Religion, or lack of, open discussion/FRIENDLY debate.

CaptnJack

CaptnJack

Active Member
jfgordon1 said:
this is how you put it in...

[ y o u t u b e ]watever is after v=[ / y o u t u b e ]

no spaces at all :)
Click to expand...

much appreciated BROseph, you know, you've been the most courteous to me since i've joined man, you seem like a cool guy, too bad we never met, haha. any way thnx fer the tip man. :joint::-D
 
jfgordon1

jfgordon1

Well-Known Member
CaptnJack said:
much appreciated BROseph, you know, you've been the most courtious to me since i've joined man, you seem like a cool guy, too bad we never met, haha. any way thnx fer the tip man. :joint::-D
Click to expand...
lol not the first time ive heard that dude. but hey man.. i'd like to meet a lot of people on here. but when it comes down to it... its pretty sketchy :cry:. but who knows.. might meet up one of these days
 
CaptnJack

CaptnJack

Active Member
jfgordon1 said:
we do if they kill someone "in the name of god". and i'm sure we have a lot of written material on people who have thought they are god. i'm sure i could google and get a long long list. if jesus did indeed arose from the dead... that would convince a lot of people.. he would be thought of a magician similar to david blain to say the least. he would definitely be written about.
Click to expand...
this is a good point, only thing is jesus and his apostles didnt kill in the name of god, and plus we can google anything, we have vast amounts of resources now, as apposed to then when paper was a rarity and used by scholors and in empires, not common citizens, plus if the bible IS accurate, then only two witnessed christ arise, who'd believe them? no one, in fact the romans believed it to be grave robbers.
 
Tagh

Tagh

Active Member
I do not believe a god exists or ever has.

A couple reasons

How many gods are there? Not everyone can be right.
In modern society, we have many sciences. Many of which can prove Religious stories wrong.
For example in the Bible, I believe when Moses is around, The red sea thing. Scientists have come up with explanations to many stories.

I believe religion has it ups and downs.
People have been killed over Religion. People have seem their ways through Religion. People have used Religion.
Cities have probably fallen and risen over Religion.

For as long as human's have been on the earth, We've wanted to find an understanding to life. Like English glass 5W's (What,When,Who,Where,Why) and of course How. I don't any of those questions will ever be answered.

In the end I dont believe in anything ( There is a word for that but just sounds like a new religion of not believing to me :P)
I'm neutral I guess. If you believe go ahead, If you don't go ahead. Pretty much I don't care.
I could argue the goods and bad all day, but in the end who is right?
Whoever thinks they are.

Btw. I am baptized,did communion,and reconciliation. I have been to church many times as a kid. My family is catholic I'd guess. My grandma still goes to church as often as she can. But after what I have learned over time, I just can't believe in one god/religion.
 
CaptnJack

CaptnJack

Active Member
jfgordon1 said:
we do if they kill someone "in the name of god". and i'm sure we have a lot of written material on people who have thought they are god. i'm sure i could google and get a long long list. if jesus did indeed arose from the dead... that would convince a lot of people.. he would be thought of a magician similar to david blain to say the least. he would definitely be written about.
Click to expand...
this is a good point, only thing is jesus and his apostles didnt kill in the name of god, and plus we can google anything, we have vast amounts of resources now, as opposed to then when paper was a rarity and used by scholors and in empires, not common citizens, plus if the bible IS accurate, then only two witnessed christ arise, who'd believe them? no one, in fact the romans believed it to be grave robbers.

you should watch this docu. (this is just a clip couldnt find the whole thing)
but if you go to this vids page on youtube, it gives an impressive description on the leading sceptic scientist who was dead set on disproving the shroud of turins authenticity, then before he died, flipped and after further examining says it very well could be the shroud for the historic jesus.

[youtube]vACRZTHX8Iw[/youtube]
 
CaptnJack

CaptnJack

Active Member
and also watch this video, its a little old and some of the skepticism of the cloth switching i can is explained in part two of the vid above, based of these vids, tell me how its fake, or debatable.

trust me, you probably wont say anything i havent heard or already debunked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8KLjxFCpXw

this aught to be good. i love debates.
 
northerntights

northerntights

Well-Known Member
Pieces of the shroud that were originally taken for carbon dating were not entirely destroyed in the process. The bulk remains in cold storage and there is currently a movement to have them re-tested with the most modern equipment. Carbon dating has come a long way since them, but in terms of detailed accuracy. Over 5 independent labs tested the samples, the consensus was it was from the middle ages, and thus a forgery. For all the independent labs to be off by more than a thousand years and yet give highly overlapping dates... it would be an astronomical coincidence that such a thing could occur.
 
CaptnJack

CaptnJack

Active Member
northerntights said:
Pieces of the shroud that were originally taken for carbon dating were not entirely destroyed in the process. The bulk remains in cold storage and there is currently a movement to have them re-tested with the most modern equipment. Carbon dating has come a long way since them, but in terms of detailed accuracy. Over 5 independent labs tested the samples, the consensus was it was from the middle ages, and thus a forgery. For all the independent labs to be off by more than a thousand years and yet give highly overlapping dates... it would be an astronomical coincidence that such a thing could occur.
Click to expand...

they HAVE retested and it was a docu on discovery channel, they piece they took from the older documentary is actually from whenever it was almost destroyed by fire, and the wove together new tapestry when the templar knights were holding it. so the pieces they snipped from the corners WERE from middle ages, how ever recent examination shows that there is newer (middle ages) fabric woven with the original cloth to give it back its full shape to the shroud.
 
CaptnJack

CaptnJack

Active Member
northerntights said:
Pieces of the shroud that were originally taken for carbon dating were not entirely destroyed in the process. The bulk remains in cold storage and there is currently a movement to have them re-tested with the most modern equipment. Carbon dating has come a long way since them, but in terms of detailed accuracy. Over 5 independent labs tested the samples, the consensus was it was from the middle ages, and thus a forgery. For all the independent labs to be off by more than a thousand years and yet give highly overlapping dates... it would be an astronomical coincidence that such a thing could occur.
Click to expand...

they HAVE retested and it was a docu on discovery channel, they piece they took from the older documentary is actually from whenever it was almost destroyed by fire, and the wove together new tapestry when the templar knights were holding it. so the pieces they snipped from the corners WERE from middle ages, how ever recent examination shows that there is newer (middle ages) fabric woven with the original cloth to give it back its full shape to the shroud.

they took 5 samples and of those some retested AS being original cloth

http://shroudofturin.wordpress.com/carbon-dating-news-in-2008/(below article)

LOS ALAMOS FINDINGS RELEASED AUG 15, 2008
"Using some of the most advanced analytical equipment available, a team of nine scientists at the famed Los Alamos National Laboratory confirmed that the material used for radiocarbon dating of the shroud in 1988 was not part of the shroud’s fabric. Previously, micro-chemical tests had demonstrated that the cloth is at least twice as old as the medieval date determined by the now discredited carbon 14 tests. This gives new life to historical and forensic arguments that the shroud might indeed be the burial cloth of Jesus."
 
northerntights

northerntights

Well-Known Member
I noticed a while back that some people started, but didn't really follow through, on including evolution in the mix. The scientific community is behind darwinian evolution by natural selection by 99.99%, the "controversy" is a fabrication. Our modern crops being an example of artificial selection (cucumbers were once purple, bananas were a mutation from plantains and those were bread from a barely edible wild fruit, corn was a grass, dogs from wolfs, etc), marijuana is also such an example. Strains that benefitted man were those that would be seeded the next year.

Marijuana is part of this natural history and most likely owes it's current safety and effectiveness to our influences on it's evolution. When a beneficial trait emerged, it was capitalized upon. Plants with harmful traits would have been left to rot and not pass on their genes. This is artificial selection and, along with the other examples, proves that trait selection (artificial or natural) can create new, drastically different species.

Then where does that leave us on the topic of religion? Well, this video may be of some relevance... and yes, it is of an atheist conference, but the science is sound and the arguments interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iMmvu9eMrg

I can't get it to embed correctly
 
CaptnJack

CaptnJack

Active Member
northerntights said:
I noticed a while back that some people started, but didn't really follow through, on including evolution in the mix. The scientific community is behind darwinian evolution by natural selection by 99.99%, the "controversy" is a fabrication. Our modern crops being an example of artificial selection (cucumbers were once purple, bananas were a mutation from plantains and those were bread from a barely edible wild fruit, corn was a grass, dogs from wolfs, etc), marijuana is also such an example. Strains that benefitted man were those that would be seeded the next year.

Marijuana is part of this natural history and most likely owes it's current safety and effectiveness to our influences on it's evolution. When a beneficial trait emerged, it was capitalized upon. Plants with harmful traits would have been left to rot and not pass on their genes. This is artificial selection and, along with the other examples, proves that trait selection (artificial or natural) can create new, drastically different species.

Then where does that leave us on the topic of religion? Well, this video may be of some relevance... and yes, it is of an atheist conference, but the science is sound and the arguments interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iMmvu9eMrg

I can't get it to embed correctly
Click to expand...
but what exactly does that have to do with the shroud? and the evidence that it is backdated to when christ was supposedly around? also the shroud shows all of christ's specific wounds he endured and to falsify the cloth is impossible for the time it came into public eye much less the time of christ.
 
northerntights

northerntights

Well-Known Member
CaptnJack said:
LOS ALAMOS FINDINGS RELEASED AUG 15, 2008
"Using some of the most advanced analytical equipment available, a team of nine scientists at the famed Los Alamos National Laboratory confirmed that the material used for radiocarbon dating of the shroud in 1988 was not part of the shroud’s fabric. Previously, micro-chemical tests had demonstrated that the cloth is at least twice as old as the medieval date determined by the now discredited carbon 14 tests. This gives new life to historical and forensic arguments that the shroud might indeed be the burial cloth of Jesus."
Click to expand...
Sorry I didn't post very quickly. The fact is that a date, isn't a red flag, Nor indisputable proof. We are still talking about a figure with no proof he existed outside the bible... and an image can be of anyone. The story of jesus was told many times before, recycled from the gods before him. In the end, a shroud is not proof of divinity, regardless of it being from the correct time period or resembling iconic images. The shroud is an interesting tool of debate, but in the end less relevant than the larger questions of who we are and why we are here.

Oh and that second post, wasn't meant to be related to the shroud.
 
hom36rown

hom36rown

Well-Known Member
northerntights said:
I noticed a while back that some people started, but didn't really follow through, on including evolution in the mix. The scientific community is behind darwinian evolution by natural selection by 99.99%, the "controversy" is a fabrication. Our modern crops being an example of artificial selection (cucumbers were once purple, bananas were a mutation from plantains and those were bread from a barely edible wild fruit, corn was a grass, dogs from wolfs, etc), marijuana is also such an example. Strains that benefitted man were those that would be seeded the next year.

Marijuana is part of this natural history and most likely owes it's current safety and effectiveness to our influences on it's evolution. When a beneficial trait emerged, it was capitalized upon. Plants with harmful traits would have been left to rot and not pass on their genes. This is artificial selection and, along with the other examples, proves that trait selection (artificial or natural) can create new, drastically different species.

Then where does that leave us on the topic of religion? Well, this video may be of some relevance... and yes, it is of an atheist conference, but the science is sound and the arguments interesting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iMmvu9eMrg

I can't get it to embed correctly
Click to expand...
[youtube]1iMmvu9eMrg[/youtube]
 
CaptnJack

CaptnJack

Active Member
northerntights said:
Sorry I didn't post very quickly. The fact is that a date, isn't a red flag, Nor indisputable proof. We are still talking about a figure with no proof he existed outside the bible... and an image can be of anyone. The story of jesus was told many times before, recycled from the gods before him. In the end, a shroud is not proof of divinity, regardless of it being from the correct time period or resembling iconic images. The shroud is an interesting tool of debate, but in the end less relevant than the larger questions of who we are and why we are here.

Oh and that second post, wasn't meant to be related to the shroud.
Click to expand...
thats true, however at this point in time, what other evidence are we going to find?

we've found john's grave (mary's second son)

and the iconic figure shown in the cloth is again, an identical match to the description givin in the bible, blood from the forehead (crown of thorns), hundreds of holes from lashes, bludgeoned, and ultimately the only recorded to be stabbed in the kidney to my knowledge and research. and above all, the amount of energy needed to embed the imprint into the cloth is massive, but only instantaneous, any longer and it would burn the cloth, and for its time of public show casing, to be faked would've required tech that that wasn't yet created in its time, that is substantial evidence idc who or what you believe in.
 
P

PadawanBater

Guest
That's not evidence of Christ's divinity.

All the shroud is is a piece of cloth that may or may not be from the period of Jesus Christ with a suspiciously coincidental image of what looks like what the Bible describes Jesus Christ as... that's it. What exactly is that proof of?
 
CaptnJack

CaptnJack

Active Member
PadawanBater said:
That's not evidence of Christ's divinity.

All the shroud is is a piece of cloth that may or may not be from the period of Jesus Christ with a suspiciously coincidental image of what looks like what the Bible describes Jesus Christ as... that's it. What exactly is that proof of?
Click to expand...
scientifically quite a bit, the skulls of cromagnums and Neanderthals are similar to ours coincidentally, but what exactly is that proof of?
 
Stoney McFried

Stoney McFried

Well-Known Member
Don't see how I "cut"quite a bit, I'm only speaking the truth.Papyrus was invented about 3000 or so years B.C. by the Egyptians.Ink was about 5000 years ago by the chinese.They had the writing utensils for a long time.Since the bible also appears to have many authors, it isn't at all inconceivable that it could be done in a short amount of time.Basically, the bible is a bunch of different books put together, by different authors, promoting the same belief.Not at all unheard of.Far more improbable would be god dictating that same bible to moses on mt. sinai word for word in a short time, which is what a lot of christians argue.Logic tells me that this book is a work of fiction.I am not a christian.I rejected that long ago.I never said the entire bible was written after christ lived.I said the testimonium flavium was. And the people who wrote of christ in a personal manner were all born AFTER he had been dead at least 70 years.(eg.josephus,tacitus).However, the books of the bible have been heavily edited and revised,and mistakes were made as soon as they began translating it from one language to another.The christian religion borrows most of it's rites and holidays from older religions.It is obvious if you look.
But if you need to believe, go ahead.I don't.I'm not afraid of death.I know in some way,I will go on.Not necessarily spiritually-I don't know that and anyone who says they do is most likely misguided.But my body returns to the earth and is recycled-and that is good enough for me.
CaptnJack said:
that is a completely low blow to the christian religion, seeing as how only a a small percentage of christians believe in "speaking in tongues" in modern day. you know i read your post and as they are composed in a civil manner you cut quite a bit, which im sorry is bull shit, and im not gettin worked up, nor angry, but its not necessary, logic should tell you what it tells most all christians, gifts cannot be taught, but way to take a stab.

just as there are ppl who can pick apart christianity that are respected, there are so in the opposite, both discredit each other, and both lead by personal opinion, as it will be for quite sometime, however there are some non believers who still research to find an un biased truth, i mean i could sit here and google for my argument, but i choose to go based off of what i've gathered and learned. and to be quite honest, yea i was a self proclaimed christian for quite sometime in my life, however the past year or so, ive been more so inquisitive of god, and have my own personal theory of life, one without a particular god, but i still believe there was a man named jesus and spoke of good morals, check out a book called "the real jesus" because there are discoveries that are brushed aside, by media, and colleges. discoveries that could say there was a possible true person, a man named jesus. and your comments that the bible was written 100 yrs after "supposed" christ lived, well is just as common of an argument from "atheist" types. and its untrue, think about how long it would take to write the bible, ok? i mean really that large of a book, in that time, would have taken quite some time? no? i mean, first you have to have materials to write with, and i mean its not like they had ink pens or pencils and sharpeners on hand, but yet people are notably quoting the new testament as early as 100 a.d., do the math involved with that. 1198 pages on a larger sized book with average sized font, so that would take some considerable time to write. and to already to have been quoted and being read, doesnt add up, its one of the most common comments that atheists use. and in its way discredited as well.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top