spiritstone
Cave Dweller 
Member since August 2014
Posts: 2,061 
|
Post by spiritstone on Jul 26, 2015 20:55:05 GMT -5
Socrates was an agnostic on the subject of immortality. That answer by Socrates as had major implications for the Western world beliefs. Socrates or Jesus. A major battle was waged on what was the best moral guide. That history is not written. Or its written by the victors. But there were many schools of Philosophical thought through out the Mediterranean area prior to the advent of Christianity. The Academy, Lyceum, Epicurean, Stoicisms ect… Those schools taught all the moral lessons and more that a person would need to know to live the ‘good life’. Unfortunately those schools collapsed. You had to be a thinking person to attend. Instead we ended up with the dogma of the church. And I think the major reason why was because of Socrates agnosticism about what happens after death. Its much more comforting to know everything works out well in the end. mostly™ similar to holding the middle ground between Creationism and Evolution idealogies. |
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Jul 26, 2015 21:42:05 GMT -5
hey spirit I had heard of that book but my library must not have it or I would have already checked it out already I'm enjoying the lecture \ and to think that happened just down the street from me.. ASU. I'm disappointed I didn't get a personal invite.  What do they know  if they don't know mohs? mostly™ |
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Jul 27, 2015 6:35:46 GMT -5
I quoted you Dave: Remember, Genesis was written some 5,000 years ago by Moses for a bunch of uneducated people who had been slaves making mud and straw bricks for 200 years. It had to be simple for them to understand. I find it interesting that his order of creation agrees well with modern geology. Read more: forum.rocktumblinghobby.com/thread/71544/after-die?page=2#ixzz3h5jTkAmfI live in the Bible belt. Many of us are certainly a pack of hypocrites LOL. So be it. Not entering the word 'Christian' or 'Religion', political views and fanatics, I study the Bible. Primarily from an unbiased as possible viewpoint. Say just the Old Testament. No claims of being a Holy Roller or Zealot. And Neil Young told me not to forget what my good book says. A gun in one hand, a Bible in the other, the perfect psycho. ha Focusing on something tangible like early man, and the evidence he left behind. Ah, arrowheads and his encampments, rocks. His tools and fire rings, carbon from his fires and logs he used as building materials. Collectables that can be fairly well dated by modern technology. You could ask "what happens after we die", maybe asking "when were we created" would shed light. Man apparently left the Bible behind, call it an artifact. In this artifact he recorded an elaborate time line of genealogies. 14 million interpretations of the Bible LOL. Probably that many denominations. But the timeline of the Bible in terms of genealogy is pretty well agreed upon. ah, a majority Archeologists pretty much make their own conclusions, I would guess they are not getting a biased opinion from the Bible. More so in recent years archeologists and scientists with their layered digging methods and state of the art dating equipment seem to have changed their opinions. About the age of man. Statistically, evidence is leaning closer to the time frame of the genealogy of the Bible. The majority of archeologists/dating scientists are going with 6000-12,000 years. ah, another majority Statistical distribution an important factor, i.e., what is the majority of their findings and opinions ? Not a perfect science.... Yes, skulls implying we evolved have been found. But they are rare, few and far between. Infrequent enough to make it difficult to base opinions on. It most likely takes many thousands of years for a mammal to evolve. Science has a far less better argument about man's evolution. Lack of fossil evidence for sure. As everyone knows, the Bible community not so into evolution, but creation. Fair enough. And, for what it is worth, the timeline of the genealogy of the characters in the Bible in a chart:  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2015 7:27:45 GMT -5
If I only had one choice of religion to follow, it would be the Tibetan form of Buddhism. Why you may ask ? 1 -- I like the fact that they mourn a birth because of everything the newborn will suffer while alive. 2 -- They celebrate death because at last a person can be at peace. No more suffering. Another cool thing about that religion is that they carry your body up on a hill and let the buzzards pick your bones clean. They were pretty upset about having to bury bodies after the last earthquake because there were too many bodies for the buzzards to eat. I also like how someone is trying to get a thing started where they put the body in a bag in the fetal position, bury the bag vertical and plant a tree on top of it. Afterlife as a tree. Sweet. Jim |
|
spiritstone
Cave Dweller
Member since August 2014
Posts: 2,061
|
Post by spiritstone on Jul 27, 2015 7:33:15 GMT -5
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Jul 27, 2015 7:49:27 GMT -5
That suggests some much more recent dinos. Wow, too recent for comfort. Could it be ?? A 40,000 year old T-Rex is going to make me nervous in the deep out back. Thinking it is time to look over my shoulder for a remnant. Suits me if it is an error and that monster was gone a million years ago. |
|
spiritstone
Cave Dweller
Member since August 2014
Posts: 2,061
|
Post by spiritstone on Jul 27, 2015 7:58:12 GMT -5
They also find soft tissue in triceratops horns? Baffling on the timeline.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2015 8:07:35 GMT -5
I quoted you Dave: Remember, Genesis was written some 5,000 years ago by Moses for a bunch of uneducated people who had been slaves making mud and straw bricks for 200 years. It had to be simple for them to understand. I find it interesting that his order of creation agrees well with modern geology. Read more: forum.rocktumblinghobby.com/thread/71544/after-die?page=2#ixzz3h5jTkAmfI live in the Bible belt. Many of us are certainly a pack of hypocrites LOL. So be it. Not entering the word 'Christian' or 'Religion', political views and fanatics, I study the Bible. Primarily from an unbiased as possible viewpoint. Say just the Old Testament. No claims of being a Holy Roller or Zealot. And Neil Young told me not to forget what my good book says. A gun in one hand, a Bible in the other, the perfect psycho. ha Focusing on something tangible like early man, and the evidence he left behind. Ah, arrowheads and his encampments, rocks. His tools and fire rings, carbon from his fires and logs he used as building materials. Collectables that can be fairly well dated by modern technology. You could ask "what happens after we die", maybe asking "when were we created" would shed light. Man apparently left the Bible behind, call it an artifact. In this artifact he recorded an elaborate time line of genealogies. 14 million interpretations of the Bible LOL. Probably that many denominations. But the timeline of the Bible in terms of genealogy is pretty well agreed upon. ah, a majority Archeologists pretty much make their own conclusions, I would guess they are not getting a biased opinion from the Bible. More so in recent years archeologists and scientists with their layered digging methods and state of the art dating equipment seem to have changed their opinions. About the age of man. Statistically, evidence is leaning closer to the time frame of the genealogy of the Bible. The majority of archeologists/dating scientists are going with 6000-12,000 years. ah, another majority Statistical distribution an important factor, i.e., what is the majority of their findings and opinions ? Not a perfect science.... Yes, skulls implying we evolved have been found. But they are rare, few and far between. Infrequent enough to make it difficult to base opinions on. It most likely takes many thousands of years for a mammal to evolve. Science has a far less better argument about man's evolution. Lack of fossil evidence for sure. As everyone knows, the Bible community not so into evolution, but creation. Fair enough. And, for what it is worth, the timeline of the genealogy of the characters in the Bible in a chart: Lucy, not even the oldest humanoid fossil is 3.2 million years old. Distant relatives up to 7 million years old. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_human_evolution_fossilsEvidence that we have some DNA from the Neanderthal that mixed with humans at some point. I wish I could read the chart you posted. Any way of getting a clearer picture? Blowing it up makes it even worse. Jim |
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Jul 27, 2015 8:10:19 GMT -5
Time of events since the last ice age say 5000-10000 years ago has kind of gone full circle as far as the time of man's existence in the archeology community.
Some are finding that mammoth may have been around much more recently, like 4000 years.
They are having a hard time proving evolutionary time frames on man, due to his more modern than previously thought existence.
Technology is improving, comparisons made of dating equipment readings to older known civilizations in the mid east is giving accurate comparison data.
Will be watching the collagen measurements.
|
|
spiritstone
Cave Dweller
Member since August 2014
Posts: 2,061
|
Post by spiritstone on Jul 27, 2015 8:12:03 GMT -5
Time of events since the last ice age say 5000-10000 years ago has kind of gone full circle as far as the time of man's existence in the archeology community. Some are finding that mammoth may have been around much more recently, like 4000 years. They are having a hard time proving evolutionary time frames on man, due to his more modern than previously thought existence. Technology is improving, comparisons made of dating equipment readings to older known civilizations in the mid east is giving accurate comparison data. Will be watching the collagen measurements. Thats what I get from all this. Timeline is much shorter then were told it is? It isnt only found in Trex but others as well. |
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Jul 27, 2015 8:25:05 GMT -5
@wampidy Jim, we are a smart bunch us humans. There are some fossils that challenge creation.
Archeologists are as a majority starting to question isolated findings more and more.
They are dialing in on early man's goings ons. And seem challenged about finding evidence of man older than 5000-10,000 years ago.
Hundreds of repetitive dug sites are finding the bottom of the pile seems to stop at 5000-10,000 years ago.
Repetitive chronology of arrowhead and spear designs, from the top of the dig to the bottom of the dig. Latest to earliest.
At prime strategic sites, inviting and likely guaranteeing man's inhabitation.
The evidence is starting to become overwhelming.
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Jul 27, 2015 8:32:04 GMT -5
This is like the first 2400 years genealogy starting with Adam, starting about 4000 BC. Not sure the author.  |
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Jul 27, 2015 8:39:54 GMT -5
Abraham to Jesus  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2015 8:40:24 GMT -5
Hah, we were posting at the same time. Very informative. Good post. Jim I watched another video after the one you posted and it is also very informative. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2015 8:45:19 GMT -5
Too much info, too much info. hahaha
The video I posted gives another dating method that is considered the most accurate method to date. But they are not dating fossils, they are dating the age of the planet. Worth watching.
Jim
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,602
|
Post by jamesp on Jul 27, 2015 8:47:11 GMT -5
Granted, @wampidy, maybe the genealogy is too much info. But Bible scholars have stuck to this time line for many years.
So they pretty much deducted 6000 years was the number, as mentioned, many years ago.
These numbers are starting to match up with much more recent findings of archeologists.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2015 9:00:08 GMT -5
Okay, lets say that Adam and Eve started having children 4000 years ago. The only way life could have continued was for brother and sister mating or father and daughter, which I believe the bible is strictly against. Not sure how this works. Were more people created? The same thing would have had to happen after the flood. Not sure who was on the boat but crossing brother and sister can make so very bad offspring.
And now they are saying dinos were around when the flood happened? Would have been very interesting. If everything was created in seven days where did the present animals come in?
Jim
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Jul 27, 2015 9:29:51 GMT -5
I am a Christian, but feel no insecurity or any need to jack-jaw with others who try to demean and diminish my beliefs. This sums it up well, in a comedic sense...
(See 2:10)
|
|
|
|
Post by mohs on Jul 27, 2015 9:34:19 GMT -5
 I think were spinning out of control here mostly
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 27, 2015 9:55:00 GMT -5
@greyfingers. I did not start this discussion. I am not in the habit of preaching unless I am preached to which happens every time I say I do not believe in a god. I do not care what anyone else believes but jamesp and I were in a discussion that had nothing to do with anyone else. If you do not want to read someone else's opinion DON'T EFIN READ IT. Jeeze Bill, you know how it goes on here. Your name never came up in this discussion so not sure why you had to jack-jaw in it. Jim |
|
if they don't know mohs? 
I think were spinning out of control here 
