Half of European men share King Tut's DNA

[Xavier_Onassis]

I read the Bible assuming that it was written by some human beings and translated by others into English. If it were written by an all-knowing perfect God, it would certainly be easier to understand. It says that a cloth of linen and wool may not be worn, but it does not say why. It does not explain why some locusts are Kosher and others are trayf (non Kosher).

[Plane]

All worthwhile scientific discoveries begin with the assumption that nothing is known. Then you start with a hypothesis and try to disprove it. So if you wish to study God, you take his existence as a hypothesis and then attempt to disprove it.

Yes, do that.

[Amianthus]

[Xavier_Onassis]

Actually, the proper method would be to assume that no entity exists unless there is evidence that it does, in fact exist.

One of the rules of logic is that you cannot prove a negative. You can observe that there are no unicorns or fire-breathing dragons. but you cannot prove that they never have existed.  you were to find some strange fossils, perhaps you could prove that they once existed.

The absence of Ice Giants is most likely due to the fact that there never were any Ice Giants in the first place.

The burden of proof for God's existence, like the burden of proof for the existence of unicorns, fire-breathing dragons, and even the Flying Spaghetti Monster, rests upon the believers to prove.

Jesus, it appears, has yet to abolish wicked people. He should, at the very least, tell his Daddy to stop making them. They are, after all, mortal.

[Plane]

        Jesus absolutely never said that Christians would ever suffer any lack of wicked persons untill the end of the world.

       I note a total lack of intrest in what Jesus actually did promise.

   As far as Earthly situation ...http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+24&version=NIV

9 “Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me.

     Now how could you get this with any derth of wicked people?

[Xavier_Onassis]

I believe that Jesus promised to return and rule for a thousand years in peace and harmony. He has not popped in so far, but this rather implies that the wicked will be eliminated. This is in the Book of Revelation.

At the end of the peaceful thousand-years reign, THEN the Earth will, according to Revelations, be turned over to Satan. No explanation for this is given.

All this is a diversion from the topic of Biblical "scholarship" vs the scientific method, which is an improvement of the pursuit of the truth and has produced superior results. At least superior visible results.

[Plane]

       A thousand years of peacefull reign proves a point, but why do you call it a promise made by Jesus?

         After a thousand years of the most benevolent dictatorship possible , people would still accept temptation and do wrong.


       Think of in terms of being a thought experirnent.
     

[Plane]

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+20:3-5&version=NIV


 4 I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They[a] had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I consider Revelation to be the rantings of a disturbed mind, by the way.

Not a thought experiment.

Not gonna happen.

[Plane]

  You might get it better , if you realised yourself as a thought experiment .

  The word of God is real, we are ephemeral.

[Plane]

http://www.nicky510.com/comics/2011-09-19OlfGodisArt.png

[Plane]

Quote from: Xavier_Onassis on October 06, 2011, 12:47:49 AM
All worthwhile scientific discoveries begin with the assumption that nothing is known. Then you start with a hypothesis and try to disprove it. So if you wish to study God, you take his existence as a hypothesis and then attempt to disprove it.

Actually, the proper method would be to assume that no entity exists unless there is evidence that it does, in fact exist.

You know ,I like the first method much better.

So science depends a lot on preference?

[Xavier_Onassis]

No, science depends on logic, and one of the prime rules of logic is that you cannot prove a negative.

You cannot prove that there are no unicorns, fire-breathing dragons, jackalopes or deities.

[Plane]

No, science depends on logic, and one of the prime rules of logic is that you cannot prove a negative.

You cannot prove that there are no unicorns, fire-breathing dragons, jackalopes or deities.

Unicorns are Narwhales , the bombardeer beetle sprays boiling acid, the real jackalope is called the Dik-dik in its native land and you would have nothing to say if God had not created you.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Unicorns are not Narwhals. They have four legs.

Beetles are not dragons.

A jackalope is a rodent, not an African deer.

And there is no proof that God created anyone.