Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join Similar Worlds today »

The End Is Near

The Bible can be summed up like this: mankind rejected their creator against his advice. The last days began with the birth of Adam and Eve's first child, Cain. As the end draws to a close we will see that we are going to destroy ourselves without Jehovah's interference. Can you see it? Religion has diminished. It was false anyway, but it spawned an illegitimate offspring, science. You can't stop it, and why would you? Watch the spectacle.
newjaninev2 · 51-55, F
Well, the Earth will end in 4 billion years, and much as I’d like to wait around and ‘watch the spectacle’, I feel that may be a little long to wait.
DocSavage · M
@newjaninev2
What to join me for dinner at “Milliway’s”
newjaninev2 · 51-55, F
@SemmelweisReflex Enjoying the game? Are you still playing? Here’s some more evidence for common ancestry... this time from your inner fish (in this case, more mine than yours)

In a female mammal there is a pair of tubes along which eggs travel from the ovaries to the uterus. These are called the Fallopian Tubes (salpinges). Sometimes when a human egg is ejected from an ovary it does not make it into the fallopian tube. This is because, quite oddly, the fallopian tube is not actually connected to the ovary. Rather, the opening of the fallopian tube envelops the ovary, like a too-large garden hose resting on a too-small spigot. The two are not actually attached, and sometimes an egg gets squirted out of the ovary and into the abdominal cavity instead of into the fallopian tube.

When this happens, it is usually of no consequence. The egg simply dies after a few days and is resorbed by the peritoneum, the thin wall of highly vascular tissue surrounding the abdominal cavity. No problem.

However, if an egg falls into the abdominal cavity and sperm arrives within a day or so, it might find this egg and fertilise it. The resulting embryo, completely unaware of how far it is from home, begins the process of growth, division, and tunnelling into whatever nearby tissue that it can find, usually the peritoneum but occasionally the outer covering of the large or small intestine, liver, or spleen. This is called an abdominal pregnancy

Abdominal pregnancies pose serious risks. In developing countries, they usually result in the death of the mother. In developed countries, they are easily spotted with ultrasounds and treated with surgical intervention to remove the doomed embryo and repair any damaged tissue or bleeding.

Despite creationists’ laughable claims of an ‘intelligent designer’, abdominal pregnancies are 100% the result of unintelligent design. Any reasonable plumber would have attached the fallopian tube to the ovary, thereby preventing tragic and often fatal mishaps. An ‘intelligent designer’ would never have created the small gap between the human ovary and Fallopian tube, so that an egg must cross this gap before it can travel through the tube and implant in the uterus.

In reality, the gap is a remnant of our fish and reptilian ancestors, who shed eggs directly from the ovary to the outside of their bodies. The Fallopian tube is an imperfect connection because it evolved later as an add-on in mammals.
DocSavage · M
@newjaninev2

This says it all.
redredred · M
So your god created humanity and put a temptation in front of them he knew they would go for. As a result of their failure, all humans are born with a sin. To make up for this sin he sends himself as his own son to be a sacrifice to himself to save humanity from the damnation he himself would impose on them.

A bit circular, no?
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@Diotrephes



That would almost work. Abe was once accused of being two-faced and his response was something like "Do you think if I had two faces I would wear this one?!"
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@newjaninev2 [quote]Apparently ‘don’t care’ = ‘can’t explain it’[/quote]

I don't need to. I need to see the evidence of which you so tediously speak.

[quote](please note that apes didn’t evolve into humans... humans are apes)[/quote]

Okay. Problem solved. Evolution isn't contradictory to creation.
newjaninev2 · 51-55, F
@SemmelweisReflex [quote]a perfect scientific sentiment, especially to militant fundamentalist atheists[/quote]

Ah yes, there’s that purple prose again... a sure sign that you’re trying not to say something
Tinkles · 26-30, F
It can be summed up like that... but it shouldn't.

You entirely left out the hope, of Jesus saving us by dying for our sins
DocSavage · M
@SemmelweisReflex
Regardless of the technical definition of “zombie” it still means a reanimated corpse to everyone .
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@DocSavage [quote]Regardless of the technical definition of “zombie” it still means a reanimated corpse to everyone .[/quote]

Hah. Everyone are idiots.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@SemmelweisReflex I'm an atheist but did attend church when I was a pre-teen.

You do a good job of picking and choosing.

Jesus said that if a person had faith the size of a mustard seed that he could command a tree, or even a mountain. to uproot itself and to jump into the sea and that the tree, or the mountain, would obey. Why hasn't anyone ever had any faith? Maybe Jesus was just a liar.

The story plainly says that countless people saw God. Moses was always talking to him face to face. Others had a picnic with him. He was in their camps.

What about those corpse that popped out of their graves in Matthew 27:51-53 and went to visit their buddies? Don't they classify as zombies?

All of the biblical stories, except for some in the Apocrypha, illustrate one or more of the real Ten Commandments (Exodus 34:11-26) in action. The miracles are based on Exodus 34:10. Read and understand that section and the read any story and you will see the connection. The stories themselves don't have to make logical sense because that is not their real purpose. They are meant to get the listener, or the reader, to reflect on the Ten Commandments.

1 Corinthians 15:15-16 says that since it is normal for dead people to be raised from the dead that means that Jesus was also raised from the dead,

1 Corinthians 15:15-16 (MEV) = "15 Yes, and we would then be found false witnesses of God, because we have testified that God raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up, if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if the dead do not rise, then Christ has not been raised."

How many actual dead people have you seen in your lifetime rise from the dead? TV and movies don't count.

Notice that the passage doesn't say that since Jesus was resurrected from the dead, everyone else will also be resurrected. It says that because dead people are routinely resurrected, it means that Jesus was also resurrected. The passage was included that way to show that the story is just an elaborate hoax. There are countless passages like that scattered throughout the Bible.

edited to added comment
DocSavage · M
@SemmelweisReflex
In which context are you using the term. A sucker can be a piece of candy on or off a stick, it can also be the person enjoying that piece of candy, or can refer to an appendage on a squid, octopus, snail, etc. it can refer to someone using a straw to drink with. Please explain your question.
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@DocSavage Well! It can't mean all of those things! That would make it meaningless! To an idiot.
DocSavage · M
Actually it means all those things. A baby with a pacifier is a sucker. It can mean whatever you want it to mean. Just look it up
DocSavage · M
Ok, so we have a blood moon. Is this supposed to be a sign of end times, or just basic physics
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@DocSavage It's happened countless times before.
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@DocSavage [quote]Ok, so we have a blood moon. Is this supposed to be a sign of end times, or just basic physics[/quote]

I think it's funny how you keep comparing your ignorance of the Bible with your exaggerated intelligence so that you don't have to be held accountable to the God you don't have the sense to know exists. It's like watching a dumb dog chase it's own tail over and over and over . . .
Sharon · F
@SemmelweisReflex If childish insults are all you have to offer, you may as well give up now.
[quote]it spawned an illegitimate offspring, science.[/quote] 👍

We're going down along with earth.
@SemmelweisReflex I wouldn't. I don't control the universe or the end of time. God does.
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@Fragmented [quote]I wouldn't. I don't control the universe or the end of time. God does.[/quote]

Not sure what this is in response to, Frag.
@SemmelweisReflex To this, Semm. 😁[quote]Let's say that you could pull the plug. On science, technology, corporatocracy, the last of the world's superpowers, the federal reserve note . . . how long that would prolong the end.[/quote]
Elessar · 26-30, M
Day 12 of the 5th month of the 1989th year since the first time someone said the end was near (due to religious and non man-caused reasons).

We're still here.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@SemmelweisReflex It's very easy to see when you read the story. Adam was created from dust (Genesis 2:7), his purpose was to till the ground (Genesis 2:5). The Garden of Eden was created (Genesis 2:8). Adam could eat everything in sight except for the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:16-17). God then got the bright idea that Adam needed a helper so he made all of the animals and Adam got to name them but none of them were good sexual partners for Adam (Genesis 18-20) . So God gave Adam a sleeping pill, took one of his ribs, and made a feminine human called Eve (Genesis 2:21:23) . Although Adam and Eve never had fathers and mothers God gave them reproductive rights so that their kids would leave them to get married with a woman (Genesis 2:24-25). God didn't make any more men from dust or women from Adam's ribs so all subsequent people were from their incestuous union.

Naturally, Eve ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and got Adam to do the same (Genesis 3:1-21).

In Genesis 3:22 the tree of life is mentioned for the first time and it has the power to give the eater eternal life.

Read and think:

Genesis 3:22-24 (ERV) = "22 The Lord God said, “Look, the man has become like us—he knows about good and evil. [b][i]And now the man might take the fruit from the tree of life. If the man eats that fruit, he will live forever.[/i][/b]”

23 So the Lord God forced the man out of the Garden of Eden to work the ground he was made from. 24 God forced the man to leave the garden. Then he put Cherub angels and a sword of fire at the entrance to the garden to protect it. The sword flashed around and around, guarding the way to the tree of life."

So, if Eve and Adam had never ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil they would have remained stupid creatures and died none the wiser. But they ate and then knew as much as God did about good and evil, maybe that's why people will judge angels. So, while Adam & Eve did increase our knowledge they were unable give us eternal life.

So, remember that you are as smart as God about what is good and what is evil. Isn't that wonderful? Thank Eve for that, a variation of Minerva.
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@Diotrephes [quote]It's very easy to see when you read the story. Adam was created from dust (Genesis 2:7), his purpose was to till the ground (Genesis 2:5). The Garden of Eden was created (Genesis 2:8). Adam could eat everything in sight except for the tree of knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:16-17). God then got the bright idea that Adam needed a helper so he made all of the animals[/quote]

Dust: The Hebrew word aphar would later be used to describe clay, as in pottery. Comparing translations you also get "the ground," "the earth," "the soil," and "dust from the ground." What it means is that he formed man from elements of the earth.
https://biblehub.com/genesis/2-7.htm

There are two creation accounts; Genesis 1:1-24 and Genesis 2:5-4:26. the first is chronological and the second is topical in relation to mankind. So the animals were created first and Adam was created last.

[quote]Naturally, Eve ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and got Adam to do the same (Genesis 3:1-21).[/quote]

Naturally? Eve didn't have to eat from the tree.

[quote]In Genesis 3:22 the tree of life is mentioned for the first time and it has the power to give the eater eternal life.[/quote]

The trees, both of the knowledge of good and bad and the tree of life, didn't have any power beyond what a normal tree would be expected to have. They merely represented those things. The first represented God's sovereignty to man. A reminded that their creator would teach them, guide them and protect them in fulfilling their purpose as created beings. The second represented God's purpose of man living forever, though temporarily delayed, would nevertheless be fulfilled. Since Adam and Eve were immediately expelled from Eden this tree is different than the first in that it isn't a constant visual reminder, but something that he was aware of but that was, temporarily, removed from his grasp.

So, what all of this says is that man was created from the elements of the earth, was a part of the earth in the sense that he belonged there, his purpose was connected to it. He had been created perfect. Like a newborn baby in that he was innocent and having great potential to do either good or bad. If he listened to his creator he would do good, but if not he would do bad. Eve was deceived, but Adam, as steward of the earth, chose the decide for himself what was good and what was bad.

[quote]So, if Eve and Adam had never ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil they would have remained stupid creatures and died none the wiser.[/quote]

No, no, no. None the wiser of what? If they had never eaten from the tree they and their offspring would have lived forever as they were meant to do. They would have eventually reached their potential, which was the image, that is, having the qualities and characteristics of their creator. In effect, Jesus was what we could have been had Adam not sinned. Jesus could have failed. He could have sinned like Satan, Eve and Adam. Part of what Jesus did is to demonstrate that man [b]did not[/b] have to sin.

The word knowledge is used in a variety of ways in language. Basically it means familiarity with facts acquired by personal experience, observation, or study, so often knowledge means to be intimately acquainted with something. For example the homosexuals in the account of Sodom wanted to "get to know" the angels visiting Lot. They wanted to have sex with them.

Prior to the sin of Satan, Eve and Adam there was no knowledge of anything bad because there was no bad. God didn't know what was bad because there was none for him to have had an intimate acquaintance with. God knew that only bad could come of man's rejection of his sovereignty. Just as a parent would know that they can't leave their children to take care of themselves because they haven't the experience to do so.

There's no magic here. It's all practical. All of the superstitious, religious nonsense came through interpretation much later. In order to see how nonsensical all of that can be just look at what we used to think the apple of the tree represented. Sex. God had created them to produce - by having sex.

The sort of religious nonsense I'm talking about is a huge part of why I find it very difficult to talk to "believers." They believe nonsense. Traditions of men, as Jesus called it.

[quote]But they ate and then knew as much as God did about good and evil, maybe that's why people will judge angels. So, while Adam & Eve did increase our knowledge they were unable give us eternal life.[/quote]

Speaking of believers . . .

No. They knew as much as God did about good and evil before they sinned. Because God had told them. Notice that it says "like one of us, knowing good and evil." They all knew in the sense that they were aware of the possibilities, but it had never been tried. Now it has. And how is it working out compared to how it is allegedly supposed to have happened?

I go into this in greater detail in this thread: https://similarworlds.com/atheism/dislike-atheism/4329678-The-Meaning-of-the-Bible-as-I-see-it?sort=1

You bring up an interesting point about people judging angels. Since God and Jesus don't have an intimate acquaintance with sin, they haven't personally experienced sin, there will be people judging, both mortals and spirit beings because they do have that knowledge. In that respect we have a knowledge that God doesn't.

[quote]So, remember that you are as smart as God about what is good and what is evil. Isn't that wonderful? Thank Eve for that, a variation of Minerva.[/quote]

Okay. Yeah. That's sort of like what I was saying only I wouldn't say it like that. The way you put it would be like me saying someone who jumped off a cliff and broke their back was "smarter" than me.

Minerva? Variation of Eve? Minerva corresponds to the Etruscan Tinia, Uni, and Menrva. To the Romans she was the goddess of crafts, war, and wisdom. Time, from outside the gates of Eden, have provided us of many variations that intermingle in the telling.
Diotrephes · 70-79, M
@SemmelweisReflex Good attempt to spin it but it's gong nowhere.

In Genesis chapter 2:18-20 it plainly says that Adam was all alone. There were no women or animals. God then realized he had screwed up so he created the animals and birds but they all failed at being a helper comparable to Adam. So, God tried a new trick and took one of Adam's ribs and made a grown woman out of it to romp with Adam. Buzzards and rhinos aren't good sex partners and they aren't good conversationalists.

Why are you discounting the powers of the trees when they are an integral part of the fairy tale? If you don't believe in them why do you believe corpses pop out of their graves and go visit their buddies in town? Why do you believe in eternal life, heaven and hell, angels and demons, spirits and ghosts?

Adam and Eve were dumber than rocks before they ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and then they knew as much as God does about good and evil.

If God hadn't been so incompetent he could have made all animals, and humans, with the same characteristics as flies. Once they change from being maggots and turn into flying insects they are totally independent of each other, They are not like bees and wasps and ants. They live their lives totally independent of each other. Isn't that a better model for life forms?

The sin of Sodom was inhospitality to strangers, it wasn't homosexuality. And, according to the fairy tale, Sodom will be rebuilt to all of its former glory so be sure to buy some lots there as soon as it makes the news.

Speaking of Jesus, remember his ancestors were bastards and whores. The Bible is big on linking people with the sins of their ancestors, up to ten generations.
https://thebricktestament.com/the_law/racial%20tolerance/dt23_03a.html 5 pictures

According to the fairy tale, God created evil and he has a gang of evil angels to do his dirty work.

Isaiah 45:7 (LEB) = "I form light and I create darkness; I make peace and I create evil; I am Yahweh; I do all these things."

Psalm 78:49 (KJV) = "He cast upon them the fierceness of his anger, wrath, and indignation, and trouble, by sending evil angels among them."
CopperCicada · 56-60, M
You’re that dude with a different name now.

Worst evangelist evah.
newjaninev2 · 51-55, F
@CopperCicada Yes... the same unwillingness to clearly and succinctly state a claim, and the same dishonest concealment behind purple prose.

I’m sure he impresses himself 😂
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@CopperCicada What, are you 12? Make some sense.
Pinkstarburst · 51-55, F
You have a date for this closing ceremony?
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@Pinkstarburst No date. There isn't a set date. It could happen any time. Tonight or 1,000 years from now. I did mention that the end times began upon the birth of Cain. It's been a while.
InHeaven · F
I think, Jesus will come before they force their Artificial intelligence interface Neuralink crap in our skulls, at least not all of us.
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@Kwek00 Environmentalists, politicians, scientists . . .

Why is this under "Atheism" ?
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@bijouxbroussard [quote]Why is this under "Atheism" ?[/quote]

I haven't seen you around. Kind of hard to territorial piss if you aren't in the territory, huh?

This is under atheism because atheism is the antithesis of theism. You thought it was a bumper sticker? A swinging bingo club? It's debate. On atheism and theism.
@SemmelweisReflex I blocked the religious groups to avoid religious dogma from appearing in my newsfeed. Atheists don’t generally post it. Easier to block you. Bye.
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@bijouxbroussard [quote]Easier to block you. Bye.[/quote]

Oh no! I'm melting, I'm melting . . . .
FukFaceWillie · 46-50, M
Your mother sews socks that smell.
SemmelweisReflex · 51-55, M
@FukFaceWillie Your mother sews socks that smell.

FukFace! Where the hell you been?!

I don't know what you're on about smelly footwear for, but, good to see you.
FukFaceWillie · 46-50, M
@SemmelweisReflex It’s code, baby, code.
DDonde · 31-35, M

 
Post Comment
 
817 people following
Atheism
Personal Stories, Advice, and Support
New Post
Beliefs Health Pet Peeves Politics Religion
Associated Groups Category Members