Ian,if you look carefully you'll see I said Jesus of Nasareth not Mesiah... and yes if Tacitus says that " Their originator, Christ, had been executed in Tiberius’ reign by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilatus." To me, at least, that sounds pretty literal Tacitus was not a believer, nor promoter of Christianity, actually he, literally, hated their guts
evolution or creation? lets talk...
by Sam87 537 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Dansk
For those who feel life appeared as a one celled ameba...How did it sustain life after that. You know...nourishment?
Oh, no, TopHat!! You've left yourself open to further charges of ignorance - and, putting it as kindly as I can, you are ignorant (please, I say that in its intended vein and not with malice, i.e. you haven't read up on amoebas)!
Amoebas are nourished through living on their prey.They eat it by throwing pseudopodia around it, enclosing it in a spherical bubble of water. See: http://tolweb.org/notes/?note_id=51
Ian
-
Dansk
Zagor,
I know YOU didn't say Messiah. I put that in for those who do!!
Ian,if you look carefully you'll see I said Jesus of Nasareth not Mesiah... and yes if Tacitus says that " Their originator, Christ, had been executed in Tiberius’ reign by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilatus." To me, at least, that sounds pretty literal Tacitus was not a believer, nor promoter of Christianity, actually he, literally, hated their guts
OK, difficult, I know, but where did Tacitus get his information from? Ian
-
zagor
OK, difficult, I know, but where did Tacitus get his information from?
Well, it is a fair bet that these weren't "Christian sources" but official Roman documents including those submitted by Pontius Pilatus himself. Tacutus was a respected Roman historian who loved Roman way of life and certainly would do everything in his power to debunk historicity of Jesus if it was that simple because by that time christians were viewed as a scourge and a menace that required urgent attention.
-
Dansk
Well, it is a fair bet
So you don't actually know?!
It's ok, I've just put feelers out to some scholars and I'm hoping for some feedback today. Once I get word, I'll post back.
Thanks for the input.
Ian
-
TopHat
Do you mean the very beginning of life Dansk?
-
AuldSoul
I think there is solid consensus (even among Creationists) that the beginning of life on earth was plant life, not animal. Amoeba, like many herbivores, eat plants...flora...bacteria and algae.
Respectfully,
AuldSoul -
jgnat
I think Top Hat is suggesting that Amoebas were the first evidence of life (if evolution were true).
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/04/040401081143.htm
And if the first, what did they eat? So I went looking.
Amoebas eat algea among other things. Are algea life?
http://www.botany.uwc.ac.za/algae/
Yes. They reproduce. What do they eat? They transform sun and water in to sugars by way of chlorophyll. There you have it. Food that is not life. It appears it would be more proper to say that the study of Amoebas help us understand the origins of RNA and DNA, the building blocks of life as we know it.
-
Dansk
Do you mean the very beginning of life Dansk?
Sorry, TopHat, you're losing me now! You asked how amoebas got their nourishment. I answered and you then asked the above. Who said ameobas were the very beginning of life? Is that what you mean? I know they weren't! Ian
-
zagor
So you don't actually know?!
LOL, well what do you think? Lots of history is subjective and to some of those questions we'll never know the answer. No self-respecting historian will claim that he know something for certain. There are always degrees of certainty when it comes to history. I wish it was like physics but it ain't. Which is why people like Dan Brown can make up complete bullshit and get something like 50+ million people reading his book (modest estimate) and believing it.
Anyhow, back to our subject