search results matching tag: talking snake

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.004 seconds

    Videos (1)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (0)     Comments (50)   

iPhone 13 A Repair Nightmare - Teardown and Repair Assessmen

BSR says...

Creepy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

'Paradise Lost': How The Apple Became The Forbidden Fruit

This month marks 350 years since John Milton sold his publisher the copyright of Paradise Lost for the sum of five pounds.

His great work dramatizes the oldest story in the Bible, whose principal characters we know only too well: God, Adam, Eve, Satan in the form of a talking snake — and an apple.

Except, of course, that Genesis never names the apple but simply refers to "the fruit." To quote from the King James Bible:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.'"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Fruit" is also the word Milton employs in the poem's sonorous opening lines:

Of Mans First Disobedience, and the Fruit

Of that Forbidden Tree, whose mortal taste

Brought Death into the World, and all our woe

https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/04/30/526069512/paradise-lost-how-the-apple-became-the-forbidden-fruit

7 LIES You Were Taught At School

ChaosEngine says...

"There's no gravity in space"
Eh, it depends who you're talking to. If you're explaining to kids why things float in space, that's a reasonable approximation. If you're teaching physics to high school students, you're really doing it wrong.

"Trojan horse"
When was this ever presented as fact? I actually remember learning about the search for a possible real world site of Troy and I remember being taught the STORY of this, but given it was in the same story about a guy who could only be killed in the heel, we weren't expected to believe it was 100% accurate. Talking snakes on the other hand? Totally real.

The rest are reasonable enough.

Wounded By Christianithy Healed By Christianity

newtboy says...

*spam
I just lost a few IQ points watching this ad for a really dumb fantasy book.
I guess once you believe in talking snakes and capricious invisible sky daddies, you'll buy anything....only $19.95 at car washes that sell books near you.

Protests Against Trump Are Protests Against God

newtboy says...

There are far more 'common threads' between Daesh and the Bakers than there are with Daesh and the left.

Did that guy just say the Soviet Union funded nuclear protests world wide in the 80's? When they were dead broke, starving, and the union was dissolving? I'm pretty certain that would be news to my aunt and uncle who have run an anti-nuclear protest group since the early 70's.

John Guanadolo?!? Really? "Foremost terrorism expert"?!? Don't they mean "disgraced and fired ex FBI agent caught having numerous affairs, including with witnesses he was protecting, among numerous other complaints, most notably his rabid anti Muslim stances and actions but including coercion and extortion"?

Not really a surprise from people who believe in talking snakes, tout incestuous communities (Adam, Eve, and their progeny), and who worship a zombie, but still disappointing.

Shit Steve Harvey says

newtboy says...

Perhaps we should all treat him that way...if you say 'I believe in fairy tales, magic dudes, and talking snakes' we should simply walk away, because you're an idiot, and likely a dangerous angry zealous one.
It's hard to single out Steve for his 'opinion' since MOST 'christians' and other religious people actually think this way. Most of them don't have the strength of their convictions enough to follow through on this smarmy assholyness (pun intended) or even state it out loud, but it is not a minority thought.
What a douche...I nominate Steve for the next 'Biggest Douche in the Universe' for having the bad taste to say this hateful ignorant crap out loud on TV.

Dragons are Real!

BANNED TED Talks Graham Hancock on Consciousness Emergence

BicycleRepairMan says...

Sigh. Its not that I dont want a "spiritual experience", its just that the "spiritual" DOES NOT EXIST. This is chemicals reacting with the neurons in your brain, making you think you are experiencing "spiritual" things. It doesn't matter that you go "you just dont understand,man, try it yourself" blahblahblah. I dont have to. Because whatever subjective experience I'll have or you've had, will not change some basic facts that we all have to deal with: That we , along with our brains and our consciousness, are evolved biological phenomena that abide by the laws of physics. We even know that the brain is a fallible instrument thats just SO easy to fool, you dont even need drugs. Right now there are literally billions of people who are wasting almost their entire life believing in nonsense, They use laptops, mobile phones, planes and they've seen the freaking moonlanding, and they think a freaking Palestinian zombie was the son of god who rescued us from collective sin because a couple ate a fruit recommended by a talking snake.
And that's not even the dumbest religion.
People believe such bullshit because they are not really thinking straight , not taking in the facts discovered by science, not understanding the process by which such discoveries are made, not understanding the carefulness by which they are doublechecked, not understanding the implications that such discoveries have.

shagen454 said:

I understand, man. The only way to see that is to do it yourself, obviously if you do not want a spiritual experience, then you are well aware to stay clear.

Here is another article on the science behind how it works: http://www.neurophys.wisc.edu/~cozzi/Indolethylamine%20N-methyltransferase%20expression%20in%20primate%20nervous%20tissue.pdf

Street artist playing Hallelujah with crystal glasses

What Mormons Really Believe

Bill Nye: Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children

ChaosEngine says...

>> ^qfan:

Side note: Being well respected doesn't mean his views are truth.


Agreed. On the other hand, the unassailable mountains of evidence for evolution means his views (at least on evolution) are truth. Or at least as much as it's possible to have any scientific "truth".


>> ^qfan:

Though yes, perfectly fine to have an opinion. I'm not disputing that.
What's in dispute is that he's telling parents not to share their beliefs with their own children. So we're not only telling creationists they can't share their views publicly in school, we also tell them that they can't share their views in private with their own children. It's extraordinarily dangerous thinking in the free world. These are private people who wish to raise their children with their own values. Bill is publicly preaching to parents (unlike those parents who are privately teaching their children) not to share what they believe in, all the while saying "When you're in love you want to tell the world about it." The man is amazingly hypocritical and sadly without an ounce of realisation about it.


He's not saying parents can't tell their children about creationism, he's saying they shouldn't. You can dance around the issue all you want, and believe in creationism, the tooth fairy or santa claus, but there comes a time when you have to grow up and accept reality. Right now, there's no debate about evolution, simply because there is no valid competing scientific theory that even comes close to matching the evidence. That I have to even spell this out is pretty sad.

>> ^qfan:

He says "We need scientifically literate people...". The thousands of scientists that believe in creation are also literate in science, even in the evolutionary aspects, except they choose not to believe in evolutionary theory. Science is a method. Nothing more, nothing less. Creationists aren't ignoring science at all, they are ignoring evolutionary theory.


There might be "thousands of scientists that believe in creation", but they represent a tiny percentage of the overall scientific community and almost none of them work in relevant fields. You wouldn't ask a plumber about aeronautical engineering, so don't ask a physicist about biology.

And if you ignore evolutionary theory, you are ignoring the science of biology. You are cherry-picking which evidence you accept because it doesn't fit your world view.

>> ^qfan:

Bill says "We need engineers, people that build stuff, solve problems...". The example of Wernher Von Braun puts this point to rest.


I have already conceded that you do not need to understand evolutionary biology to build rockets.

>> ^qfan:

You're confusing a lot of things here. First you say he ignored an area (evolution) that conflicted with his belief "because it didn't affect his work", then go on to say "You can be damn sure he benefited from the study of evolution".


If you're going to quote me, at least do me the courtesy of doing it fully and in context. What I said was:
>> ^ChaosEngine:

You can be damn sure he benefited from the study of evolution though, given it's the backbone of a lot of medical research.


I meant that Von Braun benefited from the study of evolution in the same way that every other human in the developed world did, through better medicines. It didn't really affect his work, but it did affect his life.


>> ^qfan:

Von Braun, "For me, the idea of a creation is not conceivable without invoking the necessity of design,” “It is in scientific honesty that I endorse the presentation of alternative theories for the origin of the universe, life and man in the science classroom. It would be an error to overlook the possibility that the universe was planned rather than happening by chance." http://www.thespacereview.com/article/656/1


So what? He was wrong about evolution. Big deal. Newton was one of the greatest minds of all time and he got time wrong. Science marches on, and I'm confident that Von Braun if he had the time and inclination to really study it, would eventually have accepted the facts of evolution. And if he still chose to ignore the evidence because it didn't fit his world-view, well, that's sad, but it changes nothing about the truth of evolution.

>> ^qfan:

Bill says that denial of evolution is unique to the US (which is already a very questionable statement in itself), then goes on to say that the US is the most technologically advanced nation (with a grudging acceptance that Japan might be slightly ahead). Again, another questionable statement and slightly elitist I might add So if denial of evolution is holding the US back, why is it the most technologically advanced? You could word it another way... denial of evolution and technological advancement do not correlate with one another.


It's not unique to the U.S., but it's more prevalent than any other developed nation. What he's saying is that the U.S. should know better.

Denial of evolution in and of itself is bad, but it's symptomatic of the larger issues of anti-intellectualism and non-rational thought. The people who made the U.S. the most technologically advanced nation are not the same people that believe in a talking snake.

Besides, he's talking about potential. Maybe somewhere in the bible belt the next Alexander Fleming is having their future taken away from them because they are being lied to (intentionally or not) by their parents and/or preachers.

Stephen Fry reviews Book of Genesis

hpqp says...

>> ^Unsung_Hero:

The Old Testament of the bible is fun to read. It's chalked full of God smiting people, talking snakes, rape, murder, love triangles, and magic.
The New Testament is like the instructions from IKEA... You should probably read it but it's easy to convince yourself not to.


Don't forget the incest; the OT looooooves itself some incest. And foreskin fetishes.

As for the NT, it would be like an IKEA manual if the latter condemned you to eternal torture for shopping with another brand, or (God forbid!) making your own furniture.

Stephen Fry reviews Book of Genesis

Unsung_Hero says...

The Old Testament of the bible is fun to read. It's chalked full of God smiting people, talking snakes, rape, murder, love triangles, and magic.

The New Testament is like the instructions from IKEA... You should probably read it but it's easy to convince yourself not to.

Jesus H Christ Explains Everything

shinyblurry says...

Eve was tempted by Satan, not a talking snake.

Why isn't this mentioned in the original text?

How and why did people suddenly realize the serpent was actually Satan a few thousand years later?


God works by progressive revelation. However, you can find something about it in Ezekiel 28.

Why didn't God recognize Satan in the form of a serpent? It seems God's omniscence was on the fritz that day; he didn't know where Adam was hiding and didn't know he and Eve had eaten the fruit.

God did recognize Satan, which is why He pronounced this judgment, which is also a prophecy of the Messiah:

Genesis 3:15

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

It's a prophecy about Jesus defeating Satan on the cross.

Have you ever asked a question you knew the answer to? Then you can understand why God asked Adam where he was.

If God did recognize Satan, why did he punish all serpents to crawl on their bellies and eat dust and all that?


Can you see how those words would have a deeper meaning to an angelic being who is condemned to stay on Earth?

And why did they continue to do business together for the next few thousand years until the Fall? If Satan was just doing his original job (tempting humans), why was he punished at all?

The fall was when Adam and Eve disobeyed God. Satans original job was the worship leader in Heaven. Since falling from grace, he has attempted to corrupt and destroy Gods creation. He tempted Adam and Eve to gain power over them, and because Adam has dominion over the Earth, he would become the defacto ruler.

Satan has played a role as a prosecuting attorney against God creations. God allowed him to serve in this capacity, but it wasn't a "job". It was Satans delight to do so, and part of his determination to ruin the creation.

Why was this required? Why can't God just change the rules if that's what he wants? Why does he need to jump through all these hoops?

I answered this question in messangers reply if you want to look there..

>> ^xxovercastxx

Jesus H Christ Explains Everything

xxovercastxx says...

@shinyblurry

Eve was tempted by Satan, not a talking snake.
Why isn't this mentioned in the original text?

How and why did people suddenly realize the serpent was actually Satan a few thousand years later?

Why didn't God recognize Satan in the form of a serpent? It seems God's omniscience was on the fritz that day; he didn't know where Adam was hiding, didn't know he and Eve had eaten the fruit and apparently had no idea Satan was sneaking around the garden disguised as a serpent.

If God did recognize Satan, why did he punish all serpents to crawl on their bellies and eat dust and all that? And why did they continue to do business together for the next few thousand years until the Fall? If Satan was just doing his original job (tempting humans), why was he punished at all?

What was required was a man who lived a perfect, sinless life in total obedience to God.
Why was this required? Why can't God just change the rules if that's what he wants? Why does he need to jump through all these hoops?

People are not saved by taking the sacraments. That is a catholic ritual.
...and a Protestant ritual, and a Greek Orthodox ritual.

Jesus H Christ Explains Everything

EvilDeathBee says...

>> ^shinyblurry:

No bible was used in the making of this video, because it is factually incorrect. If you have to distort something to mock it you don't have a case..I thought atheists liked to boast about their bible knowledge?
Eve was tempted by Satan, not a talking snake. Adam and Eve both sinned when they ate the fruit, but the crime was not eating fruit, it was disobeying God. Their sin brought death into the world.
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:"
Jesus and the Father are not the same person. The Father is not the Son and the Son is not the Father, but they are both God. God is three persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Jesus did not impregnate Mary; the Father sent the third person of the Holy Trinity, the Holy Spirit, in this wise:
"And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God."
Jesus did not sacrifice Himself to Himself. Again, the Father and the Son are not the same person. He was an atoning sacrifice for the sins of the world. He bore the punishment (death) for all sins so that through Him, we could be forgiven for our sins and be given eternal life.
"This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins"
A dead body was not required for Gods plan of redemption, to correct the mistakes human beings made. What was required was a man who lived a perfect, sinless life in total obedience to God. Since no human being could fulfill that requirement, God sent His Son in our place.
"Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come
But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!
Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification.
For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ."
People are not sent to hell for doubting the love of God. They are sent to hell for their sins. God offers forgiveness to every single person, and He does not desire that any should perish, but that all will come to repentance. Never the less, because God is Holy and just, He will punish all sin.
People are not saved by taking the sacraments. That is a catholic ritual. We are only saved by faith in Jesus Christ, and that faith alone will justify us before God. We eat bread and drink of the fruit of the vine in remembrance of Him, but that is all.
The Kingdom of Heaven is not in the sky. The Kingdom of Heaven is on Earth, and will be in this Universe. We are not going anywhere. We will experience life as God had originally designed it, here on Earth, before the fall.
The gospel is simple:
We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and the wages of our sin is death. Because of sin we are spiritually separated from God and headed for His prison called hell. He has set a day to judge the world, and on that day all sin will be punished. However, God doesn't want to send anyone to hell. He created it for the devil and his angels, not human beings. He loves us, which is why God sent His only Son to bear the punishment for our sins, in our place, so we wouldn't have to go to hell. He took all of our sins upon Himself on the cross, and died in our place.
Now, because of Jesus, we can be forgiven and go free. Jesus paid our fine in full. This is the good news, that through Jesus our sins are forgiven, and that He grants us eternal life. Pray to Jesus Christ and ask Him to come into your life as Lord and Savior, and you will be saved.


~



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon