If evolution is real, then where is it?

[Parogar]

Look around you. Do you think the seas, mountains, the foundations, the heavens and everything in them were created automagically? It is clear down to the common man that there had to be a creator.

But which creator? Who, what, when and why? Go and compare an "evolution science book" written by man against the King James Bible. The "evolution science book" looks like a joke.

And what about magnets? How do they work?

 

[pakicetus]

Au contraire.

It consists of 66 books; originally written by some 40 amanuenses; over a period of some 4000 years; in three different languages; in three different continents; from a variety of backgrounds from fig-picker to king; in times of war, and in times of peace; and the writings fit together like a hand in a glove.

The ancient Israelites were literally the only people ever to have a mythology. No other religion has holy books.

 

[AV1611VET]

The ancient Israelites were literally the only people ever to have a mythology. No other religion has holy books.

What do you call the Book of Mormon, the Bhavagad-gita, The Preservation of Favoured Races, Strong's Concordance, the Necronomicon, the Egyptian Book of the Dead, the Satanic Bible, or I Ching?

 

[SLP]

Au contraire.

It consists of 66 books; originally written by some 40 amanuenses; over a period of some 4000 years; in three different languages; in three different continents; from a variety of backgrounds from fig-picker to king; in times of war, and in times of peace; and the writings fit together like a hand in a glove.

So, you don't understand what corroboration means?

Where is the corroboration for the Exodus? For the plagues? For creation?

I would hope that at least some of the historical events/places/people mentioned in the bible were real, lest the ENTIRE thing be seen as fictional.

But positing that because Egypt was real and Herod was real that therefore the Hebrew tribal deity YHVH was real and created the universe 6000 years ago is absurd in the highest order.

 

[SLP]

What do you call the Book of Mormon, the Bhavagad-gita, The Preservation of Favoured Races, or I Ching?

Um, dude?

I think he was being sarcastic...

 

[AV1611VET]

Where is the corroboration for the Exodus? For the plagues? For creation?

In the book of Psalms, written hundreds of years later -- by way of one example.

 

[AV1611VET]

Um, dude?

I think he was being sarcastic...

I know.

 

[SLP]

In the book of Psalms, written hundreds of years later -- by way of one example.

Wait wait wait - you mean to say that something written well after a claimed yet contemporaneously uncorroborated event counts as corroboration?


LOL!

Well, as long as you are not going to claim that this is fulfilled prophesy...

 

[AV1611VET]

Wait wait wait - you mean to say that something written well after a claimed yet contemporaneously uncorroborated event counts as corroboration?

Yes -- especially if written by the same Author.

 

[AV1611VET]

SLP, I suppose next you're going to tell me that Jesus' resurrection is not a corroborated event?

Even though written by four different eyewitnesses who were later martyred for what they wrote?

 

[pakicetus]

SLP, I suppose next you're going to tell me that Jesus' resurrection is not a corroborated event?

Even though written by four different eyewitnesses who were later martyred for what they wrote?

You're speeding toward conclusions and ignoring a million possible off-ramps. What makes you think the writers of the Gospels were eyewitnesses? How do you even know who wrote the Gospels? And don't you think some claims require more than just eyewitness testimony -- for example, that I talked with a sentient giraffe, or that I saw someone rise from the grave?

Also, if the Bible counts as "documentation," is the Qur'an documentation that Muhammad flew on a winged horse to Jerusalem and split the moon in half?

 

[Oncedeceived]

You're speeding toward conclusions and ignoring a million possible off-ramps. What makes you think the writers of the Gospels were eyewitnesses?

They were either eye witnesses or had contact with the Disciples themselves according to what they claimed themselves.

How do you even know who wrote the Gospels?

We don't for sure but we do know that the earliest church documentation claims the authors are who they say they are.

And don't you think some claims require more than just eyewitness testimony -- for example, that I talked with a sentient giraffe, or that I saw someone rise from the grave?

Are you trying to say that it is just one persons testimony?

Also, if the Bible counts as "documentation," is the Qur'an documentation that Muhammad flew on a winged horse to Jerusalem and split the moon in half?

That is like saying that if the U.S. constitution is "documentation" so is the "Tales of Beedle the Bard".

 

[pakicetus]

They were either eye witnesses or had contact with the Disciples themselves according to what they claimed themselves.

When did they claim to have contact with the disciples? And even if they did, why should we trust their hearsay?

We don't for sure but we do know that the earliest church documentation claims the authors are who they say they are.

Maybe the church was right. But then again, maybe not. The authors of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) actually never claimed to be disciples or even eyewitnesses, even though you'd think that would be worth mentioning. The author of the Book of John claims to be "the disciple who Jesus loved" toward the very end, after referring to himself in third person the whole time.

Are you trying to say that it is just one persons testimony?

Quite plausibly. Most Biblical scholars think the authors of Matthew and Luke plagiarized from the Book of Mark -- which wouldn't completely disprove the idea that they were eyewitnesses, but it would reduce the probability.

That isn't my whole point, though. Even if four people claim to have seen something incredible, like a man shape-shifting into a bird or a theologian flying over St. Peter's Basilica, I don't think their eyewitness testimony is enough. I don't care about the "eight witnesses" of Joseph Smith's gold plates, either.

That is like saying that if the U.S. constitution is "documentation" so is the "Tales of Beedle the Bard".

Well I guess I'll just have to take your word for that.

 

[Parogar]

SLP, I suppose next you're going to tell me that Jesus' resurrection is not a corroborated event?

Even though written by four different eyewitnesses who were later martyred for what they wrote?

I know, right!

I'll never understand why they didn't just write in the bible that it was witnessed by four ... thousand witnesses firsthand. That way no one would even begin to challenge it.

But because they only wrote down four it's not enough to cure everyone's skepticism.

 

[AV1611VET]

I know, right!

I'll never understand why they didn't just write in the bible that it was witnessed by four ... thousand witnesses firsthand. That way no one would even begin to challenge it.

But because they only wrote down four it's not enough to cure everyone's skepticism.

Maybe 500 will sate their skepticism?

1 Corinthians 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Maybe 500 will sate their skepticism?

1 Corinthians 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

For those with faith no proof is needed but for those who are sceptics no proof will suffice.

 

[AV1611VET]

For those with faith no proof is needed but for those who are sceptics no proof will suffice.

Wow!

That's sig-worthy, my friend!

 

[pakicetus]

Maybe 500 will sate their skepticism?

1 Corinthians 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

Just because the Bible says over 500 people saw whatever that verse was talking about doesn't mean it's true. Anybody could claim 500 people saw anything.

Yesterday I flew to Mars on a winged blueberry. Over five hundred people saw me do it. How can you not believe me?

I mean seriously! If the Quran said 500 people saw Muhammad split the moon in half, how much more credible would that make the story? Would you convert to Islam if it said that?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Yesterday I flew to Mars on a winged blueberry. Over five hundred people saw it. How can you not believe me?

Please supply the names and contact details for a dozen or more of the 500 alleged witnesses

 

[pakicetus]

The Bible should've said a trillion people saw it. Then it would be even more convincing!