Harsh Truth: If Intelligent Design is Untestable . . .

[JM2C]

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.




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

What do YOU mean by "DIASPORA"

 

[JM2C]

The potential energy of a rock in different locations illustrates the concept of availability & entropy.

(The comparison could've benefited from elaboration.)

Can you somehow explain Entropy in layman’s terms or the easiest way to understand it without using physicist’s.

 

[gnostic]

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 ?

Mary was never named as daughter of Heli. It clearly stated that Joseph as the son of Heli.

23 Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli,

There is no mention of Mary in this verse. The only names mentioned are Jesus, Joseph and Heli.

And no Jewish man would have his own name listed on his wife's side, because there were no point in doing so.

The absence of Mary's name is evidence that Luke was listing Heli as Joseph's father, not father-in-law.

Beside that, Mary was mention as being a kinswoman or relative to Elizabeth, so it quite possible that Mary herself was possible a descendant of Aaron, like Elizabeth (1:5), therefore not of house Judah or David.

You are making baseless claim. You are just dishonest Christian, who like to twist meaning of the verse. You are no better than JM2C, sharing a common trait, so you two make great company.

 

[JM2C]

Not in the NT

All were originally Koine Greek, not Hebrew.

OT was Hebrew and later Koine

Isn't that what he said?
"Please Shad keep in mind the original Bible manuscripts were Not written in English but Hebrew and Greek."

 

[JM2C]

Mary was never named as daughter of Heli. It clearly stated that Joseph as the son of Heli.

Luke 3:23 Jesus was about thirty years old when he began his work. He was the son (as was thought) of Joseph son of Heli,


There is no mention of Mary in this verse. The only names mentioned are Jesus, Joseph and Heli.


And no Jewish man would have his own name listed on his wife's side, because there were no point in doing so.


The absence of Mary's name is evidence that Luke was listing Heli as Joseph's father, not father-in-law.


You are making baseless claim. You are just dishonest Christian, who like to twist meaning of the verse. You are no better than JM2C, sharing a common trait, so you two make great company.

Things you can’t understand is dishonest to you and that is your problem.

 

[Shad]

You’re just implying that there was an “issue that it is unrealistic to have people travel to their places of birth for a census” which really contradicts from this

”Roman census were done based on where one lived” or “There is also the issue that it is unrealistic to have people travel to their places of birth for a census.” Which ONE it is?

It’s either traveling became the unfounded “issue” based on your unrealistic understanding of that era because of the means of transportation we have today compared to the era, or was it really “the officials of the state that traveled”? You can’t tell the difference, can you? You know why? Because you don’t know!

I guess you have reading comprehension issues. Were you home-schooled or are you incompetent?

I said it is unrealistic to have a whole population move to the place of birth for a census that is used for community based taxes and manpower evaluation for where the person actually lives as it defeats the point of the census. Do you see how one sentence leads into the other and supports it. One stating the view and the other supporting it. I never said it was impossible to travel, you are making up a strawman thus have to lie about what I said. It is not either as these are not opposite claims but one piece of evidence supporting another....

It is Luke that is considered incorrect by historians and biblical scholars not the other way around. . There is also the issue that it is unrealistic to have people travel to their places of birth for a census. Roman census were done based on where one lived not where one was born and certainly didn't involve travel by citizens. It was the officials of the state that traveled.

Actually I do know since I linked two source stating as much. Two source which are in books about the Roman government. I have studied Rome and it's history for almost a decade and a half so I am well read when it comes to Rome while you hold a fringe view only held by your cult not by historians or biblical scholars.

 

[Shad]

Isn't that what he said?
"Please Shad keep in mind the original Bible manuscripts were Not written in English but Hebrew and Greek."

Which was wrong since it was in Greek first not Hebrew.

 

[Shad]

What do YOU mean by "DIASPORA"

You claim to know the Bible and it's history but you have no idea what the Diaspora is? That is hilarious and a prime example of how religious education is worthless when from a cult.

 

[Parsimony]

I was not arguing on whether its right or wrong. What he said isWhen I asked you if you understand this on which I explained to you.

“Potential energy due to its height, “sitting on a cliff”, and as it drops it gains speed and kinetic energy while the potential energy is decreasing or losing. Energy used energy lost. Entropy! 2nd LoT. As the rock drops, gaining kinetic energy, but losing potential energy entropy is increasing and therefore creates disorder and chaos or death to this energy.”

On which you misunderstood by this post then I said: We are not talking about the literal people getting hit in the head by falling rocks. We are talking about energy, gravitational potential energy on how it can create actual energy.

And that was reason why I asked you: Or you don’t know what you’re saying here and

I really don't know what you're going on about. What does any of this have to do with evolution anyway?

 

[JM2C]

I guess you have reading comprehension issues. Were you home-schooled or are you incompetent?

I said it is unrealistic to have a whole population move to the place of birth for a census that is used for community based taxes and manpower evaluation for where the person actually lives as it defeats the point of the census.

Read your post again GENIUS!

There is also the issue that it is unrealistic to have people travel to their places of birth for a census.

READ AND UNDERSTAND THIS GENIIUS: YOU DON’T MOVE THE “whole population” BECAUSE NOT ALL THEM BELONG TO JUDAH. ONLY THOSE PEOPLE WHO BELONGS TO THE TRIBE OF JUDAH WERE THE ONE WHO TRAVELED FROM ANY PLACE TO JUDAH. IOW GENIUS, THEY ARE NOT THE “WHOLE POPULATION”. THIS IS NOT A DIASPORA WHERE YOU MOVE THE “WHOLE POPULATION” THEY WERE NOT CAPTURED BY THE ROMANS.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW, GENIUS? I GUESS I SHOULD SAY THE SAME THING TO YOU, RIGHT? I guess you have reading comprehension issues. Were you home-schooled or are you incompetent? I GUESS YOU ARE BOTH GENIUS!!!!

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Can you somehow explain Entropy in layman’s terms or the easiest way to understand it without using physicist’s.

Entropy is usually only talked about in specific systems because total entropy isn't as useful of a term to talk about. But what it simply means is that the number of ways in which a system can be arranged.

The best way to think about it is the equation (change in energy or temperature) divided by (total temperature) = Change of Entropy of a given system. Delta-s = Q/T

Another way to think about entropy is the amount of energy in the system that cannot do work. It is wasted energy if you will (but the term wasted isn't really correct but it works for this example). It is much like energy lost but without it actually going anywhere.

Anytime anything happens in a system energy is wasted. There is always a theoretical maximum efficiency. Usually it dissipates as heat energy. However in a closed system it cannot escape.
This is considered disorder or chaos. Simply because the energy isn't well defined and cannot be accounted for. It is basically bouncing around aimlessly without doing any "work". In a closed system the amount of its energy that is bouncing around doing nothing in this nonconvertible or useless for work form will only ever increase or stay the same. This is also why we have "maximum entropy. The entropy will be maxed out when all of the energy in the system is used up in its useful form.

However in systems that are not closed, such as our Earth, overall entropy can be decreased by adding more useable energy.

Imagine entropy is like a wet towel that slowly drys. And the dryer it is the more entropy it has. When it is fully dry and there is no more water on the towel in liquid form it will be considered at maximum entropy. However if we have a bucket of water that we keep pouring onto that towel it will never be dry and it can even increase its "wetness". Eventually that bucket will be empty and eventually the towel will dry. But until that time the system itself can increase in entropy and therefore order. That is why we can have life on Earth (as a non-closed system) while eventually life in this universe (which is closed system as far as we know) will be snuffed out.

Edit.
I have made an error. When I stated it cannot be accounted for that was incorrect. It can be accounted for but we require additional information to define its state.

 

[Shad]

Read your post again GENIUS! READ AND UNDERSTAND THIS GENIIUS: YOU DON’T MOVE THE “whole population” BECAUSE NOT ALL THEM BELONG TO JUDAH. ONLY THOSE PEOPLE WHO BELONGS TO THE TRIBE OF JUDAH WERE THE ONE WHO TRAVELED FROM ANY PLACE TO JUDAH. IOW GENIUS, THEY ARE NOT THE “WHOLE POPULATION”. THIS IS NOT A DIASPORA WHERE YOU MOVE THE “WHOLE POPULATION” THEY WERE NOT CAPTURED BY THE ROMANS.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW, GENIUS?

Hey "genius" I never said it was the whole Roman population. We are talking about a census of a province thus the context of population is with the context of the province. Thanks for pointing out you have reading comprehension issues and are incompetent. Also it was never for a single tribe as governors do not conduct a census on a single tribe but of a whole population of a province... You do know what context means right? You do understand the context of the Biblical verse we are discussing right? The Romans used a province system in which the governor acts as a quasi-king for a term running the province for Rome. As long as each governor and province functions along with tribute/taxes to the Senate, Rome only become involved due to corruption, rebellion and war.

The Diaspora was mentioned as the earlier Biblical texts are found after this event. It has nothing to do with the census....

Idiot...

 

[JM2C]

Which was wrong since it was in Greek first not Hebrew.

HERE WE GO GENIUS. ANCIENT HEBREW TEXT THEN TO LXX/OG/SEPTUAGINT, I.E., THE OT, THEN BACK TO HEBREW TEXT, BUT NOT THE ANCTIENT HEBREW TEXT, THEN TO AQUILA, SYMMACHUS AND THEODOTION VERSION OF THE SEPTUAGINT, NOT THE ORIGINAL LXX, BUT THE PRO-JEWISH VERSION, THEN TO MASORETIC TEXT TO WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW AND THIS IS JUST THE OT.

THE N.T. WRITTEN IN GREEK. CLASSICAL GREEK MIXED WITH KOINE GREEK.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW GENIUS?

 

[Shad]

HERE WE GO GENIUS. ANCIENT HEBREW TEXT THEN TO LXX/OG/SEPTUAGINT, I.E., THE OT, THEN BACK TO HEBREW TEXT, BUT NOT THE ANCTIENT HEBREW TEXT, THEN TO AQUILA, SYMMACHUS AND THEODOTION VERSION OF THE SEPTUAGINT, NOT THE ORIGINAL LXX, BUT THE PRO-JEWISH VERSION, THEN TO MASORETIC TEXT TO WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW AND THIS IS JUST THE OT.

THE N.T. WRITTEN IN GREEK. CLASSICAL GREEK MIXED WITH KOINE GREEK.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW GENIUS?

Wrong as the NT was in Greek first. The OT was in Hebrew, Aramaic then Greek. After all we are talking about NT verses not OT verse. Again you show you are so incompetent that you do not even know the context of the discussion.

Greek:

New Testament - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gospel of Matthew - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gospel of Mark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gospel of Luke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gospel of John - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Language of the New Testament - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Take a few New Testament courses at an accredited university to learn about your own holy book and how wrong you are.

 

[JM2C]

Entropy is usually only talked about in specific systems because total entropy isn't as useful of a term to talk about. But what it simply means is that the number of ways in which a system can be arranged.


The best way to think about it is the equation (change in energy or temperature) divided by (total temperature) = Change of Entropy of a given system. Delta-s = Q/T


Another way to think about entropy is the amount of energy in the system that cannot do work. It is wasted energy if you will (but the term wasted isn't really correct but it works for this example). It is much like energy lost but without it actually going anywhere.


Anytime anything happens in a system energy is wasted. There is always a theoretical maximum efficiency. Usually it dissipates as heat energy. However in a closed system it cannot escape.

This is considered disorder or chaos. Simply because the energy isn't well defined and cannot be accounted for. It is basically bouncing around aimlessly without doing any "work". In a closed system the amount of its energy that is bouncing around doing nothing in this nonconvertible or useless for work form will only ever increase or stay the same. This is also why we have "maximum entropy. The entropy will be maxed out when all of the energy in the system is used up in its useful form.


However in systems that are not closed, such as our Earth, overall entropy can be decreased by adding more useable energy.


Imagine entropy is like a wet towel that slowly drys. And the dryer it is the more entropy it has. When it is fully dry and there is no more water on the towel in liquid form it will be considered at maximum entropy. However if we have a bucket of water that we keep pouring onto that towel it will never be dry and it can even increase its "wetness". Eventually that bucket will be empty and eventually the towel will dry. But until that time the system itself can increase in entropy and therefore order. That is why we can have life on Earth (as a non-closed system) while eventually life in this universe (which is closed system as far as we know) will be snuffed out.


Edit.

I have made an error. When I stated it cannot be accounted for that was incorrect. It can be accounted for but we require additional information to define its state.

The way I see it is like this: Why the sun is shining every day and not once a week? Was it because the energy that the sun is giving us today is just for today and the energy for tomorrow from the sun is just the replenishment of the energy that we are using today.

 

[Revoltingest]

I was not arguing on whether its right or wrong. What he said isWhen I asked you if you understand this on which I explained to you.

“Potential energy due to its height, “sitting on a cliff”, and as it drops it gains speed and kinetic energy while the potential energy is decreasing or losing. Energy used energy lost. Entropy! 2nd LoT. As the rock drops, gaining kinetic energy, but losing potential energy entropy is increasing and therefore creates disorder and chaos or death to this energy.”

On which you misunderstood by this post then I said: We are not talking about the literal people getting hit in the head by falling rocks. We are talking about energy, gravitational potential energy on how it can create actual energy.

And that was reason why I asked you: Or you don’t know what you’re saying here and

I don't understand your point in this post.

 

[JM2C]

Wrong as the NT was in Greek first. The OT was in Hebrew, Aramaic then Greek. After all we are talking about NT verses not OT verse. Again you show you are so incompetent that you do not even know the context of the discussion.


Greek:


New Testament - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gospel of Matthew - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gospel of Mark - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gospel of Luke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gospel of John - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Language of the New Testament - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Take a few New Testament courses at an accredited university to learn about your own holy book and how wrong you are.

GENIUS, we are talking about the bible.

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

 

[JM2C]

I don't understand your point in this post.

It's not for you its for emergence.

 

[Shad]

Genius, the topic has been about the NT for the last few pages or so. The comment about the language the Bible was written in was made within this context. The context has changed from a general to a specific but you lost track of this fact.

You only change the comment after the fact to reflect the Bible as both the NT and OT. This does not change the context of the first reply nor replays after this fact.

 

[JM2C]

Genius, the topic has been about the NT for the last few pages or so. The comment about the language the Bible was written in was made within this context. The context has changed from a general to a specific but you lost track of this fact.

Why are you copying me, Genius? Your name is Genius from now on.