Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[ChristineM]

lol, all I'm asking is for you to show me the post # where you show evidence that the event was prophesied after it occurred, other than your own word.

And all im asking is that you find it yourself, contrary to your opinion i am not here to run errands for you.

 

[YoursTrue]

Nope you deliberately ignored it.

I don't really care for that Baha'i say about Bahaullah in the same way I don't believe the bible tale of Jesus.

It would take almost exactly as long for you to find it.

How many times, science does not deal in proof but in evidence, and various lined of evidence show evolution to be valid.

Snd i wonder how many times you have been asked to provide evidence for your god? I know i have asked several times but each time you ignore the question. Its as though you have no evidence to show.

You said you would walk me through the idea of evolution, now we're on your claim that life has been created in a laboratory but refuse to explain how or why. You offered. Now you're going back on your word.

 

[ChristineM]

I'm beginning to think you and shunya are phonies. But anyway -- it's been interesting.

Ignorance must be so comforting for you

 

[YoursTrue]

And all im asking is that you find it yourself, contrary to your opinion i am not here to run errands for you.

How difficult is it to provide information in reality about your contention (that of course others have provided you with). I've been there, done that with people like you. You're still unwilling to give anything but your opinion and someone else's opinion about when the prophecy was provided as well as the theory of evolution.

 

[YoursTrue]

Ignorance must be so comforting for you

No explanation except links to what you accept as true. Bye for now --

 

[YoursTrue]

Ignorance must be so comforting for you

You provide no information except your own opinion. Bye again.

 

[shunyadragon]

I'm beginning to think you and shunya are phonies. But anyway -- it's been interesting.

You have not begun to think!

 

[YoursTrue]

Ignorance must be so comforting for you

Take care.

 

[YoursTrue]

You have not begun to think!

Take care.

 

[ChristineM]

You said you would walk me through the idea of evolution, now we're on your claim that life has been created in a laboratory but refuse to explain how or why. You offered. Now you're going back on your word.

I said, if you are willing to learn you most obviously are not. That is not going back on my word. It is precisely my word


And i suggested that you look up "life created in the laboratory" you obviously don't want to, you don't want to see that life has been created several times because it will pop your bubble.
Explaining how (which i don't know in detail anyway, i am not a biologist) would only fall on stony ground

 

[ChristineM]

How difficult is it to provide information in reality about your contention (that of course others have provided you with). I've been there, done that with people like you. You're still unwilling to give anything but your opinion and someone else's opinion about when the prophecy was provided as well as the theory of evolution.

Looked in s mirror lately?

 

[ChristineM]

You provide no information except your own opinion. Bye again.

Bye

 

[Aupmanyav]

You said you would walk me through the idea of evolution, now we're on your claim that life has been created in a laboratory but refuse to explain how or why. You offered. Now you're going back on your word.

I asked you to go through the wiki article on 'Abiogenesis'. Did you read it? That is Evolution 101.
Recalcitrant student!

 

[YoursTrue]

I asked you to go through the wiki article on 'Abiogenesis'. Did you read it? That is Evolution 101.
Recalcitrant student!

I'll go over it with you, sentence by sentence, since you claim to believe in abiogenesis and that's the information you believe, right? Otherwise, it's no-go. I'm not going to run from link to link when I have a question as if you can't answer personally and instead post a link to something. Any time you're ready to start with that article, it's fine with me. Let me know.

 

[YoursTrue]

Bye

 

[YoursTrue]

Making a prophecy after the event is no prophecy.

The bluster of an army before an war/battle is no prophecy

You are entitled to interpret history in whatever way madsages you ego. I will go by the historical narrative

That is your response about prophecy after the fact? wow. I'm not impressed at your acumen. It seems you'll just about say anything to justify yourself or at least bolster up your belief. Since I used to be an atheist, I understand many of your arguments, but not those such as the above, without substance. Then you say it's an answer... lol, ok.

 

[ChristineM]

That is your response about prophecy after the fact? wow. I'm not impressed at your acumen. It seems you'll just about say anything to justify yourself or at least bolster up your belief. Since I used to be an atheist, I understand many of your arguments, but not those such as the above, without substance. Then you say it's an answer... lol, ok.

The arch of Titus was built after Titus death, i.e. after the Jewish rebellion was subdued and the temple was destroyed. Mentioning something after the event is not prophecy but history. Sorry you don't like facts but... Wait a moment, im not sorry at all.

 

[gnostic]

That is your response about prophecy after the fact? wow.

As I wrote previously, the gospels (especially of Matthew, Luke & John) were definitely written after 70 CE. While the gospel of Mark was composed between 65 and 75 CE. The exact dates of composition are only estimated, but the gospels were definitely not written at the time of Jesus’ ministry and/or the time of death/resurrection in 33 CE.

Older than the gospel of Mark, are most of the Pauline letters (some of the letters attributed to Paul were written after his death).

By then the Jewish rebellion (or the Roman-Jewish War), the war itself, have already started in 66 CE. But the tensions between Jews and Romans have been brewing for decades. So there were no surprises at all, by the time whoever wrote these gospels.

And like @ChristineM said, gospel prophecies written after 70 CE, aren’t prophecies.

The problems with the New Testament, is that nothing pertaining to the NT writings are reliable. The historicity of the NT is very sparse. Like that of Jesus’ birth in the gospels of Matthew and Luke, regarding to Roman practices, eg the census.

According to gospel of Luke, the Roman census took place in Herod’s reign. But Roman census are only carried out in Roman provinces. Herod was still king of Judaea, and Judaea was a vassal kingdom to Rome, but it wasn’t made a. Roman province till 6 CE, which was 10 years after Herod’s death (in 4 BCE).

Augustus annexed Judaea, after he banished Herod’s son, Herod Archelaus, from Judaea in 6 CE.

Publius Sulpicius Quirinius was indeed appointed legate of Syria and to carry out the census in Judaea, but that occurred after Archelaus exile and Judaea was made a province in the Roman Empire. He was governor of Syria between 6 CE and 12 CE.

Even Josephus agree with the Roman records as to when Judaea was made a province, when Quirinius was in Syria and when the census occurred.

At the time of Herod was still alive, Quirinius was legate of Galatea, from 12 to 1 BCE, commanding army to quell a rebellion in Cilicia.

The governors of Syria at the time before Herod’s death were Gaius Sentius Saturninus (9 – 7/6 BCE) and Publius Quinctilius Varus (7/6 – 4 BCE). No census were carried out in Judaea, while Saturninus and Varus were serving in Syria. Josephus have also clearly stated Saturninus and Varus in his Antiquities of the Jews.

More importantly, Varys was a very prominent Roman, since he was a son-in-law of famous Marcus Agrippa, Augustus’ long time friend, ally and son-in-law of Augustus. Agrippa was largely responsible for Augustus’ victories over Mark Antony.

Another thing is that Roman census are carried out for where people lived, not at the ancestral home, like the gospel claimed.

If Joseph was resident of Nazareth in Galilee, then he didn’t need to travel and register at Bethlehem, since Joseph didn’t live there.

So that’s another thing the gospel of Luke got wrong, when it concern history.

The gospel of Luke was wrong about who was governor of Syria in the last years before Herod’s death, and everything about the census (when it was carried out and by whom was carrying it out, and how the system works). It just show how inaccurate the gospel of Luke is.

Note that while I considered Josephus as an ordinary historian, he was friend of Titus, so Josephus have had Roman sources to rely on, eg Roman annals, official records. Josephus even took part in the rebellion, before he became prisoner and hostage, before he befriended the future Roman emperor.

 

[YoursTrue]

The arch of Titus was built after Titus death, i.e. after the Jewish rebellion was subdued and the temple was destroyed. Mentioning something after the event is not prophecy but history. Sorry you don't like facts but... Wait a moment, im not sorry at all.

OK. I KNOW and many people know that the "Arch of Titus" was built after the temple was destroyed. I'll leave it at that right now.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I'll go over it with you, sentence by sentence, since you claim to believe in abiogenesis and that's the information you believe, right? Otherwise, it's no-go. I'm not going to run from link to link when I have a question as if you can't answer personally and instead post a link to something. Any time you're ready to start with that article, it's fine with me. Let me know.

That is OK. Let us start with the first paragraph. You will need to read the links mentioned. By the end of the effort you will become a sort of layman-expert on 'abiogenesis', i.e., understanding the process though not understanding the details. For that college education in necessary.

"In biology, abiogenesis (from a-‘not’ + Greek bios ‘life’ + genesis 'origin') or the origin of life is the natural process by which life has arisen from non-living matter, such as simple organic compounds. The prevailing scientific hypothesis is that the transition from non-living to living entities was not a single event, but an evolutionary process of increasing complexity that involved the formation of a habitable planet, the prebiotic synthesis of organic molecules, molecular self-replication, self-assembly, autocatalysis, and the emergence of cell membranes. Many proposals have been made for different stages of the process."