The concept of Christ

I think the question of there being one God, one Saviour, and a Holy Spirit to reveal the truth, to be totally plausable.
Can you imagine the chaos if a group of chess players created the Earth and tried to reconcile all mankind?....
Then again,...there's always the ape theory,...this is preposterous,..even though I do like the odd banana,.................😵

From my experience, anything is possible on this world.

Originally posted by nonononono
I think the question of there being one God, one Saviour, and a Holy Spirit to reveal the truth, to be totally plausable.
Can you imagine the chaos if a group of chess players created the Earth and tried to reconcile all mankind?....
Then again,...there's always the ape theory,...this is preposterous,..even though I do like the odd banana,.................😵

Could you explain the 'ape theory'? Not sure I am familiar with that.

Originally posted by LemonJello
Could you explain the 'ape theory'? Not sure I am familiar with that.

you know very well what he is referring to, the preposterous idea that species mutate into other species, what else?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
you know very well what he is referring to, the preposterous idea that species mutate into other species, what else?

Yep. We've put a man on the moon, we can now play chess with people around the world using the internet, we've sent space craft to the edge of our solar system, life expectantcy has risen due to human advances in medical science, the X-43A flew at 7000mph, planes fly all round the world everyday.

But that evolution thing you got it wrong, that doesn't fit in with the srciputres that were written 2000yrs ago. So it can't be correct.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Yep. We've put a man on the moon, we can now play chess with people around the world using the internet, we've sent space craft to the edge of our solar system, life expectantcy has risen due to human advances in medical science, the X-43A flew at 7000mph, planes fly all round the world everyday.

But that evolution thing you got it wrong, that doesn't fit in with the srciputres that were written 2000yrs ago. So it can't be correct.

shall we mention the negative aspects of this 'advancement', depletion of forestation, hole in the ozone, greatest ocean temperatures since records began, melting ice caps, unprecedented flooding, over exploitation of fishing stocks, general inability to manage earths resources, economic monsters waiting to devour us, my goodness man wake up and smell da coffee!

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
shall we mention the negative aspects of this 'advancement', depletion of forestation, hole in the ozone, greatest ocean temperatures since records began, melting ice caps, unprecedented flooding, over exploitation of fishing stocks, general inability to manage earths resources, economic monsters waiting to devour us, my goodness man wake up and smell da coffee!

We can mention mans mention negative advancements, but that's not the point.

You like to play chess on the internet, you probably drive a car, take a holiday by plane, watch tv, plug in appliances using electricity. All of which are possible through advancements in science. But that evolution thing, hmmmmmmmm, that doesn't tie in with what you believe so you better just call that one prepostorous and sweep it under the carpet. At least the Amish have the balls to reject all of it.

Wake up and smell the custard man!!!

Originally posted by Proper Knob
We can mention mans mention negative advancements, but that's not the point.

You like to play chess on the internet, you probably drive a car, take a holiday by plane, watch tv, plug in appliances using electricity. All of which are possible through advancements in science. But that evolution thing, hmmmmmmmm, that doesn't tie in with what you believ ...[text shortened]... At least the Amish have the balls to reject all of it.

Wake up and smell the custard man!!!

Lol, how many times must i repeat this thang! It is simply unscientific because it cannot be subject to the scientific model, my goodness, they almost had a hardon down there in the science forum when some self replicating RNA started to show some signs of adapting to its environment, big deal,! no one is saying that there is not variety within a species, but there is no evidence of one species ever mutating and becoming another, no siree, not in science, not in the fossil record, nowhere, thus its is not a matter of religion, sweeping it under the carpet, it is a matter of postulation and dogma masquerading as science! and we are not buying it!

Originally posted by Proper Knob
Yep. We've put a man on the moon, we can now play chess with people around the world using the internet, we've sent space craft to the edge of our solar system, life expectantcy has risen due to human advances in medical science, the X-43A flew at 7000mph, planes fly all round the world everyday.

But that evolution thing you got it wrong, that doesn't fit in with the srciputres that were written 2000yrs ago. So it can't be correct.

==============================
Yep. We've put a man on the moon,
===============================

That was quite an impressive feat for mankind. It really shows that power of the human mind. Incredible.

However, I am also impressed that God's creation is so precise that the mathematics of placing a man on the moon works. The timing of the orbits and rotations of these objects had to be relied upon in order for the math to work out.

So the beautiful precision of God's creation also impresses me about the moon landing.

=============================
we can now play chess with people around the world using the internet, we've sent space craft to the edge of our solar system, life expectantcy has risen due to human advances in medical science, the X-43A flew at 7000mph, planes fly all round the world everyday.
======================================

These things are also very impressive. But how can I possibly assume that the source of such a human mind is not greater?

You cannot give what you do not have to give.

"He who planted the ear, does He not hear? He who formed the eye, does He not see?" (Psalm 94:9)

I think man's intelligent technology testifies to the intelligence that is there designed in nature. Man is utilizing intelligently those intelligent laws by which the univere runs.

"The hearing ear and the seeing eye, Jehovah has made them both." (Prov. 20:12)

================================
But that evolution thing you got it wrong, that doesn't fit in with the srciputres that were written 2000yrs ago. So it can't be correct.
=======================================

There may have been some evolutionary thing going on. I think science should look more into cataclysmic events which suddenly altered life forms.

The Darwinian gradualism I find less credible. Along with mass extinctions perhaps there were also sudden mass alterations. I would like to see some evolutionists really explore that possibility.

Now complaining about the age of the Scripture, ie. Genesis, I find is a kind of "Damned if you do, Damned if you don't proposition".

If the Scripture was written only a few decades ago skeptics would complain that it doesn't have the wisdom of many centries to give it credence. It is too modern and fadish.

On the other hand if it was written long ago they make the oppoosite complaint that it is too old.

So my response to this complaint is like "We played the flute to you, and you did not dance; and we have sung a dirge, and you did not weep." (Luke 7:32)

God did very well to communicate to the largest number of people in all cultures that the world was created by Himself - exhaustive scientific details not provided.

I mean everybody should be able to understand that " In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. "

It was not the divine intention apparently to give us 66 volumes on the actual nature of a drop of water, though it probably would take as much to exhaustively discribe it.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Lol, how many times must i repeat this thang! It is simply unscientific because it cannot be subject to the scientific model, my goodness, they almost had a hardon down there in the science forum when some self replicating RNA started to show some signs of adapting to its environment, big deal,! no one is saying that there is not variety within a s ...[text shortened]... pet, it is a matter of postulation and dogma masquerading as science! and we are not buying it!

If there is no evidence of evolution. WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE OF GOD!!

Originally posted by Proper Knob
If there is no evidence of evolution. WHERE'S THE EVIDENCE OF GOD!!

what is this ?, Jaywill has played the flute and now you want to dance?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
what is this ?, Jaywill has played the flute and now you want to dance?

What the hell are you talking about?

Originally posted by Proper Knob
What the hell are you talking about?

oh now you are professing belief in Hell, why the conversion, what happened, were you traveling on the road to Damascus and suddenly a bright light appeared?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
oh now you are professing belief in Hell, why the conversion, what happened, were you traveling on the road to Damascus and suddenly a bright light appeared?

Nope. I can't use the four letter word i wished to, hell was the best replacement.

Originally posted by nonononono
I think the question of there being one God, one Saviour, and a Holy Spirit to reveal the truth, to be totally plausable.
Can you imagine the chaos if a group of chess players created the Earth and tried to reconcile all mankind?....
Then again,...there's always the ape theory,...this is preposterous,..even though I do like the odd banana,.................😵

The concept of the story of christ is irrational. It is mythology, inconsistent with all that can be reasonably anticipated to be possible in the world we live in.

The human body cannot be revived after more than a few minutes without irreparable brain damage. No oxygen, no brain function -- it is that simple.

The concept, therefore, must rely on a supernatural cause -- that is, something that transcends nature and reality, suspending the normal way in which matter, energy, and living beings actually work.

That concept, therefore, is without factual foundation and must be an a prior assumption to be at all accepted.

to accept the story of the christ, including his allegedly divine nature, his alleged revival from the dead, etc., is to accept the supernatural and is fundamentally irrational.

some things really are impossible.

the return of Jesus from the dead 3 days after he died never happened

myth -- a story -- nothing more