• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Existence

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
same thing -- there is no proof in science, and its conjectures.
Wrong. That is a black and white fallacy. It demonstrates that you do not understand how to use logic properly.

Very very few things can be proven. Especially when it comes to the real world. Proof only really works in math. Elsewhere the standard tend s to be the legal one: Proof beyond a reasonable doubt. And science goes far past that standard all of the time. Evolution is "Proven beyond a reasonable doubt". A creationist's inability to understand how it has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean that it is not so.

You may be a victim of cognitive dissonance. That occurs when one's brain is set on a belief and when evidence is presented that demonstrates that belief to be wrong it short circuits a bit. I am not sure if there is a cure for this. It can make a person look rather foolish. If you want to see some examples watch either Flat Earth videos or videos involving Sovereign Citizens. Both of those groups have severe Cognitive Dissonance. If you want to see creationists that really have it badly watch either Ray Comfort or Kent Hovind (though Hovind may just be a psychopathic liar).
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
same thing -- there is no proof in science, and its conjectures.
Worlds apart - and especially so for you if you just dismiss what we have achieved via science - especially over the last few hundred years.
 
Last edited:

ratiocinator

Lightly seared on the reality grill.
I know you don't/won't believe this: I do. I believe there is a force mightier than you and I that exists in conscience outside of our own consciousness. Anyway, do have a good day, I wish the best for you. That a force mightier than you or I exists is known by the heat of the sun, and by the fact that we face the prospect of death. That force is something stronger than ourselves. Again, so long for now. Just so I don't leave you with no conclusion about that -- the Bible says that death, too, will be overcome some day. (So long)

As I said, no evidence, let alone proof, yet you endlessly criticise others for not having absolute proof. Maybe remind yourself of Matthew 7:5?
 

Ludi

Member
God has power over the sun. Matthew 5:45.
Jesus is the purely conscious energy inside you, you were born IN, and WITH, and it never stopped giving you life, and it never changed, the 'baby,' , is still inside you. It is what you perceive as your subconscious. Have a great night.
 

Ludi

Member
I know you don't/won't believe this: I do. I believe there is a force mightier than you and I that exists in conscience outside of our own consciousness. Anyway, do have a good day, I wish the best for you. That a force mightier than you or I exists is known by the heat of the sun, and by the fact that we face the prospect of death. That force is something stronger than ourselves. Again, so long for now. Just so I don't leave you with no conclusion about that -- the Bible says that death, too, will be overcome some day. (So long)
Good morning. Sorry about that post last night I had actually drank a little to much, and I had been thinking about a what you said in that post about seek and you shall find, what you said here, about consciousness, and how death will be overcome one day. But because I was not thinking straight I posted that without explaining why, so again sorry, and really hope your having a great day.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
What do you mean, written and passed on? Many fictional stories are written and passed on.
Not starting thousands of years ago, and added to with such great detail and accuracy over many centuries, preserved. Unless you know of one -- ? do you?
 

gnostic

The Lost One
Not starting thousands of years ago, and added to with such great detail and accuracy over many centuries, preserved. Unless you know of one -- ? do you?
If Genesis and Exodus were so accurate, then why are they are so wrong.

In Genesis 11:28

“Genesis 11:28” said:
28 Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his birth, in Ur of the Chaldeans.

...it named people - the “Chaldeans” that didn’t exist in Abraham’s time.

The Chaldeans were only mentioned in southern Babylonia by the Assyrian annals around 9th century BCE. They have migrated only into region, and by 7th century BCE, they were one of several people - Chaldeans, Medians and Persians, eg fall of Nineveh in 619 BCE.

With Neo-Assyrian empire gone, the Chaldeans took over the entire Babylonia, establishing the 3rd dynasty in Babylon (626 - 539 BCE), hence the Chaldean dynasty.

If Abraham did exist (I am not saying he does, but if he did, hypothetically) would put Abraham in the Old Babylonian period, when the Amorites have established the 1st dynasty in Babylon(c 1894 - c 1595 BCE). There were no Chaldeans in Babylonia during this period. (Note that the 2nd dynasty were established by the Kassites, c 1595 - 1155 BCE.)

The only reasons why Genesis 11:28 would write anachronistically Chaldeans in this verse, is because the Jews who wrote these about the Chaldeans in Ur, is that didn’t they didn’t know Babylonia history, over a thousand years ago.

History isn’t a strong point in the Bible.

For instance, there are no mentioned of this Daniel in any Babylonian annals and chronicles, and scholars agreed that the Book of Daniel wasn’t written contemporary to Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar, and not contemporary to Cyrus the Great; more likely it was written in the 2nd century BCE.

The point is that it referred to Belshazzar being the son of Nebuchadnezzar. But Belshazzar was never related to Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar being the son of Nabonidus.

Plus, Belshazzar only served as governor of Babylon, not as king. It was Nabonidus who ruled the Babylonian empire. Nabonidus was an usurper, after Belshazzar had assassinated Labashi-Marduk, Nebuchadnezzar’s grandson.

What are written in Book of Daniel is total BS. It even mentioned the nonexistent Darius the Mede to capturing Babylon (539 BCE), not Cyrus.

History were recorded between Babylonia and Persia during these times, eg Nabonidus Chronicles, cylinders of Nabonidus, cylinder of Cyrus, and some of stone stela that survived during these periods..
 
Top