(October 21, 2011 at 4:28 pm)CoxRox Wrote: I thought an astronomical event that seemingly supported the Bible would be an interesting topic to discuss. I'm sorry it's got you so angry. That wasn't my intention.

My words are no harsher than Min's or anyone elses here. Don't play the martyr. That doesn't work here either.

Quote:I thought an astronomical event that seemingly supported the Bible would be an interesting topic to discuss. I'm sorry it's got you so angry. That wasn't my intention.

I'm curious as to how you thought that an astronomical event which contradicts the bible's dating ( flawed though that dating may be ) would in some way "support" the bible?

Being born is not a multi-year process. Matthew has Herod the Great alive ( he died in 4 BC ) and supposedly orders all male children under 2 killed...this takes us back to 6 BC. Luke notes that it happened when Publius Sulpicius Quirinius became governor of Syria and ordered a census of the newly formed Roman prefecture of Judaea in 6 AD. He then has people who live in what was, at that precise moment in time, a separate country climb on a donkey and travel to Judaea to register for a census which did not concern them in the least. Figure the latest date for a birth could have been 7 AD. We have a 12-13 year period when the gospels, which YOU not I claim are inerrant for the birth of the hero of the story happened. Introducing a 3d date would, if proven, merely invalidate the other two gospel accounts. After all, if they got that wrong why should anyone take anything else they say seriously?

Anyone here angry? I'm not angry. I'm amused, entertained even; but angry? I don't think so. Do you want me to be?

(October 21, 2011 at 10:50 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Anyone here angry? I'm not angry. I'm amused, entertained even; but angry? I don't think so. Do you want me to be?

CoxRox is referring to my use of the word "infuriating" to imply that I am currently angry and/or out of control.

Apparently she thinks the tone I am using is of a hostile nature. I assure you Cox, I can and have posted far far worse. I have absolutely no problem with you personally. I don't even know you. I have a problem with anyone trying to sell something ridiculous and ignoring the wisdom and insight of highly intelligent and educated people just because they don't share in your religious idiocy.

Case in point: My father is a religious dipshit who has betrayed his family for his precious god. None the less, if the man wants to enlighten me about calculus, American history, or economics - I'm not going to discount what he says just because we are at the opposite ends of religion. He's still highly educated and does have insight to offer on select topics.

Ah, ok. I thought I'd caught a whiff of burning martyr. Carry on.

CoxRox, you are a genuine loon. I love how you've now backed into the corner of 'Well we've proven that there was a bright light in the sky around the time of Pontius Pilate, WHO WE KNOW EXISTED'. Great. I accept this claim, tentatively. Now, one last time. HOW DOES THIS PROVE THE TRUTH OF THE BIBLICAL STORY?

If you can't understand why this cannot be accepted as evidence of the story of Christ's birth, unless you already believe that story, you are actually far stupider than I thought, and far stupider than most people here seem to give you credit for.

I also enjoy how you actually acknowledge that it 'might sound lame' that you believe all this because of a warm fuzzy feeling you get in your tummy. Well, sweetheart, you're right about that.

Forgot to include this in my earlier post:

I'd like to know where you got the information that NASA uses the Starry Night software. It wouldn't surprise me, what with budget cuts going on left right and centre, that a government agency would use an off-the-shelf consumer product, but if this is indeed true then both NASA and the Starry Night team are being very secretive about it. I'm starting to fear for your safety... it would appear that you have stumbled on something they'd rather wasn't made public, and we all know what happens when someone exposes a conspiracy.

Be that as it may, I'm still baffled by your insistence that NASA confirmed this whole Bedlam star thing with the software you mentioned they use to plan space missions (whatever it may be called). Unless they were planning a trip back in time, I fail to see why they would do such a thing.

Quote:Apparently she thinks the tone I am using is of a hostile nature.

Yeah, Cinj....you should watch that hostile tone....ya big meanie!

Even if you were being a bit hostile, who the fuck cares?

I had a debate a while back with a friend, and he said the one thing that annoys him more than crazy christians are angry atheists... I was like "WTF?".
So I asked him, "if the constant rape of children and the protection of these people and things like hymen reconstruction surgery and people killing innocent women and children with nail bombs don't make you angry then there is something wrong with you, mate."


Oh and there are loonies like this who are too crazy to get a proper answer out of... Reasonably frustrating.

I don't know which computer programme Nasa uses. Does it matter if it's Starry Night?

At the beginning of this thread, Aleialoura kindly provided a link to a short slide show of the alignment in 3/2 BC. It only takes a few minutes to watch and contains all the astronomical information, that Larson provides in his film. Here it is for anyone who missed it:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3077385/ns/t...p6n597qfRJ

Is it the case that programmes like Starry Night, are incorrect, and these alignments did not happen in 3/2BC?

You do not have to CONNECT this event with the beliefs of the magi, or gospel writers. You can just accept that the Bible has recorded an astronomical event that DID happen.