Search results

This is my bad. Given the context I thought using the word Bible was self-explanatory but on second guess it really wasn't, however in the case you quoted I was referring to the New Testament and not the entirety of the Bible. I'm well aware that the Old Testament is not written in Greek, of...

No. The Greek word used by the Bible consistently to refer to this succession of genealogies is 'sperma', literally seed. This is not a concept of idea that can be transferred through women. This also doesn't deal with the fact that the genealogies I mentioned were specifically those of Joseph...

Well, for example, two of the Gospels (Matthew and Luke) give genealogies of Joseph's line to show that Jesus is related to David, which would fulfill the Old Testament prophecy of the Messiah being of the line of David. Now this makes sense only if Jesus is biologically related to Joseph...

Half of the problem is that the reliability of the gospels as sources is absolutely shit, they were most likely edited by the early Church to fit whatever point was convenient to them and that most of the theology of the Christian church is drawn from someone that never even met Jesus in his...

I find that most of the people at my gym are either fat-ass unfit or like massive footy players or something. I play cricket, which is a far less manly sport, ergo I do fitness stuff like cycling and running and core stuff as opposed to benching like a billion kg. Yet I always feel like a tiny...

No, it's not. All the light that probability sheds onto any naturally explicable phenomenon is that it was improbable; that's all. It's not an issue of "happened by chance vs. didn't happen by chance", because those terms are so absurd, but rather the chances if someone would happen vs. wouldn't...

Not at all. See this is semantic nonsense that Christianity, in particular, has injected into the factor. The options are not 'chance vs. not by chance' because that's a completely and utterly unscientific way to look at it. The options are naturally vs. divine intervention and nothing more. We...

Well improbable things happen all the time in the world, and it's an entirely natural thing. If you can explain something and how it happened in an entirely natural way, then showing that it was a rather improbable event doesn't really demonstrate anything apart from the fact that an improbable...

Well, there is no scale of how fictional something is, it's just fictional or it's not. There are parts of the Bible that can be scientifically proven to be entirely fictional, just as Star Wars is entirely fictional.

No, it's scientific fact, thank you very much. Of course it is, because the only reason you spout such bigotry and ignorance is because of your three thousand year old collection of desert scribblings compiled by superstitious and largely ignorant Palestinian peasants.

Star Wars is just as fictional as many of the stories in the Bible. :)

Oh boy ... here we go. I sincerely hope you're fucking kidding me. This absolutely shows that you have not a clue what you're talking about. This is the most logically false statement you can make. Were this evidence that you can't be bothered to find and present to us about proteins true...

No, actually. What is logical is to include in scientific theory and thought what is quantifiable and provable. If you want to inject God into whatever science you please because you think it would be a nice idea or you don't actually understand it, then fine, but do not try and pass it off as...

Not really.

... no.

Don't be so naive and ridiculous. If people are going to claim as scientifically sound that which is nothing but a fairytale then they are well within their rights to do so, but they should, in every single way, expect to be called out on this. Now, instead of naively lecturing me, please...

I think I'm just about popular enough to start a personality cult in the NCAP forums atm. :P :) (translation: thanks for the rep)