Why Protestant and Jewish Families Rule the Earth

[Elok]

This is like a bad horror movie. Just when we think Philo's gone...he isn't. I saw the thing about him supporting Old Earth, but I gathered that was BS, seeing as he was busily attacking carbon dating and uniformitarianism. Probably there's a convoluted explanation for why he did that if he supports old-earth, though. I don't know.

[Thorgal]

It amazes me how these YEC maniacs center in carbon dating, when it is only one among many dozens of radio metric and no-radio metric dating methods. In any case having in mind that we can see stars and galaxies placed waaay beyond 6000 light-years away, it is not neccesary to use the radio-metric evidende to be sure universe is much older than 6000 years. I mean, if universe was created only about 6000 years ago as bible says, light from stars more distant than 6000 light years wouldnt have reach us yet and we couldnt see them.

[Whaleboy]

Philosophizer:

Before you can spout endless reams of crap like that, you must first do a number of things in this order.

a) Prove that God exist(s/ed)
b) Prove that God is responsible for us
c) Prove that God's intentions are as represented in the bible
d) Prove that Mosaic law was given by God
e) Prove that Mosaic law is morally absolute, and internally consistent
f) Prove that Christ existed and was the son of god and the messiah etc
g) Prove that Christ came back to life
h) Prove that Christ's teachings have the same logical value as c, d and e, assuming the aforementioned are true.

None of these have been proven as being true, and if I, personally, can shoot down all attempts I have face to do so, then what of men far cleverer than me?

You can speak of faith, and thats fine, but in doing so you retreat to a place I, and rational conversation, cannot follow. It is a fallacy to preach faith then, almost as great a fallacy as to preach that which is based upon faith, like your earlier ramblings.

Now, if you want to describe the way you feel, hey, go nuts! I'm happy that it makes you happy but dont go around prescribing your bull**** as though it's the miraculous medicine to a hopeless secular existence.

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
Philosophizer:

Before you can spout endless reams of crap like that, you must first do a number of things in this order.

a) Prove that God exist(s/ed)
b) Prove that God is responsible for us
c) Prove that God's intentions are as represented in the bible
d) Prove that Mosaic law was given by God
e) Prove that Mosaic law is morally absolute, and internally consistent
f) Prove that Christ existed and was the son of god and the messiah etc
g) Prove that Christ came back to life
h) Prove that Christ's teachings have the same logical value as c, d and e, assuming the aforementioned are true.

None of these have been proven as being true, and if I, personally, can shoot down all attempts I have face to do so, then what of men far cleverer than me?

You can speak of faith, and thats fine, but in doing so you retreat to a place I, and rational conversation, cannot follow. It is a fallacy to preach faith then, almost as great a fallacy as to preach that which is based upon faith, like your earlier ramblings.

Now, if you want to describe the way you feel, hey, go nuts! I'm happy that it makes you happy but dont go around prescribing your bull**** as though it's the miraculous medicine to a hopeless secular existence.

Whaleboy,

Its not a matter of proving God's existence. The fact is that there is SUFFICIENT proof to BELIEVE that God exists. Thats all God needs morally to indict you if you fail to acknowledge Him. He is under no obligation to prove Himself to some level of your own design or satisfaction, as if you had any rightful place to be judge over Him. There is sufficient evidence to believe He exists and that is ALL that matters.

Now, assuming then the moral obligation to believe He exists, there are three major possibilities. The first is that He is a Deistic God who has no intention of revealing Himself to us or interacting us. The second possibility is that He has revealed Himself to us- and there are two major claims which pass a low threshold of crediiblity examination- namely the Holy Bible and the Quran. So the question is then basically a choice between Christianity and Islam as God's revelation. When you examine the prophecies, the miracles, and the morality and compare them between Christianity and Islam, Christianity emerges the clear victor.

As a result, you either Believe God at His Word or you don't. Hes left plenty of signs for you- prophecy, miracles, the fact that the crucifixion is such an oddly incredible event and the even more amazing fact that as a story its been so successful, as well as the fact that you recognize interiorly that you have committed mistakes and sins in the past that need God's forgiveness.

So the point is, forget about absolute proof. God doesn't need to give it to you nor does He care to. You are under a moral obligation to accept His word simply because there is sufficient evidence to believe it as the most rational moral alternative.

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by Seeker

http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/jews-jesus/jews-jesus-index.html

strangely, it seems that for a thousand years 'some people' have found Jesus' supposedly miraculous fulfillment of OT prophecy to be neither accurate nor obvious....


Oh well guess it's just one of those things we need 'the Spirit' to open our eyes and shut down our brains to understand.

Oh, and going back to where we left off last year...you said I secretly knew god existed. I swore I didn't.

Am I a liar? Are you going to sit there and claim priveledged information about my consciousness and call me a liar to my face? (again)

You would be correct in your assessment, the jews are blinded to the clear fulfillment of their prophecy. It really is beyond clear. Their own prophets declare the Messiah will reign without end/forever. This obviously cannot be fulfilled in their kind of very temporary, mortal, earthly messiah that they envision. The jews even recognized that there would be a suffering messiah and a triumphant messiah, so many rabbinical scholars posited two messiahs. The fact though, of course, is that its the same messiah, and he came first as the merciful suffering servant, and is coming again as the Almighty and wrathful Judge of those who refused to submit to His kind offer of eternal salvation.

Near the last day, however, the Jews will indeed trust in Christ as their Messiah. The refounding of Israel in the 1940s is strong evidence that we have now entered that last time, just before the arrival of Jesus Christ.

"7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded F41 8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, F42 eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear unto this day. 9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them: 10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway. 11 I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. 12 Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing F43 of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?" (Romans 11)

"And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." (Luke 21:24)

It would seem that the times of the Gentiles has just about been fulfilled and the Jews have returned to the land once more, a primary indicator that the Messiah is well on His way and will indeed return soon.

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
sceptics claim that each new set of writers shifted the religion to better fit the current political situation...

but then at some point, that stopped happening...

but yeah, most beleivers (Even some sceptics) think that God is the uniting aspect of the Bible.. and gives it its coherence (I know that Christians think this, I Think that Jews think this about the OT also.. but not sure (see LotM))

JM

Correct, God providentially united the various writings into His Word. His Word is unbreakable and unassailable.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Philosophiser
the fact that the crucifixion is such an oddly incredible event

Crucifixion was a completely ordinary and mundane torture in Roman times. Jesus suffered from exactly the same torture as common thieves. What exactly is incredible in the event?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Philosophiser
Correct, God providentially united the various writings into His Word.

Do you mean that the Bible is the work of mankind, with God making sure it doesn't stray too far?

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by Spiffor

Do you mean that the Bible is the work of mankind, with God making sure it doesn't stray too far?

No God both inspired the writing of the various pieces and then providentially brought them together into His Sacred Word. The scripture is "God breathed".

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by Spiffor



Crucifixion was a completely ordinary and mundane torture in Roman times. Jesus suffered from exactly the same torture as common thieves. What exactly is incredible in the event?

Its not merely that its a crucifixion, but its that by being debased He became great, and by becoming foolish and miserly He became strong and wise. He became everything that people didn't expect a Messiah would be like, to become exactly what they knew He must be like.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Philosophiser
No God both inspired the writing of the various pieces and then providentially brought them together into His Sacred Word. The scripture is "God breathed".

So, the various authors have written the Bible for naught, since God eventually rewrote the whole thing once the humans were done with working on it?

[Provost Harrison]

All this crap, just because the Romans were a bit gullible. Sheesh

[Philosophiser]

Originally posted by Spiffor

So, the various authors have written the Bible for naught, since God eventually rewrote the whole thing once the humans were done with working on it?

Of course not. God inspired the authors. The Bible is consistent with itself, everything relates to everything else. The Bible is a consistent story of the redemption of humanity through Christ, from the dawn of the human race until the final day.

[Provost Harrison]

Of course, it could be a complete fabrication, cobbled together to suit the powers of the day. Oui?

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
All this crap, just because the Romans were a bit gullible. Sheesh

Bah, if Christianty hadn't been the successful cult in Europe, another one would have been (Islam, I imagine). Religion seems to satisfy a human need. BTW, this is why I think religion will come to bite us Europeans back in the ass in the coming decades