Dr. Peter Venkman Posted December 3, 2008 #76 Share Posted December 3, 2008 well I don't even know if 'blind faith' is appropriate at all. Is there non biblical documentation of an eclipse on the date of Jesus' death? is there non biblical documentation of an earthquake on that date? and is there non biblical documentation of damage to a Jewish temple on that date? if there is then 'blind faith' is hardly an appropropriate phrase. Is there geological evidence? and would an eclipse fit into that time frame? These same people had all sorts of wild claims from sea monsters to vampires. The information is not credible. I didn't say impossible, but it is unlikely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted December 3, 2008 #77 Share Posted December 3, 2008 (edited) well I don't even know if 'blind faith' is appropriate at all. Is there non biblical documentation of an eclipse on the date of Jesus' death? is there non biblical documentation of an earthquake on that date? and is there non biblical documentation of damage to a Jewish temple on that date? if there is then 'blind faith' is hardly an appropropriate phrase. Is there geological evidence? and would an eclipse fit into that time frame? You can't 'know' by faith hon.........thats all we have here so far...., Edited December 3, 2008 by Tangerine Sheri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravergirl Posted December 3, 2008 #78 Share Posted December 3, 2008 You can't 'know' by faith hon.........thats all we have here so far...., there are civilizations that recorded EVERYTHING. There should be some actual documentation from credible historians about those events. That has nothing to do with faith. I am asking if geologists have proof that an earthquake occured on that day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Posted December 3, 2008 #79 Share Posted December 3, 2008 the question is what is good evidence? . Consciousness, perception and the ability to reason as well as discern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Peter Venkman Posted December 3, 2008 #80 Share Posted December 3, 2008 (edited) there are civilizations that recorded EVERYTHING. There should be some actual documentation from credible historians about those events. That has nothing to do with faith. I am asking if geologists have proof that an earthquake occured on that day. I'm slow, were we not talking about an eclipse? Edited December 3, 2008 by Dr. Peter Venkman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravergirl Posted December 3, 2008 #81 Share Posted December 3, 2008 I'm slow, were we not talking about an eclipse? Yes. and an earthquake and damage to a Jewish Temple. These were what reseach concludes that early prophesies about the death of the messiah would bring, and the New Testament claims happened. Since a Meatloaf recipe book yeilds Meatloaf and we know that already...I want to see if Ground beef, a couple eggs, and crackers, can make a meatloaf but I don't want to use the recipe book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Peter Venkman Posted December 3, 2008 #82 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Yes. and an earthquake and damage to a Jewish Temple. These were what reseach concludes that early prophesies about the death of the messiah would bring, and the New Testament claims happened. Since a Meatloaf recipe book yeilds Meatloaf and we know that already...I want to see if Ground beef, a couple eggs, and crackers, can make a meatloaf but I don't want to use the recipe book. The difference here is that we know that ground beef, eggs, and crackers are real. As for the gentleman's biblical references are concerned, I refer you to my earlier post. They are not credible sources and certainly a shaky basis for a hypothesis at best. Like I said, we'll see what he comes up with. I doubt it will be anything that impresses those that don't believe already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted December 3, 2008 #83 Share Posted December 3, 2008 (edited) Consciousness, perception and the ability to reason as well as discern. yet i would ask in and of themsleves are these things enough to promote beleif to knowledge Irish??? Evidence has to speak to and of the claim upon which it is referencing........ evidence has to be free of equivication as much as possible,it has to be testable and replicable. Anyone can dream up a theoretical apparatus to backup a beilief they want to hold.... then you have to ask how much is enough evidence? keeping in mind I am not going for absolute certainty but just beyond reasonable doubt...... conciousness is simply what you are aware of , perception is highly subjective not all reasoning is inductive (most is deductive ) and I concur discerment is a great tool as part of critical awareness and thinking apparatus.. Most do not weigh their beleifs for merit or value let alone ask for evidence .... what they do is except them on hearsay....... Edited December 3, 2008 by Tangerine Sheri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Peter Venkman Posted December 3, 2008 #84 Share Posted December 3, 2008 (edited) Yes. and an earthquake and damage to a Jewish Temple. These were what reseach concludes that early prophesies about the death of the messiah would bring, and the New Testament claims happened. Since a Meatloaf recipe book yeilds Meatloaf and we know that already...I want to see if Ground beef, a couple eggs, and crackers, can make a meatloaf but I don't want to use the recipe book. Furthermore, I don't see any talk of an earthquake in his hypothesis. What's going on here? Your talkin' Meatloaf and earthquakes, and everyone else here is discussing the lack of credible evidence from the bible and half *** pseudo science. Edited December 3, 2008 by Dr. Peter Venkman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Posted December 3, 2008 #85 Share Posted December 3, 2008 yet i would ask in and of themsleves are these things enough to promote beleif to knowledge Irish??? Evidence has to speak to and of the claim upon which it is referencing........ evidence has to be free of equivication as much as possible,it has to be testable and replicable. Anyone can dream up a theoretical apparatus to backup a beilief they want to hold.... then you have to ask how much is enough evidence? keeping in mind I am not going for absolute certainty but just beyond reasonable doubt...... conciousness is simply what you are aware of , perception is highly subjective not all reasoning is inductive (most is deductive ) and I concur discerment is a great tool as part of critical awareness and thinking apparatus.. Most do not weigh their beleifs for merit or value let alone ask for evidence .... what they do is except them on hearsay....... Evidence is subject to the observer. I was an accident investigator for many years. Its amazing how 10 people can witness the same accident and yet all have different interpretations as to what actually occurred. The truth often lies somewhere within all the accounts. You see there is the crux of the argument, evidence is often subjective to the presenter and even evidence can be used to support both sides of a dispute. The most common sentence on UM is “I need proof” or “where is your proof?” In reality it would be extremely difficult for me to prove that I even exist in the physical world, let alone non human entities outside of our own experiences. Most will just accept the small evidence of my written words without question. Truth is defined as evidence, but any good layer worth his salt will tell you that ‘evidence’ can and is often used by the plaintiff and defendant is subjective to their own needs and desired results. Evidence has to be weighed by the individuals involved who intern lobbies others for their definition in order to strengthen their own beliefs. The opposite reaction is often not very desirable as it can shatter the individuals world view as well as turn their lives completely around. Yet at the same time the truth can be liberating, enlightening and rewarding. To some people proof is good enough in the personal experience to others evidence must be agreed on by a majority of those we hold in esteem in order to be any kind of proof. Some only accept evidence in the form of physical subjectiveness and often become entrapped within a paradigm of their own making. While others are more willing to explore the esoteric evidence of their own experience as well as others? Since consciousness itself contains no physical attributes it should exists within the realm of the esoteric rather than the physical plane, therefore those that demand physical evidence of God, Souls, Ghosts or an after life are in fact limiting there sense of reasoning and understanding to a limited paradoxical plane. Irish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravergirl Posted December 3, 2008 #86 Share Posted December 3, 2008 The difference here is that we know that ground beef, eggs, and crackers are real. As for the gentleman's biblical references are concerned, I refer you to my earlier post. They are not credible sources and certainly a shaky basis for a hypothesis at best. Like I said, we'll see what he comes up with. I doubt it will be anything that impresses those that don't believe already. earthquakes, eclipses and physical damages are real, occuring at the same time is wierd. I am just asking if anyone KNOWs if they really happened. If they really happened, the whole tone of the Original post changes. They are credible sources dear, thats like saying the people who wrote stories about what happened at Pompeii aren't credible. people saw stuff dude. If there was an earthquake and an eclipse at the same time that Mel Gibson dies, best believe I would write that down, and it doesn't make me a non-Credible witness....it would sound like this OMG, Mel Gibson croaked, and the sky went all dark and the ground rumbled and everything started falling over and I was next to the TEMPLE AND I SAW THE HOLY OF HOLYS. So thats how my hair turned white, and then later I saw Mel Gibson talking to some producers at Starbucks and he was eating meatloaf Even though no one can prove that my hair was white or he met with producers after being dead, someone will have noticed an eclipse and and an earthquake, the other stuff be danged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Peter Venkman Posted December 3, 2008 #87 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Evidence is subject to the observer. I was an accident investigator for many years. Its amazing how 10 people can witness the same accident and yet all have different interpretations as to what actually occurred. The truth often lies somewhere within all the accounts. You see there is the crux of the argument, evidence is often subjective to the presenter and even evidence can be used to support both sides of a dispute. The most common sentence on UM is “I need proof” or “where is your proof?” In reality it would be extremely difficult for me to prove that I even exist in the physical world, let alone non human entities outside of our own experiences. Most will just accept the small evidence of my written words without question. Truth is defined as evidence, but any good layer worth his salt will tell you that ‘evidence’ can and is often used by the plaintiff and defendant is subjective to their own needs and desired results. Evidence has to be weighed by the individuals involved who intern lobbies others for their definition in order to strengthen their own beliefs. The opposite reaction is often not very desirable as it can shatter the individuals world view as well as turn their lives completely around. Yet at the same time the truth can be liberating, enlightening and rewarding. To some people proof is good enough in the personal experience to others evidence must be agreed on by a majority of those we hold in esteem in order to be any kind of proof. Some only accept evidence in the form of physical subjectiveness and often become entrapped within a paradigm of their own making. While others are more willing to explore the esoteric evidence of their own experience as well as others? Since consciousness itself contains no physical attributes it should exists within the realm of the esoteric rather than the physical plane, therefore those that demand physical evidence of God, Souls, Ghosts or an after life are in fact limiting there sense of reasoning and understanding to a limited paradoxical plane. Irish True evidence can be subjective. From a certain point of view, our entire universe is subjective, if you choose to not learn from others. My issue is that the guy is using the bible... to prove the validity of the bible... esentially. It doesn't make much sense. Like I've already said though, it doesn't mean it's not true, but he's claiming this is science. It isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravergirl Posted December 3, 2008 #88 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Furthermore, I don't see any talk of an earthquake in his hypothesis. What's going on here? Your talkin' Meatloaf and earthquakes, and everyone else here is discussing the lack of credible evidence from the bible and half *** pseudo science. Because people want to rag on the bible, and IM screaming and pointing at the elephant in the room..... If the Earthquake occured at the same time and eclipse occured and a temple curtain ripped in half revealing the holiest of holies...it isn't just fluff from a book anymore. if I said JFK never got shot because it happened so long ago so all I can go on is faith....does that make it true? and if I say that the tapes could be dotored, and the winesses aren't credible, does that make it true? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Peter Venkman Posted December 3, 2008 #89 Share Posted December 3, 2008 (edited) Because people want to rag on the bible, and IM screaming and pointing at the elephant in the room..... If the Earthquake occured at the same time and eclipse occured and a temple curtain ripped in half revealing the holiest of holies...it isn't just fluff from a book anymore. if I said JFK never got shot because it happened so long ago so all I can go on is faith....does that make it true? and if I say that the tapes could be dotored, and the winesses aren't credible, does that make it true? None of this has happened. What are you talking about? Yes, we can go back and determine if an earthquake may have determined at a certain time or not. I would indeed believe that to be correct in cunjunction with a biblical reference. He has in no way shape or form mentioned an earthquake. he mentioned an eclipse and computer models to verify how it happened. Biblical locations are found all the time, but they still haven't found evidence of a worldwide flood, but they keep looking. The difference is that they have evidence to look for. There is no physical evidence of an eclipse to search for. Therefore all he has to go off of, are biblical references from the time period refering to what may or may have not been an eclipse. the same folks that assumed they'd fall off the end of the earth if they sailed far enough. Do you follow what I'm getting at here? Don't shift the focus of the thread to something you can argue. That's called thread jacking you see. I would make my own thread about biblical geological evidece if I were you. Edited December 3, 2008 by Dr. Peter Venkman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravergirl Posted December 3, 2008 #90 Share Posted December 3, 2008 None of this has happened. What are you talking about? Yes, we can go back and determine if an earthquake may have determined at a certain time or not. I would indeed believe that to be correct in cunjunction with a biblical reference. He has in no way shape or form mentioned an earthquake. he mentioned an eclipse and computer models to verify how it happened. Biblical locations are found all the time, but they still haven't found evidence of a worldwide flood, but they keep looking. The difference is that they have evidence to look for. There is no physical evidence of an eclipse to search for. Therefore all he has to go off of, are biblical references from the time period refering to what may or may have not been an eclipse. the same folks that assumed they'd fall off the end of the earth if they sailed far enough. Do you follow what I'm getting at here? Don't shift the focus of the thread to something you can argue. That's called thread jacking you see. I would make my own thread about biblical geological evidece if I were you. please can you tell me what this bolded section means to you? This was the sign that Jesus had promised to the Pharisees when they had asked for a sign from heaven. [Matt 16.1]; [Mk 8.11]; [Lk 11.16] This sign from heaven occurred as the religious feasts were about to begin. [Amos 8.10]; [Matt 26.5]; [Mk 14.2]; [Jn 18.28] This sign from heaven caused a midday darkness. [Amos 8.9]; [Matt 27.45]; [Mk 15.33]; [Lk 23.44] Finally, this sign from heaven caused an earthquake. [Amos 8.8]; [Matt 27.51,54] Therefore, I conclude that God’s Prophetic Word in [Amos 8.7-10] was fulfilled beginning at noon on the day of Christ’s Crucifixion, and that it also played an essential role in the fulfillment of the Messianic Prophecy in [Psalm 22.2], as well as in the fulfillment of Simeon's Prophecy in [Lk 2.34]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexG Posted December 3, 2008 #91 Share Posted December 3, 2008 well I don't even know if 'blind faith' is appropriate at all. Is there non biblical documentation of an eclipse on the date of Jesus' death? is there non biblical documentation of an earthquake on that date? and is there non biblical documentation of damage to a Jewish temple on that date? if there is then 'blind faith' is hardly an appropropriate phrase. Is there geological evidence? and would an eclipse fit into that time frame? There doesn't appear to be any documentation earlier than 100 years or so after the fact. We're not even sure of the date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt_Ripley Posted December 3, 2008 #92 Share Posted December 3, 2008 there are civilizations that recorded EVERYTHING. There should be some actual documentation from credible historians about those events. That has nothing to do with faith. I am asking if geologists have proof that an earthquake occured on that day. an earthquake , volcano , tsunami ............ all things then that were attributed to the doing of God. Comets , eclipses ........ from God .... what do we think of them now ? is it plausible that to bolster the story of Jesus that one creatively inserted that at the time of death a eclipse or earthquake happened to give it more validity ? The birth of Jesus isn't pinned down let alone the death. What year was it btw ? seems there isn't a sure bet on that either since the dates from the Roman calander guesses originally at the birth of Jesus and the year . If Jesus was crucified at the age of 33 and The best guess of most Biblical scholars is that Jesus was born between 4 and 7 BCE - that would have him too young to be on the cross for the November dated eclipse . this too is an interesting read - http://www.thenazareneway.com/date_of_birt...th_of_jesus.htm also - The crucifixion of Jesus is the central event of the Passion narrative, but the narratives don’t agree on when the crucifixion occurred. Mark 15:25 - Jesus was crucified on the “third hour.” John 19:14-15 - Jesus was crucified on the “sixth hour.” Matthew, Luke - It’s not stated when the crucifixion starts, but the “sixth hour” occurs during the curcifixion Was there an earthquake when Jesus died? Matthew 27:51-53 - At the moment Jesus dies, a massive earth quake strikes and opens tombs where dead people rise again Mark, Luke, John - No earthquake is mentioned. No earthquake and no massive influx of formerly dead people is mentioned in any historical records, which is strange given how monumental such an event would be. and as for eclipses ( and many people are listed to have been born or died under one - ancient eclipses ) another site by NASA - a good one showing paths -NASA , Mark 15:33 - At the sixth hour darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour. first - there are no actual eyewitness accounts. - just accounts written decades later. an actual eclipse from start to finish , about 2 hours. however one in 2000 lasted What was the world's longest eclipse? To start, there are two types of eclipses, a solar eclipse and a lunar eclipse, and we'll shed some light of both. A solar eclipse is when the moon passes between the Earth and the Sun. The longest a total solar eclipse can last, theoretically, is 7 minutes and 31 seconds and the longest recorded solar eclipse we could find lasted 7 minutes and 8 seconds in 1955. If you're around on July 16 2186 you'll have the opportunity to experience an all but perfect solar eclipse lasting 7 minutes and 29 seconds. A lunar eclipse is an eclipse of the moon and occurs when the Earth passes between the moon and the Sun. The longest recorded lunar eclipse occurred on May 31 318 lasting 1 hour 47minutes and 14 seconds. so it seems it is all hearsay............. there may or may not have been an earthquake , eclipse ect........ jesus more than likely was born in 6 bc. and that wouldn't match the date of that eclipse for his crucifixion . nor is there a record of earthquake at that time. I think those events more than likely were attributed in order to push the christian agenda further. it wouldn't look as good if nothing happened. But hey ! remember that eclipse a couple of years later ? Writers and story tellers have great imagination. Ask anyone who fishes about their catch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravergirl Posted December 3, 2008 #93 Share Posted December 3, 2008 There doesn't appear to be any documentation earlier than 100 years or so after the fact. We're not even sure of the date. does that strike you a little odd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt_Ripley Posted December 3, 2008 #94 Share Posted December 3, 2008 does that strike you a little odd? an earthquake during an eclipse most certainly would have been recorded. none was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted December 3, 2008 #95 Share Posted December 3, 2008 (edited) Evidence is subject to the observer. I was an accident investigator for many years. Its amazing how 10 people can witness the same accident and yet all have different interpretations as to what actually occurred. The truth often lies somewhere within all the accounts. You see there is the crux of the argument, evidence is often subjective to the presenter and even evidence can be used to support both sides of a dispute. The most common sentence on UM is "I need proof" or "where is your proof?" In reality it would be extremely difficult for me to prove that I even exist in the physical world, let alone non human entities outside of our own experiences. Most will just accept the small evidence of my written words without question. Truth is defined as evidence, but any good layer worth his salt will tell you that 'evidence' can and is often used by the plaintiff and defendant is subjective to their own needs and desired results. Evidence has to be weighed by the individuals involved who intern lobbies others for their definition in order to strengthen their own beliefs. The opposite reaction is often not very desirable as it can shatter the individuals world view as well as turn their lives completely around. Yet at the same time the truth can be liberating, enlightening and rewarding. To some people proof is good enough in the personal experience to others evidence must be agreed on by a majority of those we hold in esteem in order to be any kind of proof. Some only accept evidence in the form of physical subjectiveness and often become entrapped within a paradigm of their own making. While others are more willing to explore the esoteric evidence of their own experience as well as others? Since consciousness itself contains no physical attributes it should exists within the realm of the esoteric rather than the physical plane, therefore those that demand physical evidence of God, Souls, Ghosts or an after life are in fact limiting there sense of reasoning and understanding to a limited paradoxical plane. Irish I would concur that any explanation is possible given the appropriate theory , however one explaination is not as good as another....(discernment) the door needs to be open to make connections in the light of further evidence...( e.g. methodology of scientific inquiry) Logical certainty is impossible when we are talking about matters of fact... In matters of substance one has to be willing to hedge all bets and revise given that the conclusion of any valid deduction is contained in its premises ( otherwise it wouldn't be valid) irish, what do you put forward as the frame of this consciousness you speak of??? (do you see something conscious as creating the universe, or do you see consciousness resulting from the universe evolving ?) and why? one of the problems i see with consciousness is that it is at this point nothing more than a new-age anthropomorphism of our environment. So far there is nothing to suggest the universe itself is self-aware. For me there are a great deal of very complex questions that rise from this script that are for the most part tainted by superstitious and anecdotal conjecture. we need to be careful in identifying how we contaminate our own constructs. Edited December 3, 2008 by Tangerine Sheri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Sherapy Posted December 3, 2008 #96 Share Posted December 3, 2008 (edited) an earthquake , volcano , tsunami ............ all things then that were attributed to the doing of God. Comets , eclipses ........ from God .... what do we think of them now ? is it plausible that to bolster the story of Jesus that one creatively inserted that at the time of death a eclipse or earthquake happened to give it more validity ? The birth of Jesus isn't pinned down let alone the death. What year was it btw ? seems there isn't a sure bet on that either since the dates from the Roman calander guesses originally at the birth of Jesus and the year . If Jesus was crucified at the age of 33 and The best guess of most Biblical scholars is that Jesus was born between 4 and 7 BCE - that would have him too young to be on the cross for the November dated eclipse . this too is an interesting read - http://www.thenazareneway.com/date_of_birt...th_of_jesus.htm also - The crucifixion of Jesus is the central event of the Passion narrative, but the narratives don't agree on when the crucifixion occurred. Mark 15:25 - Jesus was crucified on the "third hour." John 19:14-15 - Jesus was crucified on the "sixth hour." Matthew, Luke - It's not stated when the crucifixion starts, but the "sixth hour" occurs during the curcifixion Was there an earthquake when Jesus died? Matthew 27:51-53 - At the moment Jesus dies, a massive earth quake strikes and opens tombs where dead people rise again Mark, Luke, John - No earthquake is mentioned. No earthquake and no massive influx of formerly dead people is mentioned in any historical records, which is strange given how monumental such an event would be. and as for eclipses ( and many people are listed to have been born or died under one - ancient eclipses ) another site by NASA - a good one showing paths -NASA , Mark 15:33 - At the sixth hour darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour. first - there are no actual eyewitness accounts. - just accounts written decades later. an actual eclipse from start to finish , about 2 hours. however one in 2000 lasted What was the world's longest eclipse? To start, there are two types of eclipses, a solar eclipse and a lunar eclipse, and we'll shed some light of both. A solar eclipse is when the moon passes between the Earth and the Sun. The longest a total solar eclipse can last, theoretically, is 7 minutes and 31 seconds and the longest recorded solar eclipse we could find lasted 7 minutes and 8 seconds in 1955. If you're around on July 16 2186 you'll have the opportunity to experience an all but perfect solar eclipse lasting 7 minutes and 29 seconds. A lunar eclipse is an eclipse of the moon and occurs when the Earth passes between the moon and the Sun. The longest recorded lunar eclipse occurred on May 31 318 lasting 1 hour 47minutes and 14 seconds. so it seems it is all hearsay............. there may or may not have been an earthquake , eclipse ect........ jesus more than likely was born in 6 bc. and that wouldn't match the date of that eclipse for his crucifixion . nor is there a record of earthquake at that time. I think those events more than likely were attributed in order to push the christian agenda further. it wouldn't look as good if nothing happened. But hey ! remember that eclipse a couple of years later ? Writers and story tellers have great imagination. Ask anyone who fishes about their catch. and .. very well done lady R.... Edited December 3, 2008 by Tangerine Sheri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ravergirl Posted December 3, 2008 #97 Share Posted December 3, 2008 an earthquake , volcano , tsunami ............ all things then that were attributed to the doing of God. Comets , eclipses ........ from God .... what do we think of them now ? is it plausible that to bolster the story of Jesus that one creatively inserted that at the time of death a eclipse or earthquake happened to give it more validity ? The birth of Jesus isn't pinned down let alone the death. What year was it btw ? seems there isn't a sure bet on that either since the dates from the Roman calander guesses originally at the birth of Jesus and the year . If Jesus was crucified at the age of 33 and The best guess of most Biblical scholars is that Jesus was born between 4 and 7 BCE - that would have him too young to be on the cross for the November dated eclipse . this too is an interesting read - http://www.thenazareneway.com/date_of_birt...th_of_jesus.htm also - The crucifixion of Jesus is the central event of the Passion narrative, but the narratives don’t agree on when the crucifixion occurred. Mark 15:25 - Jesus was crucified on the “third hour.” John 19:14-15 - Jesus was crucified on the “sixth hour.” Matthew, Luke - It’s not stated when the crucifixion starts, but the “sixth hour” occurs during the curcifixion Right, but there was a reason for marking the time, due to the Sabbath. the sixth hour is Sabbath and the third hour is not. perhaps there was some monetary gain by flubbing the time in marks account. a bribe or a threat. He wasn't Jewish and perhaps didn't understand the importance, especially since his lessons would have been focused away from Jewish tradition, and he didn't have the upbringing. Thanks for the rest. although, I remember thinking, Is it strange that there are recorded star movements for all other events. and also Galilee is a port city if im not mistaken, obviously sailors watch the stars for navigation in those times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Peter Venkman Posted December 3, 2008 #98 Share Posted December 3, 2008 please can you tell me what this bolded section means to you? It means there was an earthquake that coincided with the supposed eclipse. I never said that didn't happen. Indeed i said that could probably be proven. I didn't notice the reference in his post either though. Regardless, His research does not involve the earthquake. Stop it. It makes you seem foolish. I'll reword my post again for ya. None of this has happened. What are you talking about? Yes, we can go back and determine if an earthquake may have determined at a certain time or not. I would indeed believe that to be correct in cunjunction with a biblical reference. He has in no way shape or form mentioned RESEARCH INVOLVING an earthquake. He mentioned an eclipse and computer models to verify how it happened. Biblical locations are found all the time, but they still haven't found evidence of a worldwide flood, but they keep looking. The difference is that they have evidence to look for. There is no physical evidence of an eclipse to search for. Therefore all he has to go off of, are biblical references from the time period refering to what may or may have not been an eclipse. the same folks that assumed they'd fall off the end of the earth if they sailed far enough. Do you follow what I'm getting at here? Don't shift the focus of the thread to something you can argue. That's called thread jacking you see. I would make my own thread about biblical geological evidece if I were you. I stand by my post. Are you capable of responding to it? Or do you wish to be petty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Peter Venkman Posted December 3, 2008 #99 Share Posted December 3, 2008 Right, but there was a reason for marking the time, due to the Sabbath. the sixth hour is Sabbath and the third hour is not. perhaps there was some monetary gain by flubbing the time in marks account. a bribe or a threat. He wasn't Jewish and perhaps didn't understand the importance, especially since his lessons would have been focused away from Jewish tradition, and he didn't have the upbringing. Thanks for the rest. although, I remember thinking, Is it strange that there are recorded star movements for all other events. and also Galilee is a port city if im not mistaken, obviously sailors watch the stars for navigation in those times. What's this perhaps this perhaps that stuff? Stop cherry picking what you feel to be true. and twisting everything else to meet the argument. Perhaps Jesus was latino, and was a professional kickboxer. What are you thinking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irish Posted December 3, 2008 #100 Share Posted December 3, 2008 irish, what do you put forward as the frame of this consciousness you speak of??? (do you see something conscious as creating the universe, or do you see consciousness resulting from the universe evolving ?) and why? This may surprise you and you may not agree with my reasoning but I personally see evidence of an intelligent designer in the very fact that humans have inherent unique flaws in our makeup. Individual sentient beings that are not the result of a cookie cutter process of evolution or creation. I believe the flaw was intentional and for a purpose we do not yet know. It’s interesting that the greatest artists/painters in the world include a flaw in their best work on purpose. Could this be part of our god nature? I like to think of it as a measure of randomness within creation that makes life interesting. I used to know a man that built grandfather clocks but he used to create flaws in his work as well as throw in a few redundant parts, when I asked him why he did this he explained that it was his signature within his work and no automated manufacture could duplicate his precision work. It made each clock an individual and unique time piece, thus greater value and craftsman ship. Man is made in the image of God, I believe that image is not physical but in our ability to create or destroy within our art and our music and even in our sciences. Man is rabidly increasing in knowledge to the point he may be able to create life itself in a laboratory soon. Perhaps other creations of God both good and evil have achieved this ability already. It is our uniqueness that makes us identifiable to God as part of His great work. Irish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now