Anything Divine in the Bible?

I'll try to answer the points I can. Would you mind sharing this evidence with us? There are many transitional fossils, and strictly speaking ALL fossils are transitional. There is no design observed but by those who want there to be design.I'll skip the prophecies, as they're not my ballpark. Of course there is absolutely NO evidence for this statement. A few problems here. First there is NO evidence Jesus ever did or said this. Second the 2lot deals with movement of heat, not "energy". Oh yes, ancient Egypt wasn't prosperous at all, neither were ancient Babylon, ancient Greece or ancient Rome....Oh wait they were, and to top it off, after Rome adopted Christianity, it fell....Need I say more? And as I hope I've shown you, there isn;t any evidence for ANY of those claims. Actually there are only cons. What we do here every time Buz brings this up is point out that the pros aren't valid and that there are many cons. Buz however doesn't like this and chooses to ignore it.

---

I hunt for the truth

Yes, I don't know a lot about prophecies, however from what I've read here on this site, I'll say that there doesn't seem to be ANY prophecy that was ever fulfilled. No. There is NO evidence for the most important events in the bible, so why should we take your word for it that this is true then? Don't know about prophecies, however, again, my experience on this site make me lean to no confirmed prophecies. Now this I DO know. There is NO evidence for the crucifixion of Jesus WHATSOEVER. Yes, but not all energy is heat. Based on what Brian wrote, this video will depict something that might look like a chariot wheel. You say the ENTIRE story of Exodus is true, because somewhere in a sea there lies something that could be a chariot wheel? Now, let me be very clear here. Even if this is a chariot wheel, it proves ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. I will see if I can find the video and watch it, however. Oh? so the kings and emperors of the dark ages were saints? They were all Christians you see, and so was almost everybody else back then. I still would rather live as a citizen in Ancient Egypt then as a citizen in the dark ages. I admit to ignorance of this subject, I can however recall other prophecy threads in which you participated, and you were utterly disproven time and again.

---

I hunt for the truth

How about against reality, and what that shows us via empirical evidence?

---

I hunt for the truth

You mean in contrast to the medieval kingdoms of Europe, where almost everyone was a Christian, and nobody did anything bad, especially not massacring Jerusalem when they took it? Oops, they did didn't they? Oh, and why is your country so violent, with all it's "good christians" as opposed to Europe, where most people are secularist? And another one, Pedophile priests of course are doing nothing wrong either?

---

I hunt for the truth

Of course, they weren't really Christians, how could I have forgotten.Nice try Buz, but I don't think anyone will fall for that one.And by the way, you brought that point up, not me, I just use this example to show how wrong you are.

---

I hunt for the truth

Buz, you can claim they were not Christians, and I'm sure you believe this to be the case, but the fact remains they WERE Christians, no matter how much you don't want them to be. They used the bible to justify their actions, the same you're doing today.

---

I hunt for the truth

Let me just ask this, if your god ordered you to stone an entire family to death, because one member of that family said to god "go fuck yourself" would you do it? I wouldn't, I would tell god to "go fuck himself".

---

I hunt for the truth

No. I answered your question, now please answer mine. There is no standard. And , yes, I don't like what he asks me to do, so I don't. No, why would I? I don't view that action as morally wrong. No, I'm not.

---

I hunt for the truth

Will you answer my question? I answered yours, while you keep avoiding mine.
And how does anything I said point to there being an absolute standard for right and wrong. In my life I decide what that is, nobody else.

---

I hunt for the truth

No it doesn't, many people in the past believed what they were doing was right, while we view these actions as plain wrong. Where's the universal standard now? Yes they are, see example above, our ethics change with time. I never called anything objective morality, in fact, I say there is no such thing, there is only subjective morality. No it doesn't, again, see above, we were NEVER consistent in what we held to be right or wrong. Hell, even I changed stances on some things during my life time. So, if you had an experience, and you would be 100% convinced God spoke to you, and commanded you to rip the heads off of 100 new born babies, you would do it? That's the difference between you and me I guess, even if I was 100% convinced by this experience that it was God talking to me, I'd still tell him to go fuck himself. I agree. No, he doesn't, that doesn't stop him from doing it though. What is? That there is no absolute right and wrong, and yet we judge? Whoever said we were perfect? You're answers are very clear. I don't agree with them though.If you don;t mind, I would like to react to some of the things you said to Cavediver and Straggler.On the point you made that humans find it ok to harm animals but not other humans:
I can say that I know plenty of humans who think it is wrong to harm animals in any way. In fact in my country we have a political party who's sole purpose is to fight against animal cruelty and basically is promoting that meat is bad and shouldn't be eaten. They have 2 seats in our representative government body. Nearly 180.000 people voted for them (my country only has roughly 16 million inhabitants, so you can see that's quite a number). Again, it seems not everyone agrees. Where's the absolute morality now?

---

I hunt for the truth

I agree, this however doesn't mean we can't judge them, in fact it happens everyday. No I don't, because it basically isn't. It's just that more people think my way about it, and so, we get to enforce our version of it. Who says I justify it? First of all, I don't condemn anyone, I judge. Further, I don't justify this judging to anyone. It's the way I do it. Don't like it? Tough luck. What? I can't agree with you on some points? I agree. Again, I agree. I know how a debate works, I just happen to agree with you on tose points. Now, wether or not I consider this a problem is another thing.Now, you are saying there is an absolute morality, and God ingrained this in mankind. Simply looking at the world around us shows us there can be no such thing, since people all differ on what they consider moral or not. For example, I don't know how you feel about capital punishment, but in America, it's still done. I'm against it. Now, where is the absolute morality here? And, just to make matters more complicated, I'm not against killing humans either, I can think of situations where I would find it ok to kill another human being. Again, no absolute morality either.

---

I hunt for the truth

Why would it need to have meaning? We judge as we see fit according to our laws, why would there need to be any meaning to this? Well, I see condemning as something far more final then judging. When i condemn someone I am branding them for all time, when I judge someone, that judgement is not at all final, it might have a duration, but it certainly isn't for all time. That sort of absoluteness is impossible, as there are no absolute right and wrong. That wasn't specifically aimed at you, it was a general you. I am entirely consistent to my own standard (though that standard does change). There is no absolute standard, so I can't be consistent with it. Yes, they might very well be. They'd need to use some sort of logic to point that out though. Animals are entirely consistent with their instincts, they can do nothing else. No, I actually meant I agree with you when you say there is no absolute standard, and no one can claim to be "right". Ok, let's see this evidence. There is no "intrinsic value" in humans, look around you, people hold different opinions on everything. God's existence is far from obvious. First of all there is absolutely NO evidence for his existence, second of all, there is no absolute standard, everybody disagrees on at least something. Hell, even Christians bicker among themselves which interpretation of the bible is right. True. Cool. Correct. In fact I say no such standard exists AT ALL. Oh, and I fixed that little Gid/God typo for you, wouldn't want him to get mad for misspelling his name, now would we. Reality of morality? Why does morality need a reality? It's an absolutely subjective concept. In fact that's the only thing absolute about it, it will always be just subjective relative to the observer. Yes, that's basically what our existence is. What point are you trying to make anyway, I'm sorry, you got me confused. Is it that without an absolute morality, there is no absolute morality?{ABE}As for the question you asked Straggler, here's my answer to it. MY standard. Well, since it's not an absolute standard, I don't see why I should explain why it is. Well, there you have it, can we move on now?Edited by Huntard, : Added a bit

---

I hunt for the truth

Yes. Yes. Yes once more.That's pretty much what I've been saying all along. Yes, it's irrelevant in the larger picture, but to me it is relevant, because I don't want to live my life that way. Yes, but since neither exists, it IS meaningless. Then you'd first have to show your god exists, then show he indeed HAS eternal perspective. Only then can you make such a claim, until then, I say there is no such thing, and thus no absolute right and wrong. And intelligence IS the only thing that allows us to make rules. Do you see animals behaving to rules they themselves set up? No, because they have no intelligence with which to conceive these rules.

---

I hunt for the truth

Jaywill, what exactly is "The Divine"? How would I recognize it if it were to come into contact with me?

---

I hunt for the truth

And? This doesn't mean we can't still do this. In fact we can do it, and do it all the time. Someone being evil can never be determined objectively, this doesn't stop people from finding certain actions evil. No absolute morality is needed for this. Yes, it can never be determined if any action is good or bad absolutely. Again, this doesn't stop people from doing just that. Sure it can, it might not be correct, nut that doesn't matter. If someone from their own values finds something to be evil. Yes, and still we judge, and not even consistently with one another. more proof that it's all subjective, yet not less true to the individual person. I've never said anything different. This still doesn't matter to the individual, who'll still judge things. Sure I do, in fact I do it everyday. It might not mean anything in the long run, but it means something to me, and that's all that's needed for me to do it. So? That doesn't make it less true to me. Sure I can, and in fact do. A duck can't judge, it has nothing to weigh the situation against, only it's instincts. Yes it does. Intelligence allows us to weigh a situation against our opinions, without intelligence, this isn't possible, and we can't judge without this. That's because there is no such thing as objective morality, there is only subjective morality. When you take the objectiveness out of the picture, all the problems go away. All right, let's have them. Only to an observer, and differently for each observer. None, in fact I don't say they are absolutely real, I say they are subjectively real. Yet they aren't, they are fully consistent with that persons morality, showing again that objective morality doesn't exist. Ok. You're basically right, what you fail to account for is a persons own opinions and beliefs, that make him judge regardless of there being an absolute morality. They might be completely wrong, but to them, they are completely right. Put like that, yes. But like I pointed out, you didn't take everything into account. Well, sure, but it is you who claims that's where aboslute morality comes from, and I say there is no such thing. So for you to prove your point, these are the things you'd have to do:
1) Show there is in fact an "objective morality"
2) Show that this morality came from something other then humans themselves.
3) Show this other thing to be god.
4) Show god exists.Now, I'm not asking you to do this, but keep this in mind when you again claim there is an absolute morality. Yes, they are. However objectivity, and that objectivity coming from god are not. Yes, this doesn't stop me from judging them though. Yes, again pointing to the fact there is no objective morality. MY standards. And? You keep repeating this. Why would I need a platform to judge? First you claim god has nothing to do with this, and now you bring up a debate on the existence of god? I'll go watch it, and perhaps even do a reaction to it, but that just depends on what I get to see. yes, as I've always said it was.

---

I hunt for the truth