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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Thanks I guess I don't need to read his book. Isn't sexual union part of evolution? So it wasn't the Sanhedrin that accused Jesus of being a blasphemer and brought the matter to Pilate? Or do you think maybe that was a myth too?
If I remember correctly Pilate wanted to release Jesus. Remember? But what happened?
Wonder why. Since humans supposedly came about from interbreeding eventually stemming from fishes and prior etc.
The Sanhedrin had no power of crucifixion.
But they did accuse him of blasphemy. No they did not have power to legally kill him. Pilate did. You know that.
Of course.
It's fine with me if it's fine with you that you've chosen creationism, but it pretty much guarantees that you will be forced to reject all correct science that contradicts those beliefs, rendering those opinions relatively valueless to a critical thinking and scientifically literate community. You hold them not because they are reasonable, but because you choose to. Reason tells us that cetaceans had terrestrial ancestors. They have lungs, which would not be selected for in an aquatic environment. They don't work under water, which is why these animals need to come up for air. That's also why terrestrial animals don't have gills. They'd have to keep sticking their heads in water to breathe.
You might be enjoying yourself, but you don't appear to be learning anything. If his purpose is to teach you using evidenced argument, he is indeed wasting his time. That's not how you decide what's true except in the areas of your life unrelated to your faith, where you likely do use evidence to decide what's true, like looking at the online menu of a restaurant you were considering patronizing and deciding that you do or don't want to pay those prices, or looking at a traffic light and deciding whether to proceed or stop. In those situations, evidence and reason inform your beliefs and choices, and failure to think critically can cost you, but not in the creationism-vs-science part of your life, where, fortunately, not recognizing that you are incorrect won't cause you pay a price greater than not realizing that dolphins are what they are or that the theory of evolution is correct.
I've only ever seen that word used by creationists and recognize when I see it that their opinions will be like yours. The word has no utility with the critical thinker, no more than gravitationist does, which we would no doubt be reading if gravity science contradicted creationists beliefs. I can't imagine that even a tenth of a percent of scientifically literate people ever use either of those words to describe their beliefs.
Is Jesus the only character in history to have been convicted of unrelated capital crimes by two legal systems, neither crime being violent? His words and deeds were called blasphemy by the Jews for "violating the Sabbath law (by healing on the Sabbath); threatening to destroy the Jewish Temple; practicing sorcery, exorcising people by the power of demons; and claiming to be the Messiah," but sedition by the Romans for challenging Roman authority when he called himself the king of the Jews. Both were willing to execute him for it, even though only one had the power. He didn't deserve to die for either of those things by humanist standards, where blasphemy isn't a thing, and sedition or treason require actual or attempted harm be done.
The people who matter and who know what they are talking about say they did
They didn't see it and maybe you think you can show evidence biologically of the different consequential transformations the scientists you say know offer up with genetic biological changes.
Very good. The Jewish Sanhedrin accused him of blasphemy. And managed to get him to appear in front of Pilate for the death blow. Pilate as you know, wanted to let him go. But ..he didn't.
There are some problems with the Barabbas narrative according to the Roman historians, plus the other accounts of Pilate don't match the scriptures. However, since nothing can be proved one way or the other, I'll pass on this.
What makes you think that you can trust the Bible for getting the details right? Pilate may have been totally for the crucifixion of Jesus. The accounts in the Bible make him look as if he were a rather indecisive leader and that seems to be unlikely for a Roman of that time.
The two thieves nailed up alongside of Jesus is problematic too. Crucifixion was reserved for state crimes. Thievery would not qualify.
Under Pilate, I'm not sure which state crimes would get the death penalty, but what the Roman historians tell us is that Pilate was recalled to Rome for being overly brutal.
That sort of contradicts the Christian version of Pilate. But I have heard that too.
I am quite sure that not all secular narratives are accurate.
From the Biblical account, Pilate gave in to the crowd, yelling for Jesus' execution. There are some interesting aspects to this, though. I'd have to read more about it in the Bible again.
It is a matter of fact, not opinion, that some medicines that scientists make up have a deleterious effect on a patient, and these are prescribed by doctors who may even know about the possible dangerous results of taking the medicine.
Nor scriptural.