What would it take?

[Bow Before Zeus]

The bible was meant to be taken literally by the writers. We look at it today and laugh at the ignorance of the writers. Your analogy with the plane is erroneous. I will tell you why I can read the bible and see no meaning in it. It only requires basic comprehension to find meaning. I have read Shakespeare and Plato and many other texts and find meaning. The bible has none. You can pontificate on this point all you want. Facts are facts.

The only fact you have given is that you have read, if you have read Plato and Shakespeare and found some eternal meaning you are the one who is reinterpreting what you read.

There is no such thing as "eternal meaning". There is no such thing as "eternity". These are part of your mythology, not part of observable fact. Nothing stays the same, nothing lasts forever.

The Bible offers a hope that nothing else can and that's because it comes from the One who can give hope. You are rejecting the One who first loved you and gave His life for you before you were born, why that doesn't move you is beyond me.

It does not move me because it does not exist. What exists is the wonder of the world and universe around us. That moves me. To love, to be lost in the music, to watch a play, an opera, these things have the power to move me. They exist albeit in tiny moment of existence but they can be experienced.

 I feel that speculation is just that speculation it holds no truth nor reality, I deal in both of those. Wishing and pretending is for the foolish. Christianity is the only way of real life and why, because it leads to eternal life, everything outside of it leads to eternal punishment. Like I said the Father hasn't told Christ that the hour has come for His return, I'm not God so I couldn't tell you what His reasons for the eventual return of Christ is, I can tell you with absolute certainty that Christ will becoming soon.

GC

I can tell you with absolute certainty that he is not returning. The difference with my statement and yours is that mine is based on simple observation. Yours is based on fantasy. Which one do you think will come to pass?

 Mine because it's based on the word of the God who created us. Your observations, what observations, you expect me to believe you have a knowledge that no one else does. That's like me going to the bus stop to catch the bus and you observed it leaving and you have no idea of which bus I'm looking to take. You make statements without knowing what you are looking for. You make a lot of noise but have shown me nothing to make me believe that Christ isn't going to return, your arguments are weak at best and in reality they are nonexistent. 

GC

I observe that christ has not returned for over 2,000 years despite the constant predictions of his return. I observe that wine and bread cannot literally turn into blood and flesh. I observe that the world is 4.3 billion years old. I observe that our universe is over 14 billions years old. I observe the fact of evolution. I observe facts that contradict pretty much everything that is in an iron-age text written by goat-herders.

My arguments are strong. You just can't see them because you have been blinded.

[Succubus]

Who wrote the cannon gospels?

The Holy Spirit wrote the gospels. What scribes did He use? we refer to the indivisual scribes as Matthew Mark Luke and John.

No. The canon gospels were written anonymously. This has been known for seventeen hundred years. That you are unaware of this is proof positive that your understanding of the story of Christianity is very shallow. And yet you dare lecture on the subject! You are nothing more than a standard issue blind faith bible thumper.

[Drich]

Ok, you're a very angry person, I get that. But here I must draw the line. So let me start drawing.

I am not angry. I just do not respect you. as it was pointed out you are a troll account/farce which speaks or repersents all the nasty bits of atheism. As a result I don't have much desire to help you specifically. the reason I do is because of those who don't know any better than to think the way you do.

I asked, since your pathetic little god-being had not returned "imminently" like he supposedly said he would, what it would take before you would give up your pathetic little religion. Your response was to threaten that nobody escapes judgement much like a voodoo witchdoctor would threaten that I am going to die by shaking a bone at me. What would I do in that situation? Laugh in the witchdoctor's face! I have shown restraint in not laughing at you and have politely asked you to partake in a thought experiment that you are clearly not capable of understanding.

I get what you were trying to say, and I up'ed you one and doubbled down. When I said that none of those guys escaped judgement, meant that all who were told they would face judgement soon, did indeed receive judgement very soon. In fact their bodies may not even had time to be burried before they were judged.

So for them judgement was instantaneous.. So then because the warning remains then for us our judgement would be equally as fast.

But rather than see What I said as being an answer to your question, you promptly pull the emergency "i dont believe in God" brake on the conversation which was supposed to nullify the conversation in your favor.. To which I pointed out, if you are going to ask a canonical based question, why is God ABC then expect I give an answer from the same bible you got your question from!

On many levels I could turn around and call you a complete moron. Firstly for not understanding purpose of a thought experiment and secondly for believing the scribblings of iron age goat-herders but I have shown great restraint in not doing so.

And what do I get to call you for being a step ahead of your "thought experiment?"

You sit there with the intellect of a witch-doctor calling me a moron.

because when you are challenged to think you put the brakes on the conversation. You are not perpaired for the conversation to go in any direction than the way you have been taught that it should go!

It seems to be a pattern of behavior that xtians here seem to engage in.

Only a simple mind looking for sterotypes could make that observation. The Christians here are a very diverse group who are fully capable in speaking with you line by line well far and beyond that what you seem capable of keeping up with. what a cop out to lump everyone here into the same group while none of us share the same faith.

A similar accusation was thrown at my daughters by another xtian poster. Young women that are studying degrees that would completely befuddle you and the other xtian poster. My family is a family of engineers and scientists.

As am I sport. Actually have my own engineering firm along with a few other business. "science" in not an enemy here sport, however the idea that all science is equal is beyond laughable. to equate demonstrable scientific principle with a fringe theory based only on what can be tacitly observed is closed minded at best. If your daughter no matter how much smarter they are than you, thinks and has their faith in tactile scientific theory then they are just as foolish as those who believe the world is flat.
Why? because they like the lemming that came before can only observe and or recognise what someone smarter than them has identified ( right or wrong) they must believe what the "smarter" scientist thinks. If some smart 'scientist' says the sky is falling then for your girls they must believe the world is getting warmer... or colder.. or no ozon.. or warmer then and ice age.. No matter how stupid the 'science' is your poor girls will have to believe or risk being labled as ignorant as I am.

We are the high priests and gods of the modern era.

Irony in truth... It also takes an equal or even greater share of faith to believe you are the "right gods"

We create machines that would seem like magic to the primitive goat-herders that wrote the bible.

Again I am one who does indeed create great machines and can tell you the science that supports me is from from the 'science' that supports a big bang.

We create the modern society that you live in. We build the buildings, the cars, the planes, the bridges, the computers, almost every aspect of modern society.

Actually YOU don't. most of you are mindless consumers who create an economic infrastructure that allows for smarter people to create those things. The fact that you think the same science that powers your cell phone underwrites Darwinism only shows you are a 'consumer.'

We are in the process of creating life in the lab and sentient machines and becoming an interplanetary species. This is what scientists and engineers do. Not theologians, not religious nutters, but educates, intelligent people. This is what intelligence is, not waving a witchdoctor's bone and someone and accusing them of being a moron.

Religious people don't have to use a 'lab' there is a better much more fun way of creating life.

So instead of throwing accusations at people, why don't you learn how to build stuff for modern society?

If I could only share what i do without causing a "ruckus"

And before you start calling people something that you are guilty of, put your science, engineering or medical degree on the table first.

Don't need an engineering degree to hold patents (which I can give you numbers to look up if wish)

You would have to come out of your trailer park, earn a decent living, afford to go to university and of course have the intellect to be able to complete the degree in the first place. None of which I would wager you are capable of.

I could but choose not to brag any further than what God has allowed me, because to a degree you are right. I could not accomplish these things on my own. After all I did not teach myself to read till I was in my 20s.

PS One of the posters has noted it but you still don't get it so let me spell it out for you. It's canon, not cannon. You are illiterate as well. Just stating a fact here.

reading or rather spelling is a poor measure of a man's whole ability. I found it a crutch and a hide behind when that is all a man is good at.

I can tell you with absolute certainty that he is not returning. The difference with my statement and yours is that mine is based on simple observation. Yours is based on fantasy. Which one do you think will come to pass?

Here's the thing you missed sport.. When I said non of those who issued those original warnings nor none of those who received those warning did not escape the second coming, meant, that the second coming may not be a one single point in time but rather linear event. One that happens upon death.

[Whateverist]

According to christian scriptures, the end of times was "imminent" at the time the bible was written, most likely in the lifetimes of the "apostles". There are a number of references which support this view:

8 …the coming of the Lord is near.
(James 5:8)

9 …the Judge is standing right at the door.
(James 5:9)

Children, it is the last hour;
and just as you heard thatantichrist is coming,
even now many antichrists have appeared;
from this we know that it is the last hour.
(1 John 2:18)

Moreover, Jesus was reported to have told his disciples, "Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened."
(Matt. 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32)

But after Christ did not return in the 1st century after his death, xtians have expected Christ's return at various times - some of the more prominent ones are:

1st Century CE: As per the "imminent" predictions in the bible
2nd Century CE: Prophets and Prophetesses of the Montanist movement predicted that Jesus would return sometime during their lifetime and establish the New Jerusalem in the city of Pepuza in Asia Minor.
1000-JAN-1 CE: Many Christians in Europe had predicted the end of the world on this date. As the date approached, Christian armies waged war against some of the Pagan countries in Northern Europe. The motivation was to convert them all to Christianity, by force if necessary, before Christ returned in the year 1000.
Around 2000 CE: Various predictions of Christ's return by Harold Caming, Jerry Falwell and others.

Even after all these failed predictions of Christ's return, xtians still hold on to the belief that he will miraculously appear to claim his "flock" of "chosen ones".

So I would like to run a little throught experiment here. Christ has not returned in year 100, 1000 or 2000 but xtians still believe. What if the year is 10,000 CE - would you still be an avid xtian expecting Christ's return? What if you lived in the year 20,000? 100,000? 200,000?

What would it take for you to finally admit that Christ is not returning and xtianity is false?

Riddle me this... did any f the people who wrote those words you quoted or anyone who read those words that are not still living Escape the judgement or anything written by dying?

No. So then can it then be said those words of warning were just as important then are they are now?

Oh absolutely. It was rubbish then and is still rubbish now. Good point.

[JackRussell]

I wrote a book once, hope nobody believes everything in it, coz I was lying!!!!

Books aren't evidence.

M,M, L and J are later attributions, even most bibles are honest enough to state that the names of the authors are unknown.

Good luck with showing a god wrote or inspired anything, I know some other holy books that have adherents that claim the same.

and I have A/S/K'd, yet nada.

Guess gods are picky after all, or credible rubes believe their own brain-farts, just as conditioned to do so.

[Bow Before Zeus]

Ok, you're a very angry person, I get that. But here I must draw the line. So let me start drawing.

I am not angry. I just do not respect you. as it was pointed out you are a troll account/farce which speaks or repersents all the nasty bits of atheism. As a result I don't have much desire to help you specifically. the reason I do is because of those who don't know any better than to think the way you do.

I asked, since your pathetic little god-being had not returned "imminently" like he supposedly said he would, what it would take before you would give up your pathetic little religion. Your response was to threaten that nobody escapes judgement much like a voodoo witchdoctor would threaten that I am going to die by shaking a bone at me. What would I do in that situation? Laugh in the witchdoctor's face! I have shown restraint in not laughing at you and have politely asked you to partake in a thought experiment that you are clearly not capable of understanding.

I get what you were trying to say, and I up'ed you one and doubbled down. When I said that none of those guys escaped judgement, meant that all who were told they would face judgement soon, did indeed receive judgement very soon. In fact their bodies may not even had time to be burried before they were judged.

So for them judgement was instantaneous.. So then because the warning remains then for us our judgement would be equally as fast.

But rather than see What I said as being an answer to your question, you promptly pull the emergency "i dont believe in God" brake on the conversation which was supposed to nullify the conversation in your favor.. To which I pointed out, if you are going to ask a canonical based question, why is God ABC then expect I give an answer from the same bible you got your question from!

On many levels I could turn around and call you a complete moron. Firstly for not understanding purpose of a thought experiment and secondly for believing the scribblings of iron age goat-herders but I have shown great restraint in not doing so.

And what do I get to call you for being a step ahead of your "thought experiment?"

You sit there with the intellect of a witch-doctor calling me a moron.

because when you are challenged to think you put the brakes on the conversation. You are not perpaired for the conversation to go in any direction than the way you have been taught that it should go!

It seems to be a pattern of behavior that xtians here seem to engage in.

Only a simple mind looking for sterotypes could make that observation. The Christians here are a very diverse group who are fully capable in speaking with you line by line well far and beyond that what you seem capable of keeping up with. what a cop out to lump everyone here into the same group while none of us share the same faith.

A similar accusation was thrown at my daughters by another xtian poster. Young women that are studying degrees that would completely befuddle you and the other xtian poster. My family is a family of engineers and scientists.

As am I sport. Actually have my own engineering firm along with a few other business. "science" in not an enemy here sport, however the idea that all science is equal is beyond laughable. to equate demonstrable scientific principle with a fringe theory based only on what can be tacitly observed is closed minded at best. If your daughter no matter how much smarter they are than you, thinks and has their faith in tactile scientific theory then they are just as foolish as those who believe the world is flat.
Why? because they like the lemming that came before can only observe and or recognise what someone smarter than them has identified ( right or wrong) they must believe what the "smarter" scientist thinks. If some smart 'scientist' says the sky is falling then for your girls they must believe the world is getting warmer... or colder.. or no ozon.. or warmer then and ice age.. No matter how stupid the 'science' is your poor girls will have to believe or risk being labled as ignorant as I am.

We are the high priests and gods of the modern era.

Irony in truth... It also takes an equal or even greater share of faith to believe you are the "right gods"

We create machines that would seem like magic to the primitive goat-herders that wrote the bible.

Again I am one who does indeed create great machines and can tell you the science that supports me is from from the 'science' that supports a big bang.

We create the modern society that you live in. We build the buildings, the cars, the planes, the bridges, the computers, almost every aspect of modern society.

Actually YOU don't. most of you are mindless consumers who create an economic infrastructure that allows for smarter people to create those things. The fact that you think the same science that powers your cell phone underwrites Darwinism only shows you are a 'consumer.'

We are in the process of creating life in the lab and sentient machines and becoming an interplanetary species. This is what scientists and engineers do. Not theologians, not religious nutters, but educates, intelligent people. This is what intelligence is, not waving a witchdoctor's bone and someone and accusing them of being a moron.

Religious people don't have to use a 'lab' there is a better much more fun way of creating life.

So instead of throwing accusations at people, why don't you learn how to build stuff for modern society?

If I could only share what i do without causing a "ruckus"

And before you start calling people something that you are guilty of, put your science, engineering or medical degree on the table first.

Don't need an engineering degree to hold patents (which I can give you numbers to look up if wish)

You would have to come out of your trailer park, earn a decent living, afford to go to university and of course have the intellect to be able to complete the degree in the first place. None of which I would wager you are capable of.

I could but choose not to brag any further than what God has allowed me, because to a degree you are right. I could not accomplish these things on my own. After all I did not teach myself to read till I was in my 20s.

PS One of the posters has noted it but you still don't get it so let me spell it out for you. It's canon, not cannon. You are illiterate as well. Just stating a fact here.

reading or rather spelling is a poor measure of a man's whole ability. I found it a crutch and a hide behind when that is all a man is good at.

I can tell you with absolute certainty that he is not returning. The difference with my statement and yours is that mine is based on simple observation. Yours is based on fantasy. Which one do you think will come to pass?

Here's the thing you missed sport.. When I said non of those who issued those original warnings nor none of those who received those warning did not escape the second coming, meant, that the second coming may not be a one single point in time but rather linear event. One that happens upon death.

Ok "sport", now I understand why the other atheists around here dismiss you so quickly as an idiot. You claim to be a scientist but deny the scientific facts of evolution and climate change. There is nothing more to be said here. Your extreme lack of education are duly noted. Do yourself a favour and get an edumacation or forever hold your piece otherwise the old saying of "empty vessels make most noise" becomes more and more apparent.

[Drich]

Riddle me this... did any f the people who wrote those words you quoted or anyone who read those words that are not still living Escape the judgement or anything written by dying?

No. So then can it then be said those words of warning were just as important then are they are now?

Oh absolutely.  It was rubbish then and is still rubbish now.  Good point.

Aren't you supposed to be trying to figure out how to prove me a liar in that other thread??? what, did you give up and now move back to snipering insults from the side lines?

[Whateverist]

Oh absolutely.  It was rubbish then and is still rubbish now.  Good point.

Aren't you supposed to be trying to figure out how to prove me a liar in that other thread??? what, did you give up and now move back to snipering insults from the side lines?

Who are you trying to fool.  You're not capable of genuine engagement.  Just be thankful for my occasional snipe.

[Drich]

Ok "sport", now I understand why the other atheists around here dismiss you so quickly as an idiot. You claim to be a scientist but deny the scientific facts of evolution and climate change. There is nothing more to be said here. Your extreme lack of education are duly noted. Do yourself a favour and get an edumacation or forever hold your piece otherwise the old saying of "empty vessels make most noise" becomes more and more apparent.

No.. I claim to be a engineer who has a successful business in the field that I work (Which happens to center around temperature change, and the mechanical means needed to drop and maintain temperature change even with a 100+ degree delta between set point and ambient conditions.)

If you do not understand that the science behind something like temp change and the science behind the bull shit global climate change are different then you are the uneducated fool. ANYONE with any education concerning thermal change or properties temperature exchange knows the current models that explain or try to explain global climate change are incomplete at best/fraudulent at worst.

The first thing we need to look at is how the industry/science determines a objects resistant to heat. this is determined by R-value which is calculated from the insulating properties of it shielding k-factor. both need to establish a constant in the way of a heat source. meaning in order to determine an objects resistance to heat (which will tell us if the object is warming to the addition of insulating material such as carbon in the atmosphere) we need to establish the heat source out put. and make sure it is the same during the test period. During R-rating test we must provide a constant heat source at a predetermined distance none of which can be moved. Because if the heat source puts out less heat, It will look like the insulating media is working too well and the object being insulated temp will drop. this is true when you move the heat source or test object away from the heat source as well. The opposite will happen when you move the object closer and or increase the heat source output.

Still with me?

Now here is the problem with the "science" behind global warming. The sun's output is not constant. nor is the earth's rotation around the sun round like a spinning wheel on an axle. (google it) the sun's out put varies from year to year anywhere from .5 to 15% since we have been measuring it in 1978.

The next thing we need to look at orbit and it's contribution to climate change. A long time ago we figured out our orbit is not round like a wheel but more egg shaped on a hulu hooping axis. Which could put us several hundred miles closer to the sun on a given summer day or several thousand miles away from the sun a few years later on the same day. however we have been able to calculate or predict solar activity in relation to our orbit with some accuracy for some time as the nature of cold and hot years has been around for some time. As farmer almanacs has been able to predict hot and cold years thus giving us planting seasons for several hundred years. Which also means solar proximity is indeed a major contributor to climate change. (as planting season can move weeks even months) Which is also why we can have winters that can end in February or it can still be snowing in places as late as may.

Next we need to understand just how much of the ice cap left over from the last ice age deflected solar energy, and the nature of a diminishing return as the ice cap melts. As the Ice cap were said to directly reflect upto 90% of the sun's energy.

Then finally we need to understand how green house gasses work. Here is where the current Al Gore "science fails." It claims the Co2 magnifies the sun'r rays and redirect them to the surface like a green house effect.

This is not how atmospheric gasses work.  Let say if the sun is a constant heat source, and a unit of sun light contains 10 units of solar energy. (just a number/place holder)

Gore says/thinks this 10 unit in the presents of co2 is magnified to 15 or 20, when infact only the sun can pack potential energy in to a unit of sun light... Green houses through their glass plates focus or direct sunlight and stores energy while providing insulation and protection When in fact co2 "unpacks solar energy." Meaning in the presents of co2 a unit of sun light may unpack 8 to 9 units of solar energy in the form of radiant energy/co2 allows heat to transfer in the "air." unlike on mars or the moon, there in the shade it can be -20*F and a few inches away in the sun it can be 200*F the difference here is far less in the the Co2 unpacks that solar energy from the shade and the sun and finds a happy medium of say 80*F in the shade and 90 in the sun.

Here's the thing.. Co2 can only unpack what is available in a unit of light.. more Co2 will only allow for more efficient heat transfer from sun light to the earth, it can not magnify it. it will increase the temp but only to the point where the unit of sun light energy is expended. IF the earth warms past this mark it is not because of Co2. it is because the unit of sunlight's energy has been increased or the earths insulation is depleted allowing more sunlight to hit the surface. Meaning the melting ice caps.


That said right or wrong, the point I am making here is I have studied this subject in depth and over a period of years tweaking my own understanding of the available data. I am not one to have another do my thinking for me as you guys are. I would never be content on simply taking the off the shelf explanation simply because that is what "science" says. That make you and people like you just as stupid as the christian you claim accept a "god did it explanation." How can you not see you in this instance are a different side of the same coin. Instead of lemming yourself behind the "religious" guy you are lemming yourself behind the science guy.. Seriously what is the difference if you are following in blind faith science or religion???

Questions like that are the reason you are being pm'ed to ignore me/allow me to burn out. because I ask question that make you people doubt what you believe and why. that scares the hell out of some of the older people here who want me gone but cant get me gone. so they are trying to shut me out to shut me up.
(Which BTW have been melting since the end of the last ice age. Very slow at first, but once we hit the point of dimishing return it accelerates just like any other body of ice would.)

---

Aren't you supposed to be trying to figure out how to prove me a liar in that other thread??? what, did you give up and now move back to snipering insults from the side lines?

Who are you trying to fool.  You're not capable of genuine engagement.  Just be thankful for my occasional snipe.

then why challenge me over those last 6 or so posts?

Called me a liar, and when you could prove it, now you call me stupid in order to dismiss what you don't want to read/hear. When will you own up to the fact that maybe just maybe what I have to say is indeed true

[Neo-Scholastic]

Books aren't evidence.

They are evidence of having been written by someone at some time. They can be dated (using various techniques) to identify linguistic changes over time, support archaeological findings, and give insight into the culture and practices of the time, etc.