Why is a non-earth entity less believable than a religious entity?

>>It was a real, actual, tangible object of historical significance. Certainly the writers of that movie used a great deal of artistic license in dramating power associated with it, but the Mcguffin itself was a real thing from history.<<

The ark is as real as 'excalibur'. There exists no historical evidence that the ark existed. It exists only in stories, legend and hearsay.

Peacock's-Eye said:

>>It was a real, actual, tangible object of historical significance. Certainly the writers of that movie used a great deal of artistic license in dramating power associated with it, but the Mcguffin itself was a real thing from history.<<

The ark is as real as 'excalibur'. There exists no historical evidence that the ark existed. It exists only in stories, legend and hearsay.

Click to expand...

That's just your ridiculous opinion. I suppose you believe the sky is purple and yellow too, don't you?

There are definitely some who view the Ark or the Grail in a much higher value as anything else. I had no problem with the Alien angle. It wasn't all that different from Raiders, except that the effects were more extreme and Spalko was no where near as obsessed as Belloq. I really think you have to take into account that the view of aliens back in the 1950's was way different than now. They were "little green men" or "Saucer Men from Mars."

........

There's no way right now to prove the Annanaki were aliens........... but what Im saying is there's no way to prove God or the miracles of Jesus either. Just stories put together 200 years after his death. Hell we question and have concerns about testimony just 2 days after some event now.......but 200 years? I believe in god and Im not saying you have to stop believing as well. Im just saying you should allow for the possibility for the ancient space travelling gods to actually be just that.

Peacock's-Eye said:

>>I personally don't see how someone could say He outright lied about his status as the Savior<<

Jebus didn't write the Gospels, other people did, after he was long dead & gone. We don't know what Jebus said, thought, or preached.

Click to expand...

Who is Jebus? The Gospels contain indpendent accounts of the same occurrences and statements of Christ. Good enough for me. That the authors of the Gospels, themselves great men -- and some quite skeptical -- were equally convinced of Christ's Savior status is also notable.

Z

Alienconspiracy said:

Im just saying you should allow for the possibility for the ancient space travelling gods to actually be just that.

Click to expand...

I've seen no evidence that would convince me of such.

Z

...........

So texts on clay and stone from ancient sumeria is not considered some evidence at all?

Show me the proof god existed........ show me proof Jesus performed miracles. Because the bible and all its texts are absolutely no different than the texts from sumeria.....its all written hear say.

Tell me , who were the annanaki? Were they Time travellers, space travellers or Dimensional travellers because these people believed in them whole heartedly. And in case you are wondering, you can do the research yourself but gods in greek mythology and later in roman mythology are derived from the stories of the Annanaki. way too much to type but believe me , you can definately tell greeks took those stories and altered them to their belief system. And we know this happened a lot back then, as evidenced by romans completely stealing the greek mythology.

If you can show me the physical evidence that God exists or that Jesus lived and performed miracles....... i'll give in to the idea the annanaki could of been made up completely. And there is my point, you cant physcially prove either so why not give them both the possibility in being true?

It says god is our creator but technically my mom and dad created me. That means in the good bible and word of god, we could of been created from the Annanaki like the sumerians say..... and wouldnt even be against religion.

And my last nugget of wisdom....... we today dont even know much of anything about the world and universe , never the less the history and details of our own existance........ but you believe somehow people 5,000-2,000 years ago knew everything? They took nuggets that god taught them and tried to fill in the rest their selves and thats where they are wrong...

But the bible was written by god right? WRONG.. written by man and here's your proof....... Bible says our world is only 6,000 years old.........WRONG..... 14 billion years old and possibly older...... Bible says we were the first here on earth....WRONG........ Proven wrong.......... 40 days and nights of rain to cause a great flood.......WRONG..... All cultures talk of a great flood but none of the others come close to 40 days and nights. The many outweigh the one. The bible was written by man and while some teachings were given to man by god, man filled in the rest to make a good story.

Alienconspiracy said:

So texts on clay and stone from ancient sumeria is not considered some evidence at all?

Click to expand...

I didn't say the evidence didn't exist, I said it wasn't convincing.

Show me the proof god existed........ show me proof Jesus performed miracles. Because the bible and all its texts are absolutely no different than the texts from sumeria.....its all written hear say.

Click to expand...

Who said I had proof?

Tell me , who were the annanaki?

Click to expand...

I don't care about the annanaki.

If you can show me the physical evidence that God exists or that Jesus lived and performed miracles....... i'll give in to the idea the annanaki could of been made up completely. And there is my point, you cant physcially prove either so why not give them both the possibility in being true?

Click to expand...

Its all about weighing the evidence we have. That the annanaki religion died out a long time ago is certainly a consideration about how substantial the evidence is.

And my last nugget of wisdom....... we today dont even know much of anything about the world and universe , never the less the history and details of our own existance........ but you believe somehow people 5,000-2,000 years ago knew everything? They took nuggets that god taught them and tried to fill in the rest their selves and thats where they are wrong...

Click to expand...

Are you sure they're wrong? I believe certain individuals, Christ and those surrounding Him particularly, were privy to certain information offering insight into the divine. Information we still have today -- in the Bible.

But the bible was written by god right? WRONG.. written by man and here's your proof....... Bible says our world is only 6,000 years old.........WRONG..... 14 billion years old and possibly older...... Bible says we were the first here on earth....WRONG........ Proven wrong.......... 40 days and nights of rain to cause a great flood.......WRONG..... All cultures talk of a great flood but none of the others come close to 40 days and nights. The many outweigh the one.

Click to expand...

First of all -- you use the word "wrong" as if you know what you're talking about. You simply cannot know the factual basis of these matters that you declare "wrong" outright.

Second, you're arguing with yourself here. The Bible is divinely inspired, thus the Word of God. That it was written and translated by human hands is understood.

As to that 6K vs. 14B nonsense -- a favorite nitpick of atheists and non-believers -- I specifically said the book of Genesis is very prone to misinterpretation and translation problems. The problem isn't necessarily with the book ... but possibly with the readers and translators thereof. As for your complaint about "40 Days" -- you're guessing.

The bible was written by man and while some teachings were given to man by god, man filled in the rest to make a good story.

Click to expand...

You're guessing again. The real point is that none of this particular minutae is essential to the Christian faith. Its all academic. I believe the Bible to be divinely inspired, but open to mistranslation and misinterpretation by human minds. All we be clarified eventually.

Z

Alienconspiracy said:

But the bible was written by god right? WRONG.. written by man and here's your proof....... Bible says our world is only 6,000 years old.........WRONG..... 14 billion years old and possibly older...... Bible says we were the first here on earth....WRONG........ Proven wrong.......... 40 days and nights of rain to cause a great flood.......WRONG..... All cultures talk of a great flood but none of the others come close to 40 days and nights. The many outweigh the one. The bible was written by man and while some teachings were given to man by god, man filled in the rest to make a good story.

Click to expand...

:Shaking his head: People's ignorance really can be astounding at times. The Bible does NOT say the world is only 6,000 years old (I have no idea where you conjured that up.), but the evidence indicates that humankind has only been around for about 6,000 years or so. The earth itself is most likely BILLIONS of years old. It has NOT been proven wrong that humans were the first beings put on the earth. All cultures have the account (in one form or another) of the Great Flood, and there's no reason to disbelieve the Bible's account of God seeing to it that 40 days and nights of rain would accomplish his goal of flooding the earth. The Bible was written by men, but was authored by God. The abundance of prophecies that have come true to the last detail though prophesied hundreds or thousands of years in advance (and supported by secular history) is ample evidence of God's backing. You could compare it to a boss having his secretary take down a letter for him. He tells her the things to include the letter, and SHE sends it out......but does that make HER the author, just because she literally typed it up? No. It's still the boss' letter.

Oh god, religious debates about Indiana ****ing Jones.

NOT.THAT.****ING.SERIOUS.

object width="464" height="392"><param name="movie" value="http://embed.break.com/NTA2ODAy"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://embed.break.com/NTA2ODAy" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowScriptAccess=always width="464" height="392"></embed></object><br><font size=1><a href="http://www.break.com/index/words-of-wisdom-from-spinal-tap.html">Words of Wisdom From Spinal Tap</a> - Watch more <a href="http://www.break.com/">free videos</a></font>

Ultimately this is what every single ancient astronaut theories and believer sounds like…insane. I suspect this was posted to make fun of the absurd plot of the latest Indy film to begin with. It’s obviously a satire. So excuse me…but I’ll believe in science and evidence over the tabloids. That's really what this sort of thing will ever be.

In my opinion, aliens are more possible than the existence of a god. I loved the crystal skeletons in the finale, but I think showing an actual living, stereotypical looking, breathing alien is pushing it. They should have just alluded to the fact, kept the mystery and left it at that.

Two words...Talking Snake.


Soooooo incredibly believable. hahahahahaha!

eroc said:

Two words...Talking Snake.


Soooooo incredibly believable. hahahahahaha!

Click to expand...

...what? I don't remember the snakes in Raiders saying, "I'm gonna get yah!" Though I bet Reggie probably was pissed off at Indy's reaction.

Mothy said:

In my opinion, aliens are more possible than the existence of a god. I loved the crystal skeletons in the finale, but I think showing an actual living, stereotypical looking, breathing alien is pushing it. They should have just alluded to the fact, kept the mystery and left it at that.

Click to expand...

I agree on that.

blueoakleyz said:

I'll answer my own question though, it's probably because most people are raised believing religious things

Click to expand...

Excellent point. Especially people who dont believe in aliens, could find the film as hoaky.

Horchata said:

Excellent point. Especially people who dont believe in aliens, could find the film as hoaky.

Click to expand...

Agreed. People tie things like the Ark and Holy Grail to Sunday School. Aliens belong largely in fiction for most people.

Mothy said:

In my opinion, aliens are more possible than the existence of a god. I loved the crystal skeletons in the finale, but I think showing an actual living, stereotypical looking, breathing alien is pushing it. They should have just alluded to the fact, kept the mystery and left it at that.

Click to expand...

The first time I watched the scene, I though it was all in Spalko's psyche.

Upon repeat viewings though, I see the alien on the right side of the frame, after Spalko has long since been dusted.

Oh well, the scene is still very effective for me. I really like the spinning camerawork and Irina's reactions.

Wow, interesting thread.

Doesn't the term extra-terrestrial literally mean "beyond the earth"? A god or god like diety would certainly fit that description so it seems like 6 of one and a half dozen of the other.

I was mentioning this to a friend of mine in regards to this issue and the new movie. It seems we have become more intolerant to the idea of a supreme diety and we are a more athiestic society than ever before. Could the use of an alien artifact as opposed to a religious artifact in this movie be a reflection of this shift in belief?

Personally, I'm more willing to believe in aliens (inter-dimensional beings) than Bible stories, but there is something appealing about spiritual artifacts because they lend themselves to the development or growth of the character who seeks them. It's a parallelism that doesn't seem to apply to aliens. And yes, it does seem like Indy's quest has shifted from mysticism to knowledge, something that modern society could stand to do as well.