Author Topic: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?  (Read 31350 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4618
  • Darwins +105/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1073 on: October 25, 2013, 09:44:06 AM »
Skep is like a fish talking to a leaking oil tanker,asking it to stop leaking,we all know how that ends....for the fish.
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Truth OT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1452
  • Darwins +88/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1074 on: October 25, 2013, 10:42:56 AM »
The evidence is that I was transformed by the blood of the Lamb. My whole mindset and outlook on life completely changed. I used to be an atheist and pissed off that this life is all we get so I went around in a bad mood taking it out on others. People said I was a negative person. That all changed when I gave my life to the Lord. I am living proof.

Let me make sure I'm hearing you out and am listening to you well enough to get your point correctly without making any unnecesary assumptions. You seem to be saying that your feelings and attitude about life changed because you came to believe in Jesus and in your heart of hearts you conceded that Jesus is Lord.

You make the claim that it was the 'blood of the lamb' that transformed you, BUT if you look carefully you may notice that no evidence was provided that that was indeed the case. What you seem to be overlooking about your own situation is that you were changed by your BELIEFS. The power that changed you was your own mind! With your mind coming to believe that there was in fact "power in the blood"; I hope you realize has no bearing on whether or not the power it came to believe in was real. 

Again you have failed to prove or even attempt in demonstrating that it was a god that revealed anything to you. You were most likely won over by something that effected your thinking be it an argument, personal feelings, another person's caring efforts, etc. You would do well to positively identify that something and stop assuming at best or lying to youself at worst, that that something was in fact a god.





Offline skeptic54768

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2665
  • Darwins +52/-437
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1075 on: October 25, 2013, 12:10:45 PM »
The evidence is that I was transformed by the blood of the Lamb. My whole mindset and outlook on life completely changed. I used to be an atheist and pissed off that this life is all we get so I went around in a bad mood taking it out on others. People said I was a negative person. That all changed when I gave my life to the Lord. I am living proof.

Let me make sure I'm hearing you out and am listening to you well enough to get your point correctly without making any unnecesary assumptions. You seem to be saying that your feelings and attitude about life changed because you came to believe in Jesus and in your heart of hearts you conceded that Jesus is Lord.

You make the claim that it was the 'blood of the lamb' that transformed you, BUT if you look carefully you may notice that no evidence was provided that that was indeed the case. What you seem to be overlooking about your own situation is that you were changed by your BELIEFS. The power that changed you was your own mind! With your mind coming to believe that there was in fact "power in the blood"; I hope you realize has no bearing on whether or not the power it came to believe in was real. 

Again you have failed to prove or even attempt in demonstrating that it was a god that revealed anything to you. You were most likely won over by something that effected your thinking be it an argument, personal feelings, another person's caring efforts, etc. You would do well to positively identify that something and stop assuming at best or lying to youself at worst, that that something was in fact a god.

One of the kickers for me was the fact that natural selection only changes already existing information in the genome. It doesn't create new information. The first cells that formed according to abiogenesis did not contain any information to make a human. Yet, they want us to believe somehow human information came around on its own.

Once I started to understand evolution, the more flaws and holes I saw in it. Then there's the fact that giant skulls were found in Peru and scientists are baffled because they don't want to admit that the Bible is right. Bible says "there were giants on the earth in those days."

if you don't believe me, google giant peru skulls.

I have to go out for a few hours. I will respond later on to more responses.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline Jag

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1793
  • Darwins +191/-7
  • Gender: Female
  • Official WWGHA Harpy, Ex-rosary squad
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1076 on: October 25, 2013, 12:20:04 PM »
You will respond later on to the many questions hanging unaddressed all over this thread and others where you have run from simple questions.

Rules dude, the ones you agreed to abide by - your Jesus doesn't like liars and I'm done asking you to follow them.
"It's hard to, but I'm starting to believe some of you actually believe these things.  That is completely beyond my ability to understand if that is really the case, but things never cease to amaze me."

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1077 on: October 25, 2013, 12:21:22 PM »
Rules dude, the ones you agreed to abide by - your Jesus doesn't like liars and I'm done asking you to follow them.

Just report him to the moderators. It saves you some time and is the proper procedure.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Jonny-UK

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 356
  • Darwins +31/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1078 on: October 25, 2013, 12:27:45 PM »

Once I started to understand evolution, the more flaws and holes I saw in it. Then there's the fact that giant skulls were found in Peru and scientists are baffled because they don't want to admit that the Bible is right. Bible says "there were giants on the earth in those days."

if you don't believe me, google giant peru skulls.
Skull binding is well known and documented.
A quick google and this is very easy to explain.
Your simply showing yourself to be more and more gullible.
Would you perhaps like to buy some magic beans? I will do you a great deal on them  ;)
"Do I look like someone who cares what god thinks" - pinhead

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3014
  • Darwins +265/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1079 on: October 25, 2013, 12:29:14 PM »
Quote
Star and Crescent  - Represents the moon goddess Dianna and the "son of the morning", the name of Lucifer in Isaiah 14:12. Witchcraft uses it the way shown and Satanism turns it in the opposite direction.

Must be some confusion. Jesus claims to be Lucifer/Venus, in Rev 22:16, and 2 Peter 1:19-21.   Lucifer = Venus in Roman, not Satan. Lucifer doesn't have a name, because Lucifer is the planet Venus.  Satan may have erroneously been called Lucifer, by idiots, but Lucifer can't have a name, because he's a Christian fiction.

You think that's confusing, AH?  /Me is having an identity crisis of epic proportions.  I trace My roots back to Astarte, also associated with the planet Venus.  Does that make Me Jesus and/or Lucifer too?

Mind you, it would explain both My trickster side and the Easter thing...  ;D
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1080 on: October 25, 2013, 12:34:52 PM »
MY RESPONSE TO THE ARBITRARY

First, let me start by saying I think we are talking to a different person here. The "Skep" writing style has changed from when we began with him. It has gone from child to childish (a somewhat small but significant difference). So it could be that he has pulled the old bait and switch tactic - couldn't take the heat so he went and got his dad, uncle, or church pastor to debate with us. Either is fine. I just think it's funny.

Now, regarding Berkeley's idealism let me first say that I much more enjoy reading Berkeley (and Locke, and Hume, and Kant, etc) than I do reading this arbitrary uneducated sounding nonsense about "it can't be refuted!" (cry). On the contrary sir, yes it can (and has) been refuted (multi-times over) by many professional and non-professional philosophers. How much training in philosophy do you have? Have you actually studied the philosophical responses to Berkeley? You haven't, have you? That is what confirmation bias does to a religious weenie. Multi-times over during this discourse you have attempted to use terms for which you have refused to define (even when asked over and over). You use words like "objective", "faith", "God", or "proof" in an attempt to make yourself sound intellectual but when we ask for your definitions of how you are using those terms, you ignore the call. Clearly, intellectual honesty is not your strong suit.

TO BE IS TO BE PERCEIEVED? PROVE IT

Now, whereas I think Berekely's argument was very creative, it still fails to show what it intended. He wants to argue that because your perceptions are the medium by which you are abel to conceive of external corporeal objects you can never actually know if there in fact is an object that lies behind your perception. In other words, we can never actually concieve of min-independent objects. Here is the Stanford response (in part):

Quote
"The argument seems intended to establish that we cannot actually conceive of mind-independent objects, that is, objects existing unperceived and unthought of. Why not? Simply because in order to conceive of any such things, we must ourselves be conceiving, i.e., thinking, of them. However, as Pitcher (1977, 113) nicely observes, such an argument seems to conflate the representation (what we conceive with) and the represented (what we conceive of—the content of our thought). Once we make this distinction, we realize that although we must have some conception or representation in order to conceive of something, and that representation is in some sense thought of, it does not follow (contra Berkeley) that what we conceive of must be a thought-of object. That is, when we imagine a tree standing alone in a forest, we (arguably) conceive of an unthought-of object, though of course we must employ a thought in order to accomplish this feat.[6] Thus (as many commentators have observed), this argument fails." [read on for further discussion]

But should be buy Berkeley's assertion? There is simply no sound reason to accept Berkeley's presupposition, and it is indeed a presupposition, that mind-independent objects cannot be held to exist due to the mitigation by our cognitive faculties. It is merely an arbitrary assertion based upon his presumption of theism (his ultimate motivation for the argument in the first place). Now, even though I really enjoy reading Berkeley (and others of his day) it simply does not follow that just because we cannot "go beyond" our perceptions of the world that our perceptions, themselves (our thoughts), are the only things that exist in a material universe, or that we are not justified in holding that an external world exists beyond our minds. Again, this was merely an arbitrary assertion on Berkeley's part to keep his theism (and both Hume and Kant responded - among many others). Further, Berkeley simply could not answer the problem of dreams or hallucinations. He could not rationally account for how nightmares, realistic dreams, or hallucinations could be distinguished from reality (namely b/c he had already rejected their distinction from an external world). Sure, he could just assume his initial presupposition (that his idea of "God" separates reality from fiction) but that is question begging.

Mr. "skep", you are just wrong here and I would much prefer to read Berekely than your nonsense responses which amount to nothing more than arbitrary assertions. "It can't be refuted"? Wrong. "It shouldn't be assumed!" Our perceptions of an external world work sufficiently well to aid us in distinguishing between fiction and reality and there is simply no need to posit a "God" (whatever that means) to account for our perceptions being generally accurate to reality. Further, even if we granted idealism (and I do not) it wouldn't give any credibility to the assertion of a "God" to account for perception. It could just be something else. So this entire attempt fails due to it's initial presumptions, just like your arguing from the bible fails because you assumed it in advance.

REFERENCES:
http://www.skepticink.com/believingbullshit/2012/11/24/berkeleys-idealism-explained-simply/
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/berkeley/
« Last Edit: October 25, 2013, 12:58:33 PM by median »
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1081 on: October 25, 2013, 12:50:31 PM »
Anyone else notice the irony of Skep's profile's tagline, "Bringing Souls To Christ Since 2005"?  In light of the fact that he's only been discrediting his faith on here so far?

An agent of his own version of Satan, he is.

Hey, if you can explain how you know what existed before human minds, then be my guest. Until then, Berkeley is still standing.

Stupidity at it's worst.

-Nam

many philosophers back in the day said Berkeley was a genius, even the ones who disagreed with him such as John Locke.

Many people consider Stalin, Hitler, Lenin, Napoleon. Pol Pot, Genghis Khan geniuses--doesn't mean they were right.

Bad analogy.

Try again.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1082 on: October 25, 2013, 12:54:00 PM »
Anyone else notice the irony of Skep's profile's tagline, "Bringing Souls To Christ Since 2005"?  In light of the fact that he's only been discrediting his faith on here so far?

An agent of his own version of Satan, he is.

Hey, if you can explain how you know what existed before human minds, then be my guest. Until then, Berkeley is still standing.

Your response has absolutely nothing to do with what I wrote in my post, which was a comment on this thread and your participation in it.  You are making Jesus look retarded.  Is this your intention?

Making himself look retarded not just to us but everyone, I think is his intention.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1083 on: October 25, 2013, 01:03:52 PM »
I love this guys argument.

You need to perceive something with a mind or it does not exist.

You mean like god?

Yeah, we've mentioned this already to him, several of us, and he makes an illogical excuse for it. The dude's a troll.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1084 on: October 25, 2013, 01:09:24 PM »
Someone had to say it. (I'm still on page 35)

I'm on page 22, the last page.

;)

-Nam
« Last Edit: October 25, 2013, 01:25:12 PM by Nam »
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6710
  • Darwins +534/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1085 on: October 25, 2013, 01:09:31 PM »
The crescent moon is the official symbol of Islam. Here, two Muslims answer the devotional call.
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1086 on: October 25, 2013, 01:24:11 PM »
Here's another one for ya there skep,

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Angus and Alexis

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1487
  • Darwins +71/-24
  • Gender: Male
  • Residential Tulpamancer.
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1087 on: October 25, 2013, 01:28:39 PM »
One of the kickers for me was the fact that natural selection only changes already existing information in the genome. It doesn't create new information. The first cells that formed according to abiogenesis did not contain any information to make a human. Yet, they want us to believe somehow human information came around on its own.

And you got this information where?
A theist website i am assuming?

Once I started to understand evolution, the more flaws and holes I saw in it. Then there's the fact that giant skulls were found in Peru and scientists are baffled because they don't want to admit that the Bible is right. Bible says "there were giants on the earth in those days."

Giants? Really?
Please at least use something more feasible.

if you don't believe me, google giant peru skulls.

A quick google of what you specified led to elongated skulls from peru, likely from binding the head from birth.
There is nothing "giant" about them, other than their length.
Rule 1: No pooftas. Rule 2: No maltreating the theists, IF, anyone is watching. Rule 3: No pooftas. Rule 4: I do not want to see anyone NOT drinking after light out. Rule 5: No pooftas. Rule 6: There is NO...rule 6.

Offline Deus ex Machina

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3029
  • Darwins +23/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • non-cdesign-proponentsist
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1088 on: October 25, 2013, 01:34:25 PM »
Reality is what it is. It is not (necessarily) what you, I or anyone else here believe it to be. It existed long before we were born, and will go on existing long after we are gone;

You have yet to prove that.

Identity is an axiom: A=A. "Reality is what it is" is therefore axiomatic.

If you have an issue with that, then you just disqualified yourself from any logical debate. If A can equal not-A, then the law of non-contradiction goes out of the window, and so too goes all logic.

And if you're going to claim that reality is subjective, then you just disqualified yourself any logical debate as well: for it is a nonsense to assert anything about anything or anyone existing in reality to someone else whose reality is not the same as yours. Further, subjective realities invalidate the concept of an omnipresent divine entity: if an entity does not exist in one person's subjective reality, then it is not omnipresent. If it is not omnipresent, then it is not the entity that it is claimed to be... ergo, an omnipresent divine entity is logically impossible.

So please, tell me again what it is I have to prove?

Quote
Reality is only defined by minds.

java.lang.NullPointerException. What is a "mind"?

Quote
Without a mind around, how can you define what reality is?

java.lang.NullPointerException. What is a "mind"?

Quote
This is why God must exist, for His mind is always there.

java.lang.NullPointerException. What is a "mind", and what is "God"?
No day in which you learn something is wasted.

Offline Jag

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1793
  • Darwins +191/-7
  • Gender: Female
  • Official WWGHA Harpy, Ex-rosary squad
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1089 on: October 25, 2013, 01:43:58 PM »
^^^The definition of "mind" must not include a circular reference either.

Good luck getting an answer, by the way - I've been asking for this very thing for so many pages I've actually lost track. He's dodged it every time that he didn't ignore it entirely.
"It's hard to, but I'm starting to believe some of you actually believe these things.  That is completely beyond my ability to understand if that is really the case, but things never cease to amaze me."

Offline Deus ex Machina

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3029
  • Darwins +23/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • non-cdesign-proponentsist
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1090 on: October 25, 2013, 01:51:10 PM »
The evidence is that I was transformed by the blood of the Lamb.

Which is a poetic and mystical interpretation, but meaningless in that it doesn't actually tell anyone what you thought and felt at the time, in accessible, meaningful terms - and in which you may be sorely mistaken that it is evidence of anything.

Quote
My whole mindset and outlook on life completely changed.

So? These kinds of paradigm shifts happen to people in all sorts of circumstances.

It was about a decade ago when I had a Eureka! moment in which (this is an extremely short summary, as I have posted this before) I knew that every human-made and human-asserted concept of the divine, every sacred text, every bit of philosophy and every belief in the supernatural was utter bunk, a cosmic joke. It was exhilarating; I felt like a weight had been lifted from me. And I was a lot happier for it, and noticeably so.

Does that mean that I take that as evidence that every human-made and human-asserted concept of the divine, every sacred text, every bit of philosophy and every belief in the supernatural is utter bunk?

As it happens, no: because it's easy to discover that people have all sorts of experiences like this, and they don't all agree. Revelatory experiences, paradigm shifts, Eureka! moments - call them what you will, they are more common than you might think. And as an epistemological tool, they are utterly useless.

Quote
I used to be an atheist and pissed off that this life is all we get so I went around in a bad mood taking it out on others. People said I was a negative person.

And you probably were. I am not "pissed off that this life is all we get." That makes it all the more important to live it, as far as I am concerned - and to do my best to leave a legacy of which I can be at least moderately proud - or at least unashamed. If I manage that, I'll have done ok. If I do well enough by my daughter and any other offspring we may have, to relatives and friends, that they remember me with kindness, I'll have had a good innings. Even if I were to have a heart attack the moment I finish this edit, I will still be fortunate to have lived - never mind to have lived in a Western society that is luxurious by global standards.

Quote
That all changed when I gave my life to the Lord.

And yet here you are, talking nonsense to a bunch of people who are never going to give any credence to your experience, on the grounds that (a) they're not predisposed to believe in supernatural phenomena, (b) your experience doesn't prove even half of what you think it does and (c) in this and the assortment of other statements you've made, you come across as frankly a bit of a nutter.

Quote
I am living proof.

...that paradigm shifts happen to people, sure. And that they can make people better people. But not of the central assumptions that underpin the explanations people resort to for such experiences.

Quote
But like I said, I can't just touch you on your forehead and make you feel the pure joy and peace that I experience right now.

And per the statement above, it would be arrogant and presumptuous in the extreme to believe you had a monopoly on experiencing pure joy and peace. I've been there. In the words of Inigo Montoya, "I do not think it means what you think it means."
« Last Edit: October 25, 2013, 01:58:51 PM by Deus ex Machina »
No day in which you learn something is wasted.

Offline Truth OT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1452
  • Darwins +88/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1091 on: October 25, 2013, 02:00:01 PM »
Once I started to understand evolution, the more flaws and holes I saw in it. Then there's the fact that giant skulls were found in Peru and scientists are baffled because they don't want to admit that the Bible is right. Bible says "there were giants on the earth in those days."

So it appears yau are saying that you considered the theory of evolution to the point where you came to fully understand all of its tenents which upon understanding you were able to examine and find wanting. Because of the shortcomings you found in the theory then that meant that the Bible was somehow right; how is that even connected? Furthermore, if flaws in evolution and cosmology suggest to you that a creator exists; How can you know the answers to these questions:

1. How many creators were there?
2. Who or what were/are the creators?
3. Is Biblegod anymore believable than Ahura Mazda?
 etc?

Offline Deus ex Machina

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3029
  • Darwins +23/-3
  • Gender: Male
  • non-cdesign-proponentsist
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1092 on: October 25, 2013, 02:17:52 PM »
One of the kickers for me was the fact that natural selection only changes already existing information in the genome. It doesn't create new information.

Assertion not established.

Quote
Once I started to understand evolution, the more flaws and holes I saw in it.

And when exactly do you think you "started to understand" evolution? Was this before or after your little epiphany?

Quote
Then there's the fact that giant skulls were found in Peru and scientists are baffled because they don't want to admit that the Bible is right. Bible says "there were giants on the earth in those days."

if you don't believe me, google giant peru skulls.

The very first result of which is a Daily Mail article which states that:

Quote from: Daily Mail
THE TRUTH MAY LIE IN A SIMPLE PIECE OF CLOTH...

The alternative explanation for the bizarre discovery is that the skull was artificially deformed as part of a tribal ritual.
The practice of skull elongation - to signify group affiliation or social status - dates back 9,000 years.
Common in various tribal cultures around the world (such as Mayans, North American natives and Australian Aborigines), the head moulding styles fell into three groups: flat, round or conical.
To achieve the desired shape, the head was wrapped in tight cloth.
In the case of cranial flattening, the head was placed between two pieces of wood.
The technique would usually be carried out on an infant, when the skull is at its most pliable.
The cloth would be applied from a month after birth and be held in place for about six months.

[img=http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/11/19/article-2063486-0EDBC11000000578-450_308x328.jpg]http://Painting by Paul Kane, showing a North American Chinook child in the process of having its head flattened, and an adult after the process[/img]
Painting by Paul Kane, showing a North American Chinook child in the process of having its head flattened, and an adult after the process

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2063486/Alien-skull-Peru-Mystery-giant-headed-mummy-city-Andahuaylillas.html#ixzz2ilMmOGw6
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

How do you support your assertion that "scientists are baffled because they don't want to admit that the Bible is right"?
No day in which you learn something is wasted.

Offline SnagDaddyQ

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1093 on: October 25, 2013, 02:58:59 PM »
I'm just going to jump in here.  Down syndrome has been shown to increase the number of chromosomes in the human genome.  You can look it up if you want.

If human beings managed 23 chromosomes as the product of 3.5 billion years of evolution, you could expect an increase in chromosomes likely once every 3,500,000,000 / 23 years (a little over 150 million) or by ramping the increase to an exponential level which I'm too lazy to do the math for.  Either way, increases in chromosomes are extremely rare.

The only reason to site that anyway that is to defend a couple chapters in genesis.  That entire approach (at least in defense of scripture) is entirely bias.  If you cling to a lack of increase in chromosomes with the same vigor that you cling to the reset of the perfectly validated material in the field of evolutionary biology it becomes vary obvious that evolution is as close to fact as it gets.

Mind telling me how you think the lack of genetic diversity on the arc was capable of repopulating the earth without resorting to "god is all powerful he can do what he wants"?
« Last Edit: October 25, 2013, 04:35:59 PM by SnagDaddyQ »

Offline SnagDaddyQ

  • Freshman
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1094 on: October 25, 2013, 03:00:25 PM »
sorry accidental post.  was trying to edit.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2013, 03:24:45 PM by SnagDaddyQ »

Offline Prejah

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Darwins +2/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1095 on: October 25, 2013, 03:15:20 PM »

And the guideline is the Bible, which you've admitted: you largely ignore most of what is in it because what does the Bible have to do with modern society today.

It's ironic you state that since you're not an atheist.

-Nam

can you quote me where I said I largely ignore what is in it?

Offline Prejah

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Darwins +2/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1096 on: October 25, 2013, 03:19:09 PM »
A rule not followed is not useful to the rule creator,then why have it? Ethical guidelines are a human construct,to make sure interaction is equal. Ethical guidelines,the like the rules God designated that you follow,are often broken as well.....this is why we have prison. And if you fail to follow the rules God made for you,Hell. Somehow you think God is ok with you breaking the rules,while humans sentence those who break rules of ethics to prison.

 Who has better morals? God who allows you to break rules without punishment or humans who punish other humans for breaking rules?

The rule, not to cut your hair, is followed by some but not by others.  How many people end up in prison for breaking professional ethical guidelines? But that is another topic...

Not sure I said God is OK with me breaking the rules, he just understands we are going to do it. As long as we ask forgiveness and are repentant, then he's cool wit it. It's when you are unrepentant that is the problem.  God does punish for breaking the rules, the OT is full of that stuff. The punishment today is not getting into His kingdom. If you can deal with that, go on about your way.

Offline Prejah

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Darwins +2/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1097 on: October 25, 2013, 03:44:26 PM »
Prehaj

 On these boards I have seen you suggest God judges gay and obese people in the same manner. This suggests God judges people for certain things they do regarding rules,no?
 So if the gay man and the fat man both love Jesus,but are not perfect, does God accept them?  Like you,they are not perfect and can't or won't by choice follow all the rules.  How are you better in the eyes of God than they are? You ignore rules as do they,you are no more worthy of reward than they are

Yes He will accept them if they have accepted Christ as their savior. I am not better, no one is "better". We all do what we can to be more Christlike and follow his path as best we can. That is what He looks at.

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1848
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1098 on: October 25, 2013, 03:46:31 PM »

The rule, not to cut your hair, is followed by some but not by others.  How many people end up in prison for breaking professional ethical guidelines? But that is another topic...

Not sure I said God is OK with me breaking the rules, he just understands we are going to do it. As long as we ask forgiveness and are repentant, then he's cool wit it. It's when you are unrepentant that is the problem.  God does punish for breaking the rules, the OT is full of that stuff. The punishment today is not getting into His kingdom. If you can deal with that, go on about your way.

I have an ancient book that is very rare (from ancient Ethiopia). It says all other religions are wrong and when you read it, you automatically know it's the right one (the great alien spirit tells you). It says there is a great alien who created all things we know in this universe and that man was given freedom to make up false religions (and they did) and it predicts all of the other religions. This text is older than all other texts known to man and if you don't follow it you will suffer great pain in the next universe.

Do you believe me?

My point is, just believing and quoting the ancient text you assumed was true doesn't make it so.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline Prejah

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Darwins +2/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1099 on: October 25, 2013, 03:48:18 PM »
Prehaj implies that some rules can't be broken while others can be ignored. Somehow all rules that apply to prehaj but other rules God imposed are  relevant when applied to others prehaj views as unworthy.

How did I imply that? What rules did I say can't be broken and what did I say can be ignored? It's not up to me what path people want to be on and how they decide they want to follow God's laws. Can you please quote where I said or even implied "others are unworthy"?  For a group that claims to be driven by evidence and reason you certainly take a lot of liberties in your interpretation of others words. So I'm asking for the evidence of your claims.

Offline Prejah

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Darwins +2/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1100 on: October 25, 2013, 03:50:12 PM »
Prehaj implies that some rules can't be broken while others can be ignored. Somehow all rules that apply to prehaj but other rules God imposed are  relevant when applied to others prehaj views as unworthy.

Prehaj is a part-time Christian in the sense after cherry-picking the Bible to death, what he chooses to follow he does in a part-time way. He's serious about it, that's evident but only in the way that exists in his own preconditioned viewpoint.

In my opinion.

-Nam

Once again there is supposed logic however there is no validity. Where have I "cherry picked the bible to death"?  What is a part time Christian?

Offline Prejah

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 67
  • Darwins +2/-2
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Jesus - What Kind of Sacrifice Are You Talking About?
« Reply #1101 on: October 25, 2013, 03:57:35 PM »
Prehaj

 As you stated you don't follow the rules,a choice you have made. Then you stated God is ok with your CHOICE,because he understands you can't be perfect.

 How do your choices against god make you more worthy than the gay or fat man and the choices they make, knowing God knows they can't be perfect?

In this scenario you all love and accept Jesus  as your savior

Where did I state I don't follow God's laws? God is not OK with a choice to not follow a law that he has made. You can't just say "oh I don't feel like following that law and He is fine with it. You have to ask forgiveness for not following that law. He forgives us because He knows we are not perfect. He does not expect perfection from our acts, but He does expect obedience in our best effort.

I"m sorry you seem to think I said others were less worthy. I can't think of where I could have inferred that-I probably didn't but liberties are being taken.  I am not more worthy and the gay man and the fat man have just a good a chance as being in the Kingdom as me...as long as they accept Christ as their savior.

It is really an interesting topic inside particular churches. Some will not let divorced people, or homos gain membership in the church (though fat people often get a pass) They can attend, but not be formal members, meaning they can't make decisions regarding the church. I happen to think this is very dangerous. It's not up to us to decide who meets God's standards, but some seem to take it upon themselves.