Let’s chat about the atheist religion.

[alang1216]

Any evidence that people back then were too stupid too build ships when they were able to survive horrendous weather and that's why we're here?

Any evidence that people back then were too stupid to build smart phones when they were able to survive horrendous weather and that's why we're here?

They were just as smart as we are but there is no evidence they possessed the technology for either. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

They lived near rivers and coasts, right?

And if they did?

They did. There’s no if.

So it shouldn’t be a shock that they navigated and took advantage of that resource.

That was never in dispute. The ancients didn't even cross a sea if they could avoid it, they generally sailed within sight of land. Are you trying to say they had the ships to cross the Atlantic?

I guess that's why more than 10,000 ships have sunk in the Atlantic in the last 1,000 years or so.
People risk all for new found wealth.

All true but it was only in the last 1,000 years that Scandinavians developed ships capable of long ocean voyages. Before that, maybe the Chinese but not the ancient Egyptians, Greeks, or Romans.

 

[alang1216]

Any evidence that people back then were too stupid too build ships when they were able to survive horrendous weather and that's why we're here?

Any evidence that people back then were too stupid to build smart phones when they were able to survive horrendous weather and that's why we're here?

They were just as smart as we are but there is no evidence they possessed the technology for either. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

How many people survive hurricanes because of Smart Devices?
I guess we should have Puerto Rico buy Smart Devices.
Not to mention all the nations around the world that have had thousands of casualties due to mother nature.
Do you ever read the news?

No idea what your point is you're all over the place, historically and geographically.

 

[alang1216]

bond is drunk on disinformation as a pleasurable way to pass time ...

How can one who is wrong all the time know about information? You're even wrong about what evolution states.

Too many people look at evolution all wrong. They limit evolution to biological processes when in reality evolution has been going on since the beginning of time. Evolution is when anything moves from a less advanced state to a more advanced state; a less complex state to a more complex state. There are five distinct phases or stages of evolution. Each stage built upon the previous stage. The five stages are cosmic evolution, stellar evolution, chemical evolution, biological evolution and the evolution of consciousness.

When one properly views evolution and studies the evolution of the creation of space and time from subatomic particles to beings that know and create, he cannot help but see God’s hand in creation.

On the contrary. You forgot the evolution of God and religion.

 

[Indeependent]

That was never in dispute. The ancients didn't even cross a sea if they could avoid it, they generally sailed within sight of land. Are you trying to say they had the ships to cross the Atlantic?

Still no explanation of how Sumerians and Egyptians ended up in different places?

Here is one:
" The Pre-Flood home of Noah and his family was in the area of Babylonia which was some 500 miles east from Mount Ararat, in what is today modern Turkey. After the flood they migrated back to their homeland and built cities. God then caused the confusion of languages which caused them to disperse into the world."

These people could sail across the seas. Thus, you are wrong. You have the history and still wrong. Otherwise, you would've been all over me like a rash.

I can give you the details if you want.

Were you expecting me to explain how Sumerians and Egyptians ended up in different places? I don't know how, recorded history doesn't go that far back. I only know they were there before the Flood and they were there after the Flood and it doesn't seem to have been noticed by them.

You said these people could sail across the seas. I think you're just making that up. What kind of boats did they have? Hint, archeologist have never found an ancient shipwreck capable of crossing the ocean.

Keep in mind that until post WWI, the US was a polluted shithole with coal lined skies.

 

[Indeependent]

Any evidence that people back then were too stupid too build ships when they were able to survive horrendous weather and that's why we're here?

Any evidence that people back then were too stupid to build smart phones when they were able to survive horrendous weather and that's why we're here?

They were just as smart as we are but there is no evidence they possessed the technology for either. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

How many people survive hurricanes because of Smart Devices?
I guess we should have Puerto Rico buy Smart Devices.
Not to mention all the nations around the world that have had thousands of casualties due to mother nature.
Do you ever read the news?

No idea what your point is you're all over the place, historically and geographically.

Spoiled brats such as ourselves could not have survived 100 years ago.
You really have to do some history before assuming the heaven we’re living in now has been around that long.

 

[BreezeWood]

RE: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.
⁜→ ding, et al,

BLUF: Paradox: The question about → "that the gods are such poor communicators" (sic) implies the possibility of multiple deities ("gods" >→ "Polytheism") and the assumption that the "gods" are non-human that do communicate ("intelligent" + "supernatural"). However, the question on → "have you asked a rabbi" (sic) implies a connection to an Abrahamic Religion (Monotheism + multiple religions with a belief in the same Supreme Being).

Why is it that the gods are such poor communicators?

Have you asked a rabbi that question yet?

Or Indeependent or RoccoR or rylah or irosie91 or Mindful ?

I wonder why not?

(COMMENT)

This is an illegitimately complex question (controversial presuppositions) that have to be addressed individually.

The belief in a deity (monotheistic or polytheistic) implies a belief in the supernatural (attributed to a causal force beyond human understanding or scientific explanation using the known laws of the universe).

Is the original question even in the realm of being answerable? And there is the first of the dilemma about poor communication. Is it poor communication? Is the "communication" unintelligible because of human language limitations? Even the Abrahamic Religions with a belief in the same Supreme Being have very different practices in using charms, spells, or rituals to attempt to produce supernatural effects or ultimate reality or God. Even the "words of power," the magical talisman, amulets, and sacred ruins/relics believed to have special powers are very different.

(ALTERNATIVE)

Maybe the belief in some spiritual existence beyond death, and the power of infinite is just a mental aberration to allow the mind some peace. The inability to understand the deity is because there actually is no deity.

Most Respectfully,
R

The inability to understand the deity is because there actually is no deity.

.
bold statement from a blob of physiology ... and its inseparable spiritual content.

howabout understanding without a deity is as relevant as with one.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.
⁜→ ding, et al,

BLUF: Well, this is actually the beginning of the question on the "fallibility" of the Abrahamic Deity.

Actually, GOD created a very beautiful and highly intelligent Cherubim who would later come to defy GOD and tempt Adam.

(COMMENT)

Yes, the mere fact that the Supreme Being could create an imperfect Angelic Creature that would turn against the Majesty of the Heavens means:

​

◈ The Supreme Being was not without failings.​

◈ The Supreme Being did not have a credible presence of unlimited power such that the authority would not be challenged by the Majesty's own creation.​

◈ The Supreme Being was not all-knowing and was not able to create a loyal Angelic Creature.​

◈ And the Supreme Being was not so all-knowing that it could predict disloyal behaviors by the Angelic Creations.​

◈ The Supreme Being was not so infallible that it needed to Rule Humanity by intimidation and coercion in order to maintain homage, induced special honors, and mandatory ritual respect shown publicly.​

The issue of free-will aside, the capacity of a deity can be measured by direct examination.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Vandalshandle]

Do you believe that non-Christians who equally strive to live a good and moral life will ... “burn in hell,” or somehow be punished simply for rejecting “Jesus was GOD HIMSELF” Christianity?

I think this is an important question. But first I would like to share my beliefs on heaven and hell because I think too many people get caught up in that. It is not about the destination. It has never been about the destination. It has always been about the journey. Specifically, to end the journey as a better person than when one started. A relationship with the Creator or Jesus or the Holy Spirit or whatever perception one wants to use for God is meant to inform our journey. No one really knows what happens after we die. The closest I can come to heaven is being eternally united with God on some level. The closest I can come to hell is being eternally separated from God. In effect he grants us our wish which is to be left alone and he withdraws his spirit from us. Only then will people realize what they lost and never knew what they had because they failed to seek it out even though the evidence was all around them. So getting back to your question, if someone offers you a gift and you reject it, was the gift received? Because that is what Christ was offering, a gift. I don't have a good answer, but I believe we will all be offered a chance to accept it when we die. The ones who embraced the spirit of God and transformed themselves will experience God at a different level. The ones who didn't but accepted the final offer will be united but won't experience God at the same level. The ones who reject the final offer will be granted their wish which is to be left alone.

But regardless of all of that, the ones who embraced God's spirit while alive will lead richer and fuller lives along their journey than if they had never embraced God's spirit and will be able to see how God was pruning them, will learn more lessons and will find more peace through the storms.

I think your comment about the “gift” of belief is fair — an honest presentation of a view of what a “connection to God” can bring. I really like that you speak of its potential “transforming” influence on believers. Also I like that you made your points only once directly referring to your own spiritual connection to Christ. Of course mere belief that “Jesus was GOD HIMSELF” guarantees no such transformation. To me, when such belief is dogmatically maintained it can actually narrow one’s humanity. It can be just another false ideology.

Whatever our religious or philosophical views, we all live on the same planet, in a world where MONEY is God, more or less. But that’s another whole story...

"I AM the way the truth and the life, no man comes to the Father except through ME." Sorry, but that comment alone would seem exclusive of any other means or directive. If you don't have a relationship with GOD through the LORD JESUS CHRIST, you don't and cannot have a relationship with the FATHER.

All those billions of poor buddists, Islamics, Jews, and other saddly deluded lost souls, except for you and your pals....

 

[james bond]

That was never in dispute. The ancients didn't even cross a sea if they could avoid it, they generally sailed within sight of land. Are you trying to say they had the ships to cross the Atlantic?

Still no explanation of how Sumerians and Egyptians ended up in different places?

Here is one:
" The Pre-Flood home of Noah and his family was in the area of Babylonia which was some 500 miles east from Mount Ararat, in what is today modern Turkey. After the flood they migrated back to their homeland and built cities. God then caused the confusion of languages which caused them to disperse into the world."

These people could sail across the seas. Thus, you are wrong. You have the history and still wrong. Otherwise, you would've been all over me like a rash.

I can give you the details if you want.

Were you expecting me to explain how Sumerians and Egyptians ended up in different places? I don't know how, recorded history doesn't go that far back. I only know they were there before the Flood and they were there after the Flood and it doesn't seem to have been noticed by them.

You said these people could sail across the seas. I think you're just making that up. What kind of boats did they have? Hint, archeologist have never found an ancient shipwreck capable of crossing the ocean.

I only have their Biblical history and who ended up where. I assume you have the secular one. After Noah's Flood, the continents were broken up so they would have to sail across the oceans like we do today (the continents may not have been exactly like today as they are still moving) as they had no jet planes.

The Ancient Egyptian Rowing Stroke: Propelling the Boats of Gods and Men

2 March 2018 Tim Koch is still in denial. In my recent post on the Nile Boat Races of the 1970s and early 1980s, I was rather dubious about some of the attempts by the Egyptian Ministry of Tourism …

heartheboatsing.com

I don't have who was a Tower of Babel, but afterward they didn't speak Hebrew, but different languages so they migrated across the globe as God wanted them to do. This was about 250 years after Noah's Flood, so they had boats that could make the trip. Look, your history has holes, too, as there is no explanation for the different languages.

THE DESCENDANTS OF NOAH - Genesis Ten

THE DESCENDANTS OF NOAH - Genesis Ten

www.bible-truth.org

You don't have any links, so that means I am ahead. So much for Bart Ehrman. You probably have to pay for his links.

 

[Vandalshandle]

That was never in dispute. The ancients didn't even cross a sea if they could avoid it, they generally sailed within sight of land. Are you trying to say they had the ships to cross the Atlantic?

Still no explanation of how Sumerians and Egyptians ended up in different places?

Here is one:
" The Pre-Flood home of Noah and his family was in the area of Babylonia which was some 500 miles east from Mount Ararat, in what is today modern Turkey. After the flood they migrated back to their homeland and built cities. God then caused the confusion of languages which caused them to disperse into the world."

These people could sail across the seas. Thus, you are wrong. You have the history and still wrong. Otherwise, you would've been all over me like a rash.

I can give you the details if you want.

Were you expecting me to explain how Sumerians and Egyptians ended up in different places? I don't know how, recorded history doesn't go that far back. I only know they were there before the Flood and they were there after the Flood and it doesn't seem to have been noticed by them.

You said these people could sail across the seas. I think you're just making that up. What kind of boats did they have? Hint, archeologist have never found an ancient shipwreck capable of crossing the ocean.

I only have their Biblical history and who ended up where. I assume you have the secular one. After Noah's Flood, the continents were broken up so they would have to sail across the oceans like we do today (the continents may not have been exactly like today as they are still moving) as they had no jet planes.

The Ancient Egyptian Rowing Stroke: Propelling the Boats of Gods and Men

2 March 2018 Tim Koch is still in denial. In my recent post on the Nile Boat Races of the 1970s and early 1980s, I was rather dubious about some of the attempts by the Egyptian Ministry of Tourism …

heartheboatsing.com

I don't have who was a Tower of Babel, but afterward they didn't speak Hebrew, but different languages so they migrated across the globe as God wanted them to do. This was about 250 years after Noah's Flood, so they had boats that could make the trip. Look, your history has holes, too, as there is no explanation for the different languages.

THE DESCENDANTS OF NOAH - Genesis Ten

THE DESCENDANTS OF NOAH - Genesis Ten

www.bible-truth.org

You don't have any links, so that means I am ahead. So much for Bart Ehrman. You probably have to pay for his links.

PLEASE spare me!

 

[james bond]

The boats they had in the Mediterranean back then were incapable of crossing the Atlantic since they were mostly powered by rowers. Check out the shipwrecks that have been found.

LMAO. Sure, there were few shipwrecks like we jet crashes today. However, the majority made it. You take the smaller bit of truth and try to stretch to fit your fake evolution theories. This is the basic story behind your atheist science.

The following links explain how the ancient peoples migrated across the world in time.

From Ararat to the Americas—In a Few Thousand Years?

A reader from Arizona asks about how the people spread out over the world after the Flood and about Ussher’s date of creation.

answersingenesis.org

By Land

In the Days of Peleg

Ancient documents about the days of Peleg are consistent with the total accuracy of the Bible’s chronology.

answersingenesis.org

By Sea

The Large Ships of Antiquity

Just because we cannot duplicate something that was done thousands of years ago, it does not mean the ancients could not do it either!

answersingenesis.org

I still see no links by Ehrman or anyone else. Hard to just trust your opinions based on shipwrecks. You act like these people were traveling in the SS Minnow with the skipper and Gilligan.

 

[ding]

Any evidence that people back then were too stupid too build ships when they were able to survive horrendous weather and that's why we're here?

Any evidence that people back then were too stupid to build smart phones when they were able to survive horrendous weather and that's why we're here?

They were just as smart as we are but there is no evidence they possessed the technology for either. Do you have evidence to the contrary?

They lived near rivers and coasts, right?

And if they did?

They did. There’s no if.

So it shouldn’t be a shock that they navigated and took advantage of that resource.

That was never in dispute. The ancients didn't even cross a sea if they could avoid it, they generally sailed within sight of land. Are you trying to say they had the ships to cross the Atlantic?

I have no idea. They had boats. No one really knows what extent they had or that they limited their voyages to sight of land.

At least 10,000 years ago man wasn’t much different than modern man in physiological terms. i would expect they had the same distribution of intelligence that we have now, so I’m not going to limit what that intelligence might have produced.

The boats they had in the Mediterranean back then were incapable of crossing the Atlantic since they were mostly powered by rowers. Check out the shipwrecks that have been found.

I wasn’t interested in whether they could cross the Atlantic. I’m only interested if they had boats that could navigate their waters. Is that likely?

 

[ding]

LittleNipper — Why would I want a relationship with your Father? I don’t even like you. As for Jesus, from what I’ve read he may have been a charismatic preacher, or maybe just another religious fanatic, maybe a Jewish communist trouble-maker, or a genuine prophet. I’d like to believe he was the latter. But if he’s a friend of yours ...

Just so I can understand what you mean better what’s a genuine prophet to you?

 

[ding]

At least 10,000 years ago man wasn’t much different than modern man in physiological terms. i would expect they had the same distribution of intelligence that we have now, so I’m not going to limit what that intelligence might have produced.

. Our discoveries and knowledge are cumulative in nature. So if you cant think of any reason to limit what they might have produced, then you are a grade a fool.

Do you you understand the difference between intelligence and knowledge?

Obviously i do, and you do not.

Do you place any limits on what could have been produced in the year 1810? By your own statements you do not. Obviously that is stupid. It doesn't become any smarter or more valid to change the year to 8000 BCE.

You said something pretty dumb to support a dumb implication you made. You see what happens when you start digging...it just gets worse and worse.for you....

We are talking about ancient man and boats. Who lived near rivers and coasts. Do you not suppose he saw logs floating in the water moving with the currents? Do you not suppose he swam in the water and realized he could float? So is it that huge of a leap for the ones on the far right side of the log normal distribution of intelligence to make the leap of transportation on rivers or bays or even coasts?

It must be sad going through life seeking fights like you do.

Ancient man had boats since day one, they just didn't have any that could cross an ocean. So far as I know the Ark was unpowered. Great for lazily drifting, not so great for going somewhere specific.

So they had boats but they couldn’t go anywhere? Because going someplace specific is sort of a requirement back then I would imagine. I mean it’s not like they were pleasure boats or anything. They probably served some specific purpose which required them to travel to some specific destination.

 

[ding]

bond is drunk on disinformation as a pleasurable way to pass time ...

How can one who is wrong all the time know about information? You're even wrong about what evolution states.

Too many people look at evolution all wrong. They limit evolution to biological processes when in reality evolution has been going on since the beginning of time. Evolution is when anything moves from a less advanced state to a more advanced state; a less complex state to a more complex state. There are five distinct phases or stages of evolution. Each stage built upon the previous stage. The five stages are cosmic evolution, stellar evolution, chemical evolution, biological evolution and the evolution of consciousness.

When one properly views evolution and studies the evolution of the creation of space and time from subatomic particles to beings that know and create, he cannot help but see God’s hand in creation.

On the contrary. You forgot the evolution of God and religion.

Religion, sure. God, no. There must be an uncaused first cause. You can’t get around it.

 

[ding]

howabout understanding without a deity is as relevant as with one.

Not possible. God IS the source of reality. There is no understanding if there is no reality. God IS logic. There is no logic for understanding without God.

 

[ding]

RE: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.
⁜→ ding, et al,

BLUF: Paradox: The question about → "that the gods are such poor communicators" (sic) implies the possibility of multiple deities ("gods" >→ "Polytheism") and the assumption that the "gods" are non-human that do communicate ("intelligent" + "supernatural"). However, the question on → "have you asked a rabbi" (sic) implies a connection to an Abrahamic Religion (Monotheism + multiple religions with a belief in the same Supreme Being).

Why is it that the gods are such poor communicators?

Have you asked a rabbi that question yet?

Or Indeependent or RoccoR or rylah or irosie91 or Mindful ?

I wonder why not?

(COMMENT)

This is an illegitimately complex question (controversial presuppositions) that have to be addressed individually.

The belief in a deity (monotheistic or polytheistic) implies a belief in the supernatural (attributed to a causal force beyond human understanding or scientific explanation using the known laws of the universe).

Is the original question even in the realm of being answerable? And there is the first of the dilemma about poor communication. Is it poor communication? Is the "communication" unintelligible because of human language limitations? Even the Abrahamic Religions with a belief in the same Supreme Being have very different practices in using charms, spells, or rituals to attempt to produce supernatural effects or ultimate reality or God. Even the "words of power," the magical talisman, amulets, and sacred ruins/relics believed to have special powers are very different.

(ALTERNATIVE)

Maybe the belief in some spiritual existence beyond death, and the power of infinite is just a mental aberration to allow the mind some peace. The inability to understand the deity is because there actually is no deity.

Most Respectfully,
R

Or maybe God’s spirit is within us.

 

[ding]

RE: Let’s chat about the atheist religion.
⁜→ ding, et al,

BLUF: Paradox: The question about → "that the gods are such poor communicators" (sic) implies the possibility of multiple deities ("gods" >→ "Polytheism") and the assumption that the "gods" are non-human that do communicate ("intelligent" + "supernatural"). However, the question on → "have you asked a rabbi" (sic) implies a connection to an Abrahamic Religion (Monotheism + multiple religions with a belief in the same Supreme Being).

Why is it that the gods are such poor communicators?

Have you asked a rabbi that question yet?

Or Indeependent or RoccoR or rylah or irosie91 or Mindful ?

I wonder why not?

(COMMENT)

This is an illegitimately complex question (controversial presuppositions) that have to be addressed individually.

The belief in a deity (monotheistic or polytheistic) implies a belief in the supernatural (attributed to a causal force beyond human understanding or scientific explanation using the known laws of the universe).

Is the original question even in the realm of being answerable? And there is the first of the dilemma about poor communication. Is it poor communication? Is the "communication" unintelligible because of human language limitations? Even the Abrahamic Religions with a belief in the same Supreme Being have very different practices in using charms, spells, or rituals to attempt to produce supernatural effects or ultimate reality or God. Even the "words of power," the magical talisman, amulets, and sacred ruins/relics believed to have special powers are very different.

(ALTERNATIVE)

Maybe the belief in some spiritual existence beyond death, and the power of infinite is just a mental aberration to allow the mind some peace. The inability to understand the deity is because there actually is no deity.

Most Respectfully,
R

The question have you asked a rabbi this question was rhetorical. Because she would never be that rude. She’s very selective with her animosity.

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

Just so I can understand what you mean better what’s a genuine prophet to you?

You always raise good questions, Ding. You’ve sort of got me this time!

I guess my meaning is a bit conventional, and would include philosophers and religious leaders like the Buddha & Confucius, and Biblical prophets too. Mohammed and Moses would fit in, and even semi-mythical figures, like the Greek law-giver Solon or the blind Tiresias. I think they were a pretty varied lot in reality, with doubtless many imperfections. I guess what was in common is they were seen as prophets or moral leaders to future generations. This is more or less the Jewish and very much the official Muslim view of Jesus, by the way. I suspect many non-Christians and atheists would grant Jesus the title of moral leader and prophet, at least if they viewed him just as an historical person living in a troubled time.

 

[james bond]

Ancient man had boats since day one, they just didn't have any that could cross an ocean. So far as I know the Ark was unpowered. Great for lazily drifting, not so great for going somewhere specific.

Rowing wasn't for going across an ocean. It was more for maneuvering during a sea battle. Thus, the Egyptians had a navy and military boats during the time we are discussing. To go across an ocean, we all know that one would need sails. These people knew how to navigate, too. Where are you getting your information? Are you just figuring it out based on pictures you saw of Noah's ark?