Archive for February 15th, 2006

Flavius Josephus . A Jewish historian (37 CE – circa 100 CE ) On Jesus Christ

Religious, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Feb 15 2006


For centuries Josephus’ works were more widely read in Europe than any book other than the Bible. They are an invaluable eye-witness to a momentous turning point in Judaism, Christianity, and Western civilization.

Josephus, Antiquities 18.63, probably in a Christian redaction
Tr. I. H. Feldman, Loeb Classical Library, vol. 9, pp. 49ff.

Greek Version

Re: Jesus Christ

“About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man if indeed one ought to call him a man.

For he was one who wrought surprising feats and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah.

When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing among us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not cease.

On the third day he appeared to them restored to life. For the prophets of God had prophesied these and myriads of other marvellous things about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still up to now, not disappeared.”

Arabic Version:
The translation belongs to Shlomo Pines. See also James H. Charlesworth, Jesus Within Judaism.

“Similarly Josephus the Hebrew. For he says in the treatises that he has written on the governance of the Jews:

At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous.

And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die.

And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders. “

Darwin’s Warm Pond Theory Tested and Found Wanting

Church of Darwin, Science, Uncategorized | Posted by Chris Parker
Feb 15 2006

By Rebecca Morelle
BBC News science reporter

Daniel 5:27
27 TEKEL; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting.

Life on Earth was unlikely to have emerged from volcanic springs or hydrothermal vents, according to a leading US researcher.

Experiments carried out in volcanic pools suggest they do not provide the right conditions to spawn life.
The findings are being discussed at an international two-day meeting to explore the latest thinking on the origin of life on Earth. It is taking place at the Royal Society in London.

Darwin’s theory

David Deamer, emeritus professor of chemistry at the University of California at Santa Cruz, said ahead of his presentation: “It is about 140 years since Charles Darwin suggested that life may have begun in a ‘warm little pond’. We are now testing Darwin’s idea, but in ‘hot little puddles’ associated with the volcanic regions of Kamchatka [Russia] and Mount Lassen [California, US].”

Prof Ian Smith, University of Cambridge

“The results are surprising and in some ways disappointing. It seems that hot acidic waters containing clay do not provide the right conditions for chemicals to assemble themselves into ‘pioneer organisms.’”
Professor Deamer said that amino acids and DNA, the “building blocks” for life, and phosphate, another essential ingredient, cling to the surfaces of clay particles in the volcanic pools.

“The reason this is significant is that it has been proposed that clay promotes interesting chemical reactions relating to the origin of life,” he explained. “However,” he added, “in our experiments, the organic compounds became so strongly held to the clay particles that they could not undergo any further chemical reactions.”

Martian existence?

While our understanding of the world is rapidly increasing, the answer to how life began on Earth remains elusive. The conference, involving more than 200 leading international scientists, will also explore other theories including whether life arrived from space.

“It is presumed that life arose in a soup rich in carbon compounds, but where did these organic molecules come from?” said Dr Max Bernstein from the US-based Seti Institute. He believes the answer may lie in interstellar dust, and will be talking about the possibility that a comet or asteroid may have provided Earth with the raw ingredients needed for life.

The researchers will also be asking whether life could exist elsewhere in the Universe. Professor Monica Grady from the UK’s Open University will explore the possibility of a Martian existence at the meeting.
She will discuss whether a Martian biosphere once existed by examining research into the carbon chemistry of Mars.

Professor Ian Smith, from the University of Cambridge, the organiser of the conference said: “Understanding how life emerged on Earth within 1,000 million years [sic]of its formation is both a fascinating scientific problem and an essential step in predicting the presence of life elsewhere in the Universe.”

Professor Deamer said that his research, which is not yet published, will help to narrow down the theories about how life on Earth emerged. “One possibility is that life really did begin in a ‘warm little pond’, but not in hot volcanic springs or marine hydrothermal vents,” he added.

Letter to s8int.com: Speculation About Noah’s Ark Survivors and Genetic Variation

s8int.com, Science, Uncategorized | Posted by Chris Parker
Feb 15 2006



Dear Sir

I’d like to argue the idea that Noah and his family hardly were the only survivors after the flood.

This contradicts Bible if someone insists this book should be understood to the letter.

But if Noah’s family had been the only humans after the flood the distinction among our planet’s races would
have been hardly possible.

African people the Scandinavians are Noah’s descendants? I can hardly accept this assertion.

Besides linguistic drift takes place worldwide and the deviation among languages indicates thousands of years required to cause the present difference between e.g. French or Bulgarian languages.

To my mind the flood has only destroyed civilized countries.

Primordial people remained unharmed. This also points out the possible
difference between pre-flood civilization and ours – the first didn’t
colonize wide areas of our planet.

Very likely their technology was sufficient enough to meet needs of ancient people and they regarded earth as a large reservation. So the worldwide knowledge about the flood is caused by the stories which Noah’s descendants were able to narrate.

Sincerely
Serge
Saint Petersburg, Russia

Response from s8int.com

Dear Serge,

Is the Bible to be Taken Literally?

Thanks very much for your note. We appreciate the chance to respond to the questions you’ve raised because many of them come up here frequently -and plus, this gives us a reason to put off actual work for a few minutes more.

The Bible contains various kinds of literature, and I imagine, just as when you speak or write most of what you communicate is to be taken literally, while sometimes what you say is an analogy, or hyperbole or perhaps irony. The person you’re communicating with simply needs to know which type of speech you’re engaging in from moment to moment to correctly understand your communication.

We assume by looking at this particular e-mail that you expect all of it to be taken literally—including “sincerely” at the end?

The Bible is the same. Most of it is to be taken literally but the bible student and frequent reader understands when other types of speech are being utilized.

I do believe the account of Noah is to be taken quite literally.

Human Genetic Variation

You wrote: “But if Noah’s family had been the only humans after the flood the distinction among our planet’s races would have been hardly possible.

African people the Scandinavians are Noah’s descendants? I can hardly accept this assertion.”

S8int.com: We’re going to assume that we’re misunderstanding your intent when you differentiate between “primordial people” and “civilized people”.

You are absolutely wrong about the genetic variation among humans and the possibility of the current racial makeup of the planet. In fact, the concept of race is not supported at all in our DNA; it is a recent invention of man.

Don’t you realize that the materialists, atheists and “non literal Bible believers” would be all over Christians and creationists if eight people could not in fact contain the entire human genome? If that were true, the whole Noah’s Ark story could be defeated right there.

On the contrary, however all human beings from a genetic standpoint are virtually IDENTICAL. The average genetic difference between any two people is 1 in every 1000 base pairs. This means that when a “Black man” stands next to a “White man” or an “Asian man, each of them is in fact 99.99% genetically identical!

The human genome has approximately 3 billion base pairs. The .01% difference between humans on 3 billion base pairs comes out to about 3 million genetic differences between individuals. You get 3,000,000 differences on .01% because 3 billion is such a huge number.

Of those 3 million average genetic differences in DNA between individuals, the vast majority of them do not produce visible or even detectable effects on an individual.

Here’s the point. Humans are 99.99% identical. Therefore, all human variation could conceivably be contained in two individuals (as in James Brown and Keith Richards above) . That’s unlikely. On the other hand, it’s barely possible to assemble eight people who together do not contain the entire human genome.

Clearly however, it is possible for the entire human genome to have come from eight individuals. This includes your Africans and your Scandinavians!

Think of it this way; if two individuals both received a 99.99% on an exam, what is the probability that between the two of them they got every possible correct answer? How about three people who received a 99.99%? What’s the possibility that between the three of them that they got 100% of the answers correct?

Humans are so virtually identical on a genetic level that the Author of this science article states:

“We actually found that one single group of 55 chimpanzees in West Africa has twice the genetic variability of all humans,” Gagneux says. “In other words, chimps who live in the same little group on the Ivory Coast are genetically more different from each other than you are from any human anywhere on the planet.” end quote

It’s almost as though we were virtually wiped out in something like a…..worldwide flood!

For more information on this topic, please see:National Institute of Health Education-Human Genetic Variation

Deviation Among Human Languages

This falls on the idea of whether the Bible can be taken literally or not. This language variation, if you remember came about miraculously and instantaneously according to the Bible.

Incidentally, there is evidence of one world wide language in the past and evidence that all languages can be traced back to one “mother tongue”, all of which support the literal Biblical account.

If you’re like us and Genetically You Are 99.99% Exactly Like Us, you’ll find all this very interesting.

Thanks for the note and we hope that the genetic similarity of all humans will give you a reason to believe that the Bible is the literal, inerrant Word of God.

Amen.

Sincerely,

S8int.com

Sauropods? Or Blind Chance?

Crypto, Dinosaurs in Literature, Science, Uncategorized, Unexplained Artifact | Posted by Chris Parker
Feb 15 2006

Either these ancient pieces themselves convince you that these artists had actually seen various types of dinosaurs that we now call sauropods–or they don’t.

Did these dinosaurs/dragons die out millions of years before man “evolved” or were they living “along side ” man all along?

Case closed-or objection your honor, assuming facts not in evidence?

Click Here to Read Article and to See Ancient Artifacts