They don't want us to know

[stonehart]

Good ole' Carl Sagan. His spacey visuals and music along with his narration style are captivating. You can hardly stop watching him and by the time you're into it for 5 minutes you're completely hypnotized. He could tell me the universe was made out of a vast collection of ice cream cones evolved from billions of flakes of breakfast cereal and I'd be nodding my head in complete agreement. So has this thread gone totally off the rails now ( rhetorical )?

Yeah the thread is looking like the pic.


I would say it has evolved but I do not think there was much intelligent design involved

 

[Trajanus]

I miss Tyder and it was due to the religious arguments in part that caused a bit of a forum meltdown for him.

Lol, southerners tend to be religious and I guess he just couldn't take it from people like us.

As a side note, here is a question that has never be adequately answered by any Christian of Muslim I have met.

"What makes your God the One True God and Odin, Zeus, Osiris, and Mithra myths?"

Christians would say jesus really existed and worked miracles. But so what; he was just a jewish apocalyptic prophet like so many others. As for "miracles" Ehrman noted they don't meet the criterion of dissimilarity i.e. they could've been made up to win converts like so much else.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

The thing about 'intelligent design' is that there never needs to be an active, awake and thinking intelligence doing the designing.

People remark about how perfectly balanced the fundamental constants are etc and how if things were just a little this way or that, nothing would be here. They put this as proof there must have been design.

To me though, that is like a fish saying 'isn't it great that someone put all this water here for us?'

The fish doesnt see that it only exists cos there was water there in the first place. Whatever way our universe emerged, most things could only have gone one way, there being many imperfect things happening whilst pieces of the ultimately complicated things get added bit by bit and not always in a fantastic order etc. I'm not putting down the wonder of life in any way but we are only here cos certain things were a certain way prior. It does not have to be a long-term plan that from the start said 'we will aim to make humans by such and such a date.'

WE are here because things happened that way. You can be thankful or philosophical but if there was design for the sole purpose of the life that exists since the bible was compiled - why wait all this time? What's with the billions of years before life started on earth? Was god under contract stretching the work out a bit?

It's the whole 'who or what started the universe, or the cycle of universes' that makes me scratch my head - all the stuff since is kind of a given.

I think Kim123 must never visit cos I know Kim cannot resist a good religious thread eh Mike?

 

[Trajanus]

The thing about 'intelligent design' is that there never needs to be an active, awake and thinking intelligence doing the designing.

Sure, see Creation Revisited by Atkins. The universe wasn't "fine tuned" for life not any more than the Earth was. We now know that, in addition to several lifeless--to our knowledge--planets in our solar system, there are hundreds of presumably lifeless extrasolar ones. It's my understanding that current theories predict the existence of many other universes, so our universe, like our planet, is probably just habitable by a lucky accident.

What's with the billions of years before life started on earth?

Actually life is thought to have begun only a few hundred million years or so after formation of Earth.

 

[Goggs Mackay]

No, I meant what was the point of all the billions of years before the earth was even made? (if there was an intentional design that was to end with our creation - not the time between us and the creation of the earth - cheers)

 

[Trajanus]

No, I meant what was the point of all the billions of years before the earth was even made? (if there was an intentional design that was to end with our creation - not the time between us and the creation of the earth - cheers)

Sure, it took that long precisely because there was no supervising "higher power." Although life might've arisen surprisingly early in a few places, generally it probably took billions of years because of initial paucity of heavy elements, gradually produced via nucleosynthesis.

 

[trainedobserver]

It's sad to see people try to make an argument against God.

The sticking point here is the assumption on the believer's part that the god of the Bible is any different from the god of any other religious text, of which there are literally thousands b.t.w., and that everyone else buys into, or should buy into, that particular one.

That is why my initial question to anyone who uses the word "God" (with the capital G) is, "What are you talking about exactly?" followed by "How did you come to believe that?" The answers invariably involve circular reasoning (quoting scriptures to validate scripture) and/or an act of faith, that is to say the acceptance of something as a "fact" in the absence of evidence, or in the presence of contradictory evidence.

 

[trainedobserver]

To imagine that science, religion, philosophy, or the human imagination is going to suss out the "creation of the universe" is an exercise in extreme absurdity. It is a logical and practical impossibility given the resource constraints imposed on humanity by virtue of our limited perception within the tiny slice of time and space our entire species has or ever will occupy in said universe. That doesn't mean we should strive to understand as much about it as we can, it is just an admission of hard fact which should give us caution when evaluating someone's claims of possessing knowledge of the origins of the universe.

 

[Ezechiel]

Then let's kick it up one more notch just for the fun of it. We have these alien craft flying around for what purpose? Their presence seems to date back to antiquity and our mythology lands them smack-dab in the middle of meddling in human affairs, if not having a hand in creation itself. We also have multi-generation abductees and alleged contactees and there is a distinct leaning in their behavior to steer human development on a genetic, technological and sociological scale. People who are religious interpret this alien intervention as God's plan. Others interpret it as pure myth. I'm somewhere in between. I have no doubt that UFOs are real and that they have an agenda of their own to fulfill. Have you read Bramley's book The Gods of Eden? It will make you think twice before dismissing the idea that humanity isn't being managed.

Alien micro-management (of humanity) might be a good fit for the rational explanation of some 'godly' events as described by 'sacred' documentation.

On a sanity/rationality scale, the idea of possible alien intervention (... or interference/mismanagement/abduction/impregnation (immaculate conception lol) ) in human affairs should have a higher rating than considering a universal judgmental god doing this kind of crazy stuff for his narcistic pleasure. But that's my opinion

When we are able to reach other solar systems occupied by alien sentient life forms, will we be able to resist the temptation of testing the social fabric of these entities ? We'll measure their potential for aggression, intellectual capacities, reproductive rate, technological progress... etc, etc. In essense we'll make sure they can't kick our ass too soon

 

[Trajanus]

To imagine that science, religion, philosophy, or the human imagination is going to suss out the "creation of the universe" is an exercise in extreme absurdity. It is a logical and practical impossibility given the resource constraints imposed on humanity by virtue of our limited perception within the tiny slice of time and space our entire species has or ever will occupy in said universe.

Religion is no way to the answer but science is IMO, so this is too pessimistic. See e.g. Atkins Creation Revisited. Even now we can peer virtually back to earliest Universe, who knows what we'll know in coming years?

 

[Trajanus]

On a sanity/rationality scale, the idea of possible alien intervention (... or interference/mismanagement/abduction/impregnation (immaculate conception lol) ) in human affairs should have a higher rating than considering a universal judgmental god doing this kind of crazy stuff for his narcistic pleasure. But that's my opinion

I share it of course but we shouldn't be too quick to attribute things to ET. The so called "virgin birth" for example, is probably just based on a mistranslation, as Ehrman wrote.

 

[trainedobserver]

Religion is no way to the answer but science is IMO, so this is too pessimistic. See e.g. Atkins Creation Revisited. Even now we can peer virtually back to earliest Universe, who knows what we'll know in coming years?

Yeah, who knows? I personally believe that assuming we will eventually figure out the origin of the universe is an unsupportable assumption based on an flagrant disregard for our very real resource limitations.

 

[Randall]

Yeah, who knows? I personally believe that assuming we will eventually figure out the origin of the universe is an unsupportable assumption based on an flagrant disregard for our very real resource limitations.

Perhaps you are right. Then again perhaps figuring out the origin of the universe doesn't really take that many resources. The experiments we're doing now with subatomic particles are providing clues without the need for massive resources, e.g. we're not even a Type 1 civilization on the Kardashev scale yet.

 

[mike]

On the topic of derails, its inevitable that when someone uses god or the bible as evidence for anything, that the source gets deconstructed and its value as a source debated.
It would be no different if someone were to post a link to theyfly, and claim the one armed bandit has photographed these craft so they must be real.

Ive noticed a theme to several posters here, and its worth looking at.

That being they were once believers, but after looking into it with their own reasoning and critical thinking came to the conclusion it cant be right.

The process of indoctrination is there for anyone to see, we get a character like Rev. Robert H. Schuller, with a beautific smile and a twinkle in his eyes

Grip the pulpit with both hands and declare "God is love".......
The crowd affirms this with amens, hellelujahs and praise hims
He reiterates "God IS LOVE"

And makes eye contact with as many of the audience as he can

The crowd affirms with even louder Amens, and Praise hims


Anyone plonked down in this environment for the first time will naturally go with the herd and "feel" the consensus as emotional feedback.
If you had never read the bible, perhaps you are a child, perhaps the archaic language style does your head in when you try, all those thees thous and begats....

So its easier to just go with the flow, and swallow wholesale the premise God is good, god is merciful, god is just.....

But

Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children. (Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT)

This is what the Lord of hosts has to say: 'I will punish what Amalek did to Israel when he barred his way as he was coming up from Egypt. Go, now, attack Amalek, and deal with him and all that he has under the ban. Do not spare him, but kill men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and asses.' (1 Samuel 15:2-3 NAB)

I will make Mount Seir utterly desolate, killing off all who try to escape and any who return. I will fill your mountains with the dead. Your hills, your valleys, and your streams will be filled with people slaughtered by the sword. I will make you desolate forever. Your cities will never be rebuilt. Then you will know that I am the LORD. (Ezekiel 35:7-9 NLT)

When the people heard the sound of the horns, they shouted as loud as they could. Suddenly, the walls of Jericho collapsed, and the Israelites charged straight into the city from every side and captured it. They completely destroyed everything in it – men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep, donkeys – everything. (Joshua 6:20-21 NLT)

And god isnt satisfied with dashing babies to death, they then go to hell for eternity to suffer.
He could , since according to those who subscribe to his reality as being all powerful, simply end their existance with oblivion. But instead exacts the vengance of eternal suffering.

When you compare what you get told from the pulpit, with whats actually in the book, then a rational critical thinker must see the contradiction. That far from being a kind and loving entity, this character is a cruel and petty, violent and vengeful one

The Bible, especially the Old Testament, is filled with numerous stories of animal and human sacrifice. God, we are told, likes the pleasing aroma of burning flesh. Animal sacrifice is much more common than human sacrifice, but both occur and are "pleasing to the Lord".

Genesis, the first book of the Bible, has Abraham preparing to sacrifice his son to God. "Take your son, your only son – yes, Isaac, whom you love so much – and go to the land of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains, which I will point out to you."(Genesis 22:1-18) Abraham takes his own son up on a mountain and builds an altar upon which to burn him. He even lies to his son and has him help build the altar. Then Abraham ties his son to the altar and puts a knife to his throat. He then hears God tell him this was just a test of his faith. However, God still wanted to smell some burnt flesh so he tells Abraham to burn a ram.

Even though he didn't kill his son, it is still an incredibly cruel and evil thing to do. If Abraham did that today he would be in jail serving a long sentence . It amazes me how Christians see this story as a sign of God's love. There is no love here, just pure unadulterated evil.

If there is one verse in the bible that i find worth consideration, its this one

"Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil..." (Isa 5:20).

In order to reconcile the premise god is love, god is good with whats actually written in the bible..... you need to call evil good

Dont take the preachers word for it, or the crowds consensus opinion

Read this

They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children. Isaiah 13:15-18

And draw your own conclusion

 

[Ezechiel]

I share it of course but we shouldn't be too quick to attribute things to ET. The so called "virgin birth" for example, is probably just based on a mistranslation, as Ehrman wrote.

I just dished that out as a 'paranormal' example of what christianity force-feeds its believers.

Imagine an entire society waiting for the return of its savior... 2000 years ago. It's more than obvious that the level of attention given to unusual celestial events, 'Malmstrom/Rendelsham... etc..'-type events would be extreme. Why would a population be traumatized into focusing on such paranormal expectations in the first place?

To me this sounds like an out of control 'cargo' cult and some kind of contact obviously took place at some point in time (bad timing IMHO).

 

[Randall]

I just dished that out as a 'paranormal' example of what christianity force-feeds its believers. Imagine an entire society waiting for the return of its savior... 2000 years ago. It's more than obvious that the level of attention given to unusual celestial events, 'Malmstrom/Rendelsham... etc..'-type events would be extreme. Why would a population be traumatized into focusing on such paranormal expectations in the first place? To me this sounds like an out of control 'cargo' cult and some kind of contact obviously took place at some point in time (bad timing IMHO).

I share it of course but we shouldn't be too quick to attribute things to ET. The so called "virgin birth" for example, is probably just based on a mistranslation, as Ehrman wrote.

I look at the Bible as a type of mythology, part fact and part fiction and a lot of editorializing.

I also have several other mythology texts including Yaqui, Druid, Egyptian, Dogon, Classical, and a couple of compilations and dictionaries. As reference material within a historical/mythological context they are very interesting, but in no way would it be wise to substitute one belief system for the other. The point made by Trajanus on misinterpretations is certainly relevant too. Perhaps this is the real difference between UFO "believers" and ufologists. The believers almost automatically substitute whatever fits from other beliefs into their own paradigm while the aim of ufology is ( or at least should be ) to uncover the truth regardless of how it fits with their personal beliefs. For example, original sin and the tower of Babel have been used as mythological examples of an alien entity ( God ) intervening in mankind's quest for knowledge. However should we accept that these events took place exactly as described? No. But we do still see the tradition of religion opposing scientific progress even today whenever someone invokes the, "What gives you the right to play God?" rationale for outlawing scientific advancements e.g. genetic research, and these mythological texts give us insight into where that kind of thinking comes from.

 

[starise]

Well I can certainly see that I am in the minority here as a Christian. The can of worms opened here by several different posters is a conversation catlyst for a very long time. There have been so many negative comments here toward Christianity and the Bible that I don't know where to begin. You all seem to be pretty well convinced of your own take on the matter. I think that it is certainly healthy to ask those tough questions regarding the Bible, some of those can be answered and some of those might not be fully known until later.

I can fully understand going through the Bible with scutiny and any thinking mind will question some of the things in the book. If the Bible isn't true then we will see that played out with time. If the Bible is true then we will also see that happen.

It has been said that the Bible was never written as a science book and this becomes apparent almost immediately. That new discoveries in science tend to back up what is in the Bible is apparent. I know several of you will disagree with that statement right away, but in order to prevent another 20 page argument centered around it I will say that to get to your conclusions you need only see a Biblical statement one way and not the other because there are alternate explanations to all of the supposed arguments against the many points brought against the Bible. If I were to attempt to address each and every argument raised here it would take far more than this thread to do it.

I am not a trained theologian.I make my living in a technical trade and my side interests are in the arts.I am the worship leader at my local church and I have music interests on the side. Why am I telling you this? So you know I am not a prodigy of some kind. I consider myself an average guy who is fairly studied in the Bible. But thats the point about the Bible. It was written for the common man to comprehend. Even with my lack of deep theological training I think I can reasonably answer many of the concerns you have about it.

IMO the discussion needs to be more narrowly focused on one thing at a time. All of the serious concerns/questions are valid. The others who have posted here in an attempt to create a stir are not here to really do anything more than gang up on the Christian and I won't waste my time. As I said before all I did was state that I thought some of the happenings in the paranormal were angelic related and this lit the fuse to the bomb. The discussion was never directed toward if the Bible is true or not, until others here decided to make it about that. I suspect that if I had been Hindu and said I believed in angels everything would have been ok. The crowd here is antagonistic toward Christianity,or at the very least many here are.

Like I quoted from the Bible earlier, it is a book to be spiritually discerned and it is a book written for the common men of many different generations. To look at the Bible like a scientifc book is a big mistake and will leave a scientist in the dark every time.

In my observation a person who will believe someone seen a ufo as big as a battleship but don't believe a powerful being could help get all the necessary animals on the ark is a contradiction. Did he put them to sleep in some kind of suspended animation? Maybe but the Bible isn't going to give specific scientific detail on how it was done. Many of you believe in large ufos but you have never seen one. Until the Turkish government cracked down on Mt. Ararat people were going there and seen the ark built to the specs claimed in the Bible. It has since broken up on the face of the mountain and snow covers most of it but in the early 1900s expeditions went there and found it.It is a box not like a ship. It didn't need direction or propulsion. All it needed to do was float until is wasn't needed any longer. Many of the other so called references to a great flood by other cultures were actually copied from the Biblical event. There were other references to other floods by other cultures too....not related. The evidence we have for a flood and the ark is much more than we ever had for area 51. Imagine if the Bible were a detailed scientific book, No one from several hundred years ago would begin to understand it and I suspect even those who pride themselves on being technologically advanced wouldn't understand it either.
You won't go anywhere on the earth and not find evidence of oceanic life or of water. Look at the grand canyon. Look at the most recent discoveries concerning it. I remember as a boy growing up I lived far away from any water and guess what I found in the rocks? Seashells.
As I understand it before the flood there was a layer of water above the earth in addition to clouds. This could have changed the dynamic of the interactions of the sun and may have prevented rainbows until after the flood. I could go on but there really isn't space or time on my part. I am certainly convinced that there WAS a Biblical flood.

Trainedobserver, If you taught sunday school then you will guess why I said I am not religious. It is because Jesus strongly condemned the religious of his day. Many of them were totally fake. He referred to them as "white washed tombs." In 2 PET chapter 2 they are referred to as " clouds without rain" there are also references to Noah in this chapter. I don't think much has changed in religious circles since then. In fact it may have gotten worse.These false teachers like the best seats in the house and love attention. Take your pick...you can find these guys in a lot of churches.

I have never liked anything called religious. Nothing but boring repetition designed to look make a sinner look holy.

Concerning the comments of the wars that took place and were ordained by God in the OT. Any conquering army of that time typically completely destroyed the enemy. Why? Because just like cutting a plant back to the root it would return to make war again if not completely eliminated. This wasn't just the Jewish nation. Given half the chance the opposion would have done the same thing.Many armies now try to fight a clean war . This isn't really effective as a long term strategy if you want to win a war.

God blessed Abraham and said He would bless all nations through him. Abraham is the direct bloodline of Jesus. Jesus is the answer to the blessings of all nations. The blessing needs to be recieved willingly though.In order to preserve the bloodline war was unfortunately part of it. There is a theory that one of the biggest reasons for the Noadic flood was the infusion of bad angelic bloodlines into human dna. There is disagreement amonst theologians on this as a reason.Sin and widespread evil were the main reason. Men had rejected God. The whole theory rests on the references to the "sons of God" having sexual relations with the "daughters of men". This produced men who were evil beyond belief and who were giants.I call them fallen angels you probably call them ET or ancient aliens. If you care to try and exclude the photoshopped pics from the list,there are still numerous valid pictures and explained findings of giants all over the web.....There are references in the Bible that say that in the last days it will be like the days of Noah. One could infer that there has been more tainting of our DNA IF you follow this theory.I'm not sure I buy into it as the sole reason for a flood. In some paranormal circles the spirits of these dead half breeds are what a lot of the evil spirit activity is on earth...I don't really buy into that one, but who knows?

This is probably unrelated. People are getting larger now. I attribute this to the growth horomones in our foods. 13 year olds now here in the US are nothing like they were when I was 13. When I was 13 there may have been one or two big guys in the whole school. Now it isn't uncommon to see a lot of 6 ft. tall 18 yr. olds in one class. I'm not going out on a limb here, just thinking out loud as to the reasons behind it.

Ufology, I have always liked the story of the tower of Babel. I asked the same questions . In my view on this God didn't want those people at that time to become one people. He didn't give any reason for that. Since we now regularly build skyscrapers and have gone to the moon, I think it highly unlikely that it was a statement toward all mankind from now on. I see an element of pride that God felt He needed to address in this particular situation. The creator wants the created to seek Him and the Bible says He is a jealous God. The fact that He allows this into His word seems to say to me that He doesn't mind us reading about it and He gives an action with no explanation.God doesn't necessarily need to give us one.Maybe He is aware that we NEED to depend on Him.JMO.

In the Genesis account of the fall I think the tree was placed in the garden to test mans obedience. It was a test he failed because the serpent who was satan (reptilian?) lied to Eve and Eve bought the lie. The passage is clearly written for primitive people to understand but it also has innuendos that can show us some things. Was the sword that turned this way and that an energy weapon of some kind?The meaning of the exchange is intact but what happened in concrete terms is probably much different than the primitive version.

The created can't understand the creator totally. If it could the creator would no longer be the creator. For a person who might live to be 80 to be so naive as to think they can control their destiny on their own strength is ludicrous IMHO. It is said that knowledge is power but the wrong knowledge at the wrong time could cause us more harm than good.We have limited control of our outcomes . We hold the key to our ultimate destiny determined by how we deal with our creator. He has given us His own Son, what will you do with that knowledge? If the God that you think is so evil got rid of the OT sacrifice and replaced it with the only sacrifice of His Son. If He offered this to every man who accepts it how is it that you think He is so evil?

 

[Randall]

... Ufology, I have always liked the story of the tower of Babel. I asked the same questions . In my view on this God didn't want those people at that time to become one people. He didn't give any reason for that. Since we now regularly build skyscrapers and have gone to the moon, I think it highly unlikely that it was a statement toward all mankind from now on. I see an element of pride that God felt He needed to address in this particular situation. The creator wants the created to seek Him and the Bible says He is a jealous God. The fact that He allows this into His word seems to say to me that He doesn't mind us reading about it and He gives an action with no explanation.God doesn't necessarily need to give us one.Maybe He is aware that we NEED to depend on Him.JMO.

From a rational perspective, jealousy is pretty petty for something as supposedly all powerful and loving and good as God. Also the reason was very clear for God stopping the construction of Babel. According to the text. God didn't want us to grow intellectually and kept us down ( literally ).

In the Genesis account of the fall I think the tree was placed in the garden to test mans obedience. It was a test he failed because the serpent who was satan (reptilian?) lied to Eve and Eve bought the lie. The passage is clearly written for primitive people to understand but it also has innuendos that can show us some things. Was the sword that turned this way and that an energy weapon of some kind?The meaning of the exchange is intact but what happened in concrete terms is probably much different than the primitive version.

Interesting take on the energy weapon ( sword ). The Bible has several examples of what can be interpreted as high technology ( compared to that of the day ). If you can post more examples please do! I added another at the bottom of this post. As for the issue of the sin in Garden of Eden; rationally it makes no sense for God to have punished Adam & Eve because they could not have known that what they were doing was wrong. If you recall, the fruit of which they ate was of the tree of knowledge ( in particular good vs evil ). It was only after they had eaten the fruit that their "eyes were opened" and they knew they had done something wrong. So according to the Bible itself, before that, they had no way of comprehending that what they were doing was anything wrong. The only way we can take this story is that God intentionally set them ( Adam & Eve ) up to fail. And we know that is unfair. In fact we have laws against employers doing that in the workplace. This indicates something even more devious than the serpent ( who actually didn't lie ). Their eyes were opened and they didn't die when they touched the fruit or ate it and wouldn't have ... It was actually God who lied and only his uncharitable and unforgiving actions that led to their eventual deaths through the long slow and torturous process of aging ( IMO a cruel and unusual punishment ).

The created can't understand the creator totally. If it could the creator would no longer be the creator. For a person who might live to be 80 to be so naive as to think they can control their destiny on their own strength is ludicrous IMHO. It is said that knowledge is power but the wrong knowledge at the wrong time could cause us more harm than good.We have limited control of our outcomes . We hold the key to our ultimate destiny determined by how we deal with our creator. He has given us His own Son, what will you do with that knowledge? If the God that you think is so evil got rid of the OT sacrifice and replaced it with the only sacrifice of His Son. If He offered this to every man who accepts it how is it that you think He is so evil?

Do we ever understand anything "totally". No. But we can understand many things sufficiently enough to make rational and fair decisions on what constitutes a fair and ethical being ( God or otherwise ). If you believe nothing else in support of this statement then believe that it says so in the Bible ( returning to the eating of the fruit from the tree of knowledge ) "

"And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat. And the eyes of them both were opened ..."​

​

"And Jehovah God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever ... "​

​

The fact is, God himself says we know the difference between good and evil as well as "they" [Gods] ( yes plural ... interesting isn't it? ) do. So any claim that we can't judge God based on his own rules is contradicted by the Bible. So we certainly can, and should. After all, if it's good enough for God it would be hypocritical to say it's not good enough for us.

• Regarding destiny, I don't see how we hold any "key" to destiny. Destiny by definition is predetermined. All we can do is experience it.
• Regarding God sacrificing his son for his cause, nobody in their right mind would do something so unethical, and even if the story could in some way be morally justified, the game was rigged because God just resurrected him and floated him up into the sky.
• How is God ( as depicted in the Bible ) so evil?: Lies, deception, genocide, murdering children, destruction of property ... how many more examples do you want?

The bible is a very interesting combination of myths, history, storytelling and there are certainly some good lessons to be taken away from it as well. However the Bible really gets interesting when you begin to recognize it as something other than only the indisputable truth based on the word of an all knowing and loving God.Here is another segment that describes what could be interpreted today as some kind of technology way ahead of it's time ... a submarine ( or USO ).

Leviathan ( usually interpreted as a sea monster or crocodile, Leviathan is more like a submarine than an animal )​

• Who can open the doors of his face?
• His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.
• One is so near to another ( scales ), that no air can come between them. They are joined one to another, they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.
• By his neesings a light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning.
• Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.
• Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.
• His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.
• The flakes of his flesh are joined together: they are firm in themselves; they cannot be moved.
• His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.
• The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon.
• He esteemeth iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood.
• The arrow cannot make him flee: slingstones are turned with him into stubble.
• Darts are counted as stubble: he laugheth at the shaking of a spear.
• Sharp stones are under him: he spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire.
• He maketh the deep to boil like a pot: he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment.
• He maketh a path to shine after him; one would think the deep to be hoary.

 

[Ancientsaturn]

... ( PTB are generally construed as governmental agencies ). We have determined with reasonable certainty that the PTB have historically known things that the general public does not.

This statement is interesting to me. What have you "determined with reasonable certainty"? I do not believe governments know anything more than citizens when it comes to this topic. If the government had any inkling there was an advanced aircraft all the major political powers would be pumping huge dollars into finding one. If you look at the aircraft history, including stealth technology, there is very linear development. There is nothing of a leap in technology (which would take place if there was the discovery of advanced technology).

If there was a legitimate sighting of an advanced aircraft, there would be a torrent of funding to find it. And when there is big money involved, there would be evidence of the activity. I know something about government facilities around the globe that routinely have been said on the internet to be related to UFOs and other phenomena. I have not seen any evidence of it.

The PTB have ordinary citizens working inside them. The citizens sign agreements for protecting state secrets, and while most would never risk prosecution, there is also no way a major event regarding alien life would be kept secret. If nothing else, events would be leaked to the media with sources protected. This has recently been happening from the highest levels of the US government on much more mundane topics.

 

[trainedobserver]

...
Trainedobserver, If you taught sunday school then you will guess why I said I am not religious.
...

No guesswork necessary. You are in denial for one thing, and you have also fallen victim to the practice I described earlier for another. This is where the meanings of words are altered in order to accept a logical inconsistency or contradiction. Such as your unwillingness and perhaps inability due to your brainwashed state, to recognize that you are indeed very religious. In fact, you are a worship leader. You prattle on as though this were all about Christianity when it is actually supernatural and paranormal claims. You want the god of the Bible to get special treatment. That is a logical fallacy called special pleading. The god of the Bible is in the same category as ghosts, werewolf's, Bigfoot, and aliens. To think otherwise requires something other than starting from the preconceived notion that gods exist and that the Bible is the word of the one true god.