If stars were created, cosmology is wrong

[John53]

What do you mean by dropping the universe? Are you saying the time and space of the universe
is simply way too much for the creation of a human on earth? Or that the earth, at 25,000 mile
circumference, is unnecessarily big for the task at hand? Or thousands of years for things to play
out is way too long?

You claimed the Christian God created a people for himself when I asked you why did he make the universe. Ok so why bother with a gigantic universe when the sun and earth would have done, maybe even the moon. There is no reason for a supreme being to make the universe. It all sounds like a mad professors science experiment.

 

[oldbadger]

Chapter and verse? Seems to me Jesus told John to watch over His mom.

According to John, who just wrote down yet another story that he had heard or imagined. G-John was written ciorca 100-115 AD.

She visited. So did others. Some got there first. Big deal.
False. You made up doubts.

No others...... just Magdalene and Salome. Why do you think that Magsalene was there right up to the end?

You need to add the folks who were there from the four gospels. Not pick at one gospel because it mentions or focuses on certain people.

If you want to believe in the four stories then that is your choice, but it's a very big load of twisting, shoving, manipulating and wrenching. But objective readers might appreciate to see other very reasonable findings, based more upon the balance of probabilities than the balance of myths.

 

[dad]

According to John, who just wrote down yet another story that he had heard or imagined. G-John was written ciorca 100-115 AD.


No others...... just Magdalene and Salome. Why do you think that Magsalene was there right up to the end?

To infer no others is to disrespect the rest of the gospels if they mentioned others.

Simple.

 

[oldbadger]

To infer no others is to disrespect the rest of the gospels if they mentioned others.

Simple.

I do believe that what you mean is this:- To infer anything that you don't believe is disrespectful to you and your particular kind of Christianity. And so any disagreement with you becomes a personal insult, and this might be why you have thrown so many personal comments back at other members.
You might have thrived in the days of the Inquisition or any authorities like it.

I have to tell you that imo the Gospel of Mark is the closest account to the truth, possibly from the memoirs of Cephas, possibly trying to put the record straight because he certainly didn't like Paul's ideas.
I like all the gospels for their collections of accounts, but many folks feel that these got manipulated edited and messed with by devout Christians in the early centuries. After all, they believed in what they were doing.

But John...? John went way over the top... for him the reports of who Jesus was and what he did, these were NOWHERE NEAR up to the standard required for his God...... and his fervour got the better of him....... or was it those mushrooms?

Individual Investigation beats Institutional Indoctrination, dad, and let's allow all interested individuals to research for truth and not hust swallow myth.

 

[dad]

I do believe that what you mean is this:- To infer anything that you don't believe is disrespectful to you and your particular kind of Christianity. And so any disagreement with you becomes a personal insult, and this might be why you have thrown so many personal comments back at other members.
You might have thrived in the days of the Inquisition or any authorities like it.

I have to tell you that imo the Gospel of Mark is the closest account to the truth, possibly from the memoirs of Cephas, possibly trying to put the record straight because he certainly didn't like Paul's ideas.
I like all the gospels for their collections of accounts, but many folks feel that these got manipulated edited and messed with by devout Christians in the early centuries. After all, they believed in what they were doing.

But John...? John went way over the top... for him the reports of who Jesus was and what he did, these were NOWHERE NEAR up to the standard required for his God...... and his fervour got the better of him....... or was it those mushrooms?

Individual Investigation beats Institutional Indoctrination, dad, and let's allow all interested individuals to research for truth and not hust swallow myth.

I would not infer that Scripture is wrong by grasping at differences in how various writers of the gospel record what they remember. If one apostle tells us of some people at the empty tomb or cross, and another writer remembers a different part of the morning or day with other people also, that is fine. It does not mean you can latch onto the one writer and pretend this means the other is wrong.

 

[oldbadger]

I would not infer that Scripture is wrong by grasping at differences in how various writers of the gospel record what they remember. If one apostle tells us of some people at the empty tomb or cross, and another writer remembers a different part of the morning or day with other people also, that is fine. It does not mean you can latch onto the one writer and pretend this means the other is wrong.

Huh? Don't just worry about the one day. John's entire lat week is rubbish. No part of John's last week is corroborated by the synoptics.

Now if John had been there then he certainly would not have ignored the demonstrations and picketing in the Temple. That's just one example.

No........ John's gospel is good in that he had a collection of reports which he used, but the sequence of events and timeline and his idea of who Jesus's enemies were........ rubbish.

 

[Agnostic Christian]

No, sorry you couldn't chew that meat. I would think that some wild claim that a few stars 'must-have' come together to make the event possible is lacking in evidence in a very big way!

What a joke.

There is no "must have" being stated in what you quoted. They said "one explanation". It's a hypothesis. Why are you warping their words?

This doesn't even have anything to do with creationism. Why must creationists pounce on every new opportunity for discovery to try and "stick it" to science? It's absurd and childish. If you don't want to figure out how the universe works, then fine. Stay in your little bubble.

Besides the basics such as not being able to know sizes or distances to stars, (they base all distances on a belief time exists homogeneously in the universe)

Wow, they base their research on exactly what we see all around us? Instead of presuming some nonsensical difference with no evidence anywhere to support it? For shame.

Yes, if God created the earth and then the stars for us to mark time and etc here soon after, then there is a conflict with stellar evolution and the standard model.

And the stars we can't see without cutting-edge telescopes soaking in trace amounts of light over extended periods of time, are those put there for us to mark time?

I notice when two stars need to have come together to make a flash of light fit into the cosmological models, and there is no evidence offered at all, you do not call that magic! Hypocritical.

You don't accept the evidence offered. There's a difference.

 

[oldbadger]

] I disagree.
Speculat5ion.
Your opinion of Scripture is rubbish.

No speculation at all!
Straight Evidence!
MARK's ACCOUNT
DAY ONE
When Jesus and his friends arrived in Jerusalem James and John were in everybody's bad books because of what they had asked Just before Jericho.

Jesus entered the Temple and looked about the place with his friends, then they left.

Did John mention day one? No.

DAY TWO
They stayed out in Bethany for the night, then returned the next day and Jesus and friends demonstrated in the Temple against the corruption of the money-changers and the sacrificial bird and animals traders.and they picketed the Temple Courts.

Did John mention all that happened in Day two? No

DAY THREE
Jesus and friends left the Temple and went out to Bethany for the night. The next day Jesus and friends returned to the Temple and continued to picket the Courts and debated against the Temple priests in front of the whole crowds.

Did John mention all that happened in day three? No.

Because John the Apostle had no clue about such details. He had not been there. He was writing his own story for Christians.

 

[dad]

No speculation at all!
Straight Evidence!
MARK's ACCOUNT
DAY ONE
When Jesus and his friends arrived in Jerusalem James and John were in everybody's bad books because of what they had asked Just before Jericho.

Jesus entered the Temple and looked about the place with his friends, then they left.

Did John mention day one? No.

DAY TWO
They stayed out in Bethany for the night, then returned the next day and Jesus and friends demonstrated in the Temple against the corruption of the money-changers and the sacrificial bird and animals traders.and they picketed the Temple Courts.

Did John mention all that happened in Day two? No

DAY THREE
Jesus and friends left the Temple and went out to Bethany for the night. The next day Jesus and friends returned to the Temple and continued to picket the Courts and debated against the Temple priests in front of the whole crowds.

Did John mention all that happened in day three? No.

Because John the Apostle had no clue about such details. He had not been there. He was writing his own story for Christians.

Looking at sites like this -
Christ’s Resurrection—Four Accounts, One Reality

- we see that explanations are easy. Some people choose to latch onto bits where it is a matter of faith and presume God is dead, and the apostles were lying. Those who realize that Scripture is true and have tested and proved it in many ways have no problem in giving God the benefit of the doubt.

It is purely a matter of how you choose to view things. That tells us a lot about you.

 

[oldbadger]

Looking at sites like this -
Christ’s Resurrection—Four Accounts, One Reality

Just a second! I showed you the first three days of that visit to Jerusalem. Three days of visits to the Temple.
The above does not cover those three days.
I haven't even got anywhere near the execution or just afterwards.

- we see that explanations are easy. Some people choose to latch onto bits where it is a matter of faith and presume God is dead, and the apostles were lying.

Well go and argue with them. I like many of G-John's accounts.... most valuable. He just didn't know the timeline and he went a bit wild with his exaggerations and pretences, is all

Those who realize that Scripture is true and have tested and proved it in many ways have no problem in giving God the benefit of the doubt.

Well you can't deny what I have shown you, that apostle John KNEW NOTHING of the events during the first three days of that week. We haven't even gotr close to any arrest, trial, conviction or execution yet.

It is purely a matter of how you choose to view things. That tells us a lot about you.

Us? Us? Who are 'Us'.
All this can tell about me is that I am an objective impartial observer. I most certainly could debate the existence of Jesus the Galilean more effectively than you because I have a better grounding in the history surrounding events. I'm not brainwashed in to anything.

Now. Where was John during those three days?
Answer: He was with the others with Jesus, and he would have remembered every moment of every part of those days.
John the Apostle? Nothing! Nothing!

 

[dad]

Just a second! I showed you the first three days of that visit to Jerusalem. Three days of visits to the Temple.
The above does not cover those three days.
I haven't even got anywhere near the execution or just afterwards.


Well go and argue with them. I like many of G-John's accounts.... most valuable. He just didn't know the timeline and he went a bit wild with his exaggerations and pretences, is all


Well you can't deny what I have shown you, that apostle John KNEW NOTHING of the events during the first three days of that week. We haven't even gotr close to any arrest, trial, conviction or execution yet.


Us? Us? Who are 'Us'.
All this can tell about me is that I am an objective impartial observer. I most certainly could debate the existence of Jesus the Galilean more effectively than you because I have a better grounding in the history surrounding events. I'm not brainwashed in to anything.

Now. Where was John during those three days?
Answer: He was with the others with Jesus, and he would have remembered every moment of every part of those days.
John the Apostle? Nothing! Nothing!

Explanations are easy. Some people choose to latch onto bits where it is a matter of faith and presume God is dead, and the apostles were lying. Those who realize that Scripture is true and have tested and proved it in many ways have no problem in giving God the the benefit of the doubt.

It is purely a matter of how you choose to view things

John did tell us things about the resurrection and surrounding events. You can doubt it, but you cannot offer anything in the way of evidence that he was somehow wrong.

 

[John53]

Explanations are easy. Some people choose to latch onto bits where it is a matter of faith and presume God is dead, and the apostles were lying. Those who realize that Scripture is true and have tested and proved it in many ways have no problem in giving God the the benefit of the doubt.

It is purely a matter of how you choose to view things

John did tell us things about the resurrection and surrounding events. You can doubt it, but you cannot offer anything in the way of evidence that he was somehow wrong.

This is becoming embarrassing to watch. I would suggest leaving quietly.

 

[dad]

This is becoming embarrassing to watch. I would suggest leaving quietly.

When people post the supposed proof for their silly doubts, they get blown away like a feather in a tornado.

The issue is so lame I don't have any inclination to waste time on it. But if anyone posts specs rather than huffing and puffing, well, we could look at that.

 

[oldbadger]

Explanations are easy. Some people choose to latch onto bits where it is a matter of faith and presume God is dead, and the apostles were lying.

Who are they?
I am a Deist who believes that Jesus really did exist, but also that historical research can discover where the inclusions, editions, manipulations and exaggerations occurred.
I believe that I can tell where the apostles were true. So you won't be used to folks like me.

Those who realize that Scripture is true and have tested and proved it in many ways have no problem in giving God the the benefit of the doubt.

If you have tested it so well, how come you cannot answer as to how Apostle John did not think that any of the happenings in those first three days were of interest, eh?
Scripture is only true where it is honest.

It is purely a matter of how you choose to view things

Tell folks that you have faith and many will just leave you alone, as long as you don't try to interfere with what they think or do. But if you try to control others with youre faith then that could cause difficulties.

John did tell us things about the resurrection and surrounding events. You can doubt it, but you cannot offer anything in the way of evidence that he was somehow wrong.

We have not even covered that part of the week yet! First you have to explain how he did not know about anything which happened in the first three days during THREE visits to the Temple!

You mentioned that 'we know......' You once told me that there is no 'we', that you belong to no church, group or collective. Creed. True?

 

[oldbadger]

When people post the supposed proof for their silly doubts, they get blown away like a feather in a tornado.

That is what is happening to you.
You haven't got a verse which you can refer to to explain why apostle John knew NOTHING about what Jesus and his friends did in the first three days of their visit to Jerusalem.
The tornado of objective research is blowing you around a bit.

The issue is so lame I don't have any inclination to waste time on it. But if anyone posts specs rather than huffing and puffing, well, we could look at that.

You have the versea of the Gospel of Mark to cover all that I have covered.
Obviously, if you are ignorant about these then just tell me that you need to be taught and I will show you chapter and verse for the first three days. And I will show you that John knew none of it. Very strange.

And when you have acknowledge that we can move on to the next three days.!!

 

[John53]

When people post the supposed proof for their silly doubts, they get blown away like a feather in a tornado.

The issue is so lame I don't have any inclination to waste time on it. But if anyone posts specs rather than huffing and puffing, well, we could look at that.

The evidence has been posted several times. The only huffing and puffing is yours.

 

[John53]

Lie. Belief is not evidence. If you claim there was any nonbelief based evidence provide the link. Hahahaha

And as usual just huffing and puffing. Is it possible for you to have a friendly adult discussion or do you always use the, "I'm always right so you're wrong ner ner nee ner ner" tactic?

 

[Darkstorn]

And as usual just huffing and puffing. Is it possible for you to have a friendly adult discussion or do you always use the, "I'm always right so you're wrong ner ner nee ner ner" tactic?

I use this tactic: Whenever i see him post something that blatantly violates the rules of the forum, i report him. Which is most of the time he says anything. I don't talk with Last Thursdayists.

It's clearly not working so maybe i'm just an idiot.

 

[Polymath257]

**** Mod Post ***

**** Thread Locked Subject to Staff Review****