Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[gnostic]

Antiquity is before the Middle Ages, which began with the time of Rome's fall in 476 CE to the Ostrogoth king Odoacer - sometimes called the start of the Dark Ages.

But this is mostly for Western Europe, because the Eastern Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire didn't go through the Dark Ages.

 

[JM2C]

Bloody fricking hell.

Man, you really don't unsderstand similes, do you?

When wrote some like "Samson is strong like a bear", I am comparing Samson to a bear, because of strength, but Samson himself is not a bear. I was hoping that you would understand better what a simile is, when I making a comparison between bear and Samson, but they are not one and the same.


Bolt is not the wind, but he run fast like the wind.


I gave you two examples and all you do, is argue with me over trivas or over-complicate whatever you read, and failing to understand what I am talking about, which make you look like a fool.

I shouldn't waste any more time on fools who don't want to learn from their mistakes.

This is what I said: “As” [or if you like the other word “LIKE”] a bear in not actually a bear. And you said, “Samson himself is not a bear”. Should I put the word “Samson” in front of “AS” so you could understand it better?

Like [or IF YOU LIKE THE OTHER WORD “AS”] the wind is not actually the wind.

THIS IS WHAT YOU SAID: “Bolt is not the wind, but he run fast like the wind.” Should I put the word “Bolt” in front of “LIKE” so you could understand it better?

The other way to win a debate it to use intimidating words like “fool” and “stupid” and “idiot” and so on, but the things is, remotely intimidating an opponent for me is a sign of defeat and the other one is, I cannot degrade myself to the same level where you are right now.

 

[Revoltingest]

Or you don’t know what you’re saying here

No, he's spot on.
Entropy is a measure of reaching equilibrium, ie, the lack of potential energy available to do work (aka "availability" in engineerspeak).
"Order" in thermodynamics is not measured by number of parts, but rather by the possible number of their states.
A rock in a valley would indicate more entropy than the same rock sitting on a hill.

 

[JM2C]

Again, you are fool, failing to understand what I am saying. You are deliberately misreading what I wrote.

I just saying that just because our family name are similar to Zhou, doesn't make me or my ancestors come from royal line.

There are many women whose name are Elizabeth, doesn't mean they are all the queen of England. There are many women named Mary, but just because they have the same name, doesn't mean they are all the Virgin Mary.

Are you getting my points, now? Are you done with making wrong assumptions on what you read or hear?

Seriously, you have a tendency to jump to conclusions, making me to explain or clarify what I have written every single bloody times. You level of comprehension is seriously deficient.

Oh yeah! That’s right; I forgot you’re just making a rhetorical speech, i.e., saying something the opposite of what your ego really wanted to say just like this one here,

I have qualifications in civil engineering and computer science, so my scientific background, based on practical science, hence the Bachelor of Applied Science. And even though I find theoretical physics very exciting, it is not fields of expertise, so I tends to learn more on experimental science, in which empirical evidences to go with any idea, view, hypothesis or theory.

 

[JM2C]

No, he's spot on.

Entropy is a measure of reaching equilibrium, ie, the lack of potential energy available to do work (aka "availability" in engineerspeak).

"Order" in thermodynamics is not measured by number of parts, but rather by the possible number of their states.

A rock in a valley would indicate more entropy than the same rock sitting on a hill.

That's not necessarily true. Entropy can also be view as a reduction of available potential energy to do work.
A rock sitting on a cliff has more gravitational potential energy than the same rock would have if it was sitting in the valley below. However, both situations are equally complex (since they have the same number and kinds of parts).

Why do you think he made this comparison?

 

[Revoltingest]

Why do you think he made this comparison?

The potential energy of a rock in different locations illustrates the concept of availability & entropy.
(The comparison could've benefited from elaboration.)

 

[Parsimony]

Does this not imply potential energy into kinetic energy?

Yes. So what?

Or you don’t know what you’re saying here

Revoltingest explained it further.

 

[Shad]

Of course you would say that and I’m not really surprise at all.

It is surprising that the majority of historians and biblical scholars state this?

Did you that in the four gospels the Lord Jesus traveled from Capernaun to Gennesaret to Tyre and Sidon back to Gennesaret then to Bethsaida to Caesarea Philippi and went to Jerusalem then back to Galilee so many times by foot and so did Paul who traveled farther up to Macedonia. You think traveling long distance in that era is impossible, but realistically, that’s the only way most people traveled is that time frame unless of course they have wagons and donkeys.

I never said traveling a long distance was impossible, strawman. I said the Roman system of taxation and population census were based on property and wealth for a community. Forcing people to move to a place where they have no property and possible no wealth is nonsensical. We also have records of the Roman tax system which never required what the bible claims. Thus the bible is in error.

No proof otherwise you would have posted it already.

A quick google would prove my point but either you are inept or do not want to challenge your bias.

Imperium Romanum: Politics and Adminstration, Andrew Lintott, chapter 5.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

The stars are dying by using up their energies [2nd LoT] and at the same time some are being form but not as much as those that are dying. The energy that the stars produced are the one that is causing entropy as they heat up the universe to avoid equilibrium. Imagine if all the stars, including our sun, used up their energies, the universe, and that’s us too, will freeze to death, but before all this happen our sun will peak its energy and burn the earth to death.
2Pe 3:10 "But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up."
So, the sun is the same thing as the stars. It uses its energy every minute non-stop to give life here on earth, to increase entropy, and like the stars, someday the sun will peak its energy and this is what we witnessed, the solar storm.
According to NASA the sun in not a perfect sphere and gravity or space is pushing the explosion back to the sun, but effect of this explosion can generate solar wind or solar storm that can reach the earth’s magnetic field that can cause chaos here on earth and that is just the beginning of earth's destruction.

First, please remember Peter knew nothing of the elements as the Periodic table as we do today.
The elements or elementary things especially in Satan's system - 2nd Cor. 4:4 - shows Satan's system will be exposed for what it is in totally lacking the fire-resistant qualities of goodness. Elementary as in fundamental as elementary education.
Malachi 4:10 mentions all those doing wickedness must become as stubble ( destroyed - Psalm 92:7 )
Who (Not what ) perishes ( will be destroyed ) according to 2nd Peter 3:9 ?__________________

Peter was Not speaking of literal heavens being destroyed and earth, but annihilate wicked ones out of earth - Isaiah 13:9
God's Day of Salvation ( Jesus' millennium-long judgment day ) will be a Day of Salvation.- Ezekiel 9:4
Who inherits the earth forever according to Psalm 37 vs 11,29 ?__________________

What does Ecclesiastes 1:4 B say about our earth ?________________________________
What does 1st Chronicles 16:30 say ?
What does Psalm 96:10 say ?
What does Psalm 78:69 say ?
What does Psalm 104:5 say ?
Who gets consumed out of the earth according to Psalm 104:35, and who remains - Proverbs 2:21,22 ?

Mountains and heavens are also mentioned in Scripture as pictorial of rulership over mankind.
That is what will end. Earth will never end but wicked society days are numbered.
God brings to ruin (Not earth ) but those bringing ruining to earth ( Literal and moral ) - Revelation 11:18 B
The righteous people alive on earth at the soon coming time of Revelation 7:14 will survive on earth.
At the end of Jesus' 1000-year governmental rulership over earth, the living will gain ' everlasting life ' forever on a paradisaical earth.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

It is surprising that the majority of historians and biblical scholars state this?
I never said traveling a long distance was impossible, strawman. I said the Roman system of taxation and population census were based on property and wealth for a community. Forcing people to move to a place where they have no property and possible no wealth is nonsensical. We also have records of the Roman tax system which never required what the bible claims. Thus the bible is in error.
A quick google would prove my point but either you are inept or do not want to challenge your bias.
Imperium Romanum: Politics and Adminstration, Andrew Lintott, chapter 5.

Please Shad keep in mind the original Bible manuscripts were Not written in English but Hebrew and Greek.
In the Greek language at Luke 2:1,2 the words used in Greek is NOT tax or taxes but rather registered and registration.
KJV Bibles that translated some words into English that we now know by examining the Hebrew and Greek have a refined meaning.
So, a registration or registration census does Not necessarily mean property wealth.

 

[outhouse]

Please Shad keep in mind the original Bible manuscripts were Not written in English but Hebrew and Greek.

Not in the NT

All were originally Koine Greek, not Hebrew.

OT was Hebrew and later Koine

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Not in the NT
All were originally Koine Greek, not Hebrew.
OT was Hebrew and later Koine

Yes, didn't Matthew write his gospel account in Hebrew then in the common Greek ?
Later the Greek Scriptures were also translated into Latin. From the Latin then into English.
Weren't some of the Christian Greek Scriptures also in the Aramaic ?

 

[gnostic]

Oh yeah! That’s right; I forgot you’re just making a rhetorical speech, i.e., saying something the opposite of what your ego really wanted to say just like this one here,

I have not once did our family genealogy, nor did I ever touch genealogy of the Zhou dynasty. I have no desire to look it up.

So I find you baiting me about this, arrogant and childish.

My whole point about genealogy, is that relying on ancient genealogies as sources for historicity are not reliable, and the genealogies of Jesus found in two different gospels, prove that names and generations are inconsistent and conflicting between David and Joseph (husband of Mary).

Both trees are linked to Joseph, and yet he has two different fathers, grandfathers, all the way back to David. Both genealogies can't be right, and since their are no other sources to Joseph's ancestry, we have no way to confirm which genealogy is right, because they certainly can't be both right.

There are 39 names in the gospel of Luke, between David and Joseph (starting from Nathan to Heli), while the gospel of Matthew have only 25 names (starting from Solomon to Jacob). That's a difference of 14 generations between 2 gospels.

Matthew followed the royal line of Solomon, so we can compare actually compare the OT genealogy and Matthew's genealogy. But even here we find inconsistencies, because the OT genealogy (from Solomon) to before the fall of Jerusalem have 4 generations more than Matthew's version: Ahaziah, Jehoash, Amaziah, and Jehoiakim. (2 Kings)

Why did Matthew omit 4 names from genealogy?

Either one of them (gospels) are made up, or both of them were inventions, to link Jesus to David.

Christians prided their bible as being historically accurate, and yet we have Matthew omitting 4 generations out of known dynasty. There shouldn't be missing names

I will be very interested in what sort of apologetic excuses you will give me about the 4 missing generations in Matthew's genealogy. And why Luke and Matthew would list 2 different fathers to Joseph?

 

[gnostic]

Yes, didn't Matthew write his gospel account in Hebrew then in the common Greek ?
Later the Greek Scriptures were also translated into Latin. From the Latin then into English.
Weren't some of the Christian Greek Scriptures also in the Aramaic ?

No everything in the NT were written in Koine Greek.

There were no Hebrew or Aramaic originals. Even when Paul wrote letter to the Romans, were written in Greek, not Latin.

 

[gnostic]

This is what I said: “As” [or if you like the other word “LIKE”] a bear in not actually a bear. And you said, “Samson himself is not a bear”. Should I put the word “Samson” in front of “AS” so you could understand it better?

Like [or IF YOU LIKE THE OTHER WORD “AS”] the wind is not actually the wind.

THIS IS WHAT YOU SAID: “Bolt is not the wind, but he run fast like the wind.” Should I put the word “Bolt” in front of “LIKE” so you could understand it better?

The other way to win a debate it to use intimidating words like “fool” and “stupid” and “idiot” and so on, but the things is, remotely intimidating an opponent for me is a sign of defeat and the other one is, I cannot degrade myself to the same level where you are right now.

They are similes, figure of speech, not meant to be taken literally. That's my point.

You are being a fool.

Job 40:17 only state the movement or stiffness of the tail of the behemoth like that of cedar. No where does that sentence mentioned the height or size of cedar, hence you have changed the meaning of the sentence to suit your claim. This denial of yours only prove that dishonesty is in your nature as much your ignorance in reading verses.

I am not going to clarify what I have posted again, since you have no comprehension what I have written about how similes to be used.

I provided two simple examples, and you just want to over complicated the contexts of the similes, simply because you are too arrogant to learn from others.

Fine, you don't want to learn, then I will let you stewed in your own ignorance.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

No everything in the NT were written in Koine Greek.
There were no Hebrew or Aramaic originals. Even when Paul wrote letter to the Romans, were written in Greek, not Latin.

Right, Not Paul, but much later translations were done from the Latin into English.

Jerome wrote that Matthew first of all composed his gospel in Judaea in the Hebrew language for the benefit of the Jews.

Origen quoted Eusebius saying Matthew at first was written for those from Judaism, composed in the Hebrew language.
Meaning that Matthew wrote first to a Jewish audience so they could benefit from his gospel account.
Matthew directs the Jew's attention to Jesus' as heir and legal descent starting with father Abraham.
Then, Matthew wrote his account in the common Greek of his day.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

I will be very interested in what sort of apologetic excuses you will give me about the 4 missing generations in Matthew's genealogy. And why Luke and Matthew would list 2 different fathers to Joseph?

Did your forget that in the Jewish temple records that ' son's in law ' were listed as ' sons' ?
Mary's father was Heli, and Joseph would have been considered as son although son-in-law.
Matthew traces through Jesus' paternal line, whereas Luke traces through Jesus' maternal line.
Any comments about Ezra's Jewish ancestral list between chapters 1 to 9 of 1st Chronicles ?

 

[outhouse]

Yes, didn't Matthew write his gospel account in Hebrew then in the common Greek ?

Nope.

Matthew was not the author. And that communities work was all Koine in origin as there are no Hebrew transliterations. It was written in the Diaspora probably.

Weren't some of the Christian Greek Scriptures also in the Aramaic ?

None originated in Aramaic, those are all much later copies of Koine.

 

[outhouse]

Later the Greek Scriptures were also translated into Latin. From the Latin then into English.

Yes long after.

 

[outhouse]

Jerome wrote that Matthew first of all composed his gospel in Judaea in the Hebrew language for the benefit of the Jews.

Origen quoted Eusebius saying

All far removed from the origin.

So far away they had no idea when or where they originated or by who.