What's your opinion on Love?!
"Wanting material positions or mastery makes people behave stupidly just like love"
This statement could also be interpreted as wanting material possession or mastery is due to a love i.e. wanting material possession is due to a love for wealth and one pursues mastery due to his love for that art.
A philosophical question,
This requires a grand definition of all the terms you put in the question. What do we mean by science and what do you mean by materials? Does your use of "science" mean positive or exact or "hard" science or does it include more formal sciences that depend on logic and deduction? Similarly, by materials are we to suppose that nothing beyond matter is to be excluded. If we take evolution as the only mechanism of change in the universe, then it becomes difficult for anything to exist that is non-material. An interesting thought: if matter has been eternally present would it not be a higher power than us?
Dyson Spheres - Will Humanity Relocate?
@cephalon I can't say I'm too hopeful that we will ever create one. Even with a super advanced civilization several millennia ahead of us, the sheer scale of such an undertaking would be absolutely insane. The sphere's radius would have to be large enough such that the sphere is not destroyed by the concentrated energy, and any sphere that fits that criteria would require about 62 metric asstons of raw materials. Then there is the issue of material strength; it seems almost inconceivable that any material could be developed with the requisite tensile strength. Ultimately, it just sees more practical for humanity to develop a somewhat smaller source of energy. What that source is I don't think we yet have the knowledge to properly conjecture upon.
Which are the manga related episodes in “Naruto Shippuden” anime?
Since all the rest of the answers are outdated now, here's a new and updated Guide to Watching Naruto (not Shippuden) Without Filler:
Follow the link (Complete list of Naruto Shippuden Filler Episodes)
Watch episodes 1-25
Pick up at 27-96
Pick up at 98-100
Pick up at 107-135
Pick up or Skip at 220 (Start the episode at 12:02. You will see a little bit of the eye burning filler so dont worry about the scenes you don’t understand. All you have to understand is that in this episode: Everyone returns to the Hidden Leaf Village and resume their training. Ino makes a request to also become Tsunade's student and everyone says goodbye to Naruto, who is about to head off for his two-and-a-half years of training with Jiraiya (who returned with information about Akatsuki's plans) You could skip this episode. It is optional.
Guide to watching Naruto: Shippuden without Filler:
Watch episodes 1-56
Skip at 57-70
71 -Last 10 min or so is manga material. But is relevant for the next arc.
Pick up at 72-89
Skip at 90-111
Pick up or Skip - 112 - Last 10 min or so is manga material. But is relevant for the next arc. You will see eye burning filler but all you need to know is that the akatsuki captures the three tails.
Pick up at 113-143
Skip at 144-151
Pick up at 152-169
Skip at 170 & 171
Pick up at 172-175
Skip at 176-196 (Some of this arc has filler mixed in with manga material so for those who care about the 100% completion and dont mind seeing a little burning lol, check out the spoiler below.)
176 - manga/filler
skip - 177
178-181 - manga/filler
most of these involve information related to the taka group, and also some related events to tobi. If you watch the anime, you know what I’m taking bout.
Pick up at 197-222
Pick up at 243-256
257 -half filler/half manga
Pick up at 261-278
Pick up at 282-283
Pick up at 296-302
Pick up at 321-346
Pick up at 362-375
Pick up at 378-388
Pick up at 391-393
Skip 394 - 413
Pick up at 414 to 415
Skip 416 - 417
Pick up at 418
Pick up at 420-421
Pick up at 424-426
Pick up at 458–459
Pick up at 463
Pick up at 469–479
Pick up at 484–500
Guide to watching Boruto: Naruto Next Generations without Filler:
Watch episodes 1– <<Not yet known>>
I know that that's a alot of fillers! Those who are bored with them can entertain themselves with the memes below:
If god created the universe, then who created god? (question for theists)
@thestrangest "I find it extremely aggravating when people realise that the first definition they had of god was too strict therefore too easy to criticise and that's why they string together a bunch of words like "energy", "frequency", "collective consciousness" "
About this, you are acutally going against a school of thought.
"A school of thought" what is it called then? And if it's a school of thought then who cares? Does that mean I'm not allowed to criticise it?
A school of thought that I believe in and just like jesus or any other Gods, at the end of the day, they are just beliefs
Some beliefs are harmful(e.g. believing in the need for an Aryan race) and irrational(astrology) which in turn also makes them harmful(the average IQ of a theist is 7 points lower than an atheist). What is "they are just beliefs" supposed to mean
I don't think there is any point on me trying to argue about the fact that my beliefs are the right ones or the ones that everyone should follow.
Doesn't this mean you just admitted that you don't care if your beliefs are true or not?
The reason why I believe God is "energy" or just an "higher consiousness" are simple.
Well let's see the reasons
I believe in a creator
I don't think you have a good reason for believing in a creator
but I do not believe in the holly books and all the history and the beliefs that are taught around
You realise how stupid religion is but you still want to hold on to a concept/thing that comforts you and call it god when infact you can just hold on to that comfortable concept/thing and call it what it is
which is why I decided to start everything on my own and begin meditation
As a result, I did feel a flow or a connection that went through the bounderies
your self perceived sufficient revelation which I'd argue adds no validity to your beliefs even from your own perspective because atheists have claimed to have had the same experiences(but ofcourse atheists and religious people all atribute these things to different causes, the atheist usually knows how neurology explains all these things or just that it does even though he doesn't need to) so until you give a good reason for why you think these experiences couldn't have happened without a god your opinion doesn't matter
which is why I define it as the core and I decided to interpret that this energy that flows through everything is God as God is everywhere.
So basically god is everything and everything is god.
(YOU CONVENIENTLY IGNORED THIS PART OF MY LAST REPLY):
That's just the same as saying that god is the universe in which case sure, god exists, you can feel his presence and you are part of him and he is part of you just like when meditating you're told to feel the world around you, how you are part of it and it is part of you(atheists meditate too and can be spiritual), but what need is there to call the universe god when you can just say "universe"?
I can understand why you would think that "energy" has no link to the holly science but this is how I made the link between the sun and my beliefs:
The Sun is God and the Sun is a Major source of energy.
so you are literally a sun worshipper, am i supposed to take what you're saying seriously? You believe the sun is god, that's just stupid, tge sun simply didn't create the universe, we know it didn't
Either way, would you mind giving your definition of energy as you said people get confused when you show them energy itself?
MY definition of energy? There is only 1 correct scientific definition of energy
Energy, in physics, the capacity for doing work. It may exist in potential, kinetic, thermal, electrical, chemical, nuclear, or other various forms. There are, moreover, heat and work—i.e., energy in the process of transfer from one body to another. After it has been transferred, energy is always designated according to its nature. Hence, heat transferred may become thermal energy, while work done may manifest itself in the form of mechanical energy.
What we perceive as our physical material world, is really not physical or material at all, in fact, it is far from it.This has been proven time and time again by multiple Nobel Prize (among many other scientists around the world) winning physicists, one of them being Niels Bohr, a Danish Physicist who made significant contributions to understanding atomic structure and quantum theory.
“If quantum mechanics hasn’t profoundly shocked you, you haven’t understood it yet. Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real.” – Niels Bohr
At the turn of the nineteenth century, physicists started to explore the relationship between energy and the structure of matter. In doing so, the belief that a physical, Newtonian material universe that was at the very heart of scientific knowing was dropped, and the realization that matter is nothing but an illusion replaced it. Scientists began to recognize that everything in the Universe is made out of energy.
“Despite the unrivaled empirical success of quantum theory, the very suggestion that it may be literally true as a description of nature is still greeted with cynicism, incomprehension and even anger.” (T. Folger, “Quantum Shmantum”; Discover 22:37-43, 2001)
There is no reason to think energy as we know it is conscious, everything is energy including human consciousness(and other animals with brains) that's just a bunch of neurons and the electrical pulses neurons use to communicate with each other(as far as we know) but there is 0 good reason to think the universe is conscious, which means that it knows that it exists and can think for itself
Nice video by the way but if you want to get in debt into the subject I would highly suggest this one:
Go in depth*
That video wasn't meant for you but thanks. And no i will not watch a 3 hour video (this being part 1), i watched 5 minutes and stopped
English is not one of my first languages so I might be making mistakes that I am not aware of, feel free to correct me if you feel the need to do so.
Don't worry you're comprehensible. I'm Palestinian(Palestine;Jesus's supposed place of birth), it isn't my first language either not to mention me never having been in an English speaking country.
This is the first reply from you to me and you are already cherry picking which parts you want to respond to, read the whole thing man.
P.S. optional video, it helped me feel spiritual for the 1st time as an atheist:
Short Chapter Idea That I Need Votes For
"Do I have to go?" The female brunette whined as she tugged on the strap of her glittery green dress. It flowed to the floor and had a slit in the leg that reached farther than her knee. It left her back bare and instead, had rippling fabric pooling at her arse. The cut for the bust was low, but didn't reveal too much. It also had a thick black belt. The whole dress hugged her frame perfectly.
Originally, it had belonged to Mary Jane Watson, or MJ. But the beautiful evergreen clashed with her fiery red hair. So, Pep got the hand-me-down. But it was a beautiful hand-me-down.
"Yes!" Her girlfriend hissed as she harshly tugged a lock of dark auburn hair, only to pin it back.
The younger girl glared at her best friend through the mirror, but huffed as the redhead reporter let out a pleased mewl and stepped back, grinning. "Done!" She beamed proudly.
Dark green eyes looked at her reflection before a gasp escaped her plump lips and her plucked eyebrows rose to her hairline. Pale powder defined her high cheek bones, black eyeliner and eyeshadow made her sparkling dark green eyes pop, not that they didn't already, and crimson red was painted across her lips. Her hair was pulled back into a half ponytail. Causing her hair to mimic that of a waterfall as thick, dark auburn locks fell across her back and shoulders, little strands framed her thin face.
She was a thing of dreams.
"Whose she?" She blurted out, obviously impressed.
MJ's grin widened before she checked the time. "Crap!" She cursed before running out of the room to finish getting ready.
A few minutes passed, leading Peter Penny Parker, or more commonly know by her friends as Pep, to quietly admire herself in the full body mirror. She noted the fact that MJ had made her look older. Instead of looking like a nerdy 16 year old girl in an expensive dress, she matured, with the help of the bra pads, into a gorgeous 20 year old woman.
You see, Pep's Highschool had won a football game, finally, and Harry decided it was an occasion worth celebration. The eccentric redhead was all too quick to agree, but it was the youngest of the trio that was more unsure. Eventually, they coaxed her into celebrating with them... which she immediately regretted. Turns out, Harry was planning to take them clubbing, at the fanciest club around and completely ignore that fact that they were underage, to cut loose. For some reason, Pep reluctantly agreed...
...But if anyone mentions the fact that they slipped something into her smoothie, they would completely deny it.
"You look amazing." Was the soft whisper from behind her.
Looking up in the mirror, she smiled at the figure standing in her doorway, "You look handsome too." She complimented as she looked him up and down. Her wore a nice black suit and tie with a gray undershirt.
Harry smiled, smug that he could make her cheeks heat so much that they resembled the color of her lipstick. Standing behind her, he wrapped his arms around her waist and rested his chin on her shoulder. He was taller than her by 3 inches, which was enough to be able to hold her tiny frame.
Seconds ticked by before Harry slowly pulled away and turned her to face him. Their faces were inches apart as their eyes darted from each others lips, eyes, then lips again. Harry edged closer and-
"'Kay guys! I'm ready!" MJ yelled from the hallway.
At supernatural speeds, the two teens pulled away and stood 2 feet apart, flushed as their best friend entered the room in a dark red, knee high, deep cut dress.
Quick to avoid the incoming questions, Pep spoke first, "MJ, you look gorgeous!"
MJ's nose twitched, but she followed along and thanked Pep.
The trio made their way out of Pep's house, after bidding Aunt May goodnight, and entered Harry's limo. The drive to the club was lively, as if nothing had happened.
The vechile came to a stop before the group filed out of the limo and into a long line. Miraculously, they managed to cut the line and enter the club, with the help of their fake ID's, without trouble.
The friends ordered drinks, though Pep never got half way through with hers, before Harry became sick. MJ left her alone to help him in the bathroom, but not before telling her, "Stay here and enjoy yourself. At least one of us should." Pep wanted to object, but MJ gave her one of the looks that said your life would be infinitely better if just kept your mouth shut.
Sighing, she nodded her head and leaned against the counter, stirring the acholic beverage, she forgot the name, in her hands.
The bright lights and blaring music blinded her from noticing the tall man making his way towards her. It wasn't until it was too late and he was standing beside her that she noticed his presence.
"Hello beautiful." He greeted, giving her a toothy grin.
Pep noticeably flinched as her head snapped to face him. Her wide eyes widened more as she realized who had just greeted her.
Tony. Fucking Stark.
TONY FUCKING STARK!!
Tony grinned at her reaction and handed her a drink, "Try this."
It was a pink beverage, with cherries in it.
She looked at the drink in his hand, not even realizing he had ordered one, before placing hers down and taking it. Placing the glass to her lips, she took a large sip and pulled the glass away, leaving lipstick marks.
(A/N: This is exactly what you should NOT do when in a bar or club. If some random guy, no matter how populuar... or hot... or sexy.... or- I'm getting of track, but no matter how famous they may be, you never know if they drugged it or something. So, in short, just like a kid shouldn't accept candy from strangers, an adult should not accept drinks from strangers at bars. 'Kay. I'm done.)
Her face contorted into a strange look as she smacked her lips, "It's... Sweet. Really sweet." After a moment of rolling her jaw, she finalized, "I like it." She said, grinning as she faced him.
"Good. I knew you'd like it. I figured your a sweet person." He shot with his award winning, sometimes literally, smirk.
Pep's cheek heated farther to once again match her lipstick. "T-thank you, Mr. Stark." She stuttered in a quiet voice, looking down at the ground.
He chuckled deeply, a melodious sound, before he replied, "Mr. Stark? Please, call me- Oh." He grumbled as his phone rang. Pulling it out of his pocket, he looked like he was about to ignore it, but saw the ID. Rolling his eyes, he looked back up at her and smiled, "I'll be right back. Okay? Will you stay here?" He asked, his eyes pleading as if he was a puppy.
Biting her lip, she shrugged, "I promised I'll stay." She said softly.
He grinned before walking into the crowd.
A few seconds went by before she heard her ringtone. Pulling her phone out of her purse, she saw a text.
-Harry's feling a lil betr. I can finally Carey him 2 the car witout hum puking ALL over me... in short,2 go.-
Pep smiled slightly at MJ's semi-long text before frowning as she remembered her promise. Biting the inside of her cheek, she looked around then back at her phone and began typing.
-can I stay? I met some 1.-
-squeals FINALLY YO INTERACTING EITH SOMEONE OTHER THAN US AND TMSOMETHING OTHER THAN SCHOOL PAPARR!!!! AAAGGGGHHHHHHHHH!!!-
Pep rolled her eyes at that, but she couldn't hold back the small laugh.
- So can I stay?-
- I didn't type all that just to say no. Yes, you can stay. B careful tho.-
Pep grinned with enthusiasm.
-No prob. Love ya, Harry says so 2... and 2 wear protection.-
Pep rolled her eyes, deciding to not acknowledge the sexual comment and just say bye.
- u guys 2.-
Pressing the off button on the side of her phone, she pushed it back into her purse and took another sip of her drink before Tony Stark came back out of the crowd.
He grinned at her wolfishly, to which she looked down and shyly tucked a strand of hair behind her pierced ear.
"You stayed!" He declared, to which Pep nodded smally. "Hey, you wanna come to the tower? It's a bit more quiet there."
Pep's eyes blew wide at the thought of visiting the inside of the Avengers Tower.
She nodded quickly, to which Stark chuckled.
Taking her hand, she blushed of course, he weaved them in and out of the crowd before they came outside. With a few motions of his hands, he was covered in his armor. Turning to her, he spoke, "C'mere."
Slowly, she came close and let him hug her before she let out a shrill, but short scream, and held onto him for dear life, quite literally.
They flew over the city, the lights looked beautiful in contrast to the pitch black night.
After a few silent minutes, they landed on the balcony of the Avengers Tower. She stepped aside as he slightly nudged her before a machine came out of the ground and removed his suit. It looked incredibly complicated.
A second later, he held her hand as he led them inside, out of the cold night air. He led them through the living room and kitchen, but only made it to the hallway before Tony turned to her.
Somehow, slowly, but also quickly, his hands came to the sides of her face. He inched closer before laying a lustful kiss onto her soft, red, plump lips.
To Pep, it felt amazing. Though, internally, as she melted into the kiss and wrapped her arms around his neck and moaned, she screamed that this was her first kiss.
Tony. Fucking Stark.
TONY FUCKING STARK!!
Stole her first kiss. And she was entirely fine with that.
The kiss was warm and rough as he licked her lip for entrance, to which she quickly gave. He lightly nipped her bottom lip before exploring. His lips were rough yet soft, and he tasted like alcohol, coconut, and metal.
Her hands tangled into his brownie cokored hair as his arms crawled down her face and to her back, to which he rubbed before lightly pulling on the strap of her dress
Immediately, red alarms went off in Pep's head. It wasn't until both straps were off her shoulders and he was trying to take it off her arm completely, that she pulled back and laid her forehead against his, "W-wait." She stuttered softly, inhaling deep breaths.
He looked worried as he peered into her dark green eyes and asked, "What?"
She bit her bottoms lip as tears welled up, /He'll be furious./ She thought.
She inhaled deeply before speaking, "I-I can't. I'm only 16."
That was the soft whisper that caused Tony Stark to step back. His face was blank as he stared at her, before it morphed into horror, surprise, then amusement. He smirked as he shook his head, "Well, I've done weirder things in my teens." He chuckled.
Curiously, and still a bit worried, Pep mumbled, "Your not mad?"
"No. Completely fine... We just won't be able to do some of the stuff I had planned for tonight, and tomorrow morning... And evening." He joked.
A blush crawled up Pep's cheeks at the sexual comment, but nodded.
"But, that won't ruin our night. You wanna see my suits?"
Her eyes light up immediately as she tossed her head up and down, furiously.
He chuckled at her excitement before taking her hand and pulling her down to his workshop. Upon entering, she gasped in amazement. It was a nerd paradise. All the tools, materials, and equipment she could ever need, all in one room.
Walking over to a contraption, that this author will never know how to build, she told him what it was.
He rose an eyebrow and nodded, impressed.
She ran around the room, labeling equipment before, in her excitement, she ran into Stark. "Oh, sorry." She laughed nervously, noticing his warm hands that held her arms to keep her from falling
"It's fine." He smiled before guiding her to one of his many workbenches and setting her down. He began the exciting process of explaining parts of his suit to her, his prototypes, and the such.
She took it all in stride, much to the surprise of Stark. Of course, there were a few materials that she was not familiar with, but other than that, she impressed and intrigued the multi-millionaire, playboy, philanthropist.
... This happened a year ago. I'm now 17, and living the life.
A/N: So, this is basically a introduction, or trailer, to a possible story that I'm thinking about writing on another site called Wattpad(Username: Lil-Loki). I have some of the plot down, but I'm tweaking on relationships.
Warning, this is officially NOT a fem!Peter x Harry fanfiction. I swear on a lot of dead family and friends' graves, it is not. I'm still working on the relationships, so this could be a fem!Peter x Loki, x Steve, or even x Bucky. So... Ya...
Anyway, the point of me writing this and showing it to you, is that I want you to decide on whether or not this would make a good story. I'd like you to read this and tell me if it is story material and if it could mature into a full blown fanfiction.
Also, this is my writing, so please do not copy this. As crappy as it is, and as inexperienced as I am, being 12, I like how I wrote this, compared to previous attempts, and would not appreciate it if you decided to copy this and claim it as your own. So please don't. Thank you.
If god created the universe, then who created god? (question for theists)
@thestrangest 0 evidence of Jesus... That is an incorrect statement. According to modern day historians, 1 ancient Jewish historian and two Roman politicians around the Second Century AD who make reference to Jesus of Nazareth. Flavtheius Josephus (the Jewish historian), who wrote a history of Judaism around AD93 who references James the brother of Jesus, "the so-called Christ", then Pliny and Tacitus write of Jesus and his followers. Tacitus making note that Jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate.
1st Josephus's works are generally accept to be forgeries, the only debate that remains is on how much of it isn't forged if it isn't 100% forged, he talked about MANY Jesuses in his books and none of them completely fit the description of the christian jesus, here are the 2 most common citations and a short explanation on how they are most definitely forgeries.
The Testimonium Flavianum
"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(Christ). When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had prophesied these and countless other marvelous things about him. And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared.Citation 12"
A citation that comes next
"Ananus… convened the judges of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ, and certain others. He accused them of having transgressed the law and delivered them up to be stoned."
-Josephus was jewish and these are not things a devout jew would write(e.g. "Jesus was the messiah/christ", "On the third day he appeared to them restored to life"... would never have been written by him)
-Josephus is usually sophisticated in his vocabulary(E.g. he wouldn't have said "he won over many jews and many of the greeks"... without saying to what he would have won them, he also wouldn't have said that he was one "who wrought surprising feats"/"a doer of incredible feats"... without giving examples and explaining what he meant)
-Josephus usually explained anything out of the ordinary to his audience(Christ was not a common word in gentle vocabulary so Josephus wouldn't have used such a word without explaining what a Christ is, neither would he have said that there were Christians without explaining what Christians are)
If you strip away all the things that Josephus would have never written the only thing that remains is "About this time, there lived Jesus, a wise man" not to mention that even this should be stripped away since not only is the whole citation above out of place and doesn't fit in the story Josephus was telling but even if it was just this small "about this time lived Jesus..." then Josephus would have most definitely explained who this Jesus is and what his role in the story is
For the James citation to not waste anymore of my time I'll just quote one of the 2 sources i state below
"It must be admitted that this passage does not intrude into the text as does the one previously quoted. In fact, it is very well integrated into Josephus’ story. That it has been modified from whatever Josephus’ source may have said (remember, here too, Josephus could not have been an eye-witness) is nevertheless extremely probable. The crucial word in this passage is the name James (Jacob in Greek and Hebrew). It is very possible that this very common name was in Josephus’ source material. It might even have been a reference to James the Just, a first-century character we have good reason to believe indeed existed. Because he appears to have born the title Brother of the Lord,Note Hit would have been natural to relate him to the Jesus character. It is quite possible that Josephus actually referred to a James “the Brother of the Lord,” and this was changed by Christian copyists (remember that although Josephus was a Jew, his text was preserved only by Christians!) to “Brother of Jesus” – adding then for good measure “who was called Christ.” According to William Benjamin Smith’s skeptical classic Ecce Deus,Citation 15there are still some manuscripts of Josephus which contain the quoted passages, but the passages are absent in other manuscripts – showing that such interpolation had already been taking place before the time of Origen but did not ever succeed in supplanting the original text universally."
But if you prefer a video breakdown and in depth explanation, here is one:
Now for the next 2 i hope you forgive me for this but if the 1st one took me so long i really am not in the mood for these 2. I would appreciate it if you can just read these 2 citations i spent some time to pick but if you don't want to I'll just come back to this in 1-4 weeks and write a long ass text explaining why they do not provide historical proof for the jesus of christianity
In addition to the palpably bogus passage in the Antiquities of the Jews by Josephus called the "Testimonium Flavianum" is another of the pitiful "references" dutifully trotted out by apologists to prove the existence of Jesus Christ: To wit, a short passage in the works of the Roman historian Pliny the Younger. While proconsul of Bithynia, a province in the northwest of Asia Minor, Pliny purportedly wrote a letter in 110 CE to the Emperor Trajan requesting his assistance in determining the proper punishment for "Christiani" who were causing trouble and would not renounce "Christo" as their god or bow down to the image of the Emperor. These recalcitrant Christiani, according to the Pliny letter, met "together before daylight" and sang "hymns with responses to Christ as a god," binding themselves "by a solemn institution, not to any wrong act." Regarding this letter, Rev. Robert Taylor remarks
"If this letter be genuine, these nocturnal meetings were what no prudent government could allow; they fully justify the charges of Caecilius in Minutius Felix, of Celsus in Origen, and of Lucian, that the primitive Christians were a skulking, light-shunning, secret, mystical, freemasonry sort of confederation, against the general welfare and peace of society."
Taylor also comments that, at the time this letter was purportedly written, "Christians" were considered to be followers of the Greco-Egyptian god Serapis and that "the name of Christ [was] common to the whole rabblement of gods, kings, and priests." Writing around 134 CE, Hadrian purportedly stated:
"The worshippers of Serapis are Christians, and those are devoted to the God Serapis, who call themselves the bishops of Christ. There is no ruler of a Jewish synagogue, no Samaritan, no Presbyter of the Christians, who is not either an astrologer, a soothsayer, or a minister to obscene pleasures. The very Patriarch himself, should he come into Egypt, would be required by some to worship Serapis, and by others to worship Christ. They have, however, but one God, and it is one and the self-same whom Christians, Jews and Gentiles alike adore, i.e., money."
It is thus possible that the "Christos" or "Anointed" god Pliny's "Christiani" were following was Serapis himself, the syncretic deity created by the priesthood in the third century BCE. In any case, this god "Christos" was not a man who had been crucified in Judea.
Moreover, like his earlier incarnation Osiris, Serapis—both popular gods in the Roman Empire—was called not only Christos but also "Chrestos," centuries before the common era. Indeed, Osiris was styled "Chrestos," centuries before his Jewish copycat Jesus was ever conceived....
In any event, the value of the Pliny letter as "evidence" of Christ's existence is worthless, as it makes no mention of "Jesus of Nazareth," nor does it refer to any event in his purported life. There is not even a clue in it that such a man existed. As Taylor remarks, "We have the name of Christ, and nothing else but the name, where the name of Apollo or Bacchus would have filled up the sense quite as well." Taylor then casts doubt on the authenticity of the letter as a whole, recounting the work of German critics, who "have maintained that this celebrated letter is another instance to be added to the long list of Christian forgeries..." One of these German luminaries, Dr. Semler of Leipsic provided "nine arguments against its authenticity..." He also notes that the Pliny epistle is quite similar to that allegedly written by "Tiberianus, Governor of Syria" to Trajan, which has been universally denounced as a forgery.
Also, like the Testimonium Flavianum, Pliny's letter is not quoted by any early Church father, including Justin Martyr. Tertullian briefly mentions its existence, noting that it refers to terrible persecutions of Christians. However, the actual text used today comes from a version by a Christian monk in the 15th century, Iucundus of Verona, whose composition apparently was based on Tertullian's assertions. Concurring that the Pliny letter is suspicious, Drews terms "doubtful" Tertullian's "supposed reference to it." Drews then names several authorities who likewise doubted its authenticity, "either as a whole or in material points," including Semler, Aub, Havet, Hochart, Bruno Bauer and Edwin Johnson. Citing the work of Hochart specifically, Drews pronounces Pliny's letter "in all probability" a "later Christian forgery." Even if it is genuine, Pliny's letter is useless in determining any "historical" Jesus.
Turning next to another stalwart in the anemic apologist arsenal, Tacitus, sufficient reason is uncovered to doubt this Roman author's value in proving an "historical" Jesus. In his Annals, supposedly written around 107 CE, Tacitus purportedly related that the Emperor Nero (37-68) blamed the burning of Rome during his reign on "those people who were abhorred for their crimes and commonly called Christians." Since the fire evidently broke out in the poor quarter where fanatic, agitating Messianic Jews allegedly jumped for joy, thinking the conflagration represented the eschatological development that would bring about the Messianic reign, it would not be unreasonable for authorities to blame the fire on them. However, it is clear that these Messianic Jews were not (yet) called "Christiani." In support of this contention, Nero's famed minister, Seneca (5?-65), whose writings evidently provided much fuel for the incipient Christian ideology, has not a word about these "most-hated" sectarians.
...the Tacitean passage next states that these fire-setting agitators were followers of "Christus" (Christos), who, in the reign of Tiberius, "was put to death as a criminal by the procurator Pontius Pilate." The passage also recounts that the Christians, who constituted a "vast multitude at Rome," were then sought after and executed in ghastly manners, including by crucifixion. However, the date that a "vast multitude" of Christians was discovered and executed would be around 64 CE, and it is evident that there was no "vast multitude" of Christians at Rome by this time, as there were not even a multitude of them in Judea. Oddly, this brief mention of Christians is all there is in the voluminous works of Tacitus regarding this extraordinary movement, which allegedly possessed such power as to be able to burn Rome. Also, the Neronian persecution of Christians is unrecorded by any other historian of the day and supposedly took place at the very time when Paul was purportedly freely preaching at Rome (Acts 28:30-31), facts that cast strong doubt on whether or not it actually happened. Drews concludes that the Neronian persecution is likely "nothing but the product of a Christian's imagination in the fifth century." Eusebius, in discussing this persecution, does not avail himself of the Tacitean passage, which he surely would have done had it existed at the time. Eusebius's discussion is very short, indicating he was lacking source material; the passage in Tacitus would have provided him a very valuable resource.
Even conservative writers such as James Still have problems with the authenticity of the Tacitus passage: For one, Tacitus was an imperial writer, and no imperial document would ever refer to Jesus as "Christ." Also, Pilate was not a "procurator" but a prefect, which Tacitus would have known. Nevertheless, not willing to throw out the entire passage, some researchers have concluded that Tacitus "was merely repeating a story told to him by contemporary Christians."
Based on these and other facts, several scholars have argued that, even if the Annals themselves were genuine, the passage regarding Jesus was spurious. One of these authorities was Rev. Taylor, who suspected the passage to be a forgery because it too is not quoted by any of the Christian fathers, including Tertullian, who read and quoted Tacitus extensively. Nor did Clement of Alexandria notice this passage in any of Tacitus's works, even though one of this Church father's main missions was to scour the works of Pagan writers in order to find validity for Christianity. As noted, the Church historian Eusebius, who likely forged the Testimonium Flavianum, does not relate this Tacitus passage in his abundant writings. Indeed, no mention is made of this passage in any known text prior to the 15th century.
The tone and style of the passage are unlike the writing of Tacitus, and the text "bears a character of exaggeration, and trenches on the laws of rational probability, which the writings of Tacitus are rarely found to do." Taylor further remarks upon the absence in any of Tacitus's other writings of "the least allusion to Christ or Christians." In his well-known Histories, for example, Tacitus never refers to Christ, Christianity or Christians. Furthermore, even the Annals themselves have come under suspicion, as they themselves had never been mentioned by any ancient author....
In any event, even if the Annals were genuine, the pertinent passage itself could easily be an interpolation, based on the abundant precedents and on the fact that the only manuscript was in the possession of one person, de Spire. In reality, "none of the works of Tacitus have come down to us without interpolations."
Regarding Christian desperation for evidence of the existence of Christ, Dupuis comments that true believers are "reduced to look, nearly a hundred years after, for a passage in Tacitus" that does not even provide information other than "the etymology of the word Christian," or they are compelled "to interpolate, by pious fraud, a passage in Josephus." Neither passage, Dupuis concludes, is sufficient to establish the existence of such a remarkable legislator and philosopher, much less a "notorious impostor."
It is evident that Tacitus's remark is nothing more than what is said in the Apostle's Creed—to have the authenticity of the mighty Christian religion rest upon this Pagan author's scanty and likely forged comment is preposterous. Even if the passage in Tacitus were genuine, it would be too late and is not from an eyewitness, such that it is valueless in establishing an "historical" Jesus, representing merely a recital of decades-old Christian tradition.
Here is a video only on Tacticus if you want:
Just because a book is deemed "sacred" doesn't make it 100% inaccurate to historical events or figures.
True but this one in particular(the bible) has close to 0 if not 0 historical merit
If we're going to die why were we even created?
From a biological standpoint, we die because we didn't ever as a species need to live that long, so it wouldn't make sense to invest any energy into keeping us alive any longer. When you raise as many children, who are themselves able to reproduce, you "fulfill your purpose", so that your genetical material spreads. There is no purpose to life, you are just a robot, a slave to your DNA. If genetical material wouldn't spread, there wouldn't be any life.
Dyson Spheres - Will Humanity Relocate?
@truongk20 I agree, it would be a huge project, one that we may never finish considering modern problems like resource depletion, national competition, religious terrorism, and countless other things. The big issue isn't building the structure itself, it's lasting long enough to complete the project.
Also, you don't necessarily have to completely surround the star. You don't even have to build a giant platform. There are multiple ways to do it, two of which I will share.
1.) Build a bunch of small space stations, not very large, just numerous, and throw them into orbit around the star. You can always add to the number of stations, the big issue is making sure they don't collide. Even so, it shouldn't happen very often.
2.) Build a massive ring around the star, similar to the ring around Saturn, except one large object. It should be relatively thin, since you can always build more, and it can house a TON of people. You can also approach this design with a ladder-like structure, where the rungs of the ladder are constantly rotating, providing artificial gravity. This also cuts back on the needed materials, since there's a sizeable gap between each rung.
Both of these methods don't require insanely strong materials, more so the former. You could always pull resources from other planets, or somehow fuse large amounts of common atoms to make things like iron, similar to how a star does. Sadly, this is not possible yet, but we're getting pretty close to starting nuclear fusion.