omnipotent beings discussion

[MuzztheEagle]

I don't.

How could any rational thinking person believe that?? The textual case for an historical Jesus is far superior than the one for Alexander the Great! Archeologists have learned the hard way not to assume the bible is historically innacurate based on missing evidence...and although atheists delight in saying things like...."Yeah, well...where is the evidence for the exodus from Egypt?"....well..the exact same thing was said about the "mythical" Nineveh (discovered in 1850) and absolutely, positevely nonexistent Hittite empire (which was discovered in 1906). If the bible is proving more and more to be historically accurate, it'd be silly to write it off as fable/myth stories.

I find it ridiculous that people of this day and age still argue that Jesus was a good moral teacher...and that's it. You can't say that because Jesus took that option away from us. He said he was more. A lot more.

Now, isn't logical to think...if Jesus was an actual historical figure and his works and teachings (which we all agree were valuable and more than any man could or has achieved, ever) were witnessed and recorded by eyewitnesses...and those accounts have been thoroughly investigated by secular and theist scholars countless times and have been found accurate...It is reasonable to believe he was who he said he was?

So, if Jesus...this great moral teacher/miracle worker, as we all agree...claimed to be more than just man...and claimed to be one with the father (omnipotent being)..what does that mean? Was this great moral teacher a lunatic...or a con man?

If you investigate with an open mind (like that of an agnostic...eg "meh, and let live" lol) you will see that the way Jesus lived, the things he taught, the things he was against (understanding the dangers of that alone in the time he lived) the way he died and the ressurection are incomparable to any other.

So there are only really 3 choices. Jesus was a con man that gained nothing in his lifetime except a few feeds along the way to his agonising death. A complete looney that somehow also managed to demonstrate a superior way of living, until his agonising death, or...he was exactly who he said he was. The omnipotent being in human form.

There is a fourth option; that Jesus's words were re interpreted by his followers in order to elevate his status and the cause.
Many other men have claimed to be Messiahs and connected to god (Mohammed, Buddha, L Ron Hubbard etc.) So what makes Jesus's story more believable? And would you be willing to say that to a Muslim/Hindu etc

 

[wombatgc]

The people have "freedom from religious belief" forced upon them and thousands have reportedly been tortured for their faith (all faiths)

It's a simple question....do you believe what Jesus taught (screw the church) would be a better model to live by?

I think he was right in getting rid of the pigeons.

 

[Woodsie]

I don't.

How could any rational thinking person believe that?? The textual case for an historical Jesus is far superior than the one for Alexander the Great! Archeologists have learned the hard way not to assume the bible is historically innacurate based on missing evidence...and although atheists delight in saying things like...."Yeah, well...where is the evidence for the exodus from Egypt?"....well..the exact same thing was said about the "mythical" Nineveh (discovered in 1850) and absolutely, positevely nonexistent Hittite empire (which was discovered in 1906). If the bible is proving more and more to be historically accurate, it'd be silly to write it off as fable/myth stories.

I find it ridiculous that people of this day and age still argue that Jesus was a good moral teacher...and that's it. You can't say that because Jesus took that option away from us. He said he was more. A lot more.

Now, isn't logical to think...if Jesus was an actual historical figure and his works and teachings (which we all agree were valuable and more than any man could or has achieved, ever) were witnessed and recorded by eyewitnesses...and those accounts have been thoroughly investigated by secular and theist scholars countless times and have been found accurate...It is reasonable to believe he was who he said he was?

So, if Jesus...this great moral teacher/miracle worker, as we all agree...claimed to be more than just man...and claimed to be one with the father (omnipotent being)..what does that mean? Was this great moral teacher a lunatic...or a con man?

So, your entire arguement rests on the supposition ... that Jesus was a real historical person .... therefore it is true that he was also the son of a Omnipotent God .... you used the word logic in your hypothesis .... I am struggling to make that connection ...

If you investigate with an open mind (like that of an agnostic...eg "meh, and let live" lol) you will see that the way Jesus lived, the things he taught, the things he was against (understanding the dangers of that alone in the time he lived) the way he died and the ressurection are incomparable to any other.

So there are only really 3 choices. Jesus was a con man that gained nothing in his lifetime except a few feeds along the way to his agonising death. A complete looney that somehow also managed to demonstrate a superior way of living, until his agonising death, or...he was exactly who he said he was. The omnipotent being in human form.

So, your entire supposition is ... that because Jesus is an actual historic fiqure ... then it must therefore be true that he is the son of an Omnipotent God ... you used the word logic in your hypothesis ... I am struggling to make the connection .....

 

[Woodsie]

I think he was right in getting rid of the pigeons.

Agree ... fukk the pidgeons ...

 

[Woodsie]

My type of worship ..

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=447705039406202

 

[Dan]

We can only really conclude after these debates that

1 - If there is a god, they realises their creation is broken and beyond their ability to correct and has thus abandoned us
2 - There is no god

 

[Kevinward777]

We can only really conclude after these debates that

1 - If there is a god, they realises their creation is broken and beyond their ability to correct and has thus abandoned us
2 - There is no god

Or 3 - Man is responsible for the diabolical state of the world and free will is the gift that curses us.

 

[Dan]

Or 3 - Man is responsible for the diabolical state of the world and free will is the gift that curses us.

Read point one

 

[Kevinward777]

Read point one

I did.

 

[Loobs]

We can only really conclude after these debates that

1 - If there is a god, they realises their creation is broken and beyond their ability to correct and has thus abandoned us
2 - There is no god

3. Elon was right - we live in a simulation.

 

[Dan]

3. Elon was right - we live in a simulation.

Haha but this

Re: point two.

I've got it all covered in two points

 

[Loobs]

Haha but this

Re: point two.

I've got it all covered in two points

Perhaps, but what’s outside the simulation..?

 

[Dan]

Perhaps, but what’s outside the simulation..?

See point 1 and 2

 

[MuzztheEagle]

Perhaps some of you more knowledgeable, better schooled in the modern age of enlightenment, bible dodgers could help me understand this...

The vast majority of evolutionists claim that nowaday birds evolved from dinosaurs around 65 million years ago. So how is it that scientists have discoverd a bird fossil (archaeorhynchus spathula) which using their massively flawed evoulutionary scientific dating systems...has been dated as being 120 million years old??

Not only that, but this bird fossil that is supposedly 120 milion years old has a toothless spatula like bill and the ability to flex its upper jaw....modern day shore birds have these features. The fossil also has well defined flight feathers that indicates it could fly very well and it even has long pointed feathers not found in any other mesozoic era birds.

Also...this fossil appears to have lungs. Again...unlike reptile lungs, these appear to be the same as modern day bird lungs. Now that's a head scratcher, hey?

So...just to recap...we have a fossil of a bird that is already fully developed with all these modern day features...that died 120 million years ago...even though evolutionary science tells us that birds only evolved from dinosaurs 65 million years ago. Watch "science" start shifting the goal posts on this one so it fits evolutionary timelines. Don't laugh...they've done it before!

Hmmm...new age enlightenment, atheism, evolutionary science...how anyone could be so impressed (indoctrinated) with this nonsense amazes me! Talk about blind faith. Perhaps the bird is a time traveller or maybe it inadvertantly flew through a worm hole in time and went back 120 million years...or maybe evolution is crap and you're all being hoodwinked.

Sorry Moz....looks like I got it wrong (and I may need to go back to pre school)

Man that lemonade sounds good - too bad they missed the boat I guess.

 

[Woodsie]

OK ... enough frivolity .... serious question ...

It would take a serious denial of science to conclude anything other than ... the Earth's sun will one day go nova ... therefore the Earth and all it's life forms are predestined to be destroyed ... but God knew this .....

So what is his end game ....

 

[Loobs]

OK ... enough frivolity .... serious question ...

It would take a serious denial of science to conclude anything other than ... the Earth's sun will one day go nova ... therefore the Earth and all it's life forms are predestined to be destroyed ... but God knew this .....

So what is his end game ....

I am Ubik. Before the universe was, I am. I made the suns. I made the worlds. I created the lives and the places they inhabit; I move them here, I put them there. They go as I say, they do as I tell them. I am the word and my name is never spoken, the name which no one knows. I am called Ubik, but that is not my name. I am. I shall always be.

 

[Woodsie]

I am Ubik. Before the universe was, I am. I made the suns. I made the worlds. I created the lives and the places they inhabit; I move them here, I put them there. They go as I say, they do as I tell them. I am the word and my name is never spoken, the name which no one knows. I am called Ubik, but that is not my name. I am. I shall always be.

Thanks ... it's all clear now ...

 

[Loobs]

Thanks ... it's all clear now ...

Thats how I feel after finishing any Philip K Dick book

 

[Dan]

I did.

Well it sums up your point, no need for a point 3.

The only point 3 that could possibly be added is; "thus all arguments are moot and pointless"

 

[Kevinward777]

Well it sums up your point, no need for a point 3.

The only point 3 that could possibly be added is; "thus all arguments are moot and pointless"

You still going? Confucius say’s... If that’s what you want to believe, then good luck to you.