Young earth vs old earth theory?

How is Jesus Christ made up if historians of Roman and Jewish writers state there was a man named Jesus. Since he existed then it's only your opinion that Jesus did not performed miracles, atoned for our sins and paved the way for our eventual resurrection and salvation and exaltation. Do you have proof? I have the Bible, a written record of the times and events of our Lord. You have nothing.

 

Exactly right. All are free to exercise their religion. All. Every single religion is protected from all the other religions, too. Freedom of religion is, indeed, freedom from religion. No single religion is endorsed. You claim otherwise. Good luck with that. When is the big court date?

 

I said the magical stuff is made up, at the least. The magical jesus is a made up character. And i can for sure you tell you who has "nothing" showing otherwise. That would be everybody.

 

I think you are really losing persepctive here.

Why are you worried about a sports team changing its name? You can not POSSIBLY believe that means and end to accurate history. We're just not all that stupid.

And, are you really sure that what Trump, West (head of the GOP) and all those Republican congressman want is a dicatorship? It's certainly clear that they want to end what we have, but I think you're just guessing at what form of government they want.

Byt the way, what form of government do YOU want?

Do you agree with Trump and West and all those Republican congressmaen that losing an election is justification for terminating our form of government?

If not, why are you not pushing back against their move in a strong way?

Also, the idea that Biden is paid by China could not be more stupid. You REALLY need to check out your sources.

 

Arizona tried that.

They passed a bill that said that religious belief is a valid reason to ignore Arizona law.

Seriously!! They DID that!!

Of course, it was vetoed and it's never going to happen. In no way is that kind of use of religion something imagined by our founders when they wrote that first amendment.

 

Again, you're trying to claim that religion gives you immunity from the law.

Your community does not have to allow you to have a naked pig roast in your front yard. It doesn't have to let you turn your residential neighborhood home into a church. They don't have to let you broadcast calls to prayer from speakers on your home's roof tower. etc.

But, that is not at all what the first amendment means. You don't get to ignore the law.

 

Tacitus is definitely interesting reading. However, my reading did not turn up any mention of Jesus being supernatural in any way. (I chose to read this as portions this work by Tacitus were required in my daughter's undergraduate coursework.)

I would point out that your claims fully depend on him being supernatural.

But, there is no confirmation of Jesus being supernatural in any way.

 

Exactly. It’s strange that evangelical Christians who believe the early Bible would fail to even ask a Jew what it all means. The Old Testament was written by Jews for Jews, not Christians. They are parables or stories written to scare the bejesus out of people.

 

And there were schisms along the way, branching into the Abrahamic religions of 2020, which now dominate the world outside of Asia. It is an academic task to follow these myths throughout recorded history and watch them change under selective pressures. All of it makes sense and nothing is out of order, when analyzing the history of it. We can follow these Abrahamic myths through history, starting from before they "originated" via plagiarized, older mythologies to the point of fulfilment of those prophecies (as many before Jesus had already done, according to the plagiarized mythologies)., through the birth of Islam (which crushed the brilliance of the Arab world as surely as the Roman Catholic Empire killed Hellenistic thought, Aristotelean thought, and inquiry in general for a millennium in its territories) to today's state of affairs, wherein one wants elimination of the other, which controls a tiny little state, while the third 'controls' most of the modern world. And we all have nukes. Yay. Time to go Hindu. Oops, they have nukes, too. Dang it.

 

are you being deliberately obtuse on purpose or do you really not know this stuff. I should think a religionist like you would be well versed in this particular issue.


https://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment1.html
1st Amendment Annotations

• Religion
• An Overview
  • Scholarly Commentary
  • Court Tests Applied to Legislation Affecting Religion
  • Government Neutrality in Religious Disputes
• Establishment of Religion
  • Financial Assistance to Church-Related Institutions
  • Governmental Encouragement of Religion in Public Schools: Released Time
  • Governmental Encouragement of Religion in Public Schools: Prayers and Bible Reading
  • Governmental Encouragement of Religion in Public Schools: Curriculum Restriction
  • Access of Religious Groups to Public Property
  • Tax Exemptions of Religious Property
  • Exemption of Religious Organizations from Generally Applicable Laws
  • Sunday Closing Laws
  • Conscientious Objection
  • Regulation of Religious Solicitation
  • Religion in Governmental Observances
  • Religious Displays on Government Property
  • Miscellaneous
• Free Exercise of Religion
  • The Belief-Conduct Distinction
  • The Mormon Cases
  • The Jehovah's Witnesses Cases
  • Free Exercise Exemption from General Governmental Requirements
  • Religious Test Oaths
  • Religious Disqualification

 

And it’s only your opinion that he did atone for everyone’s sin. Now, you’ve introduced another fallacy to prove a fallacy. That’s the fallacy we were born with original sin. This is why the Bible is such an “unbelievable” form of evidence. Even science does not recognize the opinion of other scientists as evidence from their trials they have conducted.

Do you think the CDC will allow the Covid vaccine from these pharma corps based upon their opinions ? No, they must SHOW the evidence from the trials they conducted.

So, where is the evidence that Jesus is the son of a god, when even “god’s” have no evidentiary existences ?

Do you want a scientific way to prove a god ?
Do a simple trial and have three thousand people pray to god that three loaves of bread will feed them for a week. Shouldn’t be too hard to do for a god.

 

Neither does OF mean you must practice some religion. It simply means you are free to practice religion, “any religion” that doesn’t break any laws we make. It’s ridiculous to assume freedom of religion means you must practice a religion. We are all free to not practice a religion. Good grief.

 

That’s big fallacy. Evidence is a body of observable facts. The Bible is not evidence of anything. You continually miss state science too. Science based facts never represents proof. It adds knowledge.

 

You say this, yet you keep acting as if religion is science and I have to keep correcting you...

 

Nope. You can have mine...

I've had numerous vaccines in my life. I was vaccinated as a child for various things, and I got the flu vaccine for the last two years (prior to this year, of which I have now decided not to get one anymore).

Sometimes science is applicable... Other times, things such as economics, history, logic, etc. are more applicable. It depends on the specific issue at hand.

See above.

The Bible contains a lot of useful information. What is Fix News?

 

No, it is Will who is acting as if religion is science. I am saying that they are completely separate things.

 

The meaning of the term scientific theory is significantly different from the common vernacular of theory.
In everyday use, the word "theory" often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence.
To be accepted by the scientific community, a theory (in the scientific sense of the word) must be strongly supported by many different lines of evidence. Claiming that science does not use supporting evidence is inane.

 

Fallacy Fallacy.

Incorrect. Evidence is, quite simply, any statement that supports an argument. Evidence is, essentially, a predicate.

Facts are, quite simply, assumed predicate. If a predicate is agreed upon by both you and me, then it becomes a fact. If either one of us disagrees with a fact, then it returns to being an argument.

Yes, it is. It is evidence that the Christian God exists. It is evidence that Satan exists. It is evidence that Adam, Eve, Abraham, Lot, Ruth, David, Goliath, etc. all existed. It is evidence of MANY things.

No, I don't. That is what people like you and Will are doing.

Facts are not based in science. Facts are simply assumed predicate. Facts are about logic, not science.

 

Science is logic. Science is a method of deductive logic that is our best way of obtaining knowledge. That's why we had to invent it. Because, frankly, your iron aged book of fairy tales -- one of our first and worst attempts at philosophy and science and morality -- just wasn't cutting it.

You are holding the same iron aged book of magical nonsense in your hand as people were holding 700 years ago. It hasn't changed. But now you get to comment on it on a quantum mechanical machine on an internet that relies on general relativity, and you get to live past about the age of 35 while doing so. Thanks to science, the best method ever invented of finding out what is true. You're welcome.

 

Do you now agree that there is a bright line between science (experimental sciece, the science we use to examine the universe around us) and religion?

 

Because, Jesus was a common name at that time. Christ was not his given Jewish name. Who is to say anyone knew who “Jesus “ really was.

 

There is no such thing as a "scientific theory". There are only theories. Some theories are unfalsifiable and can only ever remain theories of religion. Other theories are falsifiable, and can become theories of science (and can eventually get destroyed via falsification).

The word theory means "explanatory argument". Philosophy and logic define this word, and it means the same whether in everyday use, or whether talking about religion or science.

Science is not a community. It is a set of falsifiable theories (IOW, it is a set of falsifiable models that predict nature). There are no "communities" in science.

There is no "scientific sense" of the word. There is only the word 'theory', as defined by philosophy and logic.

Science does not make use of supporting evidence. That is what RELIGION does. You, like Will, do not understand what science and religion are, nor how they work, nor the logical framework behind them.

No, it is simply understanding what science is and how it works. It is understanding what religion is and how it works. It is understanding what logic is and how it works. It is understanding what evidence is and what proof is.

 

Its obviously an attempt to disavow the English language. That’s made up sht that does not appear in any dictionary...this is what conservatives and trumpets do. They just make up sht.

A fact in science is an observed truth that can be measured or illustrated. There is no disputing FACTS in evidence. It’s not sht one can just make up because they are wrong, ignorant and want to pretend the entire scientific community is instead. Its hilarious. People who make theses statements don’t even deserve a seat at the table when science is involved.

 

Statements may be found by the millions.

To be evidence of some proposition, WAY more is required.

This is not true in sciene. In science, a fact is a well recorded observation, such as a temperature taken by a specific method at a specified time and place.

There is NO assumption, no agreement, no element of logic or argument involved in a fact.

Facts are not argument. They are recorded observations.

Like all statements, the statements in the Bible are open to interpretation. And, there isn't any possibility of those statements forming an argument concerning the existence of god.

So NOW you want to claim that logic and science SEPARATE???

 

I agree that the bible is an iron age book full of magical explanations to unanswerable fundamental human questions. OTOH, I think it is the most successful attempt at philosophy and morality in human history. (Success measured in longevity, reach and effect) Any science in it is merely fundamental observation (the earth is an orb and such) while explanatory origin myths proved more than sufficient for the ignorant masses.