The Anti-Christ =D

[CapnG]

Perhaps, but we get into trouble when people start classifying stuff like the old testament as historical.

People get confused because Egypt, Isreal, Babylon, Sumeria, and Ur are/were real places, the Tigres and Euphrates are real rivers, etc.That doesn't make the stories written about them in the Bible real.

.
Slim: Don't be so quick to judge. The world is much more complicated then we are able to know. There is belief, and there is empirical data. Faith has been around a lot longer than the Greek idea of what we call logic. Brushing off ancient knowledge as "bullshit" is a mistake. Most of the "true believers" in modern thought have little or no idea where their world view originated, or for that matter, how the physical world works. I have talked to a fair amount of western rationalist, who have no idea how a refrigerator cools, or how an airplane archives lift. They just have “faith” in science, which makes them no different than those they deride. Peace. zp

That something is older doesn't make it more likely to be true. Quite the opposite in fact. Earth for instance turns out not to be flat and not to be the center of the universe... or galaxy... or even solar system. And anyone who doesn't understand the principles of lift, refrigeration or anything can simply read about it if they're curious. Individual ignorance doesn't equate to a lack of knowledge generally as obviously since we can build planes and fridges the science exists, is tested and is repeatable.

 

[exo_doc]

I agree that no one should push there agenda scientific or religions its up to the individual and no has the right to pressure them for choosing that's what free speech is about However, both religious or science inquiry can work together in finding the answers of the universe which maybe humanity is on a speck in it. Has anyone been into the Vatican library who knows whats hidden in it corridors as the same as the many private libraries of the world?

Ah, the Vatican library! The modern day Library of Alexandria. It boggles my mind just to ponder what might be hidden in there. Brain drooling..........aaaaaaah
I know the Papacy would never open it too the public, or digitize everything (it would probably mean the death of the Catholic church),....but one can dream.

 

[Facius_Cardan]

Anyone who says that the bible is bullshit is utterly wrong. The bible has allowed us to extract many information about the civilizations and cultures that coexisted with the jewish people (often some of the names of rulers and places mentioned were considered ficticious but later found to have really existed). The question goes well beyond faith. You can extract historical, anthropological, theological, archeological and sociological information from the book, for it is a repository (though incomplete and tainted) of beliefs and cultural habits that cross the millennia. All that can result from an objective approach to the bible.
Now, if you're a believer you may also take the supernatural events as a fact, but that's a completely different aspect of the matter. I'm not a believer. To me the version of the creation presented in Genesis is no more than pure mythology, a fictional construct that emerged from a then growing religion incorporating many elements from the surrounding cultural traditions like the Mesopotamian. Further scuffles about personal faiths won't lead anywhere because the believers don't have rational and debatable arguments to present (that would be impossible for faith is, by definition, an ilogical credence, devoid of proof).

 

[CapnG]

Anyone who says that the bible is bullshit is utterly wrong. The bible has allowed us to extract many information about the civilizations and cultures that coexisted with the jewish people (often some of the names of rulers and places mentioned were considered ficticious but later found to have really existed). The question goes well beyond faith. You can extract historical, anthropological, theological, archeological and sociological information from the book, for it is a repository (though incomplete and tainted) of beliefs and cultural habits that cross the millennia. All that can result from an objective approach to the bible.

Then by that criteria it is 50% bullshit at least. Like I said, a quasi-historical volume.

 

[Xzorter]

Cheeez and rice ! The book in there called Job is talking about the earth's path around the sun, how bodies of water effect the earths weather and it's cycle, accurate astronomy , and many other truths that have taken thousands of years for our scientists to affirm. That can all be attributed to a lucky guess ..probably just imagination ..probably,most likely.Interpretation.I alway's wondered what the interpretation is of "Jonah was swallowed by a whale". And then people saw him on the beach bleached white. Just kidding.

 

[Ron Collins]

"anti-christ"

I rarely actually laugh out loud to something I read, but this gave me a good chuckle.

---------- Post added at 09:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:45 AM ----------

Glad to see Angelo you were around back then to see that Genesis was not written 6000 years ago.

Please tell me this is just a jib and you are not in the "The Earth is 6 thousand years old" club.

---------- Post added at 10:25 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:51 AM ----------

So here is my dilemma. The concept of an anti-christ assumes a monotheistic deity. This deity is an omniscient, infallible, all powerful creator of everything. He decides to create all things physical in about 7 days... after creating the concept of seven days. Then he creates helpers. Then he creates physical creatures to inhabit this one rock he created whilst creating everything else in our universe and all other parallel universes and whatever else is out there. So, he (why a progenitor deity needs a gender is beyond me) creates these helpers and after a while they start to get a bit frustrated with the boss. So they revolt with violence. Now this all loving, omniscient deity either didn't see this coming or didn't care. But, he gets pissed about it later and decides to toss the troublemakers out and ostensibly made a place for them that seemed to fit their mood. But, then he decides that any of his new creation that didn't do precisely as he wanted would also be tossed into the bad bucket. blah blah blah.

This concept has so many holes, logic traps, gaps, and boundless BS how can anyone take it seriously. it paints the opposite picture of the deity then the one they want to portray anyway.

1. Deity has mood swings
2. Deity lets bad things happen while knowing they are going to happen (you cant escape this if you portray your God as omniscient)
3. Deity couldn't control his helper creation and allowed that creation to rival his own power.
4. Deity provides creation with free will to choose things. Then gives them rules indirectly(apparently he is also incapable of allowing his creation to see and speak to him without killing them???). Then he gives them shor memories and doesn't allow any further angelic confirmation of the rules 20 generations after providing them except through cryptically placing the likeness of his sons mother in potato chips and pancakes. Oh, and the occasional bleeding statue. Nothing sends a clear message like a bleeding statue.

This sounds like a universe my 5 year old would create in his bedroom with his toys. So, if there is a God, then we are his imaginative play. Thus he cares for us about as much as my son cares for his toys. Which is to say he wants very much to keep them.. he loves them. He truely loves them. I mean he has a massive fit if he looses one or if they are taken away. but as soon as he gets it back then he proceeds to throw them all around his room, jump on them, and pit them against each other. He makes up silly rules and situations to put them in. All for fun. Then his attention wanes and he is on to something else.

There you have it. That is my take on God, faith, angels, and the concept of the anti-christ. Its G.I. Joe, HotWheels, some random stuff from the dollar store, and a few stuffed animals all tossed about in a sandbox.

 

[CapnG]

All correct Ron but you're missing the crown jewel of the illogic: if God is omniscient then he knows ALL. Every millisecond of existence from the begining of time to the end. But more importantly, he's known ALL of that from the very FIRST millisecond of time, perhaps even before (as we reckon time). That being the case, regardless of what choices you may make in life not only does God know whether or not you will ultimately wind up in Hell, roasting away for eternity without hope of reprieve, he has ALWAYS known since the dawn of time, since before Adam and Eve were created, let alone your own conception.

Not only does that make the concept of "free will" less an illusion and moreso a joke, it also begs the question: why would a loving God go to all the trouble of creating billions of people knowing their ultimate end would be resolved in an eternity of torture?

Or more simply: Why is God an asshole?

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

Ron ,yes its a jib but keeping a open mind to all possibilities in life and try not to put all my eggs in one basket Science is about learning and discovering from all parts of the World and its cultures.

 

[Facius_Cardan]

Or more simply: Why is God an asshole?

For someone who isn't a believer you certainly seem quite angry at God.

 

[Slim Shady]

=( Didn't expect this to happen....

 

[exo_doc]

For someone who isn't a believer you certainly seem quite angry at God.

I have debated the merits of God and Christianity with Christians online many times, and I have seen this very statement made by them just about every time.
It usually shows up when I say something they don't want to hear about God/Christianity, or if they feel they are losing ground. It redirects the conversation away from the point or question, and seems to be designed to make me (or anyone else taking a position they don't like) defensive.
You might as well say, "Well, you're just angry at God, so naturally anything you say is biased, twisted, and spiteful. The anger in your heart keeps you from seeing the truth."
That statement has nothing at all to do with the merits of Christianity, it's reactionary and emotional, has nothing to do with logic or reason,yet in their minds, it effectively shuts down any further consideration of anything I could say.

So here is my current response to statements like that; "Angry at God? How can I be angry at something that doesn't exist? I'm angry at YOU."
Responses vary to that, from Whaaa? to silence.
If you're gonna debate something, keep it to the reasons, the logic, and the facts.

 

[ALPHA ROMEO UNIFORM]

Who's logic, facts and reasons dominate culture or faith? Both science and religion are joined at the hip through historical events through political wars like it or not that's fact. Great scientist such as Albert Enstien , Sir Charles Darwin both had religious faiths that's fact. Oral history is another factor in World cultures that some have religious histories entwined in there cultures does that also result in negative reactions? Furthermore, maybe science and religion needs to look through more than one lens when researching universe secrets ?
Peace & Ja Love,
BF

 

[Xzorter]

Quit the little hornets nest of mental ascension.

 

[Facius_Cardan]

I have debated the merits of God and Christianity with Christians online many times, and I have seen this very statement made by them just about every time. It usually shows up when I say something they don't want to hear about God/Christianity, or if they feel they are losing ground. It redirects the conversation away from the point or question, and seems to be designed to make me (or anyone else taking a position they don't like) defensive. You might as well say, "Well, you're just angry at God, so naturally anything you say is biased, twisted, and spiteful. The anger in your heart keeps you from seeing the truth." That statement has nothing at all to do with the merits of Christianity, it's reactionary and emotional, has nothing to do with logic or reason,yet in their minds, it effectively shuts down any further consideration of anything I could say. So here is my current response to statements like that; "Angry at God? How can I be angry at something that doesn't exist? I'm angry at YOU." Responses vary to that, from Whaaa? to silence. If you're gonna debate something, keep it to the reasons, the logic, and the facts.

That's the whole point. I don't believe in God so I have no feelings towards Him. If you had read my previous post you could have certainly arrived at that conclusion.

 

[jtaylor]

Here is my opinion. Some of the bible is bullshit. I mean c'mon....the whole story of Noah getting 2 of every animal???? I dont think so. My opinion is that God is an alien lifeforce and did create all life on the planet. I was really fascinated in some the the old Sumarian text which state that the Sky Gods created life. Thats just my opinion.

 

[CapnG]

For someone who isn't a believer you certainly seem quite angry at God.

How you got that impression is beyond me. If I'm angry at anything it is stupidity (and those who would preach it) but as to my previous comment, I'm using the rules established by christians for their own religion to point out it's underlying illogic. Emotions don't enter into it.

 

[Xzorter]

If the bible is True then the Anti-Christ is a way that the devil will copycat the supposed second coming of the Messiah.The teachings refer to various ways Ole horn head copies different gifts like word of knowledge and prophecy. ...Remain calm.

 

[trainedobserver]

If the bible is True then ...

That is one interpretation. In another the Antichrist was Nero. In another it is all symbolism. At any rate, the Bible refers to all non-believers as antichrists. 2 John 1:7.

---------- Post added at 08:10 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:56 AM ----------

If you're gonna debate something, keep it to the reasons, the logic, and the facts.

I cannot believe you put that sentence into a thread that has "Antichrist" in the title. We're talking the supernatural boogie-man of all space and time in some flavors of Christianity. Little things like reason, logic, and facts are more relevant to an episode of I Love Lucy than to this subject for Pete's sake.

---------- Post added at 08:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:10 AM ----------

When you compare the logical inconsistencies of both the Christian and UFO mythos you can quickly see that neither makes any sense whatsoever for much of the same reasons. The primary one, as Ron has already pointed out, is behavioral. None of the character's behavior matches up with their proposed roles or alleged abilities.

 

[Facius_Cardan]

When you compare the logical inconsistencies of both the Christian and UFO mythos you can quickly see that neither makes any sense whatsoever for much of the same reasons. The primary one, as Ron has already pointed out, is behavioral. None of the character's behavior matches up with their proposed roles or alleged abilities.

One may add that the actions/behavior of the biblical celestial entities (and the main human protagonists also) are as seemingly absurd as the ones that the UFO phenomenon presents. There's a schizophrenic side to both subjects that may reveal more about the humans behind the writing and the sightings than about the potential manifestations to which they attribute their experiences. That apparent lack of a subjacent logic already puzzled the likes of Charles Fort and, later, Jacques Vallée and John Keel.
It's frustrating when we're unable to separate the characteristics that belong to the phenomenon and the ones that are added by the altered perceptions of the witnesses.

 

[trainedobserver]

There's a schizophrenic side to both subjects that may reveal more about the humans behind the writing and the sightings than about the potential manifestations to which they attribute their experiences. ... It's frustrating when we're unable to separate the characteristics that belong to the phenomenon and the ones that are added by the altered perceptions of the witnesses.

Bingo. These are human stories created by human beings. The real truth that glares out at us from religious and UFO/paranormal myth and legend is that neither contains anything that can be truly characterized as non-human or alien. The content and sources are all very human in nature.

The fact that no prophet or contactee has channeled or otherwise been given any actionable information from their gods or aliens that could even be remotely considered as coming from inhumanly spiritually or technologically advanced beings is not trivial. If gods or aliens were real and truly wished to be known, worshiped, appreciated, or contribute to the welfare of humanity in any real way their actions and communications would contain real-world changing information instead of dime-store philosophy and useless diagrams, symbols, and schematics.

On the UFO front I'd also like to add that no one has ever found (to my knowledge) a dropped alien (or inter-dimensional) screwdriver, bolt, nut, or chewing gum wrapper while the debris of our technological advancement is evident wherever we go. We even have frozen human bodily waste in orbit around the planet. "Where is the non-human intelligence spore?", so to speak. If visitations, abductions, and appearances are so prevalent throughout history where are the commonly found indicators corresponding to the presence of intelligence or technology in the way of simple debris?