Gospels

[Dex]

The Gospel according to Matthew says (27:52-54) 'the graves were opened, and many bodies of the saints who slept rose up and came out of their graves after His resurrection, and went into the Holy City and appeared to many'. Do you believe this happened? If Yes: How could this amazing event have escaped everyone else's notice, even the other evangelists? If No: How could the author of Matthew get away with such a lie?

[Fisherking]

1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence.
2. The universe has a beginning of its existence.
Therefore:
3. The universe has a cause of its existence.
4. If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is God.
Therefore:
5. God exists

(1) cannot be shown to be true.

I am not aware of any case where this principle has been falsified. Every time something begins to exist we find that there is a cause to its existence. I'm not aware of a single case where something is known to have popped into existence from nothing -- if we follow where the evidence leads, it would appear this principle is indeed true.

(4) is not necessarily true. Calling the alleged ultimate first cause, God, is not particularly helpful. The term God is a loaded word with lots of implied meaning. Why not say that (4)If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is X.
Therefore: X existed at least at the beginning of the universe.

No, X would be eternal (like the God of Christianity is).

X still exists - [strike]No[/strike]

Yes, X is eternal.

X is intelligent - [strike]No[/strike]

Yes, X is intelligent enough to cause to universe to exist.

X has will - [strike]No [/strike]

Yes, X by its will caused the universe to exist.

X shows intent -[strike] No[/strike]

It appears X intended for life to exist in the universe it caused to exist.

X is omnipotent -[strike] No[/strike]

We could conclude X is more powerful than anything in the universe it caused to exist (more powerful than any of intelligent beings in the caused universe can literally imagine)

I think this is enough to show that X is not necessarily equal to God.

I think this enough to show that the God of the bible fits the X of the kalaam argument quite well.

[McCulloch]

I am not aware of any case where this principle [Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence.] has been falsified.

This does not hold true on a quantum scale. But then the beginning of the big bang, the universe itself was on a quantum scale.

If you postulate that there was a cause that created the universe and call that first cause X, what can you infer about X (knowing only that X caused the universe)?

Fisherking claims that the cause of the universe must necessarily be eternal. Why is that? The universe could have been created by something that has subsequently ceased to exist.

Fisherking further claims that to have created the universe, X would have to have been intelligent. Again, there is no requirement for this to be true.

Fisherking claims without evidence that the causal agent for the universe must have will.

Fisherking observes that it appears X intended for life to exist in the universe it caused to exist. This is, in fact a false observation. If the universe was intended to produce life, one would expect it to have been a bit more efficient at the task.

[Jerada Davidhefter]

I am not aware of any case where this principle [Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence.] has been falsified.

This does not hold true on a quantum scale. But then the beginning of the big bang, the universe itself was on a quantum scale.

If you postulate that there was a cause that created the universe and call that first cause X, what can you infer about X (knowing only that X caused the universe)?

Fisherking claims that the cause of the universe must necessarily be eternal. Why is that? The universe could have been created by something that has subsequently ceased to exist.

Fisherking further claims that to have created the universe, X would have to have been intelligent. Again, there is no requirement for this to be true.

Fisherking claims without evidence that the causal agent for the universe must have will.

Fisherking observes that it appears X intended for life to exist in the universe it caused to exist. This is, in fact a false observation. If the universe was intended to produce life, one would expect it to have been a bit more efficient at the task.

Why does everybody assume there must be falsification for these arguments? Creator X (would he exist) would be cruel and unintelligent. According to the second law of thermodynamics, the entropy of the universe is at a constant. Yet the randomness of said universe is increasing. This is because planets and the organisms on and within them are of ever increasing order and complexity. However, this increase of order has not been executed efficiently. Our eyes came from simple photon-absorbent molecules, and have evolved to their current state of imperfection quite nicely. The cornea is surrounded by indecent amounts of matter, obscuring the image which now must travel to the optic center, located in the far hindbrain.

Humans stand on their hind legs, exposing our stomachs and groins- as well as forcing our hearts to fight gravity, shortening our lifespans by nearly thirty percent.

That's some INTELLIGENT design.

[Jian^sia]

Humans stand on their hind legs, exposing our stomachs and groins- as well as forcing our hearts to fight gravity, shortening our lifespans by nearly thirty percent.

A dog lives, compared to a man?

Or how long will a monkey be able to live? I read, up to 25 years. A wild baboon may live up to 30 years. Compare that with a healthy human being, I don't have to go into the details. Now read what the Bible says,

When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.Adam lived 930 years, and then he died.

When Seth had lived 105 years, he became the father of Enosh. 7 And after he became the father of Enosh, Seth lived 807 years and had other sons and daughters. 8 Altogether, Seth lived 912 years, and then he died.

When Enosh had lived 90 years, he became the father of Kenan. 10 And after he became the father of Kenan, Enosh lived 815 years and had other sons and daughters. 11 Altogether, Enosh lived 905 years, and then he died.

In the end, the human race began living less and less. Noah lived around 500 years. And from the descendants of Noah we had all the nations of the world. From Abraham, who lived 100+ years, we had the Hebrew, Edomite and Arab racial lines.
In Genesis 6:3, God made a declaration that the lifespan of Man should be "a hundred and twenty years".

Let's first deal with my original logic.

1. Everything that exists has a beginning to its existence.
2. God has no beginning.
3. Therefore God does not exist.

Does time have a beginning? Does love have a beginning? Love, joy, peace.

I expect that you may have difficulty with (1), pleading that God is the one exception, being the one existing thing with no beginning.

Restated

1. Everything that exists has a cause.
2. Nothing can be its own cause.
3. God is the ultimate cause of all things.
4. God must be his own cause.
5. Therefore, God does not exist.

Again, I expect special pleading regarding (1), Everything except God has a cause. Or regarding (2) Nothing except God can be its own cause.

1. Everything that exists (that was created) has a beginning.
OR everything that had a beginning was created.
God, was not created. God is the first cause of everything which had a beginning.

Jesus says, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and Last, the Beginning and the End."

Now, on to the Cosmological Argument.

1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence.
2. The universe has a beginning of its existence.
Therefore:
3. The universe has a cause of its existence.
4. If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is God.
Therefore:
5. God exists

(1) cannot be shown to be true.
(4) is not necessarily true. Calling the alleged ultimate first cause, God, is not particularly helpful. The term God is a loaded word with lots of implied meaning. Why not say that (4)If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is X.
Therefore: X existed at least at the beginning of the universe.
What then can be inferred about X?

1. X still exists - No
2. X is intelligent - No
3. X has will - No
4. X shows intent - No
5. X is omnipotent - No
6. X loves us - No
7. X communicates to humans - No
8. X became a human and died for us - No

2 - 8 would only be true if X is a Spirit.

God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."

[Jerada Davidhefter]

First of all, the only reason a human lives to seventy or so years is because of modern medicine. We should die at about thirty. But if we were restructured, life could be prolonged significantly.

When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.Adam lived 930 years, and then he died.

Really? 930 years? You believe this? I don't even know how to respond. It's madness.

Does time have a beginning? Does love have a beginning? Love, joy, peace.

How does one relate these things? Show some decency, my good sir.

Jesus says, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and Last, the Beginning and the End."

Really? I didn't think you came about till 2000 years ago. If at all. In other words, you are talking in circles. Why must everything, apart from God, have to have an origin?

[McCulloch]

Let's first deal with my original logic.

1. Everything that exists has a beginning to its existence.
2. God has no beginning.
3. Therefore God does not exist.

Does time have a beginning?

I don't know if this is a rhetorical question or not. Apparently time has a beginning. So does space.

Does love have a beginning?

Most definitely. Without sentient beings to express it and experience it, there is no love.
Are you trying to argue that God is an intangible attribute like love or time? Or just that not everything has a beginning?

You see, if you argue that there does not need to be a beginning to things that exist, then the whole first cause argument goes down the tubes. Occam's razor eliminates God and simply postulates an eternal multi-verse.

I expect that you may have difficulty with (1), pleading that God is the one exception, being the one existing thing with no beginning.

Restated

1. Everything that exists has a cause.
2. Nothing can be its own cause.
3. God is the ultimate cause of all things.
4. God must be his own cause.
5. Therefore, God does not exist.

Again, I expect special pleading regarding (1), Everything except God has a cause. Or regarding (2) Nothing except God can be its own cause.

1. Everything that exists (that was created) has a beginning.
OR everything that had a beginning was created.
God, was not created. God is the first cause of everything which had a beginning.

Jesus says, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and Last, the Beginning and the End."

Just as I predicted. You wish to use special pleading. God is the exception. God has no beginning. Everything else has to have a beginning, but God, for some reason, does not.

Now, on to the Cosmological Argument.

1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence.
2. The universe has a beginning of its existence.
   Therefore:
3. The universe has a cause of its existence.
4. If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is God.
   Therefore:
5. God exists

(1) cannot be shown to be true.
(4) is not necessarily true. Calling the alleged ultimate first cause, God, is not particularly helpful. The term God is a loaded word with lots of implied meaning. Why not say that (4)If the universe has a cause of its existence then that cause is X.
Therefore: X existed at least at the beginning of the universe.
What then can be inferred about X?

1. X still exists - No
2. X is intelligent - No
3. X has will - No
4. X shows intent - No
5. X is omnipotent - No
6. X loves us - No
7. X communicates to humans - No
8. X became a human and died for us - No

2 - 8 would only be true if X is a Spirit.

God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in spirit and in truth."

I am pointing out the weakness of the first cause argument for God's existence. If it is true that there had to be some uncaused first cause of the universe, calling that first cause God does not prove God's existence. We cannot show that the universe's causal agent did or did not have all of the attributes of God. In fact, if all you have is the first cause argument, then the most you can hope to prove is a kind of nebulous amorphous deist God. There is a long and difficult path from the alleged ( and in my opinion misnamed ) God of the first cause argument and the God described in the Bible.

[OnceConvinced]

Humans stand on their hind legs, exposing our stomachs and groins- as well as forcing our hearts to fight gravity, shortening our lifespans by nearly thirty percent.

A dog lives, compared to a man?

Or how long will a monkey be able to live? I read, up to 25 years. A wild baboon may live up to 30 years.

What does that prove? No much. We live totally different life styles to animals. Generally, we don't live our lives in filth, eat and drink disgusting things, lick muck off each other etc etc. I'm sure there are many reasons why our life spans are different that are a result of differences between us and them.

Anyway, what about the giant tortoise? They are able to live longer than humans. Up to 150 years! Elephants are also known to live as long as humans.

Compare that with a healthy human being, I don't have to go into the details. Now read what the Bible says,

When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters.Adam lived 930 years, and then he died.

When Seth had lived 105 years, he became the father of Enosh. 7 And after he became the father of Enosh, Seth lived 807 years and had other sons and daughters. 8 Altogether, Seth lived 912 years, and then he died.

When Enosh had lived 90 years, he became the father of Kenan. 10 And after he became the father of Kenan, Enosh lived 815 years and had other sons and daughters. 11 Altogether, Enosh lived 905 years, and then he died.

In the end, the human race began living less and less. Noah lived around 500 years. And from the descendants of Noah we had all the nations of the world. From Abraham, who lived 100+ years, we had the Hebrew, Edomite and Arab racial lines.
In Genesis 6:3, God made a declaration that the lifespan of Man should be "a hundred and twenty years".

I'm not sure if you are aware, but by bringing up this stuff (which by the way are only bible claims, which can't be taken as fact), adds support to Jerada's point. Perhaps the reason life spans dropped was due to the fact man went from walking on all fours to walking on twos?

Jesus says, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and Last, the Beginning and the End."

Just because someone makes a claim, doesn't make it true.

[InTheFlesh]

"And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died"

Anyone have any evidence that this claim is false?

"And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years"

Anyone going past 120yrs these days?
I think the oldest person alive right now is about 116.
His years are numbered.

[Jerada Davidhefter]

How many times must it be said that a lack of able falsification does not give grounds to truism? For, in this case especially, there is less proof FOR said claim than there is against it. One needn't prove the nonexistence of something for its existence to be fallacious and ridiculous. The reasoning behind a need of disproof in religion is the fact that so many people, through a common fearful nature, believe in the superstitions that run rampant throughout the great parables of the Bible. And they are, indeed, parables. Getting back to the original topic at hand, (unintentionally, mind you) the gospels are INDEED parables, not to be credited any more zealously than Aesop's Fables. The few gospels that possess any championship of human decency are on the same level as the Greek stories, and should be followed just as literally. Convincing people to believe nonsense via blackmail and empty promises is on the same level as propaganda, if it is not, in fact, one in the same.

[InTheFlesh]

"And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died"

The question was,
do you have any evidence that this claim is false?
You are entitled to your opinion
but do you have any evidence
to back up that men didn't live that long back then?
How do you know it's not true?