questions and answers anyone?

[fencerider]

what would happen if their were absolutely no restrictions absolutely no war or anything that would limit or regulate human growth? what if we then also lived 200 years??? how long before our natural resources were depleted or worse yet how long before the strong subjugate the weak into harvesting said resources in such a way as to have no parallel yet thus far in history because our global resources have yet to feel such a tax?

our natural resources are being depleted. the strong do subjugate the weak and have since the beginning of civilization. I suppose your church teaches the idea; completely unsupported from the Bible; that god won't allow humans to destroy this planet.

[Hydra009]

Wait a sec...the brutality of war, resource depletion, the plight of the little guy - those are are actual, serious problems.  And a religious person was the one to do it?   

Not homosex perverts turning little Timmy gay through Rainbow Fries or if this year's blood moon signals the End Times or whether the existence of bananas refute atheism-evolution or whether or not Adam rode a brontosaurus bareback or with a saddle?  (Adam was naked, so duh, he had a saddle.)

Actual, serious problems brought up by a religious person.  Is this year a leap year?

[Drich0150]

our natural resources are being depleted. the strong do subjugate the weak and have since the beginning of civilization. I suppose your church teaches the idea; completely unsupported from the Bible; that god won't allow humans to destroy this planet.

Yes moron they are being depleted, I know, that is my point, now I ask you consider the rate of depletion if we added the trillions killed off by war and by famine and disease, plus all of the unborn that never were because their parents died in war or in some other way. If you multiplied the current population by 10 I don't think you could account for all the people who would be on this earth if no one died by anything except old age.

Soilent green anyone?

Actually the bible says God Himself will destroy this world after the 1000 year reign of Christ/after the resurrection.

[Colanth]

Yes moron they are being depleted, I know, that is my point, now I ask you consider the rate of depletion if we added the trillions killed off by war and by famine and disease

You just don't understand population dynamics, do you?  Or the fact that so far, about 108 billion people have been born?

I don't think you could account for all the people who would be on this earth if no one died by anything except old age.

Why would an all-powerful, all-merciful god allow anyone to die?  Ever?  He could have created the world with the ideal number of people and let us all live forever.  Oh, right, that would be too simple for your super-complicated god.

Actually the bible says God Himself will destroy this world after the 1000 year reign of Christ/after the resurrection.

And science knows that the sun will consume the world in 4 billion years.

After the 1,000 year reign after the resurrection, huh?  Well, let's see if you're as smart as a 3rd grader.  The resurrection was around the year 33 CE.  (Dennis the Humble made up the "year of Christ's birth" out of whole cloth, but let's just assume, for the moment, that it was really 787 AUC.)  1,000 years after that would be 1,033.  And that's when your god will destroy the world, huh?  Boy, I'm not paying this sloth by the hour.  How many more millennia is it going to be before he finishes "destroying" it?

(BTW, you do realize, don't you, that the only original source for a "Christ" is the Bible, right?  And that, as described in said Bible, he was a spirit that lived in the 7th heaven?  The "man form" of Jesus dates to about 187 CE.  After all, if Mithra and Osiris and the other 8 "mystery godlets" existed in human form, yours did to.  But Paul, the only Biblical source of Jesus, described him as a spirit.  And assuming that we buy into your wrong-headed idea that he was also a man is just you making more of a fool of yourself every time you make that assumption.)

[Cavebear]

our natural resources are being depleted. the strong do subjugate the weak and have since the beginning of civilization. I suppose your church teaches the idea; completely unsupported from the Bible; that god won't allow humans to destroy this planet.

Some will die, some will live.  Industrialization will collapse. 

[Drich0150]

You just don't understand population dynamics, do you?  Or the fact that so far, about 108 billion people have been born?

Glob...
What is it do you think I was describing in my last post there old sport? or did you not read that bit?

Why would an all-powerful, all-merciful god allow anyone to die?

because not all want to live forever. this life this death will separate out those who do want to live from those who do not. How could you know what you want unless you experienced both?

Ever?  He could have created the world with the ideal number of people and let us all live forever.

That almost sounds like Heaven...Oh, wait it is!! That is what comes after this life smart guy. Otherwise it would be Hell for those who did not want to live forever.

Oh, right, that would be too simple for your super-complicated god.

Kinda already spell out genius. In that this is why life will eventually be.

And science knows that the sun will consume the world in 4 billion years.

Maybe that is why there is a promise of a new heaven and a new earth!

After the 1,000 year reign after the resurrection, huh?

So says the bible

Well, let's see if you're as smart as a 3rd grader.  The resurrection was around the year 33 CE.
(Dennis the Humble made up the "year of Christ's birth" out of whole cloth, but let's just assume, for the moment, that it was really 787 AUC.)  1,000 years after that would be 1,033.  And that's when your god will destroy the world, huh?  Boy, I'm not paying this sloth by the hour.  How many more millennia is it going to be before he finishes "destroying" it?

frigging idiot... Next time ask a question. Rev 20 speaks of two resurrections. the first Jesus will call the 'saved' to live with him for 100 years, then He will call for everyone else. to judgement and then satan for one last skirmish, then new heaven new earth and all the baddies will be sent to Hell.

(BTW, you do realize, don't you, that the only original source for a "Christ" is the Bible, right?)

You mean aside from (BTW, you do realize, don't you, that the only original source for a "Christ" is the Bible, right? Pontius Pilate's letters and the letters from Pliny the younger to emporer tragan and then emperor's tragen's letter in return???

And that, as described in said Bible, he was a spirit that lived in the 7th heaven?

book Chapter and verse please

The "man form" of Jesus dates to about 187 CE.

citation never head that one before.

After all, if Mithra and Osiris and the other 8 "mystery godlets" existed in human form, yours did to.

ow you are just all over the place.

But Paul, the only Biblical source of Jesus, described him as a spirit. 

book chapter and verse please.

And assuming that we buy into your wrong-headed idea that he was also a man is just you making more of a fool of yourself every time you make that assumption.)

I make no assumptions which is why I asked for so many citations

[Mike Cl]

Glob...
What is it do you think I was describing in my last post there old sport? or did you not read that bit?
because not all want to live forever. this life this death will separate out those who do want to live from those who do not. How could you know what you want unless you experienced both?
That almost sounds like Heaven...Oh, wait it is!! That is what comes after this life smart guy. Otherwise it would be Hell for those who did not want to live forever.

  Kinda already spell out genius. In that this is why life will eventually be.
Maybe that is why there is a promise of a new heaven and a new earth!
So says the bible
frigging idiot... Next time ask a question. Rev 20 speaks of two resurrections. the first Jesus will call the 'saved' to live with him for 100 years, then He will call for everyone else. to judgement and then satan for one last skirmish, then new heaven new earth and all the baddies will be sent to Hell.


You mean aside from (BTW, you do realize, don't you, that the only original source for a "Christ" is the Bible, right? Pontius Pilate's letters and the letters from Pliny the younger to emporer tragan and then emperor's tragen's letter in return???
book Chapter and verse please
citation never head that one before.
ow you are just all over the place.
book chapter and verse please.
I make no assumptions which is why I asked for so many citations

Now if you are read..................

[Cavebear]

The door knocker Christians are always astonished when I ask them for proof there even was  "Christ"  They point to the bible.  I sk them if some character in a sci book existed and they say "of course not" (and I agree).  When I point out the equivalence, they blither about how the bible is true but other books are not.

These people are so stupid I worry about them.

[Drich0150]

The door knocker Christians are always astonished when I ask them for proof there even was  "Christ"  They point to the bible.  I sk them if some character in a sci book existed and they say "of course not" (and I agree).  When I point out the equivalence, they blither about how the bible is true but other books are not.

These people are so stupid I worry about them.

And you'd be surprised when I provided you with the answer you pretend to seek. then point out your argument went out of atheistic fashion in the early mid 2000's That now the fashionable thing for atheist to do is attack the prophesy of the messiah, where he was from when he would arrive ect. they go down Isaiah and say nope or nut-huh to everything.

[Colanth]

because not all want to live forever.

But for those who do, there goes your all-powerful, all-merciful god.  It's not merciful to let someone who doesn't want to die, die.

How could you know what you want unless you experienced both?

Well ... during my first heart attack, I was dead (flat EEG) for a while, so I know what both life and death are like - and I prefer life.  Besides, if you die, then decide that you prefer life, how do you get back?  (Objective evidence, of course, no "I believe" nonsense or Bible quotes [which is the same thing - you believe, I don't, so it's just your opinion that the bible is correct].)

That almost sounds like Heaven...Oh, wait it is!!

Not the one I was in when I was dead.

That is what comes after this life smart guy.

As I said, I've been there, you haven't - so I'd rather believe my experience than something you make up.

Otherwise it would be Hell for those who did not want to live forever.

Which is why an all-merciful god would have designed humans that could live forever - for those who decided that they wanted to.  Unfortunately, your god is, at best, an incapable worker - even though some tortoises can live 300 years, no animal (and man is an animal) can live forever.  Run out of telomeres and you die.  He didn't think that one out very well.

Maybe that is why there is a promise of a new heaven and a new earth!

Or just maybe ... it's because the human mind is incapable of contemplating its own non-existence, so primitive people made up stories about an "afterlife" - and mentally primitive people still believe them now, thousands of years later.

So says the bible

Evidence, not Bible quotes.

frigging idiot... Rev 20

Revelation?  The ravings of a madman?  That's your objective evidence?  Wait - I'll quote Tolkein  At least LotR claims to be an accurate history.  Your Bible?  Read Luke 1:1.  It claims, right there in the Bible, to be hearsay.  ("You've heard it before, but let me give you my version."  Some "source".)  Refer to the line I quoted for this response, but apply it to the person it belongs to - the one you see in the mirror.

the first Jesus will call the 'saved' to live with him for 100 years, then He will call for everyone else. to judgement and then satan for one last skirmish, then new heaven new earth and all the baddies will be sent to Hell.

First 100 years, then 1,000 years.

Sorry, that's just 2 more failed Bible prophecies.

You mean aside from (BTW, you do realize, don't you, that the only original source for a "Christ" is the Bible, right?

Wrong.  The word "Christus" comes from the Greek, it was  noun use of the verbal adjective of khriein "to rub, anoint".  It had nothing to do with a "Jesus" who wouldn't be born for centuries.

Pontius Pilate's letters

Unknown until the 4th century CE, so who knows who  wrote them?  Definitely not someone who would have known that Pilate was governor, not procurator.  See http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2013/05/the-fraudulent-letter-of-pontius-pilate.html  (See?  You're not the only one who knows how to use a browser.)

the letters from Pliny the younger

Born in 61 CE, so that's hearsay at best.

ow you are just all over the place.

You don't know the history of the myth of Mithra?  Or the myth of Osiris?  They're just about the same as the myth of Jesus.

I make no assumptions which is why I asked for so many citations

ALL your assertions are baseless assertions.  How can they be anything else?  They all start with the assumption that the Bible is true.  Since it's not all true, you're doing it backwards, the way all Christians (except the honest ones) do - start with the Bible, ignore anything that contradicts it, and find or make up "proofs" for what it claims.

So where's that objective evidence that I keep asking you for, and that you keep ignoring?  All you respond with is "it says so in the Bible", and the only thing the Bible is objective evidence of is that someone, somewhere, wrote it (and we don't even know who or when - "John" may have been written by someone named John, or it may have been written by some of his students, or it may have been just someone who wasn't known but used the name of a known author to lend credence to his tales).  Can't you understand a simple English request?  (Or are you just admitting that you have no objective evidence for any of your assertions, but are too dishonest to say that you don't?)

[Colanth]

And you'd be surprised when I provided you with the answer you pretend to seek.

You've provided NO objective evidence of Yeshua bar Yosuf being real.

they go down Isaiah and say nope or nut-huh to everything.

You do realize that the "savior" Isaiah was referring to was Cyrus, and Isaiah was a history of past events, right?  (Oh, I forget, you're Christian, so you accept the Christian interpretation of a Bible Christians had no hand in writing.)  Isaiah isn't referring to the future.  No actual historian makes that claim any more.

[Cavebear]

Just to mention that most of the New Testament seems to have been written by people several generations separated from the names they used.  That has been common in history.  Even the US "founding fathers" often adopted older names to disguise their identities or suggest some authority.

[Cavebear]

The clarification is appreciated.  My original interpretation of your comment was that Drich serves as a holotype for certain theist visitors, which isn't off the mark either.

That is much as I look at him too.  A representative of a group I know all too well.

[Baruch]

On the Pilate letters ... the Church is a well known forger of hagiographies.  In parts of the Church, it was believed that Pilate converted to Christianity, and was martyred.  So in those parts, he is a saint.  Part of the Ro-mansplaining that Christians do.

[Colanth]

In parts of the Church, it was believed that Pilate converted to Christianity, and was martyred.  So in those parts, he is a saint.

So Pilate, who caused Jesus' death (no one did anything without the consent of the governor) was a saint but, until pretty recently, Jews were reviled for killing Jesus.  Christianity - the religion that's only as good as its last rewrite.