coral reefs take millions of years to grow

[jdragunas]

Originally Posted by Darth Tang
Be quiet underling, before I am forced to show you the true power of the force........
Uh, ahem, what? Oh, where were we before that unforseen out burst occurred?
and once again, you have made me laugh out loud during work... i really gotta stop reading these posts, but they're so addicting!!!

 

[darth tang]

Originally Posted by jdragunas
and once again, you have made me laugh out loud during work... i really gotta stop reading these posts, but they're so addicting!!!
Just ignore mine and you should be fine. That will probably make you miserable, but you will keep your job.

 

[jdragunas]

i'd rather lose my job... i love to laugh!

 

[fish_feed6]

chistianity or not it has been proved the earth is millions of years old...

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Fish_Feed6
chistianity or not it has been proved the earth is millions of years old...
False...
IF you believe in Intelligent Design then you open a whole variety of possibilities to the age of the earth.
Case in point.. let's pretend you were going to "create" a rock. How old would the rock be when you created it? How old would the rock "look"? Those are possibly two very different things.

 

[farmboy]

If I'm not mistaken, the isotope used for calculating the age of rocks breaks down quicker under intense pressures/heat. THus, if said conditions were produced, a rock would appear older than normal half life would indicate.
What IF: when the plates shifted (after a flood or something) some old-looking rocks were churned up from under the surface. Can anyone see this happening? How many billion year old-looking rocks are there anyway?
Any thoughts?

 

[farmboy]

 

[kablamo]

Ok i've been in dallas for the past few days and before that my neighbor cut my cable lines so it looks like i got a lot of typing to do.
Also, i hate trying to use the quote system of this board, you get one quote wrong, and the whole thing is quoted wrong, so i will answer after all of it.
Originally Posted by Darth Tang
Actually, you are wrong. The first 1500 years were the jewish church taught by Moses after their oppression by the egyptians. If you actually READ the bible you would know this. The catholic religion came about many years after the crucifiction of Christ. *shortened for length
First of all, in regards to the torah being the beginning of the christian church, you are wrong. Jesus's teachings were blasphemy to the jews, and he was killed for it. Ask any jew around if they think that christianity is just the natural continuation or fulfillment of judaeism, they don't even worship the same god for pete's sake.
Think of it, think of all the discriptions of God in the old and in the new testament.
In the old testament God was a powerful avatar who constantly crushed those who stood against his will. The old testament god was not an all loving father who just wants your love. If the old testament god was still around do you think san fransisco would still be a city? how about Bankok? Or Moscow during the cold war for illegalizing christianity?
No. The old testament bible is a reflection of the times and location they lived in. They were desert nomads who lived in an extremely feirce environment, and their god reflected that.
The old testament God didn't even send you to hell! Ask any religious Jew, to them, when you are dead, you no longer exist. I have looked many many times and I have never seen a reference to someone going to heaven when they die in the old testament, save for i think two prophets who DID NOT DIE and were called up to heaven by god.
Heaven, in the old testament almost exclusively refers to the sky (god created the heavens and the earth) and Gods realm (those who oppose the LORD will be shattered. He will thunder against them from heaven; the LORD will judge the ends of the earth. "He will give strength to his king and exalt the horn of his anointed.").
But it never refers to a human with a soul entering heaven to be with god. This is a new testament creation.
Search for "soul" in the old testament, when a soul is described, it almost exclusively refers to a center of awareness or feelings. "in all of my heart and soul".
Also, Jesus didn't fulfil as many prophecies as the church will tell you.
may i direct you to an artical here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/mode.../prophecy.html
Jesus, raised as a jew believed himself to be a god, or believed himself to be one with god, and, as a jew, had to be VERY careful how he explained that, and too many people misunderstood.
About the catholics being corrupt and all of that passing down dogmas and everything because the "weren't in the bible":
The Catholic church and members of the early church wrote the books of the bible, decided which ones were official 300 years later, and you think that the problem is with them doing things that "weren't biblical"? What ever they say is biblical, is biblical.
This being said, you cannot trust what the new testament says about the old testament. They tailored the new testament to fit their needs and to shape our understanding of the old testament.
Now I have to go move my 70 gallon across the room so wish me luck.

 

[37g joe]

Originally Posted by fishnet
Before we get too carried away discussing any subtleties or "possibilities" regarding this claim (and there are many to explore, such as how do we know that the earth's orbit wasn't further away as well OR how does this change in volume affect the total mass, thereby also changing the gravitational field... etc.), how about we evaluate the nature of the claim itself.
First off, there is no Boyal Observatory (nor is there a Boyle Observatory). However there are a couple of "Royal" Observatories -- one in Greenwich and one in Edinburgh. Since the Greenwich is "the" observatory from which we get "Greenwich Mean Time", I'm going to assume that this is the institution. In either case, these organizations are barely 300 years old (Greenwich was founded in 1675).
Additionally, one must carefully consider the viewing and measuring technology available at any given point in history. The posted rate of 5 ft/day is equivalent to 8.3 miles per year -- but that's the net decrease, because the sun's size does oscillate (plus solar flares, etc.).
SO: From this post, we are to understand that a net change in diameter of 8.3 miles per year was observable from a distance of over 93 million miles. Newton's reflecting telescope was only invented in 1672, let alone any type of equipment accurate enough to accurately measure the changes in diameter. Furthermore, these early observers had no awareness of the Milankovitch Cycles (named for Milutin Milankovitch [1879-1958] ), which would cetain affect the appearance of diameter.
I'm not interested in a flame war or debating the general principle of the post. I just want to reiterate a scientific maxim "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" and encourage everyone to carefully consider any scientific claim.
Interesting enough, from the Royal Observatory: sun size change statement
ryansholl: Thanks for looking up the reference, although I doubt it will sway anyone.
ophiura: I feel your pain. As a scientist and a believer, I am often caught in the chasm between two poles where neither side is willing to grant any room for "gray". No one ever likes my opinion.
the Boyal Observatory, is in Gosport, England you need check your facts befor staing wrong data this is the page I found it on http://www.davidrumsey.com/maps880041-24209.html

 

[hagfish]

Originally Posted by Kablamo
Ok i've been in dallas for the past few days and before that my neighbor cut my cable lines so it looks like i got a lot of typing to do.
Also, i hate trying to use the quote system of this board, you get one quote wrong, and the whole thing is quoted wrong, so i will answer after all of it.
First of all, in regards to the torah being the beginning of the christian church, you are wrong. Jesus's teachings were blasphemy to the jews, and he was killed for it. Ask any jew around if they think that christianity is just the natural continuation or fulfillment of judaeism, they don't even worship the same god for pete's sake.
Think of it, think of all the discriptions of God in the old and in the new testament.
In the old testament God was a powerful avatar who constantly crushed those who stood against his will. The old testament god was not an all loving father who just wants your love. If the old testament god was still around do you think san fransisco would still be a city? how about Bankok? Or Moscow during the cold war for illegalizing christianity?
No. The old testament bible is a reflection of the times and location they lived in. They were desert nomads who lived in an extremely feirce environment, and their god reflected that.
The old testament God didn't even send you to hell! Ask any religious Jew, to them, when you are dead, you no longer exist. I have looked many many times and I have never seen a reference to someone going to heaven when they die in the old testament, save for i think two prophets who DID NOT DIE and were called up to heaven by god.
Heaven, in the old testament almost exclusively refers to the sky (god created the heavens and the earth) and Gods realm (those who oppose the LORD will be shattered. He will thunder against them from heaven; the LORD will judge the ends of the earth. "He will give strength to his king and exalt the horn of his anointed.").
But it never refers to a human with a soul entering heaven to be with god. This is a new testament creation.
Search for "soul" in the old testament, when a soul is described, it almost exclusively refers to a center of awareness or feelings. "in all of my heart and soul".
Also, Jesus didn't fulfil as many prophecies as the church will tell you.
may i direct you to an artical here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/mode.../prophecy.html
Jesus, raised as a jew believed himself to be a god, or believed himself to be one with god, and, as a jew, had to be VERY careful how he explained that, and too many people misunderstood.
About the catholics being corrupt and all of that passing down dogmas and everything because the "weren't in the bible":
The Catholic church and members of the early church wrote the books of the bible, decided which ones were official 300 years later, and you think that the problem is with them doing things that "weren't biblical"? What ever they say is biblical, is biblical.
This being said, you cannot trust what the new testament says about the old testament. They tailored the new testament to fit their needs and to shape our understanding of the old testament.
r />Now I have to go move my 70 gallon across the room so wish me luck.
I don't have a lot of time to answer, so I'll make this short. I didn't read your link on unfullfilled prophecy yet since it is very long. But you sound like you think there were at least some prophecies fullfilled by Jesus. Is that just pure luck or coincidence? People don't typically predict the future on a whim and then suddenly it comes true by pure coincidence. And I'm not talking about predicting Barry Bonds hits a home run in the next game he plays in or something like that.
Just a quick note on the Catholic church comments you made. I don't think anyone ever said that the Catholic church was never correct in anything they did. Just that some of their modern day practices aren't always Biblical. You are making a presumption that you can correctly call the writers of the New Testament Catholics though. They never proclaim to be Catholics, just Christians. And that is ultimately what's important here. Jesus doesn't care about your denomination, only that you are a Christian. Although he does of course care about the actions one might take as a result of their denomination.
What religion did you say you were? Was it Buddist? May I ask why you chose that? Also, what is your opinion on Jesus? I mean, do you think he was just a good man, a prophet, a lunatic, or what?

 

[jdragunas]

kablamo, did you just say that jews and christians don't even worship the same god?...

 

[hagfish]

Originally Posted by jdragunas
kablamo, did you just say that jews and christians don't even worship the same god?...
Yes, where do you get this from kablamo?
In the Old Testament, believers (Jews) were looking forward to the coming of the Messiah. Jesus was that Messiah. Pilate could find no wrong in Him, but allowed Him to be killed anyway because the Jewish mob demanded it. So the Jews from that point on were basically only acknowledging God the Father, not Jesus or the Holy Spirit. They are still awaiting the Messiah although they've overlooked the true Messiah.
The Jews in the New Testament who didn't believe in Christ were expecting the Messiah to have more tangible qualities such as an earthly kingdom and freedom from their worldly troubles. But the battle Jesus fought was spiritual, not worldly. His will will not be fully realized on earth until He comes again.

 

[jdragunas]

if that's what he meant, i have just made my official conclusion about the person kablamo is...

 

[darth tang]

Originally Posted by jdragunas
kablamo, did you just say that jews and christians don't even worship the same god?...
Kablamo is right from a certain viewpoint. In christianity god is viewed as the holy trinity. The son, the father and the holy spirit. But to the Jewish community this is not so, as the Son isn't in the equation, nor is the spirit I believe, but I am not 100 percent sure on that one. So therefore it isn't the same "God" per say. As it isn't god the trinity.
I am still curious what Kablamo has to say about my other points. Now to my rebuttal.

 

[darth tang]

Originally Posted by Kablamo
First of all, in regards to the torah being the beginning of the christian church, you are wrong. Jesus's teachings were blasphemy to the jews, and he was killed for it. Ask any jew around if they think that christianity is just the natural continuation or fulfillment of judaeism, they don't even worship the same god for pete's sake..

I disagree, as all forms of Christianity from catholism to Mormons use the old testament in their teachings and history, thus tieing themselves to Moses and his church or followers when searching for the Promis land. However, I will concede your point and show you a different answer. After the crucifiction there were three forms of christianity that followed. Not ONE church or single form of christianity, but three.
Except for the first few years after Jesus' execution, there was no consensus of belief among Christians. The movement was split into many different groups, each teaching different belief systems. The main ones were Gnostic Christianity, Jewish Christianity and Pauline Christianity. Often, there were a number of Christian congregations in the larger cities with competing and conflicting messages. I am not sure which one as I do not remeber, but one of these went on to form Catholism. The other two continued but not to the level of the Catholic church. But Catholic was NOT the first as you are trying to imply.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
Think of it, think of all the discriptions of God in the old and in the new testament.
In the old testament God was a powerful avatar who constantly crushed those who stood against his will. The old testament god was not an all loving father who just wants your love. If the old testament god was still around do you think san fransisco would still be a city? how about Bankok? Or Moscow during the cold war for illegalizing christianity?
No. The old testament bible is a reflection of the times and location they lived in. They were desert nomads who lived in an extremely feirce environment, and their god reflected that..
Once again, you are wrong. He spared Cain after he murdered his brother.
He spared those that Threw Daniel in the Den of Lions. Confused? He has easily destroyed cities before and saved his followers by interveneing. Yet in Daniels case he saved daniel by shutting the lion's mouth yet at the same time spared his captures. Is this not mercy?
He showed restraing and Mercy against the pharoah and Egypt when it came to freeing Moses and the Slaves. He could have easily just wiped out the Egyptian nation thus setting Moses and his people free. But instead he sent signs on numerous occasion of his displeasure so they could change their ways.....mercy.
David and Goliath......God could have easily wiped out the opposing army. Yet he allowed just one man to die...Goliath. Which disheartened the enemy and allowed many to live.....mercy.
Samson had turned his back on God while young, yet God still granted him his strength. Mercy.
r />
Originally Posted by Kablamo
The old testament God didn't even send you to hell! Ask any religious Jew, to them, when you are dead, you no longer exist. I have looked many many times and I have never seen a reference to someone going to heaven when they die in the old testament, save for i think two prophets who DID NOT DIE and were called up to heaven by god...
Because the Gates of heaven are openned by the messiah.........which doesn't show up until the New Testament. However the Jews today still believe the Messiah hasn't shown, so are stuck and do not go to heaven or hell when they die. You exist, but in a state of limbo or purgatory, pending where your soul is to travel onto later.

 

[kablamo]

First, about the catholic church.
Yes, maybe the writers of the new testament weren't catholic, but the EDITORS sure were. By the 300's the catholic church was already somewhat corrupt and had begun persecuting non christians in rome and the pagan countryside around it, and it was these same people who compiled the books of the old testament.
Now what I'm about to say might upset you, and I want to let you know that I have no authority to say this as fact, it's merely my opinion. But think about it, the bible has no authority unless you grant it. If no one believes the catholic church, then it's quite clear that the catholic church has no authority.
Jesus, in my opinion, and from what I have read in the bible, has been misquoted many times. I find many extremely profound things that jesus has said, (the "consider the lillies" sermon, love they neighbor, and so on) but I have also found many things so rediculous as I can only deduce they were not uttered by the same person.
I believe that early on in Jesus' life he had a collosal experience of cosmic consciousness, of the type where you realize you are one with God. Buddha called it Nirvana, the Zen masters call it Satori.
Now, if Jesus had grown up in India and said, "I and the Father are one" They would have said "congratulations, you've found out." But he didn't live in india, he lived in Israel.
And living in Israel knowing that you are the ultimate reality of the universe, you have serious problems. Jesus went through life with the liberation of enlightenment but he could not express it without blaspheming. When it became to much to hold, he began his ministry and began to preach about his being one with god, but the gospel was stopped cold at it's inseption. It caused such an uproar that eventually they said, ok, well you are god, but that's it. There is very little scripture to back up my claim, just ghosts of ideas that seem hidden behind the text of the new testament, especially in the book of St. John.
And about not worshipping the same god, just read your bibles for descriptions, i mean, unless he went into hybernation or something, it's not the same, maybe he has moodswings??
First of all I am not a Buddhist, nor am I a Taoist or a Hindu, but I am floating somewhere in the realm of Monism, and I didn't chose it, it chose me. I will explain later.
Anyway, gotta go enroll for my classes.
For some great bible reading, go here. This site animates with pictures the bible and really truely lets you understand what happened without the king james making it sound too fluffy.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/

 

[1journeyman]

I think DT is covering a lot of these, but just in case:
Originally Posted by Kablamo
First of all, in regards to the torah being the beginning of the christian church, you are wrong. Jesus's teachings were blasphemy to the jews, and he was killed for it. Ask any jew around if they think that christianity is just the natural continuation or fulfillment of judaeism, they don't even worship the same god for pete's sake.
False.. Jesus calling Himself the Son of God, Son of Man, etc.. were blasphemy. NOT His teachings.. His teachings were the fulfillment of the law.
God is the same to the Christian and Jew. The Spirit is mentioned as early as Genesis. The only difference is that the Jewish people are still waiting for the Messiah.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
Think of it, think of all the discriptions of God in the old and in the new testament. In the old testament God was a powerful avatar who constantly crushed those who stood against his will. The old testament god was not an all loving father who just wants your love.... No. The old testament bible is a reflection of the times and location they lived in. They were desert nomads who lived in an extremely feirce environment, and their god reflected that.
Not true... although this argument is popular among Biblical naysayers. The OT is full of God's mercy... from Genesis (when God provided clothing to Adam and Eve) to Jonah (and the minor prophets) God's mercy is clearly seen. Numbers 22 even records a story of a donkey talking to it's master about saving his life...
You may not believe the Bible, but don't lie about it's contents.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
The old testament God didn't even send you to hell! Ask any religious Jew, to them, when you are dead, you no longer exist. I have looked many many times and I have never seen a reference to someone going to heaven when they die in the old testament, save for i think two prophets who DID NOT DIE and were called up to heaven by god.
DT has explained Jewish beliefs on this. Your argument perplexes me though... if you know about the prophet Elijah's ascension into Heaven then you should know that their was a witness to it. IF you read the whole story of the ascension you'll see that Elisha and other prophets cleary spoke of Elijah's impending call to Heaven. (II Kings chpt 2). While the Jewish people did not understand the afterlife, they knew there was something more.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
Also, Jesus didn't fulfil as many prophecies as the church will tell you.
may i direct you to an artical here:
http://www.infidels.org/library/mode.../prophecy.html
Jesus, raised as a jew believed himself to be a god, or believed himself to be one with god, and, as a jew, had to be VERY careful how he explained that, and too many people misunderstood.
First off, He wasn't "misunderstood". Second, I quit reading your link fairly early... I checked the first "fact" it argued and found it to be wrong (that's when I quit reading)... like you have done, the author of your weblink takes things out of context and argues his opinion... a quick study of the Feast of Tabernacles, which is the context of the referenced scripture, and related scripture explains completely the reference Jesus makes....
Originally Posted by Kablamo
...The Catholic church and members of the early church wrote the books of the bible, decided which ones were official 300 years later...
Again, false. The NT was written by first person witnesses to the life/resurrection of Christ. The letters were already in circulation in the first century. This is well before the "catholic" church.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
This being said, you cannot trust what the new testament says about the old testament. They tailored the new testament to fit their needs and to shape our understanding of the old testament.
Again, false.. although once again this is a popular statement made by Biblical naysayers. The books of the NT were ALL authored in the first century. That means they were all written within 1-2 generations of eye witness accounts. Tough to rewrite history when the folks who lived it are still alive.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Kablamo
First, about the catholic church.
Yes, maybe the writers of the new testament weren't catholic, but the EDITORS sure were. By the 300's the catholic church was already somewhat corrupt and had begun persecuting non christians in rome and the pagan countryside around it, and it was these same people who compiled the books of the old testament.
False... the OT was compiled long before 300AD.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
ow what I'm about to say might upset you, and I want to let you know that I have no authority to say this as fact, it's merely my opinion.
On the contrary, it's nice to see you stating your own opinions instead of quoting arguments that misquote scripture. I'm all for you stating your own opinions.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
But think about it, the bible has no authority unless you grant it. If no one believes the catholic church, then it's quite clear that the catholic church has no authority.
That's how authority works... a "Red" light doesn't have any authority over me unless I choose to stop for it.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
Jesus, in my opinion, and from what I have read in the bible, has been misquoted many times.
True... often by people who try to argue against His teachings, but also by the ignorant or the greedy, etc... MANY are guilty of this.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
I find many extremely profound things that jesus has said, (the "consider the lillies" sermon, love they neighbor, and so on) but I have also found many things so rediculous as I can only deduce they were not uttered by the same person....
The problem with that paragraph and your opinion on what Jesus believes is that it is based on Jesus not being the "perfect" Jew. I've already addressed this... Jesus fulfilled the OT law. He didn't rebel against it.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
nd about not worshipping the same god, just read your bibles for descriptions, i mean, unless he went into hybernation or something, it's not the same, maybe he has moodswings??
Again, it is you that needs to read your Bible. The description of God as merciful is found in the OT, and the description of God as "All Mighty" is clear in the NT. Just because the OT and NT focus on different things don't try to make them out to describing a different "God".

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Darth Tang
I am still curious what Kablamo has to say about my other points. Now to my rebuttal.
Ya.. I had a couple I'd like to see addressed as well. Imho though, I don't think we are going to see that happen.

 

[darth tang]

Originally Posted by Kablamo
First, about the catholic church.
Yes, maybe the writers of the new testament weren't catholic, but the EDITORS sure were. By the 300's the catholic church was already somewhat corrupt and had begun persecuting non christians in rome and the pagan countryside around it, and it was these same people who compiled the books of the old testament.
Now you are changing what you said. You claimed the catholic church decides what is placed in the bible....that is not true. They, under their beliefs, have had the option to edit and add what they deem fitting. ( I am not saying this was done as I do not truthfully know, as I was not around during this period. I just use the information I glean). However as I pointed out, there were three belief systems of christianity or churches have you. Therefore the Catholic church could not be the only "enterprise" to translate the bible into it's current form. I believe the bible itself is "untouched". However some religions that incorporate the bible in their beliefs do have "other documents" that are added. But these religions do not change the bible itself.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
Now what I'm about to say might upset you, and I want to let you know that I have no authority to say this as fact, it's merely my opinion. But think about it, the bible has no authority unless you grant it. If no one believes the catholic church, then it's quite clear that the catholic church has no authority..

This is not upsetting and to a degree is true. But the same can be said about anything. Here is an example. The Constitution of the U.S. has no authority over you unless you allow it to. Therefore the government, if no one follows it, also has no authority.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
Jesus, in my opinion, and from what I have read in the bible, has been misquoted many times. I find many extremely profound things that jesus has said, (the "consider the lillies" sermon, love they neighbor, and so on) but I have also found many things so rediculous as I can only deduce they were not uttered by the same person...

Again, you must look at the topic, the context, and whom the comments were directed towards. This, when done that way makes it clear and non-contradictory.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
I believe that early on in Jesus' life he had a collosal experience of cosmic consciousness, of the type where you realize you are one with God. Buddha called it Nirvana, the Zen masters call it Satori.
Now, if Jesus had grown up in India and said, "I and the Father are one" They would have said "congratulations, you've found out." But he didn't live in india, he lived in Israel.
And living in Israel knowing that you are the ultimate reality of the universe, you have serious problems. Jesus went through life with the liberation of enlightenment but he could not express it without blaspheming. When it became to much to hold, he began his ministry and began to preach about his being one with god, but the gospel was stopped cold at it's inseption. It caused such an uproar that eventually they said, ok, well you are god, but that's it. There is very little scripture to back up my claim, just ghosts of ideas that seem hidden behind the text of the new testament, especially in the book of St. John....

Your point or idea here is not a new one. In fact many religions outside of Christianity bear Jesus Christ in their teachings and portrait him in a similar light. He is more a prophet than a messiah. The only difference in their religions though are some of his teachings.
Originally Posted by Kablamo
And about not worshipping the same god, just read your bibles for descriptions, i mean, unless he went into hybernation or something, it's not the same, maybe he has moodswings??
According to God the bible was written to bear his teachings and his son's. It is the only thing we will need. Now with that said, how do you know God still isn't wrathful? He no longer spoke to man after the birth of his son except through his son. He had the bible written so he wouldn't need to after his son left the earth. The bible is clear on that much. Therefore his teachings and history are in front of you and he speaks to you through the bible........could the earthquake that shook the middle east not have been a god showing his wraith to people that still to this day, attack his holy land and "chosen"? Is this a possibility? Now don't get me wrong, I am not like that guy, Robertson is it? Saying Sharon's stroke was invoked by god because he is giving up the gaza strip or saying the hurricane Katrina is due to the Fornication and sinful natures of New Orleans. I am not saying the earthquake in the middle east happenned because of the constant attacks by some of the people and the hatred felt by many against Isreal. I do not know. But is it a possibility? You tell me............In the bible God invoked these types of things......could God still be today?