that cross worship originated within pagan rituals.

    source the claim.

    edit:
    Also you may want to do a little more research on what you just posted, as it is incorrect too!

    "In Koine Greek, the form of Greek used between about 300 BC and AD 300, the word σταυρός was already used to refer to a cross. It was used[4] to refer to the instrument of execution by crucifixion, which at that time involved binding the victim with outstretched arms to a crossbeam, or nailing him firmly to it through the wrists; the crossbeam was then raised against an upright shaft and made fast to it about 3 metres from the ground, and the feet were tightly bound or nailed to the upright shaft.[5]The Liddell and Scott Lexicon reports that in the writings of the 1st-century BC. Diodorus Siculus and in later writers, such as Plutarch and Lucian, the word stauros refers to a cross.[1]
    In A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to The English and Greek New Testament (1877), E.W. Bullinger, in contrast to other authorities, stated: "The "σταυρός" (stauros) was simply an upright pale or stake to which Romans nailed those who were thus said to be crucified, σταυρόω, merely means to drive stakes. It never means two pieces of wood joining at any angle. Even the Latin word crux means a mere stake. The initial letter Χ, (chi) of Χριστός, (Christ) was anciently used for His name, until it was displayed by the T, the initial letter of the Pagan God Tammuz, about the end of cent. iv."[6] Bullinger's 1877 statement, written well before the discovery of thousands of manuscripts in Koine Greek at Oxyrhyncus in Egypt revolutionised understanding of the language of the New Testament, conflicts with the documented fact that, long before the end of the 4th century, the Epistle of Barnabas, which was certainly earlier than 135,[7] and may have been of the 1st century AD.,[8] the time when the gospel accounts of the death of Jesus were written, likened the σταυρός to the letter T (the Greek letter tau, which had the numeric value of 300),[9] and to the position assumed byMoses in Exodus 17:11-12.[10] The shape of the σταυρός is likened to that of the letter T also in the final words of Trial in the Court of Vowels among the works of 2nd-century Lucian, and other 2nd-century witnesses to the fact that at that time the σταυρός was envisaged as being cross-shaped and not in the form of a simple pole are given in Dispute about Jesus' execution method."
    Yes OK.

    W. E. Vine, respected British scholar, offers these hard facts: “By the middle of the 3rd cent. A.D. . . . pagans were received into the churches . . . and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, . . . with the cross-piece lowered, was adopted.”—Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words. Vine further notes that both the noun “cross” and the verb “crucify” refer to “a stake or pale . . . distinguished from the ecclesiastical form of a two beamed cross.” In agreement with this, Oxford University’s Companion Bible says: “The evidence is . . . that the Lord was put to death upon an upright stake, and not on two pieces of timber placed at any angle.Clearly, the churches have adopted a tradition that is not Biblical.

    In 312 C.E., Constantine defeated his opponent Maxentius in the battle of the Milvian Bridge outside Rome. Christian apologists claimed that during that campaign, there appeared under the sun a flaming cross bearing the Latin words In hoc signo vinces, meaning “In this sign conquer.” It is also held that in a dream, Constantine was told to paint the first two letters of Christ’s name in Greek on the shields of his troops. However, this story suffers from many anachronisms. The book A History of Christianity states: “There is a conflict of evidence about the exact time, place and details of this vision.” Welcoming Constantine in Rome, a pagan Senate declared him chief Augustus and Pontifex Maximus, that is, high priest of the pagan religion of the empire.


    As the pagan Pontifex Maximus—and therefore the religious head of the Roman Empire—Constantine tried to win over the bishops of the apostate church. He offered them positions of power, prominence, and wealth as officers of the Roman State religion. The Catholic Encyclopedia admits: “Some bishops, blinded by the splendour of the court, even went so far as to laud the emperor as an angel of God, as a sacred being, and to prophesy that he would, like the Son of God, reign in heaven.”
    As apostate Christianity came into favor with the political government, it became more and more a part of this world, of this secular system, and drifted away from the teachings of Jesus Christ. (John 15:19; 17:14, 16; Revelation 17:1, 2) As a result, there was a fusion of “Christianity” with false doctrines and practices—the Trinity, immortality of the soul, hellfire, purgatory, prayers for the dead, use of rosaries, icons, images, and the like.

    The Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Constantine himself commissioned the construction of three enormous Christian basilicas in Rome: St. Peter’s, S. Paolo Fuori le Mura, and S. Giovanni in Laterano. He . . . created the cross-shaped plan that became standard for churches in western Europe throughout the Middle Ages.”

    Buildings like this were never needed by Christianity.

    Sun Worship
    The real secret of Constantine and the bishops of Rome is their cunning introduction of sun worship and paganism into Christianity. It was done so shrewdly that, incredibly, it has been veiled within the faith for centuries. Through Constantine, paganism and Christianity joined hands in the Roman Empire.
    History readily records that Constantine was a sun-worshiper. In one decree he declared, "On the venerable Day of the Sun let the magistrates and people residing in cities rest, and let all workshops be closed" (March 7, 321). He made this decree in honor of the sun after his supposed conversion to Christianity! Constantine, even after his "conversion," remained a pagan.

    Constantine sought to unite his kingdom’s pagan and Christian worshipers, in order to promote stability and ensure that his empire lasted. The easiest way to bring harmony would be to blend sun worship and Christianity. History shows that the Church of Rome did not object; indeed, it had been engaging in the practice for nearly two centuries!

    The bishops at Rome also claimed Peter as the head of the church, instead of Christ (Ephesians 4:15). Developing a non-biblical doctrine of "apostolic succession," they claimed that the authority conferred on Peter was transferred to themselves. The "Saint Peter" that was created was actually a combination of pagan idolatry and Christian veneration. Even today, the statue in St. Peter’s Cathedral in Rome includes a solar disk above his head. Tradition has it that this was actually a statue of Jupiter taken from a pagan temple and simply renamed "St. Peter"! Sun worship, which appears in nearly every pagan religion in the world, soon appeared in Christian art, imagery, and theology. The halo often seen on Christ and Mary is actually a symbol of sun worship. Madonna ("Mary") was depicted holding sun disks.


    Constantine, cover-up, and sun worship



    In 312 CE Constantine was about to lead his army in a battle that would change the world. The soldiers of his enemy Maxentius faced him at the Milvian Bridge outside Rome. The winner would become the Roman Emperor. Constantine was a pagan who worshipped the sun, and he was worried about the coming battle. He says he started to pray to the "Supreme God" for help.

    RE:Quest: The Early Church - The Roman Emperor Constantine

    You will see on this page the cross on the coin.



    Many of the main teachings and icons from Christendom are pagan in origin.
    It is from this time on that the meaning of 'stuaros' changed and became the meaning of a cross.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #153  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,564
    So there is no evidence that pagans worshiped the cross, rather there is ambiguity over the adoption of the cross into christian practices. Again you seem to be quote mining to support your assertion.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #154  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope Paleoichneum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Washington State, USA
    Posts
    4,564
    and Stauros changed prior to 300 bc not after.
    If more of us valued food and cheer and song above hoarded gold, it would be a merrier world. -Thorin Oakenshield

    The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #155  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    153
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleoichneum View Post
    and Stauros changed prior to 300 bc not after.
    Yes it was used as a symbol in pagan religions, before Jesus. The cross is a pagan symbol. Constantine used it with Christianity to bring all of his empire together. The Christian churche went along with it, and it became a tradition, in Christianity.



    Significant is this comment in the book The Cross in Ritual, Architecture, and Art: “It is strange, yet unquestionably a fact, that in ages long before the birth of Christ, and since then in lands untouched by the teaching of the Church, the Cross has been used as a sacred symbol. . . . The Greek Bacchus, the Tyrian Tammuz, the Chaldean Bel, and the Norse Odin, were all symbolised to their votaries by a cruciform device.”—By G. S. Tyack, London, 1900, p. 1.

    Long before the Christian era, crosses were used by the ancient Babylonians as symbols in their worship of the fertility god Tammuz. The use of the cross spread into Egypt, India, Syria, and China. Then, centuries later, the Israelites adulterated their worship of God with acts of veneration to the false god Tammuz. The Bible refers to this form of worship as a ‘detestable thing.’—Ezekiel 8:13, 14.


    Homeric and classical Greek

    The Greek-English Lexicon of Liddell and Scott, the major reference work on the Greek language from Homeric to early Christian times, reports that the meaning of the word "σταυρός" (stauros) in the early Homeric form of Greek, possibly of the 8th to 6th century BC, and also in the writings of the 5th-century BC. writers Herodotus and Thucydides and the early-4th century BC. Xenophon, is that of an upright stake or pole.[1]

    In this original meaning, "the Greek word for cross, [stau·ros′], properly signified a stake, an upright pole, or piece of paling, on which anything might be hung, or which might be used in impaling [fencing in] a piece of ground."[2] As stated in "The Cross and the Crucifixion" appendix, The Companion Bible (1922), in Liddell and Scott, and in many other works of reference, Homer (about one thousand years before the time when the gospels were written) used the word stauros of an ordinary pole or stake, or a single piece of timber; and this was the meaning and usage of the word throughout the Greek classics (four or five centuries before the time of the gospels). In the literature of that time it never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle, but always one piece alone.[3]

    Stauros - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    Koine Greek

    In Koine Greek, the form of Greek used between about 300 BC and AD 300, the word σταυρός was already used to refer to a cross. It was used[4] to refer to the instrument of execution by crucifixion, which at that time involved binding the victim with outstretched arms to a crossbeam, or nailing him firmly to it through the wrists; the crossbeam was then raised against an upright shaft and made fast to it about 3 metres from the ground, and the feet were tightly bound or nailed to the upright shaft.[5]

    The Liddell and Scott Lexicon reports that in the writings of the 1st-century BC. Diodorus Siculus and in later writers, such as Plutarch and Lucian, the word stauros refers to a cross.[1]
    In A Critical Lexicon and Concordance to The English and Greek New Testament (1877), E.W. Bullinger, in contrast to other authorities, stated: "The "σταυρός" (stauros) was simply an upright pale or stake to which Romans nailed those who were thus said to be crucified, σταυρόω, merely means to drive stakes. It never means two pieces of wood joining at any angle. Even the Latin word crux means a mere stake. The initial letter Χ, (chi) of Χριστός, (Christ) was anciently used for His name, until it was displayed by the T, the initial letter of the Pagan God Tammuz, about the end of cent. iv."[6] Bullinger's 1877 statement, written well before the discovery of thousands of manuscripts in Koine Greek at Oxyrhyncus in Egypt revolutionised understanding of the language of the New Testament, conflicts with the documented fact that, long before the end of the 4th century, the Epistle of Barnabas, which was certainly earlier than 135,[7] and may have been of the 1st century AD.,[8] the time when the gospel accounts of the death of Jesus were written, likened the σταυρός to the letter T (the Greek letter tau, which had the numeric value of 300),[9] and to the position assumed by Moses in Exodus 17:11-12.[10] The shape of the σταυρός is likened to that of the letter T also in the final words of Trial in the Court of Vowels among the works of 2nd-century Lucian, and other 2nd-century witnesses to the fact that at that time the σταυρός was envisaged as being cross-shaped and not in the form of a simple pole are given in Dispute about Jesus' execution method.

    But at the time of Constantine, was when it was instituted by the Christians.

    The fact that Luke, Peter, and Paul also used xy′lon as a synonym for stau‧ros′ gives added evidence that Jesus was impaled on an upright stake without a crossbeam, for that is what xy′lon in this special sense means. (Ac 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Ga 3:13; 1Pe 2:24) Xy′lon also occurs in the Greek Septuagint at Ezra 6:11, where it speaks of a single beam or timber on which a lawbreaker was to be impaled.

    Stauros - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The cross is a pagan religious symbol. Brought in at the time of Constantine, when it was instituted by the Christians.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •