• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Beginnings

exchemist

Veteran Member
So who created the ball of dense matter?
If you believe in a creator God, then ultimately God, obviously, though the mechanisms involved can be the subject of metaphysical speculation by scientists. Some, for instance, think it possible that matter rest energy and and gravitational energy are in balance and the whole adds up to zero and thus can have emerged from nothing. In that case, the question becomes where do the laws of nature comes from that determined the unfolding of this process? The believer may say that was the real creative act. But nobody knows anything about any of this, so it's just fun for some people to speculate about.
 

TagliatelliMonster

Veteran Member
Read the link. That's why I added it.

Josephus and Tacitus are independent sources. Tacitus is especially relevant as he is negative about Jesus, so it is unlikely that the text from him has been forged, later on, by Christians.

To be fair, none of those sources are contemporary and all that we really can conclude from them concerning this topic is that christians existed and that Romans were aware of who they were, what they believed and how they relate to jews. And they had this information, from what christians (and jews) told them about the religion.

So I disagree that there are independ sources about a historical jesus. When one simply repeats what believers say they believe, you're not exactly giving an independend account...

Having said that, I think it's quite reasonable to believe that christianity is build around a preacher named Jesus / Joshua / whatever that went around and spread his ideas, and even eventually got killed for it. It's not like it would be an unprecedented action by Romans. Nore was it really rare that self-proclaimed messiah's, or people called messiah's by others, were running around in those times. Both in Judea as well as in Rome itself.

So it's not really a stretch to assume that one of them had that name and kickstarted what would later become christianity. Or that there were several who's stories were consolidated in a single character name Jesus.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
To be fair, none of those sources are contemporary and all that we really can conclude from them concerning this topic is that christians existed and that Romans were aware of who they were, what they believed and how they relate to jews. And they had this information, from what christians (and jews) told them about the religion.

So I disagree that there are independ sources about a historical jesus. When one simply repeats what believers say they believe, you're not exactly giving an independend account...

Having said that, I think it's quite reasonable to believe that christianity is build around a preacher named Jesus / Joshua / whatever that went around and spread his ideas, and even eventually got killed for it. It's not like it would be an unprecedented action by Romans. Nore was it really rare that self-proclaimed messiah's, or people called messiah's by others, were running around in those times. Both in Judea as well as in Rome itself.

So it's not really a stretch to assume that one of them had that name and kickstarted what would later become christianity. Or that there were several who's stories were consolidated in a single character name Jesus.
Yes it's possible Tacitus is just repeating what he had heard, from what the Christians said, about Christ.
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I've never studied that.

What does a being do in evolution???
A being doesn't have to do anything but breed to take part in the evolution of his, her, its or their species.

I've hugely enjoyed doing that. (I'm H sap sap, to avoid any confusion. And male.)
 

blü 2

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Is breeding and evolution identical words/meanings?
Not quite.

Breeding is reproducing.

Evolving is reproducing with variations. Variations are very largely, but not exclusively, routine. Having two sexes increases the match and mix of potential variations.

The variations may be nothing new. They may confer neither advantage nor disadvantage to the being's survival and breeding ─ populations tend to be evolutionarily stable when the environment is stable. But should some variation confer an advantage, even a relatively tiny one ─ maybe, for example, the ability to go for longer without water (through body size, more efficient reabsorption before excreting, better regulation of cell-water ratios, hair growth that makes sweating more efficient, whatever), and if there's major climate change, this may determine ─ at least in the wild ─ who lives long enough to breed, who's healthy enough to attract mates. And increase the odds that the offspring will also have this advantage (given that it's still an advantage).

Slightly oversimplifying, surviving long enough to breed is the only test. Every single one of your ancestors across over 3.5 billion years of life evolving on earth passed that test. That's how you ended up as a kind of mammal, a gregarious primate, modern H sap sap, alive in 2020.
 
Last edited:

sayak83

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
from your perspective it is a science book. So what does Jesus supposed to symbolize?
That that which is truly good, even when unjustly maligned and killed and crushed, will be reborn with even greater majesty.
 

MonkeyFire

Well-Known Member
Neither evolution or creation are as natural as a singularity. Creation and evolution are not as important.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
View attachment 41104 For people who believe in God do they also believe in the Big Bang and evolution? if not when do they think the world began?

If you refer to the Judaean Christian God then you don't know.
It just says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."
Doesn't say how, or how long.
The creation account in Genesis 1 is from an observers point of view,
standing upon the earth - and written in symbolic theological language.
But the sequence is quite accurate.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Read the link. That's why I added it.

Josephus and Tacitus are independent sources. Tacitus is especially relevant as he is negative about Jesus, so it is unlikely that the text from him has been forged, later on, by Christians.

What's interesting is the independent confirmation of Jesus by Josephus
by WHAT HE DIDN'T SAY.
Josephus went into extraordinary detail about things like Herod's family.
He utterly ignores Jesus. He writes of John Baptist because John was
the last of the Old Testament prophets, according to Christians.
We take references to Jesus in Josephus as fake.
But to utterly ignore a pivotal moment in Jewish history - is deliberate.
Josephus was ignoring Jesus and his burgeoning church.
Josephus had the world's best platform to discredit Jesus, but he didn't,
or more likely, couldn't.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Yes it's possible Tacitus is just repeating what he had heard, from what the Christians said, about Christ.


Even worse. Tacitus was repeating what other Romans *said* about what the Christians said about Christ. It is pretty doubtful he interviewed any Christians himself.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
What's interesting is the independent confirmation of Jesus by Josephus
by WHAT HE DIDN'T SAY.
Josephus went into extraordinary detail about things like Herod's family.
He utterly ignores Jesus. He writes of John Baptist because John was
the last of the Old Testament prophets, according to Christians.
We take references to Jesus in Josephus as fake.
But to utterly ignore a pivotal moment in Jewish history - is deliberate.
Josephus was ignoring Jesus and his burgeoning church.
Josephus had the world's best platform to discredit Jesus, but he didn't,
or more likely, couldn't.

ALL that Tacitus did is report what some people believed. So, yes, from his account we know that there were people who believed in a 'Christus' that was condemned as a criminal and who they followed.
 

Astrophile

Active Member
Are you aware that the cosmologist who came up with big bang theory, was also a catholic priest?
Well, he was.... The Belgian named George LeMaitre.

Having said that, the majority of christians, including the vatican, has no problems with science at all and thus they accept the findings of science. That goes for big bang theory and evolution as well as all other scientific theories.



By magic.

The first person to obtain an expanding universe solution for Einstein's field equations of general relativity was the Russian cosmologist Alexander Friedmann, in 1922; see Alexander Friedmann - Important Scientists - The Physics of the Universe . According to Alexander Friedmann - Wikipedia , when he married Natalia Malinina in 1923, 'they had a religious wedding ceremony, although both were far from religious' (my italics).
 
Top