26
   

Scientific explanations for creation

 
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 May, 2014 05:18 pm
You claimed that you had only provided just one bit from a larger body of evidence that the Bible is true or that a God exists who created the universe and guides mankind. I will be interested to hear more of it.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 21 May, 2014 05:20 pm
@neologist,
You're a victim of your chosen superstition. Atheists aren't categorized thus because of a belief. They are atheists because they don't believe. It's a desperation ploy to call it a belief, as though were equivalent to theism. You carry it even further by slighting deists, as though it were only real if one is dealing with your preferred book of fairy tales.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 May, 2014 12:06 am
@neologist,
Setanta makes a good point but I would add that there is a subtle distinction between the the terms "belief" and "belief system". Deists and atheists alike all operate with basic beliefs per se in terms of the assumptions which get us through the day. The general difference is that for deists alone, aspects of getting through the day can include a psychological element of " in the sight of God". Thus all actions for deists are part of a personal system. Atheistic scientists are only aware of an impersonal "system" in terms of the paradigm in which their professional activities are embedded.

As Rorty argues, it is perfectly respectable for a scientist to be a deist provided a separation of functionality is applied to different cognitive modes.
Rorty on the Compatibility of Science & Religion
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjhVk-0Vhmk
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 May, 2014 07:22 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
Nonsense. Do you allege that Babylon controlled an empire more powerful than China?
Of course not. But China is not part of Jewish history and that is what the OT is about.
Setanta wrote:
Babylon fell to the Medes and Persians a few years later, so alleging it to have been the center of a powerful empire is laughable. In fact, Jeremiah only entered the prophet business less than a generation before the Medes overran the Assyrian city of Nineveh (circa 616 BCE) and then turned on their erstwhile ally, the Chaldeans of Babylon. The "Babylonians" negotiated, but the Medes and Persians came back and took the city in 596 BCE.
I can't figure this out.

I have always been impressed by your historical scholarship. In fact, it was only in the last few days I read a most informative and entertaining post written by you about the subjects of hogsheads and sailing ships.

So, perhaps we are talking about totally different events. A Google search for October 11, 539 B.C. E. Turns up the date revealed in the Nabonidus Chronicle to be when Cyrus entered Babylon after diverting the Euphrates River, thereby defeating the city's water defense. This was the date I have been referring to. And, of course, this was accomplished without destroying the walls of the city.

So, I cannot figure how the date 596 BC fits in relative to Jewish captivity.
Setanta wrote:
When it comes to history, you should really not make **** up when you're talking to me. It was, in fact, the Persians who sent the Jews home from the Babylonian captivity.
Yes and this date in 539 was important as Cyrus was inclined towards religious freedom. Shortly thereafter, he released the Jews from their captivity, marking the timelines for several of Daniel's prophecies.
Setanta wrote:
Babylon limped along for almost 1500 more years. Once again, predicting the fall of any city is like predicting the sunrise. If you wait around long enough, it's bound to happen.
Hmm. How many cities, once capitals of world leading empires, have become totally uninhabited?
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 May, 2014 07:25 am
@fresco,
Understood. I should have been referring to something more like core beliefs or world views.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 May, 2014 11:22 am
@neologist,
The "Old Testament" is not about history at all. It's about mythology and the rage of dreaming sheep.

The Medes controlled an empire which was not based on Babylon. It was based in the Iranian highlands. Astyages was the last king of the Medes, and he was defeated by Cyrus in 550 BCE. Taking Babylon was just mopping up the mess the Medes left behind, when they had let the Chaldeans return to Babylon. You have zero perspective on history. If it's in your cherished book of fairy tales, then you think it's important. The Egyptians were trying to invade and occupy Mesopotamia, the Assyrian empire was decaying, the Chaldeans were trying to take Babylon from them, the Scythians and the Cimmerians were attacking the Assyrians, and so their empire went into a slow collapse and they could no longer hold onto Babylon. It was at this point that the Medes appear, backed up by their cousins, the Persians.

Babylon fell to the Medes in 596 BCE. It fell to the Persians in 539 BCE.

As for how many cities which were once capitals of world leading empires became completely uninhabited, the answer is none--not even Babylon. Babylon was never the capital of a world leading empire. There has never been a world leading empire. Again, you lack perspective. Babylon only became uninhabited more than 1500 years after the events you are obsessed with. Babylon has been destroyed more than once, and rebuilt. Most recently, Saddam Hussein was trying to rebuild the city in 1983. However, he got distracted not long after that.

You are so obsessively focused on your idiot "prophecies" that you are unable to see the flow of history which swirled around the city once known as Babylon. If i had a thousand dollars for every two-bit, tin-pot thug who set up a throne in Babylon and called himself the King of a "world-leading" empire, i'd retire to Hawaii.

As for the implications of that stupidity about "world-leading" empires, the capital of the Achaemenid empire was Susa in what is now Iran. It was overrun time and again by Assyrians, Medes, Persians, Greco-Macedonians and eventually by Ali and his Muslim army of holy warriors. Just like Babylon, it was marginalized by the Muslims during their "Islamification" of Persia, and wasted away.

There were cities in the coastal deserts of Peru that "died" so long ago, we don't even know their names. Teotihuacan on the Mexican plateau was once a city of more than 100,000 people, and about 1500 years ago, may have been the sixth largest city in the world. It was a well-known religious center, very important to the people of the region--and it was completely unihabited by a thousand years ago. We don't know who it's people were, what language they spoke and why the city declined.

The city of Carthage was completely destroyed by the Romans, and they even plowed salt into the land around the city to prevent its occupation. Unfortunately for them, Utica sits on a river which silted up, so they were forced to rebuild Carthage, so as to have a reliable port. It certainly was never the capital of a "world leading empire," and for as extensive and rich as the Punic empire became before they went to war with the Romans, they were unable to either defend their empire nor to save their city.

I could go on like this for quite a while, but you've already wasted too much of my time with your obsessive idiocy. If you want to believe in your silly fairy tales about prophecy, help yourself. Don't expect that any well-educated people will take you seriously.
Quehoniaomath
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 May, 2014 12:51 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
The "Old Testament" is not about history at all. It's about mythology and the rage of dreaming sheep.

The Medes controlled an empire which was not based on Babylon. It was based in the Iranian highlands. Astyages was the last king of the Medes, and he was defeated by Cyrus in 550 BCE. Taking Babylon was just mopping up the mess the Medes left behind, when they had let the Chaldeans return to Babylon. You have zero perspective on history. If it's in your cherished book of fairy tales, then you think it's important. The Egyptians were trying to invade and occupy Mesopotamia, the Assyrian empire was decaying, the Chaldeans were trying to take Babylon from them, the Scythians and the Cimmerians were attacking the Assyrians, and so their empire went into a slow collapse and they could no longer hold onto Babylon. It was at this point that the Medes appear, backed up by their cousins, the Persians.

Babylon fell to the Medes in 596 BCE. It fell to the Persians in 539 BCE.

As for how many cities which were once capitals of world leading empires became completely uninhabited, the answer is none--not even Babylon. Babylon was never the capital of a world leading empire. There has never been a world leading empire. Again, you lack perspective. Babylon only became uninhabited more than 1500 years after the events you are obsessed with. Babylon has been destroyed more than once, and rebuilt. Most recently, Saddam Hussein was trying to rebuild the city in 1983. However, he got distracted not long after that.

You are so obsessively focused on your idiot "prophecies" that you are unable to see the flow of history which swirled around the city once known as Babylon. If i had a thousand dollars for every two-bit, tin-pot thug who set up a throne in Babylon and called himself the King of a "world-leading" empire, i'd retire to Hawaii.

As for the implications of that stupidity about "world-leading" empires, the capital of the Achaemenid empire was Susa in what is now Iran. It was overrun time and again by Assyrians, Medes, Persians, Greco-Macedonians and eventually by Ali and his Muslim army of holy warriors. Just like Babylon, it was marginalized by the Muslims during their "Islamification" of Persia, and wasted away.

There were cities in the coastal deserts of Peru that "died" so long ago, we don't even know their names. Teotihuacan on the Mexican plateau was once a city of more than 100,000 people, and about 1500 years ago, may have been the sixth largest city in the world. It was a well-known religious center, very important to the people of the region--and it was completely unihabited by a thousand years ago. We don't know who it's people were, what language they spoke and why the city declined.

The city of Carthage was completely destroyed by the Romans, and they even plowed salt into the land around the city to prevent its occupation. Unfortunately for them, Utica sits on a river which silted up, so they were forced to rebuild Carthage, so as to have a reliable port. It certainly was never the capital of a "world leading empire," and for as extensive and rich as the Punic empire became before they went to war with the Romans, they were unable to either defend their empire nor to save their city.

I could go on like this for quite a while, but you've already wasted too much of my time with your obsessive idiocy. If you want to believe in your silly fairy tales about prophecy, help yourself. Don't expect that any well-educated people will take you seriously.


Where the **** do you find this stupid information?
Just repeating the mainstream dogma now?

The whole of history is fabricated! Didn't you know that?

0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 May, 2014 01:50 pm
Standing by.....! Very Happy
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 May, 2014 02:36 pm
@Setanta,
Thanks for your for your further explanation. My statement was "I cannot figure how the date 596 BC relates to Jewish captivity. There were several kings of Babylon during the Jewish captivity. If one of them had been named Alfred E. Newman, it would have made no difference as far as the Jews were concerned. They were captive from the time Babylon leveled Jerusalem until the time they were released.

You are at least partially right when you say the Bible is not about history. In fact, it is history only of the Jews relative to the Jews. After Jerusalem was rebuilt under Persian rule, it came under Greek, then Roman rule. None of these earth shaking events are recoded in the Hebrew scriptures; and Rome was not mentioned until the time of Christ. They are not important to the OT because it was recorded for the sole purpose of identifying the messiah. At least that's what Paul said at Galatians 3:24.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 May, 2014 02:55 pm
@neologist,
No, it's no history at all, not of the Jews, not of anyone. You really have no shame.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 May, 2014 11:03 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:
You really have no shame.
Thanks for noticing.
The world is full of religionists who bear shame for the hardship and misery and bloodshed they have caused through the ages.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 May, 2014 03:37 am
But of course, your hands are clean. Hypocrite.
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 May, 2014 03:46 am
Still waiting for the claimed other evidence.
0 Replies
 
ssami8
 
  0  
Reply Fri 23 May, 2014 06:17 am
@fresco,
Each individual dimension of your so called science was founded by the people who had the privileged access to science via our holy book. This is our contribution to the humanity as a whole. I agree in recent ages we are far behind due to our own issues..

http://www.irfi.org/articles2/articles_3151_3200/the%20great%20muslim%20scientists%20of%20all%20timehtml.htm

http://www.famousscientists.org/famous-muslim-arab-persian-scientists-and-their-inventions/
ssami8
 
  0  
Reply Fri 23 May, 2014 06:19 am
@fresco,
I don't see monks coming out from jungles being human??? haven't even heard of it. Is the evolution stopped?
jespah
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 May, 2014 07:09 am
@ssami8,
Evolution goes on pretty damned constantly. You're not thinking on an evolutionary scale - change occurs over time. And you're also not thinking on a scale beyond human - evolution occurs in mice, in insects, and in bacteria, all of which have far shorter generations than we do, and so their changes are easier to spot.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 May, 2014 07:44 am
@ssami8,
Are you seriously claiming that the achievements of the recent scientists on your list were referenced directly to specific passages in the Koran ? If so, I challenge you to present the evidence.
I note that several of the recent ones are ex-patriots who found it necessary to complete their education in western institutions. How many of those are you claiming are practicing Muslims ?
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 May, 2014 07:53 am
@ssami8,
Evolution certainly seems to have stuck for those homo sapiens who have failed to progress beyond the aggressive tribalism exhibited by their primate ancestors ! Wink
timur
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 May, 2014 08:45 am
@fresco,
Yep, I share that view.

It seems to me that man has attained a stage where his evolution is a voluntary process.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 May, 2014 08:57 am
We have removed the evolutionary process from our bodies to libraries, universities and research institutions.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 10/23/2021 at 03:16:49