Political Crossfire Forums

[Nathyn]

A few points to make:
Magic is acknowledged to work at several points in the Bible. The Pharaoh's magicians did some of Moses' signs (Exodus 7). And in the New Testament, Simon Magus practiced magic (Acts 8:11). But not a single supernatural ability, including magic, has ever been proven by science. If such abilities were possible, they would have been discovered.

The construction of Noah's Ark and the Flood of Noah were both impossible. TalkOrigins has an excellent faq on the matter that goes into far more detail than I'll put here.

The Tower of Babel, if as described, would have been impossible for the people of that time to build. The first skyscraper was built in 1885 and there is no way that prehistoric human beings had the technology to create a structure which stretched out into the sky.

There are numerous giants mentioned in the Bible. There are the Nephilim (Genesis 6:1-4), who, similarly to Greek and Roman mythology, copulated with humans and created superhuman beings. The Nephilim were also the forefathers of the Anakites, also giants (Numbers 13:32-33). The Rephaim are another race of giants, who were said to be as tall as the Anakites (Deuteronomy 2:10-11). The Rephaite, Og, King of Bashan, slept on a bed of iron that was 13-feet-long. And there is Goliath, who was 9-feet-tall and had a spear which was roughly the size of a tree trunk (2 Samuel 21:19, 1 Samuel 17:4). Here's an interesting article on giants in the Bible. One could explain some of these cases as being simply the medical condition, Pituitary gigantism, such as the modern day wrestler, "Andre the Giant." Pituitary gigantism is a condition where the person's pituitary gland keeps producing human growth hormone beyond normally, but this also creates problems with the cardiovascular system, leading to heart failure at an early age (Andre died of heart failure in his mid-40's). There are other conditions which may lead to extreme tallness, but not as much as Pituitary Gigantism. Even so, the odds that such giants existed is unlikely. Andre the Giant was only 6'10". The world's tallest man was recorded to be 7'4". So, a 9-foot-tall Goliath is highly unlikely. A 13-foot-tall Og is virtually impossible. Furthermore, it must be noted that Og could not have slept on a "bed of iron," for obvious reasons that any chiropractor could tell you. Being very tall has no basis on the proper support the spine needs when sleeping. Furthermore, being that single cases of gigantism are extremely rare, an entire race of giants, the Nephilim, Anakites, etc, is again virtually impossible and if they existed, there should be a fossil record.

There are numerous mythological creatures mentioned in the Bible. In the beginning, it is said that God created great sea monsters (Genesis 1:21), although "sea monsters," in Genesis is often translated as something else, such as "great whales," and so on. But there are clear references to such monsters throughout the Bible. There is Leviathan, a giant sea monster (Job 3:8, Job 41:1, Psalms 74:14, Psalms 104:26, Isaiah 27:1). Leviathan was also capable of breathing fire (Job 41:18-21). There is Rahab, another giant sea monster (Isaiah 51:9), often viewed by Christians as simply Leviathan, although it's a different word. There is Behemoth, which was said to be a massive leaf-eating monster (Job 40:15-19). In Islam, Behemoth is "Bahamut," a dragon. The word, "Tannin," is also used frequently to denote dragons, serpents, and all kinds of reptiles. Some versions of the Bible, such as the King James Version, have added mythical creatures to the Bible, such as the cockatrice and the basilisk. While the popular New International Version and many, many, many other modern translations dubiously translate "Leviathan," as "crocodile." To my knowledge, crocodiles do not breathe fire.

[socalmasta666]

ya it just shows that teh bible is fake

[wormwood]

Quote: Magic is acknowledged to work at several points in the Bible. The Pharaoh's magicians did some of Moses' signs (Exodus 7). And in the New Testament, Simon Magus practiced magic (Acts 8:11). But not a single supernatural ability, including magic, has ever been proven by science. If such abilities were possible, they would have been discovered You are completely right...up until the end that is. By your reasoning, bacteria did not exist before there was instrumentation to examine it. Just because science has not confirmed something true, doesn't make it false by default.

Quote: The construction of Noah's Ark and the Flood of Noah were both impossible. TalkOrigins has an excellent faq on the matter that goes into far more detail than I'll put here. Improbable perhaps, but nothing is impossible :wink:

Quote: The Tower of Babel, if as described, would have been impossible for the people of that time to build. The first skyscraper was built in 1885 and there is no way that prehistoric human beings had the technology to create a structure which stretched out into the sky. First, who says your definition of "into the sky" is the same as the ancients? Secondly, this was during the period when the "gods" ruled the earth and routinely gave people knowledge they should not possess. And Finally, have you seen approximations of the ziggaraut?

Quote: There are numerous giants mentioned in the Bible. There are the Nephilim (Genesis 6:1-4), who, similarly to Greek and Roman mythology, copulated with humans and created superhuman beings.

Quote: ... is again virtually impossible and if they existed, there should be a fossil record.

This is my favorite part of the stories. I have no idea how much interest you have in the subject, but there are quite a few writings about these beings...
As for the fossil records, I could ask, "where is the missing link?", but I will take the high road :lol: Perhaps they never died, or maybe most were killed during the deluge and were eaten by fish and buried on the ocean floor. There is a province in China where (two?) seven foot tall mummies (with blond hair) were discovered in a cave...maybe that is a good place to start looking 8:)

Quote: There are numerous mythological creatures mentioned in the Bible. In the beginning, it is said that God created great sea monsters (Genesis 1:21), Leviathan is an interesting concept. On one hand it reminds me of Tiamat, and it certain aspects it is uniquely Jewish. I am currently at a loss for a name, but one prophet from the Torah warns that there will be woe for the generation who lives to see when someone can summon leviathan (again?). So, is it an esoteric concept, or is/was it an actual beast? My instinct tells me it is the former, but at this point I can't completely rule out the latter :lol: .

[mattwa33193]

Alternate theory for the "Tower of Babel" is that it is a mis-translation. What we believe was a tower was actually a (relatively) low building that was used as an astronomical observatory, much like Stonehenge is believed to have been used.

Credit - Neal Stephenson :)

[Nathyn]

wormwood wrote: Quote: Magic is acknowledged to work at several points in the Bible. The Pharaoh's magicians did some of Moses' signs (Exodus 7). And in the New Testament, Simon Magus practiced magic (Acts 8:11). But not a single supernatural ability, including magic, has ever been proven by science. If such abilities were possible, they would have been discovered You are completely right...up until the end that is. By your reasoning, bacteria did not exist before there was instrumentation to examine it. Just because science has not confirmed something true, doesn't make it false by default.
No, my point is that something so powerful that was discovered so early in our history and by so many different groups all across the globe surely would have been discovered by science now. Admitetdly, it's impossible to quantify the probability, but do you expect me to believe that they would discover quantum physics before magic?

wormwood wrote: Quote: The construction of Noah's Ark and the Flood of Noah were both impossible. TalkOrigins has an excellent faq on the matter that goes into far more detail than I'll put here. Improbable perhaps, but nothing is impossible :wink:
No, impossible. He would've needed MAGIC to make it work. :lol:

wormwood wrote: Quote: The Tower of Babel, if as described, would have been impossible for the people of that time to build. The first skyscraper was built in 1885 and there is no way that prehistoric human beings had the technology to create a structure which stretched out into the sky. First, who says your definition of "into the sky" is the same as the ancients? Secondly, this was during the period when the "gods" ruled the earth and routinely gave people knowledge they should not possess. And Finally, have you seen approximations of the ziggaraut?
The word they used, specifically, was "the heavens." In the Bible, there's usually fairly little distinction between the sky, space, and heaven. The people thought, that by building a tall enough structure, they could essentially build a stairway to heaven. So, obviously, such a structure couldn't just stretch out into the sky, but actually near or even into space, which is far larger than the Ziggurat. It also supposedly contained the population of the entire Earth. However, need I remind that according to the same date, there were other civilizations around in other places. Civilizations in China date as far back as 16th century B.C.E.. So, the claim that everyone lived there is false. And need I remind you that Young-Earth Creationism itself is disproven by numerous means of science, including:
1) Carbon-dating.
2) Measuring the depth of sediments in rock, which are buried at a set rate.
3) Cosmology, using redshift to date the age of the Earth and the universe itself.
4) Dates gained through archaeological means.

All four of these methods are verified against one another. In fact, verifying that there were discrepencies was precisely how carbon-dating today is calibrated to give calendar dates -- contrary to the claim of Creationists' that the amount of carbon in the atmosphere is unknown.

wormwood wrote: Quote: There are numerous giants mentioned in the Bible. There are the Nephilim (Genesis 6:1-4), who, similarly to Greek and Roman mythology, copulated with humans and created superhuman beings.

Quote: ... is again virtually impossible and if they existed, there should be a fossil record.
This is my favorite part of the stories. I have no idea how much interest you have in the subject, but there are quite a few writings about these beings...
As for the fossil records, I could ask, "where is the missing link?", but I will take the high road :lol: Perhaps they never died, or maybe most were killed during the deluge and were eaten by fish and buried on the ocean floor. There is a province in China where (two?) seven foot tall mummies (with blond hair) were discovered in a cave...maybe that is a good place to start looking 8:)
The claim that there is a "transitional form" or "missing link," is a myth about evolution propagated by Creationists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_link#Misconceptions

I question how they could have "never died," and it seems as though you're just pulling out magical theories out of thin air to correct the Bible's contradictions. I concede that there's a chance that such fossils could exist, but we just haven't found them yet. But we cannot claim that such a thing exists until there is evidence for it. Furthermore, the entire Bible happens throughout the Middle East, making no mention of outside cultures, thus the claim that they are in China is dubious.

wormwood wrote: Quote: There are numerous mythological creatures mentioned in the Bible. In the beginning, it is said that God created great sea monsters (Genesis 1:21), Leviathan is an interesting concept. On one hand it reminds me of Tiamat, and it certain aspects it is uniquely Jewish. I am currently at a loss for a name, but one prophet from the Torah warns that there will be woe for the generation who lives to see when someone can summon leviathan (again?). So, is it an esoteric concept, or is/was it an actual beast? My instinct tells me it is the former, but at this point I can't completely rule out the latter :lol: .
It's disputed. Some Jews and Christians say it's allegorical, others say it's literal.

[Clara Listensprechen]

The tale of Noah and the Deluge is a roughly plagiarized version of the Epic of Gilgamesh, which itself isn't original. The tale was altered for the purpose of supporting the religion of which it was part.

[thefranzkafkafront]

socalmasta666 wrote: ya it just shows that teh bible is fake

Thats what I thought till I bothered to sit down and read bits of it.

The bible is not 'fake', its a work of theology based on the oral traditions of ancient people. Its no suprise that mysticism exists in parts.

[Clara Listensprechen]

Its claims of its characterization of a single living God are fake, ergo much of what else it claims is fake.

[Enoch]

Nathyn wrote: wormwood wrote: Quote: Magic is acknowledged to work at several points in the Bible. The Pharaoh's magicians did some of Moses' signs (Exodus 7). And in the New Testament, Simon Magus practiced magic (Acts 8:11). But not a single supernatural ability, including magic, has ever been proven by science. If such abilities were possible, they would have been discovered You are completely right...up until the end that is. By your reasoning, bacteria did not exist before there was instrumentation to examine it. Just because science has not confirmed something true, doesn't make it false by default.
No, my point is that something so powerful that was discovered so early in our history and by so many different groups all across the globe surely would have been discovered by science now. Admitetdly, it's impossible to quantify the probability, but do you expect me to believe that they would discover quantum physics before magic?
Coming purely from my religious perspectives, I don't see your point as being valid. Magick takes belief. If you don't believe in the power of your own magickal ability or the spells you are casting, they won't come to fruition. I would argue that society's increasing reliance on science as an answer to all the world's questions has caused a detrimental effect in the realm of belief in magick. Given that there are FAR less people who truly believe in magick than there were during biblical times, it is quite possible that magick just isn't being utilized nearly to the extent it used to be. Less use means less chance for "scientific proof" to be brought forth.

But, just because it isn't widely used doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[Clara Listensprechen]

Quote: I don't your point as being valid.

:D
I don't about that.

The trick in magic is knowing the technology of it. Try reading Mark Twain's "Connecticut Yankee In King Arthur's Court" as a primer.

[thefranzkafkafront]

Clara Listensprechen wrote: Its claims of its characterization of a single living God are fake, ergo much of what else it claims is fake.

You cannot damn or comfirm anything in the bible by a few real events, or a few impossible events.

Its a mistake made in both camps.

[Clara Listensprechen]

For starters, I can confirm that The Bible claims that God made bugs with 4 legs and I can confirm that this world doesn't have a single bug which has 4 legs. I got news for you--bats aren't birds, either, and snails don't melt. The Bible says they are, and they do. If that is a mistake, then God makes mistakes.

Some God.

[mattwa33193]

Clara Listensprechen wrote: For starters, I can confirm that The Bible claims that God made bugs with 4 legs and I can confirm that this world doesn't have a single bug which has 4 legs. I got news for you--bats aren't birds, either, and snails don't melt. The Bible says they are, and they do. If that is a mistake, then God makes mistakes.

Some God.

Slugs melt, if you pour salt on them.

[Duchifas]

Clara Listensprechen wrote: For starters, I can confirm that The Bible claims that God made bugs with 4 legs and I can confirm that this world doesn't have a single bug which has 4 legs. I got news for you--bats aren't birds, either, and snails don't melt. The Bible says they are, and they do. If that is a mistake, then God makes mistakes.

Some God.

I think for starters we should all be a little less arrogant than we are. Scientists currently estimate that we know abotu 1.7 million species, and they estimate that there are between 10 and 30 million species on earth. To me that means that AT BEST we know of about 17% of species on our planet, so far.

So I think we are a little bit premature with "confirmations" of what species exist and what species don't exist, wouldn't you think, Clara?

Quote: Science intends to tag all life
By Jonathan Amos
BBC News science reporter

Scientists are to establish a giant catalogue of life - to, in effect, "barcode" every species on Earth, from tiny plankton to the mighty blue whale.

Initial projects will focus on birds and fish, recording details in their genetic make-up that can be used to tell one life form from another.

The initiative was launched in London at the International Conference for the Barcoding of Life.

Researchers concede it will take many years to complete the task.

"About 1.7 million species are known - we suspect there are anything from 10-30 million species on Earth," explained Dr Richard Lane, director of science at London's Natural History Museum.

"We have discovered that it is quite possible to have a short DNA sequence that can characterise just about every form of life on the planet."

Opening up

At the cost of about £1 ($1.80) per genetic test, many specimens for each species will now be analysed to obtain their barcode information.

This data will then be put into a giant database which the Consortium for the Barcode of Life (CBOL) hopes can be used to link off to all the knowledge acquired by science on particular organisms.

"It's like a policeman who sees a car breaking the law and all he's got is the licence plate number - but with that number he's got the owner and when the car was bought," Professor Dan Janzen, from the University of Pennsylvania, US, said.

"And that's what a barcode is - it's that thing that links you to the body of information the taxonomists, the natural historians and ecologists have been accumulating for 200 years."

The consortium pulls together a range of world museums, zoos, research organisations and companies concerned with taxonomy and biodiversity.

DNA barcodes should make species recognition in the field much easier, especially where traditional methods are not practical. In addition, species identification should become more reliable, particularly for non experts.

Just knowing every species on Earth would help answer some fundamental questions in ecology and evolution. And with this information we would get very much better polices to manage and conserve the world around us.

Short code

Dr Scott Miller, the chairman of the CBOL, added: "DNA barcoding will make a huge difference to our knowledge and understanding of the natural world.

"The Barcode of Life initiative aims to complement existing taxonomic practice to build on it and expand its power and use."

The segment of DNA to be used in the project is found in a gene known as cytochrome c oxidase I, or COI.

This is involved in the metabolism of all creatures but is coded slightly differently in each one of them.

In humans, for example, COI barcodes differ from one another by only one or two DNA "letters" out of 648; while we differ from chimpanzees at about 60 locations, and in gorillas by about 70.

Wednesday saw the announcement at the London conference of a project to get comprehensive barcode data on all known fish types - currently thought to number 15,000 marine and 8,000 freshwater species.

The bird project will list the world's 10,000 known avian species.

A third project will genetically label the 8,000 kinds of plants in Costa Rica, Central America.

Some doubts

It has to be said that not all of the science community shares the unrestrained enthusiasm of the barcoders.

Some researchers are concerned that taxonomic skills that have traditionally been used to catalogue individual species may suffer - fewer and fewer students now take up the discipline, especially in Western universities.

Doubt has also been expressed that the COI approach will prove as reliable in distinguishing species as is claimed.

This view is shared by butterfly expert James Mallet, from University College London. Although he supports the project, Professor Mallet thinks it may struggle in several settings, such as when a new or hybrid species has just emerged in a population.

"I just wish it hadn't been called barcoding because this should mean things are identical - for any retail product that's how you recognise them," he said.

"This is not true of mitochondrial DNA and in an evolutionary setting where species grade into other species, this is a lot more tricky.

"Closely related species are going to give you more difficulty and the more data you have, including DNA data - and DNA data is very powerful - the better."

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/sci/tech/4251309.stm

[Clara Listensprechen]

That's not melting. Nice try, but no kewpie doll for you.

[mattwa33193]

Clara Listensprechen wrote: That's not melting. Nice try, but no kewpie doll for you.

Witches?

[Clara Listensprechen]

Duchifas wrote: Clara Listensprechen wrote: For starters, I can confirm that The Bible claims that God made bugs with 4 legs and I can confirm that this world doesn't have a single bug which has 4 legs. I got news for you--bats aren't birds, either, and snails don't melt. The Bible says they are, and they do. If that is a mistake, then God makes mistakes.

Some God.

I think for starters we should all be a little less arrogant than we are.

Since you don't speak for anyone but yourself, I agree concerning your plural personalities. Chuck the arrogance then get back to me.

[Clara Listensprechen]

mattwa33193 wrote: Clara Listensprechen wrote: That's not melting. Nice try, but no kewpie doll for you.

Witches? Which witches?
That might have happened in a movie, once...

[Duchifas]

Clara Listensprechen wrote: Duchifas wrote: Clara Listensprechen wrote: For starters, I can confirm that The Bible claims that God made bugs with 4 legs and I can confirm that this world doesn't have a single bug which has 4 legs. I got news for you--bats aren't birds, either, and snails don't melt. The Bible says they are, and they do. If that is a mistake, then God makes mistakes.

Some God.

I think for starters we should all be a little less arrogant than we are.

Since you don't speak for anyone but yourself, I agree concerning your plural personalities. Chuck the arrogance then get back to me.

Well, I was actually referring to you.

Considering that AT BEST, scientists have discovered 17% of species on our planet, don't you think it was a little arrogant of you to confirm that the world doesn't have a certain type of species?

I'd say that was pretty arrogant of you. Now its your turn to chuck, Miss.

[Enoch]

Clara Listensprechen wrote: Quote: I don't your point as being valid.

:D
I don't about that.

The trick in magic is knowing the technology of it. Try reading Mark Twain's "Connecticut Yankee In King Arthur's Court" as a primer. The works of Mark Twain, while literary classics, are hardly primers on magick.