Here you go, Johnney & I.D. sent into 7th heaven.

Big Bang & Religion at CERN

Stop the planet, I wanna get off!

---

I honestly don't know what's wrong with you people here?

That is why you have the problem you do John, you've just explained it in one sentence.

Mary getting pregnant with baby Jesus sounds exactly like IVF

those are the operative words aren't they "sounds like". Yes it DOES sound like that with our modern knowledge, but how likely is it to be true? How likely is it that scientists could suddenly appear, perform IVF and disappear again without anyone else knowing, only 2000 years ago. Teleportation? Beam me up Scotty?

The bible says that there had to be an immaculate conception and a virgin birth so that Jesus could be born sinless and be a true son of god. All well and good for Jesus then, doesn't say much for gods treatment of Mary though. Even 2000 years ago an unmarried mother was still taboo in society. Mind you, later on when Jesus was at the the height of his fame and preachings, it was a handy cover up for his followers, to hide his unfortunate start in life.

You have to realise John that no-one is being nasty or unpleasant to you, no-one is insulting you or trying to belittle you, and no-one is suggesting that you don't genuinely believe the things that you do. But the stuff you come up with is very far fetched at best, and to be honest you don't have any evidence for any of it other than your own faith in it.

You must stop getting all defensive and hot under he collar, because you can't seem to convince others of your own beliefs. As I have said before, if you feel it is your calling to spend your life convincing and converting others to your way of things, then there are far better places to be heard than here.

Your right Chris,
I am biased,
I have evidence that other people don't, which is an unfair advantage. I need to work harder and publish my work sooner.

John.

It's only a coincidence if you give credibility to your claims. I see no coincidence because I see no reason to believe that's what the Bible was referring to.

Your right too Ozzfan,
Anyway, if Mary was impregnated through IVF, or if God "created" Adam and Eve through genetic engineering, then i would need proof, wouldn't i?

In fact the only way i could scientifically prove it would be to find some "old book" that God left behind to document what he done. If God headed away and left no scientific proof, then all the religions of the world are finished, they are screwed without proof.

At this late stage, the only hope of me finding God would be if God published his work in some type of ancient science journal. I would need to find the equivalent of a 6,000 year old copy of "Nature Journal". Now what are the chances of that happening? Slim to none maybe?

Hmmmmmmm.... you would think the odds are really stacked against me, wouldn't you? I'm betting that i will have the last laugh here!

John,
who stands on the right hand side of the lord God during the final days.

At this late stage, the only hope of me finding God would be if God published his work in some type of ancient science journal. I would need to find the equivalent of a 6,000 year old copy of "Nature Journal". Now what are the chances of that happening? Slim to none maybe?

I would also like to know why you believe this "journal" of God is in fact the real journal of God? What evidence do you have to suggest that whatever book you claim to have found is legitimate?

I'm sure you're convinced of your answers and your beliefs, but unless you can prove your assertions, there's no reason for anyone to join you in your beliefs unless they are already predisposed to believing things without evidence.

Hmmmmmmm.... you would think the odds are really stacked against me, wouldn't you? I'm betting that i will have the last laugh here!

Yeah, I'm sure. Just a few more years now....

I would also like to know why you believe this "journal" of God is in fact the real journal of God? What evidence do you have to suggest that whatever book you claim to have found is legitimate?

The book has been radio carbon dated by archaeologists. The book is thousands of years old. There are many many many parts to this book, or books. Its not in one nice clean single book.

And its God's science journal because it contains scientific information about the "creation" of mankind. And God did indeed publish it himself, in person.

Yep, the best way to describe it is to call it "God's science journal". Or as i like to say, the "old book" or "old books" because that what God calls them in the Christian Bible, the Jewish Torah and the Islamic Koran. He calls them "books that were written from the foundation of the world". In the Bible he says that the books are "Sealed till the end time". That time is now, and i'm opening the books to read them out to the whole world.

John.

The book has been radio carbon dated by archaeologists.

How do we know that the findings are accurate? There's a lot of bad archaeology out there. Has the findings been peer-reviewed and is it generally accepted that this book is indeed thousands of years old?

If so, how do we know you're "decoding" it properly, and not just applying today's knowledge to yesteryear's writings as you've done for the Bible? What makes your conclusions accurate?

The book has been radio carbon dated by archaeologists.

How do we know that the findings are accurate? There's a lot of bad archaeology out there. Has the findings been peer-reviewed and is it generally accepted that this book is indeed thousands of years old?

If so, how do we know you're "decoding" it properly, and not just applying today's knowledge to yesteryear's writings as you've done for the Bible? What makes your conclusions accurate?

The books are NOT all in one place. Parts of the book are spread out across several countries. Because of this, many many different archaeologists have found different parts of the book on different sites in different countries. So at this stage, i'm guessing that thousands of independent Carbon 14 dates have been recorded for different parts of the book. So in all the archaeological journals, the archaeologists are all in agreement about the dating. The books are very old!

Ohhh yes, these are peer-reviewed journals. They are all the mainstream archaeological journals. This stuff is NOT hidden, as i said, thousands of people walk past the book every day and don't really give it a second thought because they don't know that it was God that wrote the book. The archaeologists are telling them something else, and the public are gullible enough to just believe the archaeologists. Hence they walk straight past the book and carry on enjoying their holiday not knowing any better.

John.

So then we're down to interpretation of the books, and you want us to believe you're the only one "decoding" them correctly with the help of God.

Wouldn't it be easier just to tell us the name of the books so we can see if we come to the same conclusion you have, assuming there's no other conclusion to come to?

So then we're down to interpretation of the books, and you want us to believe you're the only one "decoding" them correctly with the help of God.

Wouldn't it be easier just to tell us the name of the books so we can see if we come to the same conclusion you have, assuming there's no other conclusion to come to?

Ok, this couldn't be easier for you.

For the the last 2 years, i have talked non stop about Egyptian pyramids, i thought this would have been blatantly obvious at this stage.

Secondly, the Bible tells you exactly where Adam and Eve were hanging out.

So go find what i found. See if you can find what i found!

John.

I tryed to google a 6,000 year old book. All I got was soemguy in India saying astrology was real.

---

[/quote]

Old James

There are tons of old books and there are tons of references to the pyramids. I'm not going to play a game trying to figure out which one it is only to find out I was wrong.

You have the name of the books. Cite your sources and let us decide for ourselves.

There are tons of old books and there are tons of references to the pyramids. I'm not going to play a game trying to figure out which one it is only to find out I was wrong.

You have the name of the books. Cite your sources and let us decide for ourselves.

Ozzfan,
I'm being very nice to you.

The answer your are looking for is in two books. The first book of the Bible, and the last book of the Bible. The Bible actually names the books that i am working on. It names them for you Ozzfan!

Here are the links;

Book of Genesis; (Bible book 1)
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=NIV

Book of Revelation; (Bible book 66)
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Revelation+1&version=NIV

John.

If that is indeed the books you're "decoding", then I'm afraid you truly are using your own interpretation of those books to arrive at your conclusions. What makes you so certain that your interpretation is correct, beyond "God told me so"?

Just WAG is all that I see here. No real science that can be tested. GIGO.

If that is indeed the books you're "decoding", then I'm afraid you truly are using your own interpretation of those books to arrive at your conclusions. What makes you so certain that your interpretation is correct, beyond "God told me so"?

Come off it Ozzfan,
I said Genesis and Revelation name the "old books" i am working on. I didn't say the Bible is the book. I have said this many times.

John.

Just WAG is all that I see here. No real science that can be tested. GIGO.

Robert,
You do "Intelligent Design theory" an injustice by having it as your user name. I have read lots of messages posted by you and not once have i heard you say anything that remotely sounds like "Intelligent Design theory".

John.

If that is indeed the books you're "decoding", then I'm afraid you truly are using your own interpretation of those books to arrive at your conclusions. What makes you so certain that your interpretation is correct, beyond "God told me so"?

Come off it Ozzfan,
I said Genesis and Revelation name the "old books" i am working on. I didn't say the Bible is the book. I have said this many times.

John.

So more games and you can't just say the names.

If that is indeed the books you're "decoding", then I'm afraid you truly are using your own interpretation of those books to arrive at your conclusions. What makes you so certain that your interpretation is correct, beyond "God told me so"?

Come off it Ozzfan,
I said Genesis and Revelation name the "old books" i am working on. I didn't say the Bible is the book. I have said this many times.

John.

So more games and you can't just say the names.

No, i can't, i'm sorry. You will just have to read the 2 book links i gave you to find out.

Hard luck buddy. You had your chance.

John.

If that is indeed the books you're "decoding", then I'm afraid you truly are using your own interpretation of those books to arrive at your conclusions. What makes you so certain that your interpretation is correct, beyond "God told me so"?

Come off it Ozzfan,
I said Genesis and Revelation name the "old books" i am working on. I didn't say the Bible is the book. I have said this many times.

John.

So more games and you can't just say the names.

No, i can't, i'm sorry. You will just have to read the 2 book links i gave you to find out.

Hard luck buddy. You had your chance.

John.

If you're not willing to help people out so they can follow along the same path you have, then you are not really trying to have a discussion on what it is you believe and why.

I don't need any chances. I just want to understand better and that is up to you to help others. If you can't be bothered, that isn't part of their luck that prevents them. It all lies within you.

All we have is guesses unless he tells us. I don't have time for games and if he truly wants us to believe as he does, he needs to help more than he has.