[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]Maiden3.16 wrote:
Christians, Muslims etc will NEVER believe their theory of creation to be false no matter what evidence there is against it.
[/quote]
Because there has never been any indisputable proof against it. You have any?
[/quote]
Gods born of a virgin:
Augustus
Adonis
Korbyas
Osiris
Tammuz
Krishna
Perseus
Zoroaster
Dionysus
Mithras
Buddha
Jesus
Jesus happens to be the most recent of the gods born of a virgin. Now this may not be indisputable evidence to you, but the fact is that the story of Jesus shares many similarities with other gods that predate him. So it would stand to reason that Jesus is a myth heavily influence by the myths of the past. Any evidence against this?
[/quote]
My question had nothing to do with Jesus being born of a virgin, but since you bring it up. this proof does not mean that Jesus was not born of a virgin. Just means that other claim to have been born of a virgin also. Too many prophecies of the Messiah were found completed in Jesus. Were they made up is hard to tell, but millions of people have died for this Man. People do not just willingly die for a lie. Of the 12 disciples, 10 were martyred for their faith, one hung himself because he betrayed the Messiah, and the other took care of Jesus’ Mother. Others say it was all about money and power. The disciples were poor just read the book of Acts. Everything they had was given to them. In fact Paul was a tent maker for the Roman Empire. That is how he got his citizenship as a Roman.
My question had to do with evidence or proof that creation is wrong. I wanted to know what your proof that creation did not happen the way the Bible said it happen. I personally do not buy into the notion that the 7 days are 24 hour periods. Push and I differ on this. Could it be that way yes. This is not the point of this discussion though.
I have seen the scientific theories about how the world came into existence, and I see it jiving with the Creation story in the Bible. In this scientific theory there are so many possible outcomes and everything lining up perfectly that without God we would not be here. If the earth had been a couple hundred miles closer or farther from the sun (no liquid water), if the earth had not collected enough mass (magnetic field without it we would have ended up like Mars), if the moon was larger or smaller (our orbit and the tilt of our earth for seasons and tides), if Jupiter’s gravity was not so powerful to pull in asteroids and comets (we would have more and more collisions), and on, and on, and on. This is the reason for the watch factory story. It was not by chance, but by a divine hand we are here.
[/quote]
The main difference I see between the scientific theories of our existence and the religious belief in a creator is that the former comes to their belief through observation and reason and the latter comes to their belief through blind faith in the ancient texts passed down to them by their parents (in most cases.) I wouldn’t say creationism is wrong, just that is unproven. No more proven than evolution. To go around saying people will suffer in hell for eternity because they don’t believe in a certain theory of creation is asinine IMO. Could there be a creator? I certainly am not ruling it out. Is the creator the one described in the Bible, Quran, Torah, etc.? About as probable as Jedi’s using the force in a galaxy far far away.[/quote]
At least you are not ruling it out. Just so you know the Torah and the Old Testament in the Bible are the same, unless you are using a Catholic Bible and they have 7 extra books that are added. To all the Catholics yes I know the argument you guys have about the Apocrypha.
About the Jedi’s that is fantasy and the George Lucas even says that. Now the Bible the people in it sure do seem more historical than many of the myths that people like to compare to the Bible. People that have PhDs in literature have read the Bible and state the Bible does not read like a myth, but as a historical text.
[/quote]
The religious texts of ancient Egypt and the Sumerians read like historical text, as well as most any other religion. If there is a creator, the chances it fits snugly into any of these religious beliefs is no more likely for one than the other.[/quote]
Then why has those religions not stood the test of time? The Bible was written over a period of 1500 years by 39 authors. No other religion can make those claims. Usually it is only one author during their life time or shorter.
[/quote]
The Christian Bible (what survives of it after Nicaea) was written over a period of a couple hundred years by a handful of writers. The Hebrew Bible is older by far, making Judaism a religion that had stood the test of time longer than Christianity, and without the thousands of splinterings into sects and sub-sects that Christianity has. Islam, too, is now nearly 1500 years old, and yes, you can say that the Qur’an borrows from earlier sources, but the same can be said from those earlier sources.
The Christ story borrows plenty of elements from Greek myth, particularly Heracles and Dionysos (which was itself borrowed from the Egyptian Horus myth), as well as the Zoroastrian stories of Mithra. The entire book of Matthew has some fascinating parallels to the Egyptian book of the Dead, and the book of Job and story of Noah parallels far earlier stories from Greek and Sumerian mythology.
[/quote]
The fact that their may be correlations with other earlier faiths does not stand to reason that the ‘Christ Story’ was made up as a compilation of earlier stories. We do know that Jesus did in fact exist. You may or may not believe he is who he is, or did what he did, but there is no evidence that the story was made up from earlier stories.
No we don’t and no they didn’t. They did manage to understand that there was something greater in the universe then themselves. They may not have understood what that was or had only a partial understanding of it. But to a certain degree, yes they got it. I certainly don’t dismiss these ancients as stupid. They knew there were forces at work that they didn’t understand and they strove to understand them.
[quote]
You see, the theory of evolution also applies to religion. Some religions go extinct, but not before passing a few of their genes on to other religions, which then continue to evolve and speciate. We just don’t always see it happening because the time scale is so long. [/quote]
No, I think the theory of evolution is applicable only to the adaptation of living organisms. Religions of lesser understanding gave way to those of greater understanding. I suppose you can say the ‘evolved’ to a certain degree, but it’s not part and parcel to the theory of evolution.