Post Any Evidence For God Here

[tzor]

I was referring to the entirety of the Bible.

Then your statement is false. Some "books" of the Bible are, for example, poetry and poetry is not myth. There is enough material to assert that Acts of the Apostles is historically accurate. The entirety of the Bible is not myth. (There is actually a Jewish comedy work in the middle of it. Great "fish tale," if you know what I mean.)

You remember I also live on Long Island right?

Yes, but I can't bring Cuban cigars into the United States. I do have my standards. If we were both, perhaps, in Bermuda at the same time, it might be possible.

[Metsfanmax]

Then your statement is false. Some "books" of the Bible are, for example, poetry and poetry is not myth.

Poetry can be myth. To again use the Iliad and the Odyssey as an example, these are considered to be poems. Poetry merely describes the form of the work; it says nothing about its content.

There is enough material to assert that Acts of the Apostles is historically accurate. The entirety of the Bible is not myth. (There is actually a Jewish comedy work in the middle of it. Great "fish tale," if you know what I mean.)

The Acts contain "miracles" such as resurrection of the dead. I find it hard to argue that this could possibly be historically accurate, since it is not actually possible.

[targetman377]

metsfanmax does that mean all fiction books are works of myth to you?

[Gweeedo]

Evidence For God.
Plenty of evidence for those who have died and come back to life...made believers out of them.
Evidence you can die for!

[BigBallinStalin]

--Andy

...had to... have wings? This one left us hanging, Andy.

[Dukasaur]

--Andy

...had to... have wings? This one left us hanging, Andy.

had to... take LSD.

Or LDS, in Spock's case...

[notyou2]

The Acts contain "miracles" such as resurrection of the dead. I find it hard to argue that this could possibly be historically accurate, since it is not actually possible.

It may be possible to slow the metabolic system down enough that the person appears dead, and the "resurrect" them.

[tzor]

Poetry can be myth. To again use the Iliad and the Odyssey as an example, these are considered to be poems. Poetry merely describes the form of the work; it says nothing about its content.

OK, some myths can be written poetically but not all poems are myths. I'd draw you a Venn Diagram but given the fact that the company I work for is infamous for not understanding them see this article I don't think it's a good idea.

The Song of Songs is not a myth, it's an erotic poem.

[tzor]

The Acts contain "miracles" such as resurrection of the dead. I find it hard to argue that this could possibly be historically accurate, since it is not actually possible.

It's not? Are your sure? Can you prove that? I can't offhand recall a "resurrection" mention (other than that of Jesus) in Acts. There was the case where someone fell out of a window, was assumed dead, but was healed to life ... but modern people are "clinically dead" for much longer periods these days.

[BigBallinStalin]

The Acts contain "miracles" such as resurrection of the dead. I find it hard to argue that this could possibly be historically accurate, since it is not actually possible.

It's not? Are your sure? Can you prove that? I can't offhand recall a "resurrection" mention (other than that of Jesus) in Acts. There was the case where someone fell out of a window, was assumed dead, but was healed to life ... but modern people are "clinically dead" for much longer periods these days.

So, assume Jesus died but then was healed to life... oh wait, that doesn't work.

Sure, some people's pulses stop, electric current is sent through their body, and the pulse is back. We don't call that resurrection in the same sense of someone being tortured all day, getting crucified, bleeding to death, stabbed for good measure, thrown in a cave, and then magically coming back to life because the stone to the cave was moved and because a special book said so.

Big difference between the two, don't you agree?

[tzor]

Since the quotes are getting long I'm going to do some snipping to get to the argument's point

The Acts contain "miracles" such as resurrection of the dead.

It's not? Are your sure? Can you prove that? I can't offhand recall a "resurrection" mention (other than that of Jesus) in Acts.

So, assume Jesus died but then was healed to life... oh wait, that doesn't work.

Met's statement was that Acts contains the resurrection of the dead.
I counter that the only real resurrection is a mention. Luke describes the Resurrection of Jesus in his first book (His Gospel).
People would later mention the event in Acts, but the event is not actually in Acts. Acts actually starts around 40 days after this event when the Apostles see him "ascend" to heaven. Now one can question the technical details of this event, but again, mixing such events in otherwise historical documents is a common occurrence and doesn't diminish any of the historical details.

[BigBallinStalin]

Since the quotes are getting long I'm going to do some snipping to get to the argument's point

The Acts contain "miracles" such as resurrection of the dead.

It's not? Are your sure? Can you prove that? I can't offhand recall a "resurrection" mention (other than that of Jesus) in Acts.

So, assume Jesus died but then was healed to life... oh wait, that doesn't work.

Met's statement was that Acts contains the resurrection of the dead.
I counter that the only real resurrection is a mention. Luke describes the Resurrection of Jesus in his first book (His Gospel).
People would later mention the event in Acts, but the event is not actually in Acts. Acts actually starts around 40 days after this event when the Apostles see him "ascend" to heaven. Now one can question the technical details of this event, but again, mixing such events in otherwise historical documents is a common occurrence and doesn't diminish any of the historical details.

What's your opinion on applying theory to historical documents?

[tzor]

What's your opinion on applying theory to historical documents?

What theory would you like me to apply?

[BigBallinStalin]

What's your opinion on applying theory to historical documents?

What theory would you like me to apply?

let's apply what's implicit in this:

Sure, some people's pulses stop, electric current is sent through their body, and the pulse is back. We don't call that resurrection in the same sense of someone being tortured all day, getting crucified, bleeding to death, stabbed for good measure, thrown in a cave, and then magically coming back to life because the stone to the cave was moved and because a special book said so.

toward this (specifically the underlined):

I counter that the only real resurrection is a mention. Luke describes the Resurrection of Jesus in his first book (His Gospel).
People would later mention the event in Acts, but the event is not actually in Acts. Acts actually starts around 40 days after this event when the Apostles see him "ascend" to heaven. Now one can question the technical details of this event, but again, mixing such events in otherwise historical documents is a common occurrence and doesn't diminish any of the historical details.

[tzor]

As I said, let's keep this to Acts. The basic story of acts starts out with 11 men (who become 12 and who become 13) who share a common story. You want to concentrate on that story line, but from a technical perspective this story line doesn't have to be true (through faith I believe it to be true, but that is beside the point). The story specifically takes the travels of two of these men spreading their message through locations and establishing communities of believers along the way. All of these things are historical and can actually be verified to their accuracy (although not to precise details).

Keep in mind it was written around three decades from the start of the movement. That's like writing a book about the Reagan Presidency today. A lot of detail is left out (by the time we get to chapter 14 effectively 13 years have passed).

[DaGip]

JFYI:

http://www.fnal.gov/pub/presspass/press ... 40826.html

If yes, then I am okay with knowing that I am indeed a hologram...however, where does the "consciousness" come from? I observe things in the universe, but why? What is the point to it all? If there is no higher purpose for the observation, then why does the universe allow the opportunity to observe?

Not really a "God" debate...consciousness doesn't have to be about a "God".

[BigBallinStalin]

As I said, let's keep this to Acts. The basic story of acts starts out with 11 men (who become 12 and who become 13) who share a common story. You want to concentrate on that story line, but from a technical perspective this story line doesn't have to be true (through faith I believe it to be true, but that is beside the point). The story specifically takes the travels of two of these men spreading their message through locations and establishing communities of believers along the way. All of these things are historical and can actually be verified to their accuracy (although not to precise details).

Keep in mind it was written around three decades from the start of the movement. That's like writing a book about the Reagan Presidency today. A lot of detail is left out (by the time we get to chapter 14 effectively 13 years have passed).

I take it you don't want to talk about the resurrection part?

[tzor]

If yes, then I am okay with knowing that I am indeed a hologram...

I think we are massively misunderstanding the notion of a hologram.

Don't think of the image, think of the film.

In a photo of a scene, there might be a picture of an apple and a banana. Cut out the banana and the remainder of the photo has no information of the banana.

In a hologram, the banana is all over the hologram. Cut out any portion of the hologram and the banana is still there, but perhaps one particular angle is missing.

So the notion that the universe is a hologram means that at a fundamental level, our view of space itself is an illusion.

[Gweeedo]

The facts are all there.

The resurrection (of Jesus) that took place was mentioned long before any books of the New Testament where written.
The entire History, before, during and after.
Pay no mind to the fact that it was written by over a dozen men, over thousands of years...staying the course.

I would like to point out that the guards posted at the Tomb of Jesus lied and said they fell asleep (documented).
Two Roman guards Falling asleep at their post...penalty, is DEATH!
Not to mention, in regard to Jesus Crucifixion, Simon Peter, the brothers James and John, Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas Iscariot denounced Jesus at that time...after his 'supposed' resurrection they laid down their lives for him...doesn't make sense.

What power does Evolution, science hold over you, it is nothing new.
We have Come no closer to understanding the universe than those who lived before us...nothing new, it has all been done before.
How did they know (over two thousand years ago) that the human liver could regenerate itself (documented)?

[natty dread]

The facts are all there.

The resurrection (of Jesus) that took place was mentioned long before any books of the New Testament where written.
The entire History, before, during and after.
Pay no mind to the fact that it was written by over a dozen men, over thousands of years...staying the course.

I would like to point out that the guards posted at the Tomb of Jesus lied and said they fell asleep (documented).
Two Roman guards Falling asleep at their post...penalty, is DEATH!
Not to mention, in regard to Jesus Crucifixion, Simon Peter, the brothers James and John, Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, Thaddaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas Iscariot denounced Jesus at that time...after his 'supposed' resurrection they laid down their lives for him...doesn't make sense.

What power does Evolution, science hold over you, it is nothing new.
We have Come no closer to understanding the universe than those who lived before us...nothing new, it has all been done before.
How did they know (over two thousand years ago) that the human liver could regenerate itself (documented)?

Oh yeah, there's definitely an all-you-can-eat buffet waiting for you after you die.

[tzor]

I would like to point out that the guards posted at the Tomb of Jesus lied and said they fell asleep (documented).

Really? Where?

The primary sources of details about Jesus are the Gospels. Roman records are spottier - there is no extant contemporary record of the execution of Jesus, for example, not that such a thing would be expected, and thus no details about what was done with the body afterward. As such, accounts of the days between Jesus's execution and the discovery of the empty tomb are almost exclusively based on the Gospel accounts and knowledge of society at the time...

[warmonger1981]

Jesus never died. He went to India and Tibet. They called him St.Issa.

[Lionz]

I might be getting back to page 72 stuff years later and not be real sure what all was addressed to me and what all I missed. Was there anything said to me that someone wants me to address?

AAFitz,

Did Marco Polo just happen to guess correctly about what had actually existed before? And who knows what everyone saw and wrote about in the past, but are there not several who wrote about dinosaur like creatures hundreds of years ago?

As far as if Bible stories could have changed over time? What has changed about the Dead Sea Scrolls? Are they not about 2,000 years old?

Mets,

What suggests that lunar seperation accelerates and decelerates if you were suggesting it used to move away from earth slower in the fast and then sped up and will slow down again?

[waauw]

We have Come no closer to understanding the universe than those who lived before us...nothing new, it has all been done before.

Well someone here doesnt have access to the discovery channel.

Oh yeah, there's definitely an all-you-can-eat buffet waiting for you after you die.

I heard hell is offering you a BBQ. How can you top that?

[DaGip]

Evidence For God.
Plenty of evidence for those who have died and come back to life...made believers out of them.
Evidence you can die for!

I talked to a guy that died and came back. He said that there was absolutely nothingness and the experience only made him not want to believe in a god. So I would say your statement isn't entirely true. Not everyone that dies and comes back all of a sudden fall to their knees and start worshiping The Great Spider Queen.