Moon was Created

[AV1611VET]

Nothing can justify this.

If that's your attitude, then so be it. In my opinion, only the Holy Spirit can change it at this point.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

If that's your attitude, then so be it. In my opinion, only the Holy Spirit can change it at this point.

You'd make a great defense attorney, maybe Charles Taylor might be interested. You could even reuse your earlier post - ordering the massacre of children is actually one of the reasons he is being tried for war crimes right now.

 

[thaumaturgy]

I don't need to justify it --- I wasn't there. What I need to to, is to take it on faith that God knew what He was doing.

OK, but was it God who gave the direct marching orders? I mean directly from God's lips to the soldiers?

If there was anyone else, human, in the chain of command the question arises, was this direct from God or was it from someone using God's name to justify a command?

In this case, is it not Samuel who is speaking on behalf of God?

But further, how do you know the story as written is how it all went down?

And consider this: God would not give the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20, then break one of them in 1 Samuel 15.

This is an excellent question.

Some would say that GOD wouldn't do this. But a human might. Humans have been known to break all manner of laws and rules.

But further, if indeed God did command this, then if God does the smiting he can certainly do so without it being "murder" since he previously indicated he would hold some subsequent generations liable for the crimes of their forebears (for example Ex 34:7). But it would be murder for humans to carry out these atrocities, would it not? Humans do not have the same rights as God I should think.

If I was endangered by a threatening person, and I contracted a wholly non-threatened person to come and kill the person who was threatening me, I don't think that the contracted killer could claim "self-defense".

But I'm not a lawyer.

 

[dad]

Ergot Poisoning may have played a role in the Salem Witch episode along with mass hysteria of course.

(your link)
"Caporael, now a behavioral psychologist at New York's Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, soon noticed a link between the strange symptoms reported by Salem's accusers, chiefly eight young women, and the hallucinogenic effects of drugs like LSD. LSD is a derivative of ergot, a fungus that affects rye grain. "

So, now the puritans were on LSD, rather than the voodoo demon contorting folks being what was really going on there. Absurd. Really.

I think this source is sadly biased. Here is a snip from her.
" 1. From a Darwinian perspective, we expect species-typical human over evolutionary time mental systems to "fit" or match environmental features that recur . In Caporael (1995),"

http://www.cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?6.17

 

[dad]

By the way dad, there are some posts of mine you've not responded to yet.

Maybe link them in a post, so they are easy to find, or it might be a while before I have time to sift through the last 10 pages.

 

[dad]

Nothing can justify this. Can you imagine the perps on trail for war crimes and genocide saying "It was OK because these people attacked us in the past and anyway God told us to kill them all even the babies."

Yes, I can imagine an ignorant wicked man organized so called trial based on knowing squat about His righteous reason! Really. It goes something like this. The little self righteous accuser of the saints inspired pipsqueak man call the Almighty to the stand. The audience hears a laugh, and all the accusers are dead. Then God explains the real reasons for what went on. All are amazed and happy, and agree 100% with His righteousness. And they all live happily ever after.

No one needs to justify God!! He can take care of Himself. Relax.

 

[MrGoodBytes]

(...)

So, now the puritans were on LSD, rather than the voodoo demon contorting folks being what was really going on there. Absurd. Really.

Priceless.

 

[AV1611VET]

OK, but was it God who gave the direct marching orders? I mean directly from God's lips to the soldiers?

No --- from God's lips to Samuel ---

[bible]1 Samuel 15:1[/bible]

If there was anyone else, human, in the chain of command the question arises, was this direct from God or was it from someone using God's name to justify a command?

Both ---

Verse 1. [The Lord sent me to anoint thee] This gave him a right to say what immediately follows.

In this case, is it not Samuel who is speaking on behalf of God?

Yes.

But further, how do you know the story as written is how it all went down?

You know better than to ask me that --- but to turn it around --- if it didn't go down as written, what's the problem?

But further, if indeed God did command this, then if God does the smiting he can certainly do so without it being "murder" since he previously indicated he would hold some subsequent generations liable for the crimes of their forebears (for example Ex 34:7). But it would be murder for humans to carry out these atrocities, would it not? Humans do not have the same rights as God I should think.

Please read this passage slowly --- (note the altar in verse 15) ---

[bible]Exodus 17:8-16[/bible]

If I was endangered by a threatening person, and I contracted a wholly non-threatened person to come and kill the person who was threatening me, I don't think that the contracted killer could claim "self-defense".

Again, Amalek struck first, and the Israelites struck last.

But I'm not a lawyer.

You don't need to be --- just read it --- it's written so a child can understand it; but if you refuse to do that, then go ahead and make your outlandish accusations, and we'll do the work for you.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

(your link)
"Caporael, now a behavioral psychologist at New York's Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, soon noticed a link between the strange symptoms reported by Salem's accusers, chiefly eight young women, and the hallucinogenic effects of drugs like LSD. LSD is a derivative of ergot, a fungus that affects rye grain. "

So, now the puritans were on LSD, rather than the voodoo demon contorting folks being what was really going on there. Absurd. Really.

Ergot is a fungus that grows on grain. It causes its victims to have spasms referred to as St. Vitus Dance. It was fairly common in Europe in the Middle Ages. No one is saying these people took LSD or even ergot deliberately.

I think this source is sadly biased. Here is a snip from her.
" 1. From a Darwinian perspective, we expect species-typical human over evolutionary time mental systems to "fit" or match environmental features that recur . In Caporael (1995),"

http://www.cogsci.ecs.soton.ac.uk/cgi/psyc/newpsy?6.17

So she is biased toward reality instead of your fantasies. She has made a good point about the symptoms of the supposedly bewitched people possibly being the result of poisoning by ergot.

 

[dad]

I have no doubt that the girls could have been afflicted by something. I believe as has been pointed out on this thread it may have been ergot poisoning (not unheard of at the time).

Oh. Ha! I thought he meant that the accusers were high! In that case, well, demon possession is similar to some drug symptoms. So??? Every occult person I ever met, or heard of so far was into drugs, it seems to aid them getting into the spirit they want to get into. But the spiritual demonic possession of men is not drugs, it is spirits.

Even today some people have adverse reactions to things. And even some people's bodies contort in agony from purely physical means. Even insane people have this happen! To my knowledge, unless you are going to claim that "demon spirits" respond to antipsychotic medication, it is reasonable to assume mental illness is a function of physical things, not demons.

The symptoms to 'medicine' may mimic a spiritual attack, or even bring it on in some cases.

The lesson I take from all this, is don't mess with the kingdom of darkness. It ain't funny.

Your claim about the witches contorting and heads nearly spinning being put on trial really seems to be a conflation of a couple different things. Your claim makes it sound as if these people who were contorting were the witches and they were tried in accordance with law. But in fact the "contortionists" (if you will) were the accusers:

The girls who were initially afflicted were Betty Parris and Abigail Williams. Later Mary Walcott was also "afllicted" and acted as a witness at the trials (there may have been others but I don't have the info).

Woah, so now it is the witches again?? So, what the contorting spread to those in the court?? Sounds like a strong demon(s) was at work!! No wonder the Puritans were freaking!!


I think I am starting to get the picture now. The afflicted ones were not possessed, just afflicted, because of the occult things and demons brought into their midst. They wanted to ascribe a source to the spiritual affliction, and so looked to people. Obviously, someone was messing with the devil somewhere, and this Puritan group, had laws against that at the time. Now, they would probably get a grant!!
They dealt with the attack in the only way they knew how, and tried to kill the source.
As wrong as they may have been, I seem to have not heard anything more about demonic activity in that town!!??
​

 

[dad]

Ergot is a fungus that grows on grain. It causes its victims to have spasms referred to as St. Vitus Dance. It was fairly common in Europe in the Middle Ages. No one is saying these people took LSD or even ergot deliberately.

I know, but it is the same drug. So? You simply try to assign PO causes to spiritual things. Pitiful.

So she is biased toward reality instead of your fantasies. She has made a good point about the symptoms of the supposedly bewitched people possibly being the result of poisoning by ergot.

Yes she is biased, it would appear. Beastly little philosophy. Those that are blind to the spiritual, and looked for some other PO cause, that mimics the reality of a spiritual attack need some straw to cling to.

 

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

I know, but it is the same drug. So? You simply try to assign PO causes to spiritual things. Pitiful.

So you try to assign fantasy causes to things that can be given a mundane explanation. You are just the sort person who would end up accusing innocent people of being witches. Pitiful.

Yes she is biased, it would appear. Beastly little philosophy. Those that are blind to the spiritual, and looked for some other PO cause, that mimics the reality of a spiritual attack need some straw to cling to.

You are just the sort of person who would see accidental poisoning by a hallucenogen as a spell cast by a witch and end up convicting innocent people of witch craft. As least you provide us a clear example of how such a thing as the Salem witch trials could come about.

 

[FishFace]

Maybe link them in a post, so they are easy to find, or it might be a while before I have time to sift through the last 10 pages.

#381 and #382. Also, why do you think that these women were infected with spirits when poisoning is a much more rational explanation.

 

[The Bellman]

Well, no, the pyramid really is said to be built by that watcher. Actual history.

No, it's not.

Are you claiming it doesn't exist??? Well, considering the planet full of evidence to the contrary, you better pony up.

I make no claim. You are the one making the claims - and providing no support for them. All you are doing is frantically trying to shift the burden of proof. Sorry, won't work.

I tell you how it works. It is like this. You make claims, you pony up. Likey or lumpy.

Exactly. And you repeatedly claim the spiritual exists, so pony up. You can't. You never do.

That war is won already. Sorry you missed it. No need to fight that again. Now, it is only our reactions to the known spiritual that matter. Yours is stark, raving denial. Mine is a calm acceptance of the evidences.

Provide the evidence to support your claim. You never can.

It is shown already, deal with it the best way you know how. The spiritual is not something negotiable, it is far more certain than gravity, or time.

No, it is not shown. You have never shown any such evidence. You always do the same thing. Claim the spiritual exists, insist the evidence has already been presented and then state that we need to evidence that it doesn't exist. Sorry, but that's not how it works.

You are welcome to your fishbowl of the natural only. It is an important part of reality. You may not claim it as all of reality, that is whacked out.

Just as soon as you provide any evidence that there is something beyond the natural, you'll have something.

Falsify is a fishbowl concept, applying to your little world.

Falsify has nothing to with fishbowls. Don't you know what the word means?

The spiritual is so well documented, and known, and has been for all time, that it may not be dismissed, period. No option exists to do that. Your only option is denial.

Yes, so you keep claiming...while providing no evidence to support your claims.

I see you are desperate, and clutching at straws here to keep from having to defend your same past state myth. Relax. I am aware already that it cannot be defended by any man or woman on this earth.

I'm not defending anything. I'm asking you to support your claims and telling you that until you can support those claims, they are worthless.

 

[dad]

You evidently have no understanding of infinity.

Yes, I do. And science cannot go there. It likes to pretend it can, in saying things about billions of imagined years from now --and beyond!

Again you say God is known, but knowledge requires justification - proof. So yes there is need for proof, there is a need to question. Because if there's no proof, you don't know anything, all you do is believe.
PROVE IT!

It's a done deal. Those that tried and tested it found proofs, those that did not haven't.

You have a reason to believe that the inside of the earth is made of spiritual stuff? Do tell us.

Yes, science knows nothing about it, and spirits live there, it is indicated in the bible. So, I lean towards the center of the earth being a lot like New Jerusalem in building materials at least. (No, it is not there)

Common sense applies wherever we don't have a good reason to believe it doesn't, actually. Like in a locked room - you can't see it, but you still know that the furniture's still there. You still know that there's no spiritual stuff going on. Same with the centre of the earth - it's just like a locked room, except further away.

Except man never locked it, God did.

You think it's common sense to assume that something non-physical is going on, do you? Really?

Yes, it is insane not to, with most people on earth realizing there is a spiritual. Of course spiritual things go on.

I say again: Your argument is based on doubt not reason. That is why nobody believes you.

How would you know? Many believe there are spirits under the earth. Ask around. What, you think I make this stuff up? All I doubt are the claims you have no reason for!

Ahem. "They already are a good explanation." Your words. We already have a good explanation.

We need a REASON to doubt that explanation.

Do you have a reason to doubt my explanation?

Exactly! So you ask us to DOUBT without REASON!

You ask us to believe without reason! I tend to doubt those sort of requests.

Nonono. It might be liquid, it might S/P material, or perhaps it's made of pixie dust! Did you think of that? Or perhaps it's made of holy gravy from the flying spaghetti monster itself! Perhaps it doesn't exist at all! WHO KNOWS?!

That one I can answer, the 'who knows'? NOT you. NOT science.

Actually, dad - I know! Just because you've got some crazy alternative doesn't mean it's anywhere near as good. All you're presenting is an alternative - doubt. You're not giving us a reason to accept your alternative.

There you have it, you just claimed you know the unknown.

So it may as well be goblins! You, yourself, admit that your "explanation" is just as good an explanation as saying that goblins are responsible for the wave-patterns we see!

No, your explanation. Mine is bible based, and a lot more authoritative.

Tested? So what! It could be S/P material that just happens to behave exactly like normal air! Hahaa, I love HI theory

Well, you need to ask some science folks about air, if you really doubt.

 

[dad]

A universal negative is a statement of the form "No 'x' exists" or "There has never existed an 'x'" where x is some possible thing. For example, if you put "invisible teapot" in place of 'x' then you would have a good universal negative.

Let's look at that. If X, then equals a different state past, and you say it did not exist you are making a universal negative. OK. So, admit there was one! Or prove there was not! At the very least back up your own false science claims! Then it is positive.

Good! Then we're not flying blind when we say that the earth is made of physical, molten rock. Because we have reasonable evidence that there is liquid down there, and we have reasonable evidence that there is rock down there.

No, that is not reasonable evidence. That is only as reasonable as the assumption that the surface is the be all end all.

Is it reasonable to assume that the air you're breathing is physical? But you don't test it, you don't know whether it's air or whether it's spiritual stuff that behaves like air.

It is tested, and has been. No secret there. You need to separate reality from fantasy.

So if you came across a locked room that you'd not been in, with no windows, would you assume that the stuff inside was physical or spiritual?

Did God lock it, or you??

Well then you're as barmy as people who assume leprechauns come into their room at night to party.

No, admitting I have no science evidence that the interior of the eternal earth is PO is simple honesty.

Again, universal negative. "The lame did not grow new legs" is the same as claiming "There has never existed an 'x'" where 'x' is "a lame who grew new legs."
If you can prove any statement of the form "there has never existed an 'x'" then I would be happy to do the same for you.

X is someone that grew a lew leg. You say X is false. Prove it, by your own standards here.

You proved it to... yourself? perhaps if you'd proved it to a judge or some other rational person we'd be persuaded, but proving something to yourself is not a particularly special feat.

The spiritual is experienced in person. Telling some 'judge' about it is like telling the mail man you want a quadruple heart bypass, and a new kidney.

But still, dad. You have provided us with no REASON to believe the earth is spiritual inside. You only have DOUBT.

No, I don't doubt it, that would be you, and since you have no proof, doubt is all you have!

There's a problem with doubt though, dad. (Something you'd know if you'd ever done some philosophy) And is that it's impossible to take seriously, without doubting EVERYTHING.

No, one can doubt bogus claims that are not supported, that is OK really.

This is your problem dad - you are fine doubting things, as long as they don't really have much to do with you. As long as you can't see them, or if they're a long way away from you - you doubt them. But you're so blind that you don't realise the same doubt is just as valid for doubting the EVERYDAY BELIEFS that you have about the world.

No it isn't, because some things are well founded, and evidenced, and experienced, and tested, etc. Some are not. Learn the difference. Some thing are good to doubt, some bad. Just like some places are good to walk, some bad.

 

[dad]

So you try to assign fantasy causes to things that can be given a mundane explanation.

Giving something a mundane explanation for no reason is fantasy. Even if it is fantasy that tries to come close to the truth, to fool more people.

You are just the sort person who would end up accusing innocent people of being witches. Pitiful.

No, I am not that dishonest, vile person you try to accuse me of. Not at all. Neither would I hide it if I were a witch, or whatever religion, like some do. By the way, what are you again?

You are just the sort of person who would see accidental poisoning by a hallucenogen as a spell cast by a witch and end up convicting innocent people of witch craft.

No, not at all. Any more than I would accuse a person of breaking some other law, if it was false. Strange that you wax so desperate you resort to ad hominem attacks, and insane accusations.

 

[dad]

No, it's not.

"The ancient Egyptians left records describing the First Time as actual historic period."
http://www.corzak.com/egypt/egypt0801.htm

I make no claim. You are the one making the claims - and providing no support for them. All you are doing is frantically trying to shift the burden of proof. Sorry, won't work.

Science does make claims all over the place. No wiggling out of it, and all based on assuming that the present is the key to the past. Be honest. Your inability to prove it puts the burden of proof right on your shoulders.

Exactly. And you repeatedly claim the spiritual exists, so pony up. You can't. You never do.

No need at all, that is already tested, experienced and known the world over, and has been for all time! The minority who chose to be in denial are a sad little joke.

Provide the evidence to support your claim. You never can.

I can experience the evidences like most men, and test them, I do not need to stick them in the PO fishbowl. For all who get their head out of the sand, it is right there. Seek, and you will find. Really.

Falsify has nothing to with fishbowls. Don't you know what the word means?

Which word, fishbowl? Yes.

My claims of things spiritual are beyond science, and supported as such. The claims of science are also beyond science, but they have been too dumb to realize it, and have been badmouthing God for too long. The day of reckoning is breaking. The light is starting to shine on that gross darkness. I kid you not. Let the bells ring!

 

[dad]

...why do you think that these women were infected with spirits when poisoning is a much more rational explanation.

Because the Puritans seem to have been believers. Why would they not realize something was rotten in Denmark? They also had some people foolin with voodoo, which means the occult, which means devils.
Then, there was the severe reaction, even for Puritans, that shows that some foul play likely was afoot. Something really spooked them.
Then there was contortions, and weirdness all round, that was spreading, it was so vile.
No mundane explanations required. Just half a brain. (the half that deals with sensing the spiritual)

 

[FishFace]

Yes, I do. And science cannot go there. It likes to pretend it can, in saying things about billions of imagined years from now --and beyond!

There you go again! Billions of years is not infinity - or beyond!

It's a done deal.

If you think you've got proof of God, then out with it sonny. Stop beating around the bush.

Yes, science knows nothing about it, and spirits live there, it is indicated in the bible. So, I lean towards the center of the earth being a lot like New Jerusalem in building materials at least. (No, it is not there)

Except man never locked it, God did.

Irrelevant. In a locked room you know the interior is made of normal physical stuff. Same with the interior of the earth.

Yes, it is insane not to, with most people on earth realizing there is a spiritual. Of course spiritual things go on.

How would you know? Many believe there are spirits under the earth. Ask around. What, you think I make this stuff up?

Yes I do. But even if you didn't you need a REASON - and "many believe" is not a good enough one! Got anything better?

Do you have a reason to doubt my explanation?

Yeah - it's not an explanation. If it were an explanation, you could work out what the data would be without knowing what it was. "The earth is spiritual inside" doesn't tell us anything about anything we can test.

That one I can answer, the 'who knows'? NOT you. NOT science.

Wrrrroooooooong! You see, now you're making even more nonsensical claims - you think we don't know that the earth isn't made of holy gravy or pixie dust! Crazy talk.

There you have it, you just claimed you know the unknown.

You're not giving a REASON. Are you incapable of complying with this simple request?

No, your explanation. Mine is bible based, and a lot more authoritative.

Oh really. Where in the Bible does it say anything about spirits under the earth?
Not that that constitutes a good reason, of course, because any old fool could've written that stuff down. No, you need to have a better reason than that.

Well, you need to ask some science folks about air, if you really doubt.

No, I don't really doubt it! I ask science folks about the air and about the interior of the earth thanks very much. You don't have a reason to doubt that either of them are physical.