The SUN/SON Has Risen...and Most People Missed It!
Yesterday, March 20th, someone said to me, "Hey, today is the first day of spring." I said yep, sure is and asked if he knew why today was the chosen day. He did not know but rather thought that someone just picked this date as the official start of the season. "No," I said. "Actually yesterday at 7:21 PM The Sun was crossified by finally landing smack at the intersection of the Celestial Equator as projected from our earthly equator into space, and the Ecliptic, which is the line in the sky that the sun appears to follow in it's one year journery through the signs of the Zodiac." He just looked at me and said, "Oh."Yesterday was a very important day in the sky, which is a place very few humans ever take time to look up into at night, much less understand how it works. But in fact, yesterday, The Sun of God was Crucified on the beams of those two lines in space that yesterday gave us the equinox, which means "equal night."
Yesterday the day and night was just about 12 hours long each. Now the sun heads more north from it's cold beginning on Christmas to it's highest point of summer on June 22nd where the day is the longest and the night the shortest. After that, the Sun heads south to Autumn where once again at the Vernal Equinox, we have equal day and night and then on to December and the winter solstice where the Sun dies, spends three days in the grave and is is born, of a virgin/virgo on December 25th. That was a small taste of astro-theology and a story that the vast majority of literalist Christians will never understand because they will never want to undertsand it.
For example, when John the Baptist, who is born six months before Jesus says, "I must decrease, while he must increase," in astro-theological terms he was saying that from June (six months before December) John was now diminishing as the one who prepared the way for the Sun/Son of God, but now Jesus, the Son or the literal sun, will increase, that is from December 25th to the Summer Solstice, the Sun will grow stronger.
It is interesting that Matthew places Jesus in summer at the top of Mt. Tabor transfiguring into the literal sun or at least as one who shines brighter than the sun. I have been to Mt. Tabor. More of a mound actually. You'd think someone may have noticed that from afar, but seems only those present saw this "bright as the sun" look. Jesus at the Summer Solstice, The SUN of God, is at his peak and in his best form. After the Summer Solstice, the ministry of the SUN/SON will head back down to death in the dark of winter, betrayal, imprisonment and death, to be born all over again.
But let's not stray from the wonder of the Spring Equinox, which passed mostly unnoticed yesterday. It is from this celestial event that the Christian church takes it cue for determining Easter. No the Spring Equinox IS the true EASTER. Yesterday the SUN of God rose due East for the first time and set due West last night. That's why the day and night were of equal length, yesterday.
Most pagan god/men are born on December 25th on the beginning day of the Sun's journey back to dominance in the summer sky. Most were considered crossified on the Equinox in March on the intersections of the celestial equator and the ecliptic. I have the Starry Night computer program where I can program in all the dates and just watch this wonderful reality unfold on my laptop. Very cool stuff. Punch in any December 25th and one will see at sunrise the SUN of God being brought forth by Virgo the Virgin. Hmmmm, wonder where that concept shows up again! Seems the Virgin does conceive and bring for the SUN, at least every December 25th. Just a coincidence no doubt :P
Another concept we can glean from the astro-theology of Springtime is that the SUN Passes Over and delivers the people from their darkness and sin. This is the theme, of course of the Exodus and the Passover, which is also celebrated in the Spring. Yesterday was not Passover for the Jewish People; that will come on the 14th of Nisan as they mark time, but that is very soon and close or not close to our Easter, depending. In any case, it also celebrates the deliverance of Israelites from Egypt, which is the same as being delivered from the darkness of sin in Egypt into "HIS" glorious light. Christians have christianised the Passover as well and made Jesus it's star meaning. "For Christ is our Passover..." The Son is our Passover. The Sun has Passed Over and been crossified for us on the celestial and eliptic cross. It's all the same. And these events are always spring events, which should not be lost on those that understand the heavenly origins of the literal stories.
Now somewhere along the line Christians and Jews did not want to celebrate their deliverance on the Spring Equinox as that would be too blatantly obvious as to its origins. It would be a sky event, not an earth event. So each has their own way to avoid it. Christians have the best way to find their Easter, which is now, not really Easter as that happened on the Equinox, which they avoid.
Christians have this great formula for Easter:
Take the Spring Equinox, which was yesterday and step ahead to the first full moon, which can be a few days or weeks after Equinox. Once you get to that full moon, which can be any day of any week, take the SUN day following it and call that the Christian Easter. Cool huh. If you thought Jesus rose on any real Easter, you are wrong. It's a concocted Easter date. If you want to get closer to the actual time Jesus was crucified, if he was, but that's another story, one would have to observe the Passover with the Jewish contingent as Jesus, even by New Testament definition, is our Passover, not our Easter Bunny. But then you run into unsolvable contradictions in the story as to who did it and when was it done, not to mention the Sun going dark for three hours which was never recorded anywhere else in history save in the Bible. Christians have spent lifetimes arguing over if Jesus died on the real Passover day, or the day before and if when resurrected met the disciples in Jerusalem or told them to go on to Galilee where he would meet them. The Gospels give us both options but both could not be literally true.
Wisemen, at the time of Jesus birth are said to have "seen his star in the east." These Astrologers from the East, seeing his star to the east, followed it west to Jerusalem, then south to Bethlehem where it stood over a specific home. Uh huh. One does not literally face east , see a star in the east and then follow it west where it makes turns and points out houses. But in the sky one can, but this too is another story.
Christians are sun worshippers to this day and ministers are Sun-Priests no matter how much into De-Nile they go. :) On top of this, someone made it a custom to eat pig and ham on the Christian Easter as an affront to the Jewish Passover which can come close to Easter depending. Sad huh? Nothing is going to separate a Jewish Holy Day, hijacked by the Christians as pointing to them, better than by eating pigs in celebration of the Messiah...go figure.
Well, just thought you needed to know that Easter was yesterday, March 20th at 1;26 PM. The SUN of God was indeed crossified at that precise moment on the beams of the Celestial Equator and the Ecliptic. Run your local meridian thru it and it is even more impressive. The SUN of God has risen from the temptation of the dark months of December thru March to not be the SUN of God. The SUN has been tempted by De-Evil One, the lord of Darkness to just say with him and worship him, but the SUN has Risen and defeated Dark-Evil or D-evil. Now the SUN will begin by chosing two fishermen just like the two fish in Pices, the March Constellation and go to April and be Aires the Lamb. 2000 years ago the Equinox of March was in Aires the Lamb and why Jesus was the Lamb, crucified etc. Nuther story.
Now it's in the Age of Pices, the Fish which has been the symbol of the Church for the past 2000 years. And so the cycle repeats in the heavens over our heads every night. The Sun is born, the Sun overcomes the darkness and dies in the spring for the darkness of the world and it's sins. The Sun rises into Summer and walks on the water of the Milkyway as it rises in June and then goes on to enter the twins of Castor and Pollux where Jesus is said to have put demons out of two men after He was said to walk on water. Bet their names were Castor and Pollux! Then comes the Crab where two stars in that constellation are known as the Northern Ass and the Southern Ass and Jesus, the Son, is said to ride into Jerusalem riding on "THEM BOTH," in his triumphant entry just before his death. This is also true of the story of the Sun as it unfolds during the latter part of any year heading on into death at winter. On earth this would be dumb, but the SUN riding the two asses in the constellation of the Crab in July is totally possible and occurs every summer.
Soon we go on to fall and harvests and feedings of thousands and then betrayal of the Sun/SON by the Scorpion Judas who was a follower, but like a scorpion, can go backwards and give the kiss or sting of death. Jesus is arrested in late fall by Pilate when the SUN enters Saggitarius the Archer and pierced at his darkest moment to lie three days in the grave of December to then be born again on the 25th and it starts all over again. Then Jesus, the SUN/SON enters the first 30 degrees of the next Constellation (for Jesus was about 30 years old when he began to preach) and meets Aquarius, the Water Bearer, or in this story, John the Baptist, the first event in Jesus ministry before going into the wilderness to be tempted of the Darkness not to continue as the SON/SUN of God and the rest is "history."
Either this short view of the 12 month ministry of the SUN of God through the signs of the zodiac and the 12 month journey of the Son of God with his 12 followers is a mere coincidence of history, or the SON/SUN Priests of modern Christianity have been either deliberately or naively ignorant of the deeper origins of the story of the SUN/SON of God, and keeping it under wraps.
So, Happy Easter, it was yesterday and I think most of us missed it. The Sun was crucified at the intersection of the Celestial Equator and the Ecliptic, and if you saw the beams of light spewing from the SUN, you could even imagine them as a crown of thorns. The Sun is now Risen Today and beginning that fascinating ministry across the sky and through the signs of the Zodiac that so match the events Matthew portrays in his book, but that's another story. It ends in death and birth again and the characters on the stage are right over our heads, every clear night of the year. Happy East-er. The Sun has indeed risen in the East. It's all good, and most everyone missed it!
Stay tuned. Coming soon. Isaiah 14-Satan-And a Planet Called Venus.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/165115
51 comments:
Dennis, this is fascinating stuff. Love it! Do you have any book recommendations for further reading on this subject?
Dennis, it's a clever bit of writing, but how is this different than the way Hislop linked the Catholic church to Babylonian mystery religions?
There are some great website info.
Search Astrotheology, sun worship, mythicism and Christianity,
Murdock's "The Suns of God" is good.
Hislop only had the info of his time. I don't totally his intent or overview. WCG had to make fun of it , as if that was the only source of such observations, so they could move on to Xmas, Easter etc without more resistance.
On these topics of origins, the original WCG had it more right than now. Now we have so much more info. Catholicism is just a rework of Sun Worship, as is the whole story.
Take a look on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKG59NUdn8A&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPAzBO-c9c8
Also, watch "Zeitgiest" on YT, at least the first section.
Dennis,
Clever as always.
As you know the great astrologers of old used the zodiak to determine times. The celestial clock is one of extreme precision, for millions of years it looses no time. An accident?
To me the Zodiak is not for telling futures like today, but as you point out a term describing the twelve houses or signs that were components of the only calendar available to the anchients. Astrologers knew how to read it with mathematical precision. Just the way it was created!
It is sad that today few people look up into the night sky to enjoy the splendor. In many areas light pollution blocks out most of it.
But I do look up almost every night. I have studied Astronomy a bit and enjoy looking at the awesome pictures coming in from the far reaches of the universe from the Hubble Telescope.
Your skeptical approach actually serves to make me even more certain there is one true God behind everything I believe. You illustrated the precision in the heavens that I had not considered in a while.
A possible duality? Why couldn't the death and resurrection of Christ be perfectly aligned with the celestial calendar in some way? Does that make it a fable just because it looks like just a coincidence?
Pagans will always find a way to justify their beliefs and continue to worship the creation rather than the creator.
Oh, before I forget to ask, does your "SUN/SON Has risen" work out in any other languages or just English?
Michael
TTDOCF
The Zodiac was really the twelve signs of the lost tribes in Battlestar! Any Galactian knows that!
"Pagans will always find a way to justify their beliefs and continue to worship the creation rather than the creator."
Because we know that pagan religion is baseless, but the God of the Bible is real! And we know this because we believe! Um, just like the pagans do.
Last night, a Muslim/Hindi looked into the night sky, reaffirming his belief in Allah/Vishnu. For how could this vast Universe exist without the Guiding Hand of Allah/Vishnu?
Back in my COG days, a guy gave me information on Mithraism, hoping to open my eyes to the fact that Christianity is based on many older pagan beliefs. What did I take from it? Aha! The Sunday Christians are steeped in Mithraism! My belief in god strengthened! He just shook his head at me. I read what was there, but I made a conscious decision not to critically analyze it. That way lies unbelief.
Paul Ray
"The Zodiac was really the twelve signs of the lost tribes in Battlestar!"
My certainty in the existence of Apollo has been affirmed and strengthened!
Paul Ray
"Your skeptical approach actually serves to make me even more certain there is one true God..."
Translation: "I am going to totally ignore the implications of your point Dennis, and putting on my happy "I have no evidence for god but I'll still go on believing" face, I'll use the time honored diversion tactic of claiming that your criticism only proves that my god exists! Everyone wins!"
God answered my prayer! He exists!
God didn't answer my prayer! He exists!
There is no evidence for my God! He exists!
We evolved! He exists!
There is no evidence for a supernatural realm! He exists!
Science doesn't have all the answers! He exists!
My God is one of many Gods worshipped by millions! My God exists!
Everything and Nothing points to the existence of God! He exists!
You can't go wrong with that sort of "logic."
Paul Ray
"Your skeptical approach actually serves to make me even more certain there is one true God..."
Translation: "I am going to totally ignore the implications of your point Dennis, and putting on my happy "I have no evidence for god but I'll still go on believing" face, I'll use the time honored diversion tactic of claiming that your criticism only proves that my god exists! Everyone wins!"
Sorry Mr. Ray, Mistranslation. I fully understand the IMPLICATIONS OF WHAT DENNIS WROTE AND CATEGORICALLY REJECT THEM ALL! He is entitled to his opinion, as am I, just not HIS facts.
Dennis gave irrefutable proof that God exists. Even "Chaos Theory" recognizes there is
perfect order in the universe. Things just seem random to our puny minds.
Following Dennis' thinking, for example I could use math fractals, a part of Chaos Theory, to prove the triune God is just a random and naturally occurring phenomon derived from math according to the Koch Curve.
From the McGraw-Hill Science & Technology Encyclopedia:
Fractals
"Fractals came into natural sciences when it was recognized that natural objects are random versions of mathematical fractals. They are self-similar in a statistical sense; that is, given a sufficiently large number of samples, a suitable magnification of a part of one sample can be matched closely with some member of the ensemble. Unlike the Koch curve which must be magnified by an integral power of 3 to achieve self-similarity, natural fractal objects are usually self-similar under arbitrary magnification.
Therefore if one accepts the trinity it is just a random and inevitable out come of natural mathematical probabilities and not the work of a creator God.
You might say the Triune God is merely a fractal of my imagination?
Yep, more gobble'd gook:<)
Michael
TTDOCF
Hey Dennis, Clever but Sun/Son is only clever in English.
For example in Greek SOL/FILIUS.
Looses something in the translation wouldn't you say?
Michael
TTDOCF
"I fully understand the IMPLICATIONS OF WHAT DENNIS WROTE AND CATEGORICALLY REJECT THEM ALL! He is entitled to his opinion, as am I, just not HIS facts."
I stand corrected- you acknowledge and categorically reject. Bravo. Your belief will certainly go untested and unshaken. Be confident that you will never allow your unfounded beliefs to be held up to critical analysis. And that's what matters- Believing. Reality, facts, evidence (truth) are not just secondary, not just unnecessary, but unwelcome.
"Dennis gave irrefutable proof that God exists."
He did? I missed that. Could you point it out for me? I'll notify the Nobel committee.
""Even "Chaos Theory" recognizes there is
perfect order in the universe. Things just seem random to our puny minds."
And? Since there is order, therefore your god must surely exist? Wow. Your evidence threshold isn't low, but completely non-existent. Using your logic, since rainbows appear in the sky, leprechauns must exist! Sorry, bad analogy. To you a rainbow is more proof of your particular deity.
Congrats on the Google skillz.
Paul Ray
Perhaps someone can remind me the last time "order in the Universe" and Chaos Theory was used to prove the existence of zebras. Or anything else that exists, for that matter. Why aren't brain-dulling philosophical arguments dragged out to convince people of the existence of dust-mites? Or First Cause Theory for the existence of lead?
Because they aren't necessary. All the above exist. You can provide concrete evidence of the existence of zebras; why resort to arguments that do not prove anything, other than the amount of hot air that a human being can spew?
Religion, belief in (insert name of favorite deity), must resort to such arguments, because there is not one iota of evidence for the existence of (insert name of favorite deity).
Yet many people tend to view these arguments as having some substance; they are just as valid as a videorecording of a zebra. Once again, this is due to the double standard of religion. Religion "deserves" its own special standard of un-evidence. Of course we can't require these people to actually provide evidence for their imaginary being- that's not fair. Their imaginary being can't be measured by such crude parameters as "evidence."
But when you put these so-called arguments in context with reality, they do look ever so silly.
Paul Ray
"Religion, belief in (insert name of favorite deity), must resort to such arguments, because there is not one iota of evidence for the existence of (insert name of favorite deity)."
For me the difference is when evidence of God is in my personal life on a daily basis...it can't be ignored.
When prayers get answered, and mine ALL do...just most of the time in better ways than I knew to ask... One Knows. Some time it takes patience, but the answers come. It can not be ignored. Why do you think that my faith is silly when I know the power of it through evidence? If you don't have answered prayer it does not mean I don't.
Or maybe you just never tried it.
Are you really sure Zebras exist, are they white with black stripes or black with white stripes? How about Gravity? Both are equally real, one you see one you don't.
Maybe your Deity (if you have one)should start to believe in my Deity and then maybe my Deity can help your Deity help you out on this faith issue you seem to have.
I really should be working in my garden right now...weeds to pull.
Michael
TTDOCF
M said: "As you know the great astrologers of old used the zodiak to determine times. The celestial clock is one of extreme precision, for millions of years it looses no time. An accident?"
Well what not losing time over millions of years may mean something to you and something else to me. The procession of the equinoxes around our insignificant planet changes every 2190 years. Easter has been in taurus, aries, pices, aquarius and the world view, on this planet's religions changed each time with the appropriate symbol change. Time is relative from what I hear in the world of light and matter.
M Says: "To me the Zodiak is not for telling futures like today, but as you point out a term describing the twelve houses or signs that were components of the only calendar available to the anchients. Astrologers knew how to read it with mathematical precision. Just the way it was created!"
Finally someone who spells worse than me! :) The signs of the zodiac dont really look much like the animals and humans they are said to represent. The story was made to match the constellations. One can connect the Dots/stars to make dinosaurs or Donald Trump for any month if so inclined. The Dying Godman story is the real old old story.
M Said: "A possible duality? Why couldn't the death and resurrection of Christ be perfectly aligned with the celestial calendar in some way? Does that make it a fable just because it looks like just a coincidence?"
anything is "possible" but that is not how it came about. The Christ story is also the Mithras story, the Adonis story, the Dionysus story and the Osiris story.
Mithraism was bull worship as Easter was in Taurus, OT is Lamb worship and ended with Jesus as the final lamb of that age. Pices is the Fishers of men sign adopted by the NT Church types, and I bet Water will be the fluid of choice over blood when the Age of Aquarius shows up in a couple hundred years.
The angelic creatures in the OT that have the face of a Bull/taurus-Lion/Leo--Eagle/Aquila and Man/Aquarius are merely symbols for Taurus/ Summer Leo/ Fall Aquila and Aquarius Winter. There are no such literal beings.
M Said: "Pagans will always find a way to justify their beliefs and continue to worship the creation rather than the creator."
So did the Christians
Oh, before I forget to ask, does your "SUN/SON Has risen" work out in any other languages or just English?
The Sun/Son is the English speaking, Catholic/Christian story of the past 2000 years. Ra was the Egytian Sun God, but they understood Osiris was the sun god of the day.
Did you know that "amen" is acknowledgement of Amun Ra? Many psalms are taken right out of the Egyptian book of the dead and Amen is the Egyptian god , Amun. Cool huh?
Sorry, I meant the constellations were made to match the existing story.
The apologetic that the story of Jesus is fortold in the stars and Zodiac is one way of looking at it, but it can not be proved and since all the pagan godmen had a similar life and death, as the story of the Sun going thru the yearly cycle does not change, Jesus having the same story is not surprising.
But I personally would not believe that the stars in the backdrop of our insignificant planet were put in a way so we millions of light years away could read the story in our own view. Rather egocentric I'd say.
Perhaps standing back a bit we can see we are just a mere nothing in the universe. Perhaps we can ask in our day, "when the Son of Man (Jesus thought the Son of Man was not himself BTW)returns, will he find the earth?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8Aurpr68uE&feature=related
:)
Dennis, your explanatian of all this gets better all the time. I've read your old Ezine article on the subject and this is much easier to read and follow.
Thank you Allen,
The topic is fascinating and very human in our need to explain our world and comfort ourselves with our spiritual hopes. It's also the core and foundational story that all cultures have attached themselves to to creat the world's religions.
In our culture we don't look up. We don't know much about the journey of the sun. We don't know much about the planets and how they been the source of most human stories of God and Satan.
I am suspecting the injunction in the Bible to not look up at the stars and such or to "worship" them was a con. Perhaps the priest's who knew more of this scientific or esoteric knowledge were merely guarding their turf and the source of their stories.
There were also levels of understanding allowed to people. I believe the priests of many cultures and their "mysteries" were merely scientific and astonomical truths known to them but hidden from the public.
Knowing secretly that the earth revolved around the sun or the knowledge of the procession of the equinoxes was powerful secret knowledge and could be used well.
Kinda like the black robed priests of catholicism going to Native Americans to take their land and goodies and if resisted, they would make the sun or moon go dark. Knowledge of eclipses was a great tool of coersion.
"anything is "possible" but that is not how it came about. The Christ story is also the Mithras story, the Adonis story, the Dionysus story and the Osiris story."
All of these pagan god’s you mention sprang up long, long, long after Abraham started building altars and worshipping YAHWEH in the land of Canaan. It seems to me that the prophecy against Satan in Genesis 3:4 of “Her Seed” being the first prophecy of Christ started it all. And millennia later the promise of the Seed (Christ) Gen. 22:18 that God promised would come from Abraham's descendants reinforced it.
The story would naturally have spread to all mankind, which it did. First, through Noah and his sons after the flood and secondly, through Abraham as he traveled throughout Canaan and Egypt. Abraham was considered a Prince of God among the Kings throughout the areas he traveled and settled. Melchizedek, King of Salem and Priest of "God Most High" came to pay respect to Him after his rescue of Lot.
So without doubt many who revered YAHWEH already as One, or one of their gods, were heavily influenced by Abraham’s faith. This occurred millennia before the Mithras that showed up in Rome second century B.C. , Adonis, Dionysus 600 BCE in Lesbos, Osiris whose mythical resurrection was far different than that of Jesus. It differs from Jesus Christ's in that He ruled from the dead.
You are really stretching the truth to say the Jesus story came from these pagan god’s when in fact Christ, the Seed, was prophesied in the Garden of Eden as far back as 4,000 years before Jesus Christ was born. Also consider that Abraham’s Grandson, Jacob, renamed Israel, moved into Egypt in 1886 B.C. and stayed until the exodus in approximately 1456 B.C. Jacob and his accompanying twelve clans that settled in Goshen and would have spread the story of the “Seed” there also as well as picking up the religious system of Egypt. Naturally the story would morph over the centuries as it traveled from civilization to civilization. That required Christ to come and fix the kinks in the story, “when the fullness of time had come,” Gal. 4:4.
Michael
TTDOCF
bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...thanks for playing Michael. You have quite an apologetic and grasp of reality there. Enjoy the delusion
"For me the difference is when evidence of God is in my personal life on a daily basis...it can't be ignored."
You mean god appears to you? You hear him? I'm not mocking, it's just that anything other than that isn't evidence that your god exists. It's just another subjective personal experience shared by all believers of every deity ever invented. In this, you are no different than a person who worshipped Zeus.
"When prayers get answered, and mine ALL do...just most of the time in better ways than I knew to ask..."
A believer's prayers are always answered. Always. That is why it such a positive reinforcer for believers, besides being a self perpetuated hoax.
It works like this:
1. If my heartfelt and sincere request actually occurs, this is proof that my deity heard me and with his magical powers, granted my request. Thus he exists.
2. If my heartfelt and sincere request did not occur, this is proof that my deity heard my request but in his wisdom, for a beneficial reason that I can't understand at the moment, denied my request. Thus he exists.
And that's it. With this self-delusionary tactic, the believer is always convinced that his god exists, for the believer will only accept the above rationalizations in reference to the answering of his prayers.
The problem with this is that you could also achieve, over time, the exact same results by praying to a can of spaghetti sauce. Really. You can. You should try it. For example, I could pray to a can of spaghetti sauce, and ask that my friend be healed of an illness.
If my friend is healed, whether the next day, next month, or next year, or ten years from now, this is proof that the can of spaghetti sauce is a supernatural object that heard my prayer, and using its magical powers, healed my friend. This is the only explanation. It surely isn't a coincidence.
If my friend is not healed, then this is proof that the can of spaghetti sauce is a supernatural object that heard my prayer, but chose not to answer it, due to reasons that in my limited mortal understanding, cannot comprehend. But it is always in my best interests.
You should try it.
"Or maybe you just never tried it."
I did. For years. And my prayers were always answered. Mostly not in the manner that I wanted, but always in "better ways than I knew to ask." Which means that reality went about its business and I simply picked events in life to conform to my prayers; two real-life examples:
I got a better job that enabled me to keep the Sabbath. God answered my prayer! Praise God!
God didn't heal the old lady at church. God answered my prayers by not healing her, but using her illness to strengthen her faith, which is more important to her salvation than her physical well-being! Praise God!
Look, I am not trying to mock you in this instance. Your belief and faith are confirmed by "answered prayer." But your prayers aren't being answered. It's just life, no matter how surprising or coincidental it sometimes seems.
Of course, there is easy way to prove that God is real and prayers are answered. Pray, or get every Christian on earth to pray for an amputee to be healed; that his limb be returned. If this were documented, and by several independent witnesses, I would have no choice but to accept the existence of not only a supernatural being, but specifically the god of the Bible. But I doubt that it will happen. It never has. Never. Strange. When it comes to amputees, the answer from god is always a resounding "NO." Part of his mysterious plan, I suppose.
Paul Ray
Paul...even the Bible times folks recognized this problem. When somone penned, "....because you ask amiss," they are admitting to this process yet trying to find an apologetic for the silence of God after prayer.
Same with Jesus not coming then or time not being short after all. It get's blamed on scoffers who do not understand that God does not see time as we do.
The Deity always wins no matter what doesn't happen when the Book clearly says it will happen and is heard.
How often do the COGs when things don't happen when they say or think they will come up with "God is giving us more time. What a merciful God." Same same thing.
"We aren't wrong and it was going to happen but God, in his mercy, gave us more time to do the work."
You can't win.
However...the Scoffers of Paul's day were correct and the "Church" was dead wrong about time and the second coming
Anonymous said...
" bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...thanks for playing Michael. You have quite an apologetic and grasp of reality there. Enjoy the delusion Dennis,
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz….my delusion is just fine if you would stop poking it.;<)
May I ask why atheists are writing and commenting on this blog named Banned by HWA, when what HWA banned was the knowledge of the true path to salvation through Grace and Faith in Jesus Christ. I was initially greeted and linked here with a statement, "welcome to grace." Now I am being double teamed by a couple of rabid God haters.
By commenting here I am being judged not by Judiasm/Legalism under Armstrongism from the Old Covenant but by theories that you read in books that you check out of the "Fiction" section and treat the contents as if it was another kind of statutes and ordinances. The 'Banned' sect of Athiestic Pharisees wants to put another kind of unbearable yoke on my neck.
Maybe this blog should be named; Banned by Athiests and other Pharisees. Or maybe Saducees would be better, they did not believe in life after death.
If you believe there is no hereafter, then what does it matter what anyone else believes? What is anyone going to lose in the end and what does thinking your way get me more than what you say my way will get me.....nothing and nothing? Why are you so driven in your apologia and kategoria efforts here, just cathartic? I know you were hurt badly.
If we all die like dogs, why make so much fuss about nothing? So leave me to enjoy my delusion and I won't attack your fantasy.
Michael
TTDOCF
"If we all die like dogs, why make so much fuss about nothing?"
Because those of us who realize that there is no Magical Space Disneyland waiting for us after death are intensely interested in life, and more importantly, the present and future of humanity. There is no magical deity who is going to come down and fix our problems. Only we can do that, and we have improved things quite a bit over the last few hundred years, compared to the past.
Most (all?) of that improvement is not due to religion, but science. Technology has made life better for a lot of people, and our advances come from men and women who invested a lot of time in critical thinking. Belief in imaginary beings, compounded with religion, has been a major stumbling block to critical thinking and the advancement of the human race.
And then there is the whole brutality, war, poverty, and ignorance thing, too, that religion contributes to know and then. So to me, religion is a very big deal. Especially right now in America, where a large majority of the population believes that evolution is a lie and we were created by magic.
"So leave me to enjoy my delusion and I won't attack your fantasy."
Sorry. It doesn't work that way. Your delusion, like the delusion called Islam, demands that the deluded spread their delusion until everyone on earth believes that people were created by a magic being and that we need to believe in this magic being or he'll kill us. Plus, you people have had thousands of years now to provide evidence of a supernatural realm. Enough is enough. Let's all stop pretending, through our little idols in the fire and get to work on solving our problems.
What fantasy are you referring to? I don't believe in the existence of your magical, invisible, totally- unavailable-for-comment deity. And I am the one with the fantasy?
Your predictable angry little meltdown came much quicker than I expected. Did the spaghetti sauce reference touch a nerve? Because you come across as one who has had something ugly but true pointed out to him- and reacts with anger because deep down he knows it is true and is helpless to refute it. Just like when I used to get angry when someone would say, or write: "The Bible: A book with talking animals."
Paul Ray
Ray said,
"Your predictable angry little meltdown came much quicker than I expected. Did the spaghetti sauce reference touch a nerve? Because you come across as one who has had something ugly but true pointed out to him- and reacts with anger because deep down he knows it is true and is helpless to refute it. Just like when I used to get angry when someone would say, or write: "The Bible: A book with talking animals." "
Ray, I am smiling every time I read your stuff.
In my view the 'Spag' can was (no insult) a little purile, so I didn't even give it a second thought. You are assumming it was anger, but I call it being resolute. It is clear to me that YOU are boiling over with hate and animous toward all who have a different opinion. It is you who is guilty of what you infer.
To refute your thesis, easy.
I walk outside and look at all of the highly complex creation. Especially, the microscopic life. So small that we can't see it and that we all rely on. Can't be seen with the naked eye. So men invented microscopes to see this part of God's creation. Then Man invented telescopes to see the things that are huge, far, ifinite, and ever expanding.
While men only copied what they found inside the eyes of animals they dissected, the telescope, was a great invention. You are right science is great. Created by a greatest inventor...God, along with the highly complex human mind.
I haven't run across any Chimps or Apes in my research that have been able to use their minds for very much except basic survival and a few tricks.
Then man used his wonderful mind and created the Atom Bomb, science is great.
A question for you; Did the first bird that you think evolved, lay an egg without a reproductive system? How do you think it reproduced? My bird feeder is busy with birds, eating seeds, Who taught them to eat seeds before they starved to death? How did they get a gizzard to digest the seeds before starving to death? How did it know to eat grit so the gizzard would break down the hard seeds so they could digest them....and with the exact amount of stomach acid to turn them into nutrition without eating a hole in their stomach? And how did the exactly right balance of bacteria form in the gut to digest and not be lethal?
And did our birdie fly up into a tree to make a nest for the eggs it could not lay without feathers?
Who taught them to mate, male and female, so the eggs they didn't have, without the reproductive system to form the eggs, would be fertile and hatch? Just by chance?
Oh yea, and how did they evolve male and female, and how did they know which one they were....like who is on top?
And don't give me the millions and millions of years of time argument...animals can't go millions of years without reproduction systems, or digestive systems, or circulatory systems, or nervous systems. What about when it got cold out, and the bird had not yet evolved feathers and the entire partially evolved species died out. (I guess we wouldn't know on that one.)
When you can create a working nervous system for an animal I will listen to your arguments.
Christ and the Apostles performed countless miracles witnessed by thousands and still the religious elite of the day refused to believe in the Messiah. Why would you, even if I healed an amputees limb right in front of you, if I could?
The Pharisees wanted to kill Christ because of the evidence that he had supernatural power to bring people from the dead. They also wanted to kill Lazarus, because he was the evidence of Christ's power.
Michael
TTDOCF
Michael:
Sorry if you feel offended by some of the comments here. This is my blog and many times my beliefs may be at the opposite end of the spectrum as what Dennis writes or with what some of those that comment here write. That being said, they have all provided worthwhile avenues of rethinking things from the past. It doesn’t mean I have to agree, but it does allow me to expand my own thinking.
My life is filled with questions, sometimes doubt, and even sometimes unbelief. But without the God given ability to question everything we would never be able to grow. Sometimes those questions lead us into new and amazing directions that are opposite of what we believe, or it may open us up to new avenues of exploring and deepening our beliefs.
When you look at the fact that blogs like this, or the Painful Truth, the old Missing Dimension site, or many of the others that exist despite the stance of the COG, shows the miracle of questioning and the freedom that it beings.
The fact people can disagree with COG teachings and openly discuss it is an amazing thing. This was inconceivable a mere 15-20 years ago.
The power of the internet has helped bring down the COG into the irrelevant jumble of silliness it now is. It wasn't the Holy Roman Empire, a United Europe, or the Germans. It was the internet that destroyed the Churches of God.
Meredith, Flurry, Weinland, Pack, Cox, and all the other ministurds of Armstrongism will NEVER amount to anything. Their message is one of despair and hopelessness. Graceless religion is dead religion.
And for that matter, mainstream Christianity many times is in that same state. It is stuck in rigid, black and white teachings that leave no room for doubt, for questions, or for anger. Just look at the incredible silliness that has been going on because of Rob Bell's new book on heaven and hell. That alone explains the sorry state of those who think they have the right creed or beliefs versus those that are questioners, theologically liberal or agnostic.
I facilitate a four year course on a study of Jewish and Christian scriptures, church history and Christian Thought. It is hard for people with a literalist mindset to come in and start being challenged right off the bat with questions. Living a life in the gray areas, living into the questions, understanding how metaphors, legends, stories and myths play into the picture and all kinds of other mind expanding truths is hard for many. Yet when they are given the freedom to question and explore with others doing the same, amazing things happen. I would not give up being were I am at this moment for anything.
What a road it has been for me! Rocky and rough at times, lonely at times, but oh the joy of questioning! One question leads to another, never quite getting the answer and yet moving on to another question. In fact I don’t want the answer. I want to keep looking and examining.
When you look at all the various splinter groups of Armstrongism, far too many of them take great pride in stating that they believe HWA’s teachings pre-1986 (i.e. post 1950’s). Imagine living the past day in and day out. Never exploring, never growing, never questioning.
I would rather be always searching and expanding my understanding whether it is into deeper belief or into unbelief. That is the freedom we have here.
Gary
“It is clear to me that YOU are boiling over with hate and animous toward all who have a different opinion.”
Hate? I’ve just made some simple, rational observations about your beliefs in imaginary beings. Pointed out the shortcomings. You sound like a politico who refers to opponents as “haters” of his pet policy in order to curtail any substantial criticism of the policy.
“I walk outside and look at all of the highly complex creation.”
Whoa! One foot out the gate and already you are resting on an incredible, unfounded assertion. Created? As in created by a magical, omniscient deity? You haven’t even provided any evidence that a supernatural realm exists, much less that your god of the Bible created everything with his magic.
“Especially, the microscopic life. So small that we can't see it and that we all rely on. Can't be seen with the naked eye. So men invented microscopes to see this part of God's creation.”
Whoa (again)! Two steps out and you are repeating your unfounded, incredible assertion that your imaginary (for you haven’t provided any evidence otherwise) deity created everything with his magic.
“You are right science is great....”
Except when it reveals the biblical accounts to be fairy tales, right?
“Created by a greatest inventor...God, along with the highly complex human mind.”
Here we go (again). Do you have any proof that your god even exists, much less “created” science? And the human mind? By the way, “science” is in opposition to the bible, and religion. The bible and religion demand blind faith in the absence of evidence. Science, and the advances it has allowed humans to make, demands evidence. That’s how advances are made. .
“Then man used his wonderful mind and created the Atom Bomb, science is great.”
So science is bad because it allowed us to invent the A-bomb (and nuclear reactors which provide power)? At least science, in and of its self, hasn’t led to ignorance, poverty, torture, and wars- like religion. When was the last time a nation invaded another nation in the name of science? When was the last time people were stoned or burned at the stake because of science? Etc.
“Did the first bird that you think evolved, lay an egg without a reproductive system?”
Sigh. Here we go, again. Without exception, every discussion I have had with believers on the subject of evolution is spent correcting the total ignorance of what evolution is, or the gross misrepresentations of evolution. Without fail, every believer has had no clue as to what the theory of evolution actually is.
Their entire knowledge of evolution is gathered from religious sources, or Creationist literature, and consists mainly of straw men arguments aimed at knocking down false concepts of evolution. And it’s no surprise- believers have no desire to understand evolution. This isn’t a scientific debate, but a religious one. Their magic god book says that their magic god (of whom they can’t even prove the existence of) created everything with his magic.
Tangible evidence that proves otherwise, therefore, is a lie. This is why the scientific community has slowly come to learn that Creationists (and their better dressed cousins, the Intelligent Designers) have no interest in the evidence for evolution. But unlike believers, science is willing, if asked, to teach and demonstrate. And in doing so, science corrects the erroneous assumptions, and demolishes the straw men arguments, answers how this evolved or that evolved- and watches the same believers ask the same questions, put forth the same straw men arguments, again and again.
The believers aren’t listening. They aren’t interested in knowledge- they know how the universe came to be. God did it. The magic book says so. Therefore, the whole Creationism vs Evolution is more a PR campaign than a scientific debate; it is the defense of superstition against reality.
Paul Ray
“When you can create a working nervous system for an animal I will listen to your arguments.”
All the questions that you have asked about evolution; are they true questions, or just rhetorical ones (rhetorical!)? Do you really want to know, or is this just Creationism as usual, whereby when the answer is given, the believer ignores the answer and jumps to the next straw man? Because if you want answers, you are going to have to understand what evolution is, and isn’t. Your questions show your ignorance- all of them are based on a total misrepresentation of evolution (I’m being kind here instead of assuming that you know full and well that they are straw men arguments). So, are you really interested in answers? Because if not, just say so and spare us both the waste of time.
“Christ and the Apostles performed countless miracles witnessed by thousands and still the religious elite of the day refused to believe in the Messiah. Why would you, even if I healed an amputees limb right in front of you, if I could?”
Unlike religious believers, I am interested in what is real, and what isn’t. You are assuming that I am like you. I have no religious faith to defend at all costs. If a supernatural being exists, it’s no skin off my nose to change my worldview. If evidence is provided, then I have no choice but to change my view (unlike religious believers who regularly ignore any evidence that contradicts their beliefs). But I won’t hold my breath.
Your response is typical- a modification of the old “pearls before swine,” and somewhat of a cop-out, as they say.
Paul Ray
Mr. Ray,
On the Origin of the Species by Charles Darwin as reviewed by Charles Kingsley November 1859, just a few day before the books release, went something like this;
"A celebrated author and divine has written to me that 'he has gradually learnt to see that it is just as noble a conception of the Deity to believe that He created a few original forms capable of self-development into other and needful forms, as to believe that He required a fresh act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of His laws'."
The "Theory Of Evolution" is just that, one mans theory, who conducted very sloppy science in the formation of this theory. In fact, Darwin was a trained theologian and not a scientist at all.
"Without fail, every believer has had no clue as to what the theory of evolution actually is."
Actually I believe it is you to whom this applies, because the author of the theory you cling to was not quite so adamant as you that there was no deity responsible for the original creation.
If you are stating that my lack of understanding of just what this theory is. And if you follow Kingsley's statement, then you have no choice but agree that there was at some point in the creative process a deity that set it all in motion with the built in ability of living organisms to adapt.
I certainly agree with the adaptive ability of organisms.
You did not respond to any one of my specific questions except with the most tangential and obtuse remarks...because apparently you have no argument or defense of your view. How can you when your bible, written by Darwin, claims that a deity WAS involved.
Your Theoritical, Fictional, Fantasy reading choices seem to leave you without any arguments to support your positions.
Michael
TTDOCF
“On the Origin of the Species by Charles Darwin as reviewed by Charles Kingsley November 1859, just a few day before the books release, went something like this;
"A celebrated author and divine has written to me that 'he has gradually learnt to see that it is just as noble a conception of the Deity to believe that He created a few original forms capable of self-development into other and needful forms, as to believe that He required a fresh act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of His laws'."”
I don’t know what you are attempting to say here. This is Reverend Kingsley’s view of natural selection- Darwin quotes this passage in Origin of the Species in an attempt to calm the fears of the religious. So Kingsley finds natural selection to be no threat to his beliefs- so what? What is your point?
“The "Theory Of Evolution" is just that, one mans theory,”
Which has been validated over the last 150 years by thousands of scientists, with evidence that supports Darwin’s own limited observations, and new findings that expanded the theory in ways that Darwin wouldn’t have been able to conceive of. Also, you are ignorant of what a scientific theory is, just as you are ignorant of evolution. Like I said, these little discussions never really make it past the gate, instead revolve around correcting the misunderstandings and misrepresentations of how science actually works, and the theory of evolution itself.
“...who conducted very sloppy science in the formation of this theory. In fact, Darwin was a trained theologian and not a scientist at all.”
That’s a pretty damning charge. How do you know his science was “sloppy?” How do you determine whether a naturalist- who attended medical school, studied taxidermy, went into the field with scientists studying marine invertebrates, presenting his own scientific findings from the trip, worked on plant classification at the University Museum, collected beetle specimens and had his findings published, studied geology in the field, and was considered such a naturalist that he was recommended for the position on the voyage of the Beagle- was not a scientist at all? How do you determine who and who isn’t a scientist? But this is a religious issue, not a scientific one, so the point here is to discredit at all costs, no matter how ignorant it makes you look.
“Actually I believe it is you to whom this applies, because the author of the theory you cling to was not quite so adamant as you that there was no deity responsible for the original creation.”
Sigh. Let me get this straight. If it is possible that Darwin believed that a magic deity used his magic to spark life into existence, this demonstrates that I am personally ignorant on the theory of evolution, of which Darwin contributed to with his observations on natural selection? If this is true, then the texts I have studied on the theory of evolution were ignorant of the very subject they were discussing? I don’t follow your “logic.” But this is predictable. Instead of familiarizing yourself with the evidence behind evolution, and criticizing the evidence, you are left with resorting to making mysterious correlations between a scientific theory and the religious opinions of the man who helped pioneer the scientific theory.
Paul Ray
“If you are stating that my lack of understanding of just what this theory is.”
What?
“And if you follow Kingsley's statement, then you have no choice but agree that there was at some point in the creative process a deity that set it all in motion with the built in ability of living organisms to adapt.”
Kingsley said that it was no problem for him to accept the concept that a supernatural being sparked life and evolution took over. He, nor has anyone after him, demonstrated the existence of a supernatural realm, much less showed that this being created everything with his magic.
“I certainly agree with the adaptive ability of organisms.”
To a minor extent- as long as the adaptation doesn’t interfere with the bible fairy tale of a magical, supernatural creation. For if it does, then you categorically reject it.
“You did not respond to any one of my specific questions except with the most tangential and obtuse remarks...because apparently you have no argument or defense of your view.”
Again, before I give you any answers, as I explained quite clearly, I need to know whether you honestly want answers, or were asking rhetorical questions as part of the usual Creationist strategy- ask questions you have no interest in being answered in order to attempt to gain “aha” points, then ignore the answer when given and move to the next “aha” question. Repeat endlessly, all the while claiming that evolution has “no answers.” Again, as I explained quite clearly, you’ll have to understand what evolution is, and isn’t, in order for us to proceed. I am quite willing (unlike religious believers) to provide you with answers. But I don’t think you are interested. You know your magic god created everything with his magic; therefore, evolution is a lie and there is no evidence.
“How can you when your bible, written by Darwin, claims that a deity WAS involved.”
Even if Darwin claimed that there WAS a deity involved in natural selection (over time his views changed to the point of agnosticism), then so what? How does this negate his observations, and the observations that fill hundreds of textbooks and the thousands of pages of research findings? And how can you use Darwin as an authority when you were just criticizing him as an authority? He’s a sloppy scientist so his theory is bunk, but his religious views at the time were correct?
“Your Theoritical, Fictional, Fantasy reading choices seem to leave you without any arguments to support your positions.”
So molecular biology is fiction? Paleontology fantasy? Etc. To Creationists, I suppose they are. Anything the contradicts the bible is lie, no matter if it is true or not.
Paul Ray
"I am quite willing (unlike religious believers) to provide you with answers. But I don’t think you are interested."
And that is the common response every time evolution is put up to critical analysis. "We can prove it, we have proof you know, lots of proof, yes volumes of proof, tons of it, books full of drawings, warehouses full of proof, photos, all the leading scientist behind us."
Reminds me of another recent con job; ..."just vote for it so we pass it, then we can see what's in it." (Ha, that was special too)
OK where is it? Your data base is so thin that the theory can't stand scrutiny. Not enough data to use for a statistical analysis to prove hamsters exist. 300 million years of evolution, and a hand full of samples with millions of gaps that can't be filled.
Many samples of micro-evolution (adaptation that i agree is reality) but not one single proof of Macro-evolution. And Evolutionists are wanting their theory accepted as fact in public schools.
Intelligent design proponents are waiting for your proof. We will teach evolution in public schools, but stipulation;it must be presented in an analytical way with proof.
But that proof never comes. Maybe falsified embryo drawings are your proof. Or the Galapagos finch beak is your ace-in-the- hole. That was proven a fraud along with most of what you have made public.
Without exception, your most brilliant authors and intellectuals get blown out of the water when they go one-on-one with creationists in debates.
Lets see your sampling of data that can be analyzed, so far it has not been forthcoming...we are waiting.
Your are asking me to believe in something that requires more faith than believing in God 1000:1.
Michael
TTDOCF
“And that is the common response every time evolution is put up to critical analysis.”
Critical analysis by whom? Creationists? Creationists, including most of the top “experts” in the “field” of Creationism have never critically analyzed evolution; they refuse to study evolution in the first place, to actually look at the evidence offered. They already know that evolution is a lie, and that there is no evidence, so why bother? To critically analyze science, one has to understand what is being discussed before valid criticism can be offered. For example, your questions showed that you have no idea of what the theory of evolution actually claims. How can you be so sure that there is no evidence, or that the evidence is false, when you haven’t even taken a look at it? Most Creationist’s idea of what evolution is, and the evidence for evolution, comes not from evolutionists, but the distorted, false representation of evolution as constructed by Creationist “experts,” or theologians.
“By whom"We can prove it, we have proof you know, lots of proof, yes volumes of proof, tons of it, books full of drawings, warehouses full of proof, photos, all the leading scientist behind us."”
That’s because, unlike the existence of god, there is proof, volumes of proof, tons of it, books full of drawings, warehouses full of proof, photos, all the leading scientists, etc. Evolution isn’t religion. It is science. All you have to do to look at the evidence yourself is go to the local library and check out a book, unlike religion, where all that is offered, time and time again, is personal subjective experiences and arguments of incredulity. Evolution is like any other scientific field. You may not accept the evidence, but at least it is there for you to judge. And believe it or not, I would be happy if you just took a look at it, instead of basing your view on what the bible says, and Creationist Con Men who tell you what to believe about evolution.
“OK where is it? Your data base is so thin that the theory can't stand scrutiny.”
So this is an admission that you really are interested in taking a look at the evidence? If so, start with Donald Prothero’s “Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters.”
http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-What-Fossils-Say-Matters/dp/0231139624
It’s written by a believer, for the layman (evolution is supported by many fields of science- I am a layman in most of them). It is a summary of the theory of evolution, heavy on providing the evidence. It was the first one I read when I started studying evolution. In order for me to discuss your questions with you, you have to understand what evolution is in the first place. There is simply no way to do that in this venue. Imagine you saddled with the task of explaining the entire field of physics to me, through blog comments. It would be easier if you recommended me to an easy to understand physics text where I could grasp the basics; then you could address my questions and I could understand your answers.
“....million years of evolution, and a hand full of samples with millions of gaps that can't be filled. “
This is what I was told before I actually studied the evidence. Prothero’s text is written to answer that misconception. Again, you may not accept the evidence as valid, but it is there for you to judge yourself. One of the biggest Creationist fallacies is that there is no fossil record, or transition fossils. To be blunt: it is a lie.
Paul Ray
"Many samples of micro-evolution (adaptation that i agree is reality) but not one single proof of Macro-evolution.”
This is also not true. There is ample evidence for macro-evolution- which is nothing more than micro evolution on a longer time scale. If your library does not have Prothero’s book, or you aren’t willing to buy it, I’ll see if I can pick up a second hand copy and mail it to you. Seriously. I just want you to realize that what you have been told about evolution is not true. Again, I don’t care if you accept evolution as having occurred- I just want you to make your own judgement by looking at the evidence firsthand, instead of through those who claim to have studied evolution and found it to be wanting.
“But that proof never comes. Maybe falsified embryo drawings are your proof. Or the Galapagos finch beak is your ace-in-the- hole. That was proven a fraud along with most of what you have made public.”
Again, you have no idea of what you are talking about. Darwin’s studies were no fraud. You’ll see this yourself if you would look at the actual studies.”
“Without exception, your most brilliant authors and intellectuals get blown out of the water when they go one-on-one with creationists in debates.”
There is truth to that. Evolutionary debates are usually in front of Creationist audiences who have no more understanding of evolution than the Creationist on the stage; they are rarely debates in the sense that the evidence is discussed. They are talking point dog and pony shows where rhetorical skills are all that is valued; who can make the audience laugh. The Creationist talking points never vary, and are gross misconceptions about evolution. The evolutionist usually spends the entire time correcting the distortions and outright lies, not being able to actually discuss evolution.
“Your are asking me to believe in something that requires more faith than believing in God 1000:1.”
I’m not asking you to believe. I am asking you to research the evidence yourself, as objectively as possible. Do you realize that if you were to read just one text on evolution, whether you accept it or not, you will be better informed than the majority of Creationists? That you will be in top form to actually discuss and criticize evolution? I hope that you realize that I am serious- my offer to send you a copy if you cannot get one still stands, providing you will actually read it and try to understand the points being made. I only know of one Christian who did so. I haven’t heard from him, so I don’t know what his view is now, but it doesn’t matter. He proved himself intellectually honest by researching the matter first hand. I hope you will agree to do the same. It can’t hurt. Hell, it may even strengthen your belief in creationism. Let me know what you choose to do. I look forward to discussing your questions with you.
Also, a briefer book but not as fossil-laden as Prothero’s book:
http://www.amazon.com/Why-Evolution-True-Jerry-Coyne/dp/0670020532
Paul Ray
Mike, I wrote a long reply in two parts. Only the second showed up on the blog, and during copy and paste I lost the first. Refreshing the page now shows that neither are posted. I'll try again tomorrow.
Paul Ray
HiPaul, "I only know of one Christian who did so."
Just like to say there was more than one christian who took up your challenge. I too thought I understood evolution but was proved wrong :-) I also have to say it has changed my whole way of thinking, I was hoping Michael would be able to answer your other questions but alas! (I couldn't either :-) )
Toby, what did you end up reading?
Paul Ray
Let the fallen minister be the son of Darwin's baboon if he wants to....
Darwin had a baboon? And it had a son? I had no idea. I thought Darwin just collected beetles and dead birds.
Paul Ray
Prothero - What the fossils say.
When I read what Micheal responds with I start to understand why you get mad at times :-) I had previously only studied evolution through the eyes of religionists and thought as M. did, that it took more faith to believe in evolution than in God, I,m starting to see I was wrong. How long did You attend WCG.
"Now I can throw off all moral restraint and be a bitter atheist hater! What fun! Who can I punch first?"
This is why I do not want to live next to Christians. They readily admit that they have no morality of their own; they believe that human beings are incapable of any sort of morality that is not written in their magic book. They admit, that without their god, they too would steal, murder, and rape. Christians, by their own admission, are totally immoral and the only thing preventing them from killing you and eating your flesh is that their god forbids such behavior.
What other conclusion can one draw from Baboon's statements? Only the Bible is keeping him from acting like a wild animal, therefore, he needs to live separately from the atheists, who do have a sense of morality that come from themselves, and not from a magic book. Please don't stop believing in god, Baboon, because if you do, you'll wreak havoc on us poor, peace loving atheists!
Paul Ray
the Real WCG, not this fake crap said...
" Let the fallen minister be the son of Darwin's baboon if he wants to...."
I don't feel double teamed any more. Finally a rational thinker. :<))
Ray, I will check out your recommendation. Contrary to your
perception. Some creationists are seeking truth not just totally blind in their faith.
My blog attacks most of everything I believed ten years ago. But not nearly like the DD do.
Michael
TTDOCF
I was a WCG kid for a very brief time. But as an adult, I came back and joined a splinter group for a few years.
Paul Ray
I have been around WCG and it's offshoots for a long long time, over 40 yrs and things are a bit uncomfortable mentally at present :-) I will try to read "Coyne's why evolution is true" next even if it is making thing more complicated :-)
Toby, I would exit the WCG and it's splinters. They are all unhealthy. Mainstream Christianity is more safe.
Coyne's book is decent, but I like Prothero's the best so far. Good luck.
Paul Ray
I am still in COG mode, if the Bible is as I thought, then COG basic teaching and belief is in my opinion the only "truth" but your argument is outside the Bible and that has caused me great confusion because I have no argument to present to you (or DD for that matter)my arguments were always Bible based as I had accepted from a child that it is/was the word of God and had never seen it called into question. I live in a little backwater kind of place :-) though well known to the world for baised or bigoted religion :-)
Toby,
By all means exit the COGs!
There is no way to serve the Creator in those mega-church corporations, which dictate your faith to you by minority rule and make merchandise of you by collecting illegal tithes and offerings, neither of which were collected in the New Testament 'church.'
If you wish to follow the Creator, first 'come out of her, my people,' start to pray and read the scriptures intensely and worship Him in spirit and truth, and HE WILL reveal Himself to you.
His followers are always a 'little flock' of true believers.
Armstrongism is very destructive. I left after 45 years and formed The True Doctrine of Christ Foundation to explore and find the truth. You are welcome to stop by my blog and leave your comments. I am writing a very in depth book on where Armstrong got his religion, and it was NOT from Christ.
http://www.thetruedoctrineofchrist.blogspot.com/
There is a mass exodus from the SDA church because many of them are discovering many of the same false prophets influenced their founders that influenced Armstrong. The result; Antichrist theology.
Few know Ron L. Hubbard of Scientology and Herbert W. Armstrong have a strong link in their past that influenced their religious philosophies.
Keep knocking, Christ will open the door of truth. Just don't give up!
Michael
The True Doctrine of Christ Foundation
"The study counters the view of believers that religion is necessary to provide the moral and ethical foundations of a healthy society.
It compares the social peformance of relatively secular countries, such as Britain, with the US, where the majority believes in a creator rather than the theory of evolution. Many conservative evangelicals in the US consider Darwinism to be a social evil, believing that it inspires atheism and amorality."
"The study concluded that the US was the world’s only prosperous democracy where murder rates were still high, and that the least devout nations were the least dysfunctional. Mr Paul said that rates of gonorrhoea in adolescents in the US were up to 300 times higher than in less devout democratic countries. The US also suffered from “ uniquely high” adolescent and adult syphilis infection rates, and adolescent abortion rates, the study suggested."
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article571206.ece
Post a Comment