Biblical Assumptions Resolved

[Endeavor]

How about a thread where non-Christians can ask a Christian, not about their own beliefs but what they are taught.
I know, based on personal experience: with television, songs, and general everyday rumors/ I know that there are a lot of things people think about the Bible that are not in the Bible. So feel free to ask a Christian, not about changing you, nor about you changing them, but ask them a question you have on your mind. I would like to take the time to answer. Don't ask my opinon so much, as to the literal examples given through the ages.
x
I would like to open with a question I've asked myself. Is the Bible a believeable sorce? Well, if about 1600 years ago Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt and God divided the sea. If it really happed, what would people do? I think they would write it down, and tell their children. If God appeared on earth today what would people do? Write it down, videotape it, talk about it on the web and 100 years later the general public would say it never happened.
x
One thing I read that someone else wrote was that people changed the Bible.
Who would gain from such a thing? The Hebrews who didn't believe Christ was the messiah? The Egyptions who enslaved the Hebrews? China, Australia, Bin Laden, George Bush, Dr.Phil? The Bible convicts mankinds' conscience, eliminates their self-justifications, then gives them a path out.
x
Feel free to ask what the Bible says regardding your questions.

[Endeavor]

I see people are visiting but no one has a question?
x
There are many anti-Christian things being said. I've heard such things as Hitler was a Christian?! I think what really happens is people dont get their way and feel let down, then they get angry, then they think it is too late. but He is better Savior than we are sinners!
x
An often unspoken question: who can be saved? "who soever believth in Him"
keep in mind there are many men who say they believe yet we know better. In public people put on their shows, Its amazing how much the Bible tells the non-believer he is justified to not follow the wolves in sheep clothing!

[Sparkle]

I guess I'll shoot a question out, maybe it will warm people up or something.

Hmmm . . . . Why do you think God makes it so confusing and difficult to be able to believe in him? (to push it further) Wouldn't an almighty God just up and let it be known that he is there, yet he sits back and watches things happen and everybody is all sitting here wondering what's up.

[Topher]

Is the Bible a believeable sorce? Well, if about 1600 years ago Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt and God divided the sea. If it really happed, what would people do? I think they would write it down, and tell their children.
That's not really evidence ;) You assumed what is written down is believeable , which was your original queston.

I've some questions...

1. If the Bible is the world of God, and God is infallible, why is it that some of his words are no longer followed? Some argue that the Bible states homosexuality is wrong, therefore it is wrong. But the Bible also says it’s acceptable to stone disobedient children to death, yet I don’t see any Christians advocating this.

Deuteronomy 21
21:18 - If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them:
21:19 - Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place;
21:20 - And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard.
21:21 - And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

2. How can heaven be utter bliss when people you love are care about are/maybe burning in hell?

3. Is Jesus the son of God or God in flesh?

4. Is Gandhi in heaven or hell?

5. The Bible says that God is a jealous God. How is this an example of a moral absolute of which man is supposed to follow?
1. "God is love." 1 John 4:8.
2. "Love is not jealous." 1 Cor 13:4
3. "I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God." Exodus 20:5.
So if love is NOT jealous, yet god is jealous, then God can’t be love. But if god IS love he cannot be jealous. Be he is. :confused:

[Shrukin89]

So if love is NOT jealous, yet god is jealous, then God can’t be love. But if god IS love he cannot be jealous. Be he is.

jealous god realm

[Poop-Loops]

1) God is omnipotent.

2) God gave humans free will.

Q: If God gave humans free will, can he see our futures?

A: If he can see our futures, then it is not free will. If he cannot see our futures, he is not omnipotent. Worshipping an omnipotent god? Sure, just don't keep saying you are omnipotent. Kinda "lying", you know.

3) God sents bad people to hell.

Q: If God knows who is bad befoe they are even born, does he knowingly create people just to send them to hell?

A: I don't see any other posibility. God lets people be born just so they fry when they die. Love? In BIZARRO WORLD!

[Capt Ann]

1. If the Bible is the world of God, and God is infallible, why is it that some of his words are no longer followed? Please decide how important this question is to you, and if you really want to discuss answers to it. There are fairly clear answers that I think I can get across, and/or provide some links and references, but it will involve some lengthy posts and several lengthy discussions. If this one is 'low' on your priority list of Biblical-questions-to-be-resolved, then I recommend skipping it for now.

3. Is Jesus the son of God or God in flesh?Both. In one sense, He is called the 'Son' of God like Adam was - Jesus is called 'the second Adam' because He fulfilled God's destiny for humankind, exactly where Adam failed, and brought life from death, even more than Adam brought death from life.

The Jewish culture of the time was strictly monotheistic. A claim to be the Son of God would be understood as a claim to being divine - the One and Only God, in the flesh.

4. Is Gandhi in heaven or hell?That's not for me to decide, or for me to know.

5. The Bible says that God is a jealous God. How is this an example of a moral absolute of which man is supposed to follow?
1. "God is love." 1 John 4:8.
2. "Love is not jealous." 1 Cor 13:4
3. "I, the Lord thy God, am a jealous God." Exodus 20:5.
Since the New Testament was written in Greek and the Old Testament mostly in Hebrew, the two words are actually different in the original languages. I suggest a word study to see what the shades of meaning of each are, and how they differ.

[Capt Ann]

A: I don't see any other posibility.

Discussed here:
http://www.martialartsplanet.com/forums/showthread.php?p=806426#post806426

Please don't multi-post; it makes it hard to keep track of any/all conversations/discussions that follow.

[Poop-Loops]

Yes yes, I know. I was just giving my same opinon to another thread which had the same basic idea. Sorry.

[Topher]

Here's a few more:

1.
Why would God make me already knowing that I wouldn’t accept Jesus? If he didn’t know this he’s not omnipotent, if he’s not omnipotent he cannot exist.

2.
God created us in his image.
God is perfect.
Wherefore why are we not perfect (as Christians argue?)

Note: As I know it, we were prefect, but became imperfect because of “original sin,” but an omnipotent God would have know about this before he even created us, so why bother creating us in the first place. And it’s said our free will to disobey caused “original sin,” but if we were made perfect, why would we even disobey, because a perfect person wouldn’t disobey. Finally, how can a person be punished for disobeying before they have the knowledge of what good and bad was?


Ann, I think my first question is fairly important for obvious reason, although I i dount think a long discussion needs to be made of it.

[Strafio]

I guess I'll shoot a question out, maybe it will warm people up or something.

Hmmm . . . . Why do you think God makes it so confusing and difficult to be able to believe in him? (to push it further) Wouldn't an almighty God just up and let it be known that he is there, yet he sits back and watches things happen and everybody is all sitting here wondering what's up.
This is a question I think about sometimes.
I reckon he's happy leave us guessing.
A bit like how a teacher prefers not to give an answer to a question, but leave hints so you can work it out yourself, and practice thinking and the like.

Although it does seems strange if so much is dependant on you getting this answer "right"...

[thepunisher]

Why do religion posts constantly keep popping up ? Isn't anybody ever going to get tired of talking about this ? And it always seems to end up in these atheist vs. theist debates. Astheist posts question, a thesist posts question, questions gets answered but not answered...all hell breaks loose ! I wonder how many Religion threads have alone been started the last year ? With the point being what ? Atheist will never understand Christians because we don't try to understand, theists believe their stuff because they have faith and belief...wuupee dee !

Christian

[medi]

Finally, how can a person be punished for disobeying before they have the knowledge of what good and bad was?





The instruction not to eat from the Tree was fairly explicit. As usual, the basis of 'sin' is disobedience to God, nothing to do with morality.

[Johnno]

Why do religion posts constantly keep popping up ? Isn't anybody ever going to get tired of talking about this ? And it always seems to end up in these atheist vs. theist debates. Astheist posts question, a thesist posts question, questions gets answered but not answered...all hell breaks loose ! I wonder how many Religion threads have alone been started the last year ? With the point being what ? Atheist will never understand Christians because we don't try to understand, theists believe their stuff because they have faith and belief...wuupee dee !

ChristianThat's a good point. Considering that this is a Martial Arts forum, it's amazing how many threads get started about Christianity. Although interestingly, other religions don't get much of a look in.

Personally, if I wanted to discuss a point about Islam then I'd go to an Islamic discussion site, or if it was about Buddhism then I'd go to a Buddhist discussion site, etc. But for some reason, we get vast numbers of threads about Christianity here on MAP. Usually started either by 'born-again' types who feel the need to preach the word at every opportunity, or else by atheists who seem to get a buzz out of provoking a reaction out of the Christians.

[Strafio]

I like talking religion in general.
This has turned out to be a good place to do it in.
Funnily enough, I've been to places dedicated to theological discussion and they weren't as good as this place. A forum's all about it's community and I think this religious one is pretty good. :)

[Incredible Bulk]

That's a good point. Considering that this is a Martial Arts forum, it's amazing how many threads get started about Christianity. Although interestingly, other religions don't get much of a look in.

Personally, if I wanted to discuss a point about Islam then I'd go to an Islamic discussion site, or if it was about Buddhism then I'd go to a Buddhist discussion site, etc. But for some reason, we get vast numbers of threads about Christianity here on MAP. Usually started either by 'born-again' types who feel the need to preach the word at every opportunity, or else by atheists who seem to get a buzz out of provoking a reaction out of the Christians.

on one of the bodybuilding sites i help mod we had gay threads popping up for 3 weeks, "gay marriage", "born gay?" etc etc... it ripped the forum apart as members had enough of it...

religion is not bad compared to the threads we had popping up lol :rolleyes:

[Ecks]

common sense and a strong moral base > any religion, in my opinion.

and no, moral base does not necessarily come from any religious teachings. My grandfather lived on a farm in the middle of nowhere in northern china. He had no idea who confucius or any other philosopher was. He moved to the city at the age of 24, and never once committed a crime, cheated, or stole. Moral ethics come from experience, not teachings.

[Kwajman]

WE talk about it here because we have some really smart people.

[Endeavor]

HEY HEY HEY!
I go to bed and go to work and come back and it's like everyone and their brother post at once.. haha
x
First, Mr Simpson, God knows you belive in Him, Ive read alot of your posts, your problem is not so much with God as with false Christians that have done whatever they have done to you, or the very common problem of the souls of people long gone that didnt accept Christianity.
Mr Simpson if you love your daughter or son or love to play guitar or love to read, how is reading jealous? So like Ann mentioned words have multiple meanings, but also our love is jealous, thats why Christians dont accept so
many things. We love unconditionally but we still want people to be perfect.
x
Another reason for the text could be the author, and the meaning of jealous.
If you have a million dollars Im not jealous, but if you're giving a worker who does a poor job and I have made the most custormers happy, then Im jealous.
It's all in how you read it.
x
The reason we dont stone people to death for being gay is the same reason we dont stone people to death for violating the Sabbath. When Jesus Christ died for all people, He was the sacrifice to forgive sins. All have sinned. If you do it physically, mentally, or verbally, sin exists. He forgave us and we forgive because He forgave us and we everyday need Him to forgive us so we everyday forgive also.
x
There is another thread about Hell. And for those that havent been to it. Look at the Bible for the explainations. It never says anyone suffers eternally or burns forever, and as for Ghandi in hell, no, because no one goes to heaven or hell when they die, they sleep untill the time of judgement, when all are judged. Another answer is in the book of Job, and it says to have Job pray for his friends because "his prayer will be accepted" and another text says the "prayer of faith will save the sick and if he hath commited sins, they will be forgiven." another says you will be saved "and your house" so we pray for each other and those that do not pray. To pray means to ask.
x
The Bible does tell us that God made everything, even the sinner for judgement. I know everyone wants everyone to be perfect and never sin but thats not really ever gonna happen in this world. Why did God make you if you were gonna end up destroyed. Because some of us will rejoice that we made it through this. If times were not bad we wouldnt comprehend love. Love is created by God it will return to God. We who love do suffer when people who don't accept God pass away. We cannot be truely happy until our souls are freed in the end. Of whom much is given much is expected, and to whom little is given little is expected. So those that dont believe and dont accept are in better shape than us that know better and deny.
x
Mr Simpson the word "perfect" has also been translated to mean "mature"
be ye perfect as I am perfect. NOt somone who never sins. This is another reason I made this thread. Some people think if you become a Christian you never sin, or say you never do. The difference between Christians and non-Christians is the admittions of sin. You know you think bad things, say bad things and do bad things from time to time. Ever read that one deciple of Christ that said he was the chief sinner. Or king David who sinned, and are we to be more perfect than them? No, but we must hate it that we are not that kind of person we want to be for God.
x
From early childhood you should know the difference between good and bad, hurting people: bad.. stealing...wrong.. killing/wrong. So again I must go back to the text, to whom much is given much is required and to whom little is given little is required. Your intentions and the end results will be judged fairly.
And what does it say about the sins you've done, "none of them will be mentioned to you.. if you turn from that way" not even mentioned.. sounds like a good deal, like dying a horrible humilliating death which we deserve by the law, was made intercession for us by Christ. So we dont stone people to death or be stonned but in the end we all answer God.
x
And by the way, I didnt create this thread to trigger arguements between Christians and athiests, I wanted a room for anyone who wanted to know what the Bible said about an issue, because as you can see many people in life will tell you non-Biblicial accounts on why things are that contradict the teachings.
x
God just doesnt sit back Sparkle. He is still saving lives! Still changing hearts and minds. Despite all the negative from pseudo-followers, look at all the people building homes, and giving food and giving medicine and money in the name of God. Billions of examples. God can even make a non-believe dig in his pockets to give to the less fortunate.
x
My question to you Homer is if the flood or any event in the Bible really happened, what would people do about it? Write it down and tell people?
What if God appeared before you, what would you do, you know if you came back online to tell us there would always be a hater telling you their doubts.. If it was a perfect world we wouldnt even have ever existed, God must get pleasure out of the simple things we do to express our love towards Him and our fellow brothers and sisters in the world. I think we both hurt and entertain God, I think even being able to post this makes the day mean something more.

[Topher]

Atheist will never understand Christians because we don't try to understand, theists believe their stuff because they have faith and belief...wuupee dee !

Christian
I disagree. I DO understand, which is exactly why i question it. You need to have some understanding to question it. If i dont know something, i'll ask, hence my posts here.

[Topher]

The instruction not to eat from the Tree was fairly explicit. As usual, the basis of 'sin' is disobedience to God, nothing to do with morality.
They had no knowledge of good or bad, therefore they didn't know whether dispoeying the instruction was either good or bad.

Besides, a perfect person wouldn't disobey in the first place.

[thepunisher]

I disagree. I DO understand, which is exactly why i question it. You need to have some understanding to question it. If i dont know something, i'll ask, hence my posts here.

Actually homer, you missunderstood me there. I meant it as that is the point-of-view you often get from Christians on here. But seriously, its getting a bit tiring constantly having new threads appearing on here about this.

Christian

[Topher]

The reason we dont stone people to death for being gay is the same reason we dont stone people to death for violating the Sabbath.
I wasn’t talking about stoning people for everything. I was asking why some things in the Bible are accepted and promoted by some, i.e. homosexuality, yet other rules disregarded, i.e. stoning children to death. Don’t then tell me the Bible is a source of morality and should be taken literal. If the Bible is the word of God and God is perfect, why isn’t everything followed?

Mr Simpson the word "perfect" has also been translated to mean "mature"
be ye perfect as I am perfect. NOt somone who never sins. This is another reason I made this thread. Some people think if you become a Christian you never sin, or say you never do. The difference between Christians and non-Christians is the admittions of sin.
Who said “perfect” should be read as “mature?”

And surely it’s worse to admit you sin, and then keep doing it.

Who defines what sin it?
- If it’s in the Bible, how do you know it is accurate and true?
- If it is in the Bible, why do some Christian groups each have a different take on sin? Surely everyone referring to the Bible would all have the same definition of what sin is.

You know you think bad things, say bad things and do bad things from time to time.
Of course, but what you see as bad is subjective. Sure, there are universally bad things such as killing (itself variable) or rape etc, but these are naturally upheld for the most part because of survival. But how bad (it at all) other things are such as a little white lie, or aggressions are subjective. Many issues are to some not bad at all, such as abortion, gay marriage etc. Not everyone has the same definition of ‘sin’. In then end, one persons hell and another persons heaven. ;)

because as you can see many people in life will tell you non-Biblicial accounts on why things are that contradict the teachings.
This for me of one of the big problems I see. Using the Bible to evidence the Bible. You’re using what you’re trying to prove, as evidence of its proof.


If a claim in the Bible can only be proven with the Bible it doesn’t have much standing. If something can be tested and corroborated with additional ‘outside’ material, it becomes much stronger.

My question to you Homer is if the flood or any event in the Bible really happened, what would people do about it? Write it down and tell people?
The fact something is written down is NOT proof it happened. When that writing is all you have of the event how can you possibly say it is true?

It’s also important to note that a lot of the information about Jesus and prior events was documented decades, sometimes centuries after the occasion. Information can be and is distorted quite easily, even now. It doesn’t take long for information to become altered even after a short time. (For example, most people on the life boats after the Titanic sank gave conflicting accounts of the event they just spend hours watching with their own eyes. We of course know that the Titanic was real and did sink and we have evidence to suggest how, but imagine if the only evidence for the Titanic ever existing and sinking was the many conflicting accounts of it, would you still believe in it?) Leave information a few decades and centuries then a few thoudends more, and chances are it would have been embellished and changed. Hell, if you’ve played Chinese whispers, info changes between a few people in a few minutes!! In the game, "Send reinforcements, we are going to advance" commonly ends up as "Send three and fourpence, we are going to a dance".

Elvis didn’t do no drugs!

I think we both hurt and entertain God
“Hurt” and “entertain” are emotions. Emotions are reactionary. God, being omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent would know everything about everyone before their existence. If he’s not any of these, he cannot exist.

[Capt Ann]

1.
Why would God make me already knowing that I wouldn’t accept Jesus? I don't know. Why?

2.
God created us in his image.
God is perfect.
Wherefore why are we not perfect (as Christians argue?)First, 'created in the image of God' does not mean 'exactly like God'. We are not omnipresent. We are not omniscient. We are not all-powerful. God is. Second, when we were created, everything was very good. We corrupted the good things God put in us and around us when we (each individually; not 'because of Adam and Eve') chose to rebel against God.

Note: As I know it, we were prefect, but became imperfect because of “original sin,” but an omnipotent God would have know about this before he even created us, so why bother creating us in the first place.Believe it or not, God's purpose in creating you was not all about YOU. God's purpose in creating the world and everyone in it, from before he spun the first subatomic particle into existence, was to bring redemption through Jesus Christ. Obviously, God knew mankind would fall, and he included this in His plan from the beginning.

...because a perfect person wouldn’t disobey. ....1. Not necessarily so, and 2. Depends on what you mean by the word 'perfect'.

Are you perfect (free of defect), but have a free will? Then you could ALWAYS choose to disobey, if you wanted to.

Endeavor was right on this one. The word translated 'perfect' in the Bible can mean 'mature', or 'fully developed'. When God made you, you were good. Having a free will is good. Using that free will for what is right, now THAT is perfect (in the sense of being 'fully mature', or 'complete'). Could anyone really be 'perfect' in this sense, if they have never faced trials or temptations and had the opportunity to disobey? For those with ears, perhaps that explains Hebr 2:10.


Finally, how can a person be punished for disobeying before they have the knowledge of what good and bad was?Think about this one a little more; I think it's obvious on the surface. God said, "Don't," but they did. And they knew that much. This goes back to the basis of morality. Is there an objective basis for it? If God said that certain things were defined as 'good' and others were defined as 'bad', then YES. If the only way you're willing to define morality is by a.) personal experience, b.) seeing the (limited, because we can't possibly see them all) consequences of an action, or c.) taking a wild guess based on personal opinion or preference, then NO.

Ann, I think my first question is fairly important for obvious reason, although I i dount think a long discussion needs to be made of it.To do it justice will take a lot of time and space. Anything shorter will leave lots of holes, so keep that in mind when you see holes. For now, I'll offer just one general thought and some specific examples.

General thought: If God created everything (which He did), and if He knows from the beginning how everything will end (which He does), and if He is sovereign and in control over everything that happens (which He is), then He could write 'foreshadowing' into the history of the world. Many of the historical things that happened to Israel, that are recorded in the Bible, are really there as foreshadowing to prepare us for our spiritual journey today. Many of the laws of the Old Testament are there for the same reason.

Many OT laws were foreshadowing to draw a 'picture' of what the Messiah would be like, and what he would do, when he came. Certainly, the laws about the feasts and offerings all point to this. Jesus is our Passover, through Whose blood we are delivered from slavery to sin and brought to a new life. He is the 'scapegoat' on Whom all our sins were laid, so we could go free. He is the Peace Offering and the Atonement. Other laws show a 'picture' of God's plan for salvation and relationship with Him. The sabbath rest certainly shows the rest of faith instead of personal works. The laws regarding leprosy and quarantine, mixing fabrics in clothing, mixing grains in a field, making a difference between 'clean' and 'unclean' foods, etc. show the difference between holiness (separation for God) and unholiness (separation from God).

It's as if God said, "Study this picture, so you will recognize Jesus when He comes." Well, now He has come. We have the 'real thing' with us now. We don't have to spend so much time looking at pictures.

Those laws, BTW, aren't abolished. They are still 'on the books'. It' just that they are fulfilled. When I rely on Jesus to take me out of sin to a new life, I am keeping the Passover. When I am set apart for God's holy service, I am keeping the spirit of the laws about grains, clothes, etc. When I walk by faith and have no confidence in my own physical abilities, then I am keeping the Sabbath rest. The picture is still important, but it makes no sense to elevate a picture above the Person pictured. That's why Christians keep these laws spiritually, but not necessarily physically the same way they were kept 2000 years ago.

I would say this applies to every one of the ceremonial-type laws you find in the OT, the ones that make you scratch your head and ask, "Why would God have commanded THAT?" If you look into the 'why', you will probably find something more about Jesus Christ.

In a similar vein, there are laws that applied to the nation of Israel, as a nation, but don't apply to the individual (then or now). Remember, God put foreshadowing in His laws AND in history (since He wrote that, too ). Much of the physical history of Israel foreshadows the struggles, battles, trials, dangers, downfalls, and victories that we might face today. Many of the laws are primarily for that reason (such as "make no treaties with the inhabitants of the land). Many are for a national (as opposed to personal) application. This is why, for example, Jesus could say, "You have heard it said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,' but I say to you," love your enemies, turn the other cheek, resist not an evil person, etc. An 'eye for an eye' is in the OT, and it is a valid law for a national application - nations have the civil authority to avenge injustice and mete out punishment, but I have no right to hand out vigilante justice and take matters into my own hands. That's why (in the case you mentioned, for example) I believe that both homosexuality and rebellion are immoral, but I don't believe it is my business to stone those guilty of either.

As an aside, there is a branch of Christian theology (fairly small, but there is) called Biblical Theonomy, which advocates establishing the OT civil law as the basis for national civil law today. Biblical theonomists typically advocate making homosexuality illegal, and a smaller minority within this group advocates the death penalty against it. You can find the larger view of Theonomy with some groups advocating 'Christian Reconstructionism' (google Gary North, for instance).

God promised in the OT that He would 'make a new covenant' with His people. When He called it a 'new' covenant, He made the original 'old'. He obviously found some fault with it, something it couldn't do, or some sense in which it wasn't 'good enough' for the times when the 'new' would come. Well, now that the 'new' has arrived, one of the things it does is show us how to understand and apply the old.

You might think this sounds arbitrary - how do you know which laws you should follow, and which were pictures of what Jesus would be like, and which were for nations but not individuals? I mentioned the whole difference between the 'old' and 'new' specifically because these differences are spelled out in the new covenant (the New Testament). Instead of being arbitrary, God Himself, in the NT gives guidelines for knowing how/when/if to apply OT laws. (See for example the whole book of Hebrews.)

None of this addresses the requirements for keeping the OT law in light of GRACE, but that's for a whole 'nother thread!

[Capt Ann]

They had no knowledge of good or bad, therefore they didn't know whether dispoeying the instruction was either good or bad.The word 'knowledge' here means an intimate knowledge through personal experience. It is the same root word in Hebrew used to describe when Adam 'knew' Eve, and they ended up with little Cain and little Abel.

Adam and Eve fully understood God's command, and they fully understood their responsibility to obey it. But they didn't have intimate, personal experience of the tragedy of 'evil'. That came later. After they disobeyed.

[Poop-Loops]

The word 'knowledge' here means an intimate knowledge through personal experience. It is the same root word in Hebrew used to describe when Adam 'knew' Eve, and they ended up with little Cain and little Abel.

Cain killed Abel, Seth just stood there. So how did more people come about? Sorry for derailing, but I've always wondered, and nobody could give me a straight answer.

[Capt Ann]

Cain and Abel were probably over 100 when this happened. Seth wasn't born yet. Adam and Eve had scads of other kids in between and after who had kids, who had other kids, who had more kids.......

[Poop-Loops]

With... eachother... eww....

[Endeavor]

Mr Loops, this is why I made this thread. Your assumption is that Cain married another child of Adam and Eve. If God can make Adam and Eve, the first people, can't he make others. The Bible is a very large Book it coulnt tell everyones story, it mainly tells the lineage of Christ which is Adam-Noah, Moses-David..all the way to Christ.
x
Like CapnAnne said God told Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree of knowledge and they did. Transgression.
x
"Be ye perfect" If you have a son or daughter do you not tell them to "be good" and you sure know one day they will fall and not listen, but you tell them anyway. Its like saying dont sin and you know they will, but you tell them so they dont justify themselves, you make them aware.
x
I believe it is the root of evil that seperates groups of Christians. The Bible remains and the people go east and west. So inform yourself by the Bible and you will see the alterations of man. Some good people are really evil and some condemned for evil acts were really justified. You should know this just being alive.
x
The reason why we dont stone people to death is because this is the time of the New Testament where we dont have to die or kill for sin. Let God decide and act according to what is right. And there is that "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"
x
Yes, mercy. 99.9999 percent of mercy from God isnt for believeing and having such great faith. It is a gift. If we deserve to die because of sin, and we really could be killed if someone followed the old testament laws, I know I'd be dead a long time ago for my many sins, and yet God gave me mercy the years I didnt believe and even rebelled. Just like you would take your child back if they disobeyed you. You love them till the end and even then.
x
We are using what we are trying to prove as proof? This kind of fear is one out of many. We have had our lives changed and seen lives changed and things done, like I said before if God appeared to you what could you do to prove it? write it down or tell someone, thats all you can do about it.
If you are in such confusion you will ask yourself is this all a dream and will I wake up? But it's no dream and we take the proof and the belief. What else is there looking at eternity and the generations that may come?
x
Yes Mr simpson some say some things arent so bad and other things are good and other things are death deserving, thats why we open the Bible to see what is bad and how bad. All sin is sin. And the good news is that sin can be forgiven.

[thepunisher]

WE talk about it here because we have some really smart people.

Oh, so smartness now gets associated with being religious, does it now ?

Christian

[thepunisher]

Mr Loops, this is why I made this thread. Your assumption is that Cain married another child of Adam and Eve. If God can make Adam and Eve, the first people, can't he make others. The Bible is a very large Book it coulnt tell everyones story, it mainly tells the lineage of Christ which is Adam-Noah, Moses-David..all the way to Christ.
x
Like CapnAnne said God told Adam and Eve not to eat of the tree of knowledge and they did. Transgression.
x
"Be ye perfect" If you have a son or daughter do you not tell them to "be good" and you sure know one day they will fall and not listen, but you tell them anyway. Its like saying dont sin and you know they will, but you tell them so they dont justify themselves, you make them aware.
x
I believe it is the root of evil that seperates groups of Christians. The Bible remains and the people go east and west. So inform yourself by the Bible and you will see the alterations of man. Some good people are really evil and some condemned for evil acts were really justified. You should know this just being alive.
x
The reason why we dont stone people to death is because this is the time of the New Testament where we dont have to die or kill for sin. Let God decide and act according to what is right. And there is that "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"
x
Yes, mercy. 99.9999 percent of mercy from God isnt for believeing and having such great faith. It is a gift. If we deserve to die because of sin, and we really could be killed if someone followed the old testament laws, I know I'd be dead a long time ago for my many sins, and yet God gave me mercy the years I didnt believe and even rebelled. Just like you would take your child back if they disobeyed you. You love them till the end and even then.
x
We are using what we are trying to prove as proof? This kind of fear is one out of many. We have had our lives changed and seen lives changed and things done, like I said before if God appeared to you what could you do to prove it? write it down or tell someone, thats all you can do about it.
If you are in such confusion you will ask yourself is this all a dream and will I wake up? But it's no dream and we take the proof and the belief. What else is there looking at eternity and the generations that may come?
x
Yes Mr simpson some say some things arent so bad and other things are good and other things are death deserving, thats why we open the Bible to see what is bad and how bad. All sin is sin. And the good news is that sin can be forgiven.

Care to back up anything you say up there with something ? Or did god just walk up to you personally and told you this so you could relay it back to all of us ?

Christian

[Strafio]

Oh, so smartness now gets associated with being religious, does it now ?

Christian
Dude, you were wondering why people thought you disrespected religious people? ;)

Then again, what it is to be religious?
Hold strong beliefs in something or just robotically follow dogma?
I think it's the former in which case it would cover most people on this board.
If it's the latter then I don't think many people on here would apply.

[Endeavor]

There is always a hater and an imitator.
Strafio being smart goes with religious and non-religious. and being not so smart goes with religious and non-religous. Your assumption is that someone said religious people are the only smart people, but no one said that. Actually some of the most non-religoius people know more about the Bible than alot of religious people do.
x
mr punisher, had you read the scriptures you would know if I were quoating from them. Another thing is the absence of standard explainations, these are the assumptions people have which made me create this thread. I provide alternate reasons for things people think are standard that arnt in the Bible. God told us to not sin and I said it is like telling your own children to be good, How am I supposta back that up? It's logic in its own.Self explainitory.
x
I must ask you the same question Mr punisher, everything you say, where can you back that up? Anyone who reads the Bible can see where I base my life upon, and my answers.
x
Genesis the 1st book in the Bible: tells us about Adam and Eve. I said if God appeared what would you do to prove it? I'm at a loss here trying to understand what you want me to back up. I think it speaks for itself, or should I just write down the scriptures for everyone? And yes God did just hand it to me, and others, it's actually written in theBible. I think your question is how can the Bible back it up, not where do I get my answers from.
x
I would like to help answer your questions about the Bible not about me.

[Endeavor]

Here is another assumption to dispell. The devil is never in the Bible mentioned as having a tail and a red suit and horns and a pitchfork. When Christs deciple turned against the will of God, Christ said to His deciple, "get thee behind me Satan" So evil isn't a man so much as the spirit in men.
x
We see all the art with Adam and Eve and a snake. The Bible tells us the snake convinced Eve to eat of the tree of knowledge. After this God punishes the snake saying, "on your belly you WILL go" meaning the snake wasnt on its belly when it told Eve it was good to eat. So how then is this snake like the snakes we see today? It's obviously not, but artistic freedom has made it a talking snake to cause doubts.

[Poop-Loops]

Mr Loops, this is why I made this thread. Your assumption is that Cain married another child of Adam and Eve. If God can make Adam and Eve, the first people, can't he make others. The Bible is a very large Book it coulnt tell everyones story, it mainly tells the lineage of Christ which is Adam-Noah, Moses-David..all the way to Christ.

Well, seeing as how the first man was made of clay, and the first woman made of the man's rib, it would be appropriate to state where the others came from and where they were put.

Things like this bug me, though. Didn't God know in advance that this would create a lot of confusion?

[Endeavor]

Well for me mr Loops, I dont really need to know about the first people, their eye color, the number of toes they had.. They were there we are here in 2006 and no matter how far we can and cant trace our ansestors we got today to deal with. Again I think the Bible is a large enought book already and you want it to give everyones name and history?
x
I dont think we need to know. Its like that saying which came first the chicken or the egg? It's here so how did it get here? Ive thought about that too, where did Cain find a wife and what was the mark on Cain? It makes you curious but we dont need to labor too much wondering because we may never know.
x
The Bible also says God can turn rocks into people to worship Him if He wanted, so if God can make Man from the ground He can make man out of thin air, or whatever He wants, even now...

[Poop-Loops]

I am curios. I NEED to know. There is this "evolution" theory going around. Maybe you've heard of it? If God only states the lineage of Adam and Eve, how can I assume that there were more people? Where were they put? Evolution states that people came from Africa and ventured outwards.

We won't ever know, that doesn't mean we shouldn't want to know. Humans are curios beings, God should know this, since well, He MADE us.

Don't give me that "it's already a big book" stuff, either. Leviticus is full of "Don't eat shrimp on wednesday, but it's ok to wear two different colored socks on Saturday, as long as you clean behind your ears two days prior" stuff. You'd think knowing the origins of our own race would be a bit more important.

[Endeavor]

Mr. Loops , if the first people came from Africa, what were their names and their lineage?
x
Have I heard of evolution? of course. The debate ends in a gridlock because no one gives an inch and listens to the other man. ONe thing I see too much are the people that say if you dont belive in their belief you dont belive in any science. What happenes is you got two people who say it is one way and they both say the other is too stubborn.
x
Christianity comes under attack because it doesn't accept things contrary to the Bible where other religious are usually more tolerant. If you were God would you want somone to worship a cow or a statue?There are good religous teachings in all religoius, even some things devil worshippers do could be advantageous to society, but still none of these people made the rules in life which we have.
x
Mr Loops God told us He scattered the people at the tower of Babel. You can either say people poped up one day or they were created, there is no alternative to invest your time in. I don't know about you but I see the world not as a random rock in space, but as something much more.
x
If God created the earth and everything, that includes Australia, Iceland, South America, and the people there too. You dont have the names of people in Africa that "started" anything, except for ones like "lucy" which was named after the Beatles Lucy In the Sky With Diamonds about LSD.
x
If you are curious you can only have unfulfilled curiousity with evolution because most of its' believers will act like they know everything about this world. You either take the information given or you research your curiosity, but you decide who is qualifed to tell you about life. Keep in mind who teaches who and the blunders of everyday that are made by the "well educated"
x
Here is another assumption dissected: if you don't believe in evolution you dont believe in science altogether. Wrong.
Scientists like weather men, who study the atmosphere and weather conditions. Take "hurricane Katrina" About 2 days before it hit land they predicted where it was going to strike, earlier they thought elsewhere. So can they tell the wheather 80 million years ago? No. Look at your forcast, if it is wrong by 2 degrees or it rains and wasn't supposto. They were wrong, even if not by much!
x
Doctors are scientists, extensive training and years of schooling, Ever heard of anyone suing for malpractice because the doctor did something wrong? Ever heard of a doctor giving the wrong perscription? Ever heard of an approved medication having deadly side effects. So this science is not 100 percent accurate.
x
Scientific studies can say one thing one day and then change it later on. And the errors are dismissed by new scientific studies, but the prior accepted routines are proof of error.
x
Look at sociologists and psychologists, they can't tell you who is the next mad man to gun down the innocent. They can't tell you how all your minds work. They can't detect every lie someone says. They cant perscribe to every victom of an iffliction the right medication to eliminate the problem and reverse the ailment. They can help , but not 100 percent in all cases if in any.
x
So what we have are fields of sceince where scientists are not getting 100 percent success and their words are gold to the younger students. If all science can't achieve 100 percent than that means there are errors, if Christians don't accept part of science than they can accept other parts. If you dont have 100 percent success you dont have 100 percent understanding.Period! This goes for religion and science, there is no 100 percent knowing everything!
No one accepts all parts of science unless they are assuming it is all 100 percent right. If all the other fields of science have errors in the past and present and scientists work to gain knowledge to change this, then why claim everything is exactly perfect with it now?
x
Mr Loops, if you need to know the names of everyone in your ancestory, you wont find it in Christianity or anywhere else. Youre ok for being curious about it. Maybe it was recorded back then but those records didnt survive the years? Putting this aside are there further questions? Sorry I could not have those names for you.

[Johnno]

There are many anti-Christian things being said. I've heard such things as Hitler was a Christian?!Pardon the delayed reaction, but I'm ready to bite. ;)

Of course Hitler was a Christian. Obviously not a very good one, but he was a Christian. Not a Muslim, a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Sikh, or a Jew - but a Christian. What is your point?

[Endeavor]

Christians dont kill millions of jews. "thou shall not kill" "Love thy neighbor" "with what measure you judge shall you be judged"
If Christians dont kill and torture, Hitler is not a Christian. You have blamed a following for someone who is not a follower.
Ever heard of Nazi Bible burnings? "hitlers not a very good Christian" ?
x
exactly
x
many people claim many things in life, but the proof is in the pudding. People lie, thats the problem, and the innocent suffer for other peoples lies.
x
don't bite too hard you might find a fish hook

[ryanTKD]

I've heard such things as Hitler was a Christian?!

Well, one of the three main foundations of the HJ (Hitler Jugend) was Kirche (of the 3 K's- Kinder[Children], Kuche [Kitchen] and Kirche [Church]). So,at least some Christian imput was installed into one of the most evil organizations ever created.

[Endeavor]

Christians follow Christ. Christian leaders may be Christian or non-Christian. The way to tell what they are made of is simple, do they lead you to Christ or their own advantage?
x
If the Bible says "thou shall not kill" "love thy neighbor", and "judge not" and Hitler does the contrary IS HE REALLY A CHRISTIAN? didn't I just post this?
x
Christians follow Christ, next you'll tell us that George Bush is the standard of Americans. He is an American, but the majority of Americans do not support him, yet all Americans are held accountable for the actions he directs.
Look at Saddam Hussain, look at Fidel Castrol, Look at Stallin. These are leaders but they don't set the example of who sets the standard for a good citizen and they sure dont set the example of following a good religion.
x
If you think Hitler was a Christian I can see why youre not one. This assumption must die here right now, because all you have to do to prove Hitler wasnt a Christian is read the Bible, and you wont have to get past the first few chapter before you realize what your saying contradicts the teachings of the Bible.
x

[Endeavor]

There are millions of examples done in the name of religion that are anti-Christian. When these imposters gain power you blame Christians insted of realizing what is really happening.
x
If you want to protect the public and you become a law enforcement agent, a police officer, your intent may be very good. If during this job you conficate drugs and drug money and steal them for your own financial gain and are a corrupt officer, then are you the standard cop? The corruption and the individual are to blame not the good idea that sets the standard.
x
On the other hand when someone does something good it isnt everyday they are acknowledged for their Christian actions. Sometimes doing something good is just resisting smashing someone for their own behavior. Sometimes being a Christian is just saying hi to people or giving a smile or helping somone with some money issues.
x
A lot of people in places of high power including the church are corrupt. I thought this was understood by most people, guess not. Hitler was corrupt. A wrong answer to an example of a Christian.

[thepunisher]

Dude, you were wondering why people thought you disrespected religious people? ;)

Strafio, if you might care to read the original post it is the
religious person being disrespectful towards non-religious ppl. So quit your: Let me point out how disrespectful you are towards them. In that persons mind apparently only religious people are smart. And thats insulting. And what I reacted to. :bang:

So how about you stop jumping to defence of them the whole time.

Christian

[thepunisher]

I must ask you the same question Mr punisher, everything you say, where can you back that up? Anyone who reads the Bible can see where I base my life upon, and my answers.


I base what I know upon what I learned in high school, uni and life. Meaning, in interaction with ppl around me. Not upon one single book. Must be a great feeling to have a book that has all the answers for you.

Reminds me of the three sons of Donald Duck. Whenever they have a problem they consult something called "Das Schlaue Buch" (the smart book)and all there problems are solved. Must be an amazing book in itself if you think about it, probably rewrites itself every couple of hours. Or every time they ask a new question.

Christian

[Capt Ann]

the original post it is the
religious person being disrespectful towards non-religious ppl. ...........In that persons mind apparently only religious people are smart. Please don't jump to conclusions, take a deeeeeeep breath, and re-read the post in question, with the context before it.

Several people were asking why anyone would bother asking questions about God on a martial arts forum. The person who answered, in context, was saying there are people who he considered very smart willing to talk religion on this forum, and therefore it's worthwhile continuing the discussion. He was implying, in the context of discussion, that he didn't have to go to some religion forum somewhere, because he found an agreeable lot who could discuss matters of faith rationally and intelligently here on MAP.

See? no put-down at all.

Christian, if you've been banged in the head by 'religious folk', then I'm really sorry, but there's nothing I can do about what's happened to you in the past. I know it's difficult to lay aside old hassles and hurts (I know there are certain people that when I hear them bring up certain topics, I've learned to 'duck and cover'). But I ask you please to try not to read accusations or attacks into posts. Assume the best - until proven otherwise ;)

[Ragnarok2005]

I would like to open with a question I've asked myself. Is the Bible a believeable sorce? Well, if about 1600 years ago Moses led the Hebrews out of Egypt and God divided the sea...

Considering that there was no evidence of that in Egyptian records or history I'm inclined to answer 'No.'

[Endeavor]

I see the point. Let's seperate religion and religious people. Religious people obviously need religion but religious people also stray from their teachings.
x
respect is a two way street, we're all guilty of being disrespectful and most of us show respect. Sometimes there is no nice way to say things like obviously Hitler was not a good person. This should not be a debate.
x
When anybody hears that they are wrong that automatic self defence trys to justify things. If you want to make a hindu mad tell him you love to eat cows or whatever they worship. Stomp on their feet and they wont like it. Same with Christians and even atheists.
x
We should give people equal respect and hold our personal likes and dislikes at bay. The not so well hidden idea of poking a stick at a hornets nest just to get an angry response is about as old as time itself.
x
I want this thread to offer Biblical answers to questions about the Bible and life, when we are in an angry mood we read other peoples commets in a harsher way than if we were in a good mood, therefor we are insulted more when we are on the giving end of who will have the final say.
x
Getting back to what I was saying before, The assumption that the actions of a religious person reflects the religion only applies when their actions are encouraged by the religion. Abuse of power and corruption are no stranger to history, even the micro-cosom everyday life we know as individuals. Individual actions and individual intentions define religion not the armor of religion as a defence to justify everything we do.

[Endeavor]

Mr Ragnarok, record keeping was very difficult in early times. Wars, corruption, weather, disasters such as fires, sandstorms, etc.. Think about this, where are the blueprints for building all the pyramids? Some of them have yet to be opened yet they exist, so where's the records of how they were built?
x
Look at modern times. Saddam Hussain. Where's the records of all he has done? Where's the records of all the war-crimes in the world. Some things are kept on the down low for a reason. Look at nazi Germany in the 1940's
We find this stuff out and we want to help the victoms! Egypt didnt want to say hey we got our butts kicked.
x
Another modern thing is the not so long ago slavery of black people in America. When disasters struck and people died some of these people were not in the statistics! You go to school and they tell you blacks were slaves and you study for a few minutes then they tell you something positive like about Harriot Tubbman and the underground railroad. But the overall abuse is unrecorded.
x
History is incomple and if you think the Bible can be manipulated you have already agreed that you think history can be manipulated. The present confirms even accounts of recent things are manipulated. ONe person says it happens this way, another says the total opposite.
x
Christians believe the Bible because after reading it we find that no other book or speaker tells the truths that the Bible tells us, not just the history but the deeper things in life. Dont lie dont steal dont cheat. The teachings are accepted the teachers after the Bible .. questionable.

[Capt Ann]

Pardon the delayed reaction, but I'm ready to bite.

Of course Hitler was a Christian. Obviously not a very good one, but he was a Christian. Not a Muslim, a Hindu, a Buddhist, a Sikh, or a Jew - but a Christian. What is your point?Before I became a Christian, if someone asked me if I were one, I would have said, "Yes." I assumed that because I wasn't any of those other things, I must be a Christian. After all, Christianity is sort of the 'default religious setting' in North America, right?

Actually, Christianity is a personal choice to enter covenant relationship with God through Jesus Christ. Someone who hasn't accepted God's offer of salvation through Christ isn't one. Someone who has accepted it becomes a child of God by faith. We had a saying in my church in FL - 'God doesn't have any grandchildren'. Having Christianity in your nation, or your neighborhood, or your family doesn't make you one. It isn't contagious, and you can't 'get it' by osmosis.

I think it's clear from the evidence (actions, personal writings, his own statements) that Hitler was not in any sense of the word a Christian. I think Endeavor's point is that he's trying to clear up misconceptions about the Bible/Christianity, and one of the misconceptions he sees a lot is the idea that Hitler was a Christian. Whether he's doing a convincing job of addressing this misconception or not, I have to give him kudos for trying: this one misconception has set back relations and understanding between the Christian and Jewish communities more than any other event since the Spanish Inquisition.

Well, one of the three main foundations of the HJ (Hitler Jugend) was Kirche (of the 3 K's- Kinder[Children], Kuche [Kitchen] and Kirche [Church]). So,at least some Christian imput was installed into one of the most evil organizations ever created.
Hitler was big into 'all things Aryan'. Since Martin Luther was a major theological reformer, and he was GERMAN, Hitler tried to incorporate the German Lutheran church (largest denomination in Germany at the time) into his plans for Aryan dominance. Like any other large group, it was infiltrated with spies and informers. The Nazi's tried to control the messages preached and use them, not for any Christian purpose or teaching, but for the furtherance of their Aryan message. At this time, the German Lutheran church split into those who didn't want to rock the boat (including both Nazi sympathizers, those who didn't care, and those too scared to object), and a large network of churches that formed a movement called the 'Confessing Church'. The Confessing Church refused to bow to Hitler (the 'Caesar' of their time), and insisted instead on doctrinal purity and taking a strong stand against anti-Semitism and Naziism. Many of its greatest leaders, of course, where either imprisoned or executed (such as Martin Niemoeller, Dietrich Bonhoeffer), Their writings are still largely read today (e.g., Bonhoeffer's "The Cost of Discipleship" still ranks in the 'top sellers' every year).

Hitler tried to use anything that was 'German' to further his aims. That's why there was a great 'revival' among the SS of adherence to Germanic paganism. Hitler himself was extremely superstitious (his interests in astrology and fortune telling were well-known). But, from what I've read, I don't think he had any personal interest in Christianity or Germanic paganism, aside from how he thought they might both be used to further his power base.

[CanuckMA]

1) God is omnipotent.

2) God gave humans free will.

Q: If God gave humans free will, can he see our futures?

A: If he can see our futures, then it is not free will. If he cannot see our futures, he is not omnipotent. Worshipping an omnipotent god? Sure, just don't keep saying you are omnipotent. Kinda "lying", you know.



My younges had to tackle this for his D'Var Torah for his Bar-Mitzvah.

The reasoning he came up with is that humans can have free will and G-d can be omnipotent at the same time. Omnipotence does not mean knowing the one outcome of the series of decisions you can make. G-d is omnipotent because He knows the possible outcome of every branch in your decision tree. Your free-will comes into play in selecting which decision you will make at every fork.

[Endeavor]

Your free will may not have an automatic (instant karma) response, wheather your decision/action is good or bad. If you confess and get sever punishment or if you hide your guilt and "get away" down the road things could go wrong for you or something you love dearly.
x
Look at Joseph. If you are not familiar with his story, his brothers sold him into slavery because they were jealous. He was a slave and refused to sleep with his masters wife because that would be a sin. He was put in prison because she was hurt by the rejection and did (what most women would never do?!) say he tried to pursuade her to do such things. In the end he is brought out of prison and rewared for his plan to feed the people of the land against the famine. He then feeds his brothers who are in want and he tells them dont hate yourselves, because IT WAS GOD who sent him to that place for the eventual bettering.
x
Everyone in the Bible suffered. everyone today suffers, Some people today are angry about it, some seek resolution in the world to come. That's about the only options we have. Wish I could be of more help.
x
your temptation isnt a sin.. for the evil tempts us daily.. Your bringing the temptation into the light is a sin. You seek it out. If youre a Christian you will be tempted but you refuse it best you can, if you dont try youre not being a Christian because youre not really sorry and you dont really believe its wrong.

[Strafio]

But for God to know what will happen, he has to know what those choices will be, right?

[Endeavor]

He knows everyones choice. Some choices delight Him some bring sorrow.
It is everyones place to make this life better for others and have fun themselves too! :)
Trust me man, I wish everyone made better choices including myself, God just has this love for sinners who repent.
"if a man has one hundred sheep and one goes astray, he will leave the 99 to find that which is lost and when he finds that one, he carries it and calls his friends to rejoice, there is more joy for the found one than the 99 which never left him, so is there more joy in heaven for one person who repents than for 99 who dont need repentance"
x
thats what it's all about

[Blevunly]

I posted this in the What God Wants thread but it seems relevant hear to.


You can choose to go lift weights but why did you choose to do that? maybe to gain muscle for sex appeal, maybe to do better at sports theres always some kind fo reason why people do things and where theres a reason there is something that caused that reason.

Free is just a bunch of variables that when applied to each other reach a destination that you would call choice or "free will".

The variables would be your environment which is anything that effects you (ex. parents, nature, some kid stealing your lunch money etc.). Your body is another variable this would be not just physcial but mental as well. The last variable would be the soul now there are two things souls can be they are either all the same or different.

Now the whole process of "free will" can be broken down into a math problem

x+9+8=y

The 9 represents your body and the 8 represent your environment(the things that effect you or happen to you). The (y) represents your choice and the (x) represents your soul. Now lets say that all souls are the same so lets say all souls equal 0. So lets say we put your soul in my body and let you live my life. 0+9+8=17 agian lets take my brothers soul and swap it in 0+9+8=17 . No matter whoevers soul is switched in they will always make the same choices, because the souls are all the same and the body and environemtn are always the same. So if souls are all the same then our environment and body will choose our fates.

The other solution is if souls are different so lets say my soul equals 2 and yours equals 6 (the numbers are just to show difference). We'll also say that by reaching above 20 you will make the choice to become a christian and below 20 you wont. so my equation would look like 2+9+8=19 and yours would look like 6+9+8=23. Now if souls are different and God makes souls then he knows by putting this soul in this body in this environment that it will either pass his test or that it will fail his test. Since the environment and body dont change the deciding factor in your "free will" would be your soul and since God made it he either made it so you would succeed or made it for you to fail.

So if all souls are the same then your body and environment choose your fate and anyone would choose the same thing because all the variables are the same. But if souls are different then God chooses your fate because he knows by sticking this oul in this body and environment what will happen to it and he knows if he would've sticken this one instead you would've passed his test but instead for some people he sticks in souls that will make them fail, because he is incharge of souls and that is beyond our ability to control so in this case he would choose our fates.

[ryanTKD]

"thou shall not kill" "love thy neighbor", and "judge not"

Have you not read Leviticus? And I'm sure that the son's of Abraham sleep with their own mother... yeah, that's a good example for people to follow.

[Topher]

I posted this on another thread. Worth a look... http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3593866248238036452&q=a+hepful+hand

[Endeavor]

Blevunly: different souls, different fates for SURE. Look at Judas and look at John. Two deciples, John could have stolen the money like Judas did but John was good hearted.
x
If you and me are in the same situation we might very well act different, I dont know you Im just using the example, You get married and you cheat on your wife becuase it's a thrill or whatever. Im married and I dont consider cheating. Another example is some people kill people, come people sing songs about peace. We could all kill people or all sing, people have similar temptations and similiar oppourtunities to do good instead. Different souls different fates. Yes God knows your fate from before you were made and every decision you would make.
x
Mr ryan, I think it was the daughter sleeping with their father, but one story this guys daughter waits till he's drunk and he knows she did evil. Another story the daughters face is hid being a prostitute and takes advantage of her father. These things are never justified in the Bible, but God doesnt punish the man for the sins of his daughter, that is between her and God. This is never said to be a good example of something good to do.
x
Abrahams wife was Sarah ,and Sarah bore Abraham 2? sons in her old age.Also he bore a son to another woman... I forget all the details.
x
actually the Bible tells you not to ever even look at your parents naked and not to sleep with them or your aunts or brothers or sisters, Again the actions of these people are not the standard which we act. King David killed his neighbor so he could have a shot at his wife. That wasnt good, that was evil, he was punished for it, Still, he repented and forgiven, Are we better than him? No.
x
Look at the life of the great Apostle Paul. He hated Christians, had them killed. THen his heart changed , he was forgiven. He changed and became one of the biggest influences on mankind ever. So his sins are not our standard but his story is how he was changed by God and the beauty of such a bad person being changed for good.

[Poop-Loops]

My younges had to tackle this for his D'Var Torah for his Bar-Mitzvah.

The reasoning he came up with is that humans can have free will and G-d can be omnipotent at the same time. Omnipotence does not mean knowing the one outcome of the series of decisions you can make. G-d is omnipotent because He knows the possible outcome of every branch in your decision tree. Your free-will comes into play in selecting which decision you will make at every fork.

Let me explain what "Omni" means. It means "all". Not "mostly", or "almost all", it means "all". If He doesn't know what I'm going to choose, then He isn't "all" knowing, now is He?

[Endeavor]

He knows what youre going to choose, its the rest of us who cringe sometimes :)

[Blevunly]

Blevunly: different souls, different fates for SURE. Look at Judas and look at John. Two deciples, John could have stolen the money like Judas did but John was good hearted.
x
If you and me are in the same situation we might very well act different, I dont know you Im just using the example, You get married and you cheat on your wife becuase it's a thrill or whatever. Im married and I dont consider cheating. Another example is some people kill people, come people sing songs about peace. We could all kill people or all sing, people have similar temptations and similiar oppourtunities to do good instead. Different souls different fates. Yes God knows your fate from before you were made and every decision you would make.

If we lived the exact same life from day one then the only way we could make different choices would be if we had different souls. Ok we've established that. Now what I need you to think about is why anyone would do anything for instance you said you don't cheat on your wife but i cheat on mine I'm assuming you meant if we lived the same life. Well the only way I would do something different than you is because God made my soul to do that. It's like if you took two exact same cars and their entire car is the same and you line them up to race on a track that is the same on both sides so the cars would be like your body and the track would be like your environment. But you put two different engines in them the engine will represent the soul to show difference. Now you know by putting a bigger better engine in car (A) it is going to be more successful then car (B) who has the smaller engine. This is basically what God does he know by sticking this soul in this environment what it will do and since he makes the soul he controls what the soul will do. You see because all other parts of the equation are the same so without a soul interveining then we would all end up at the same place if we led the same life. So by God adding the soul and controlling the soul because he does decide how to make the soul he infact holds the final key to all of your decisions and ultimatley decides your fate.

[Vanir]

I've got a question: say you were born in a Christianised household, but you agreed with the historically Hebrew view that heaven and hell were in fact psychological states and much of religion was in fact to do with rite and passage of adulthood than anything otherworldly or to do with afterlives. Would that make you Jewish? How is that possible?


Of course, a). I understand the general policy of religions that the alternative to adherence is abberance (i.e. evil), and b) the present policy of the Anglican church at least supports the view that the bible and Christianity is largely a political exercise (i.e. that it is a book of parables and allegory, and an exercise in the betterment of societies, which is pretty frickin arrogant in a "democratic" society).
So question two: how do the Christian fundamentalists among you feel about this? Anglicans suck and Mormons are now God?

Just curious.

[CosmicFish]

If we lived the exact same life from day one then the only way we could make different choices would be if we had different souls. Ok we've established that. Now what I need you to think about is why anyone would do anything for instance you said you don't cheat on your wife but i cheat on mine I'm assuming you meant if we lived the same life. Well the only way I would do something different than you is because God made my soul to do that. It's like if you took two exact same cars and their entire car is the same and you line them up to race on a track that is the same on both sides so the cars would be like your body and the track would be like your environment. But you put two different engines in them the engine will represent the soul to show difference. Now you know by putting a bigger better engine in car (A) it is going to be more successful then car (B) who has the smaller engine. This is basically what God does he know by sticking this soul in this environment what it will do and since he makes the soul he controls what the soul will do. You see because all other parts of the equation are the same so without a soul interveining then we would all end up at the same place if we led the same life. So by God adding the soul and controlling the soul because he does decide how to make the soul he infact holds the final key to all of your decisions and ultimatley decides your fate.
I'm trying to understand your point and this is what I've come up with. Tell me if I'm understanding you correctly or not:

It sounds like you're saying "God created our souls and defined each and every variable and parameter of their nature, therefore as the ultimate creator, he's responsible for any behaviour we exhibit. By creating souls different from one another, he's also responsible for the fact that different people behave differently."

[Endeavor]

Im not really sure of the question on that one. Yes different souls, different environmental influences.
x
Two cars, two different engines, but the more powerful engine might overheat or use up too much gas while the slow and steady can take the curves and the long haul. There never has been two people in the same exact circumstance, although they may do the same exact thing.
x
Vanier: being a Jew has three different parts, A face, a religion, and a frame of mind. The last being a "spiritual Jew" Which all Christians are. That is to say all REAL Christians. Because Christ was of the Jews, meaning the flesh was from a Jewish virgin woman. Being of the race is not possible for someone who isn't so we're not held responsible, remember God saved Ethopian and Roman people, Jewish people turned on Him. So to wrap it up you dont need to be Jewish to be accepted, and the Jews were more the people to "follow" the Old Testament.
x
Mr or Ms Vanir: there are different types of religions within religions like Christian chruches can be Catholic, Baptist, Protestant, Methodist, etc..
Within Jewish, Im not the expert, but there are Christian Jews, Sadducees, certain ones that believe in no afterlife, and etc.. Im not sure if you were asking me if you could be Jewish, becaues I dont the requirments to change your faith, or if it is requiring a great deal of things, there is probably some kind of test and vote??? I cant say what they demand or ask, Im posting in question to the Bible, Old and New Testaments, and one man told Jesus ,"I believe, what doth hinder me to be baptised" And they baptised him because he had faith, nothing more was required.
x
The danger of living a sin free life to join any religion is a constant kicker because the real honest heart is aware of sin and conviceted by their own conscious.
x
Im sorry I couldnt tell you more about Jewish customs, perhaps if you were more specific I could look it up for you on how to get in, or maybe it was just a "what if " question???
x
Vanir: heaven and hell are both psychological states in this life and a physical state in the life to come, although hell is not mentioned in the Bible as ever ongoing torment to anyone, although many people have heard it was it's not in the Bible that you suffer endlessly.
x
Christian fundlementalists feel how? As in all cases, you gotta ask the individual and more important follow the Bible because it doesnt matter how other people percieve the ways of the world against what the Bible instructs us to do and feel about it. There are different types of Christians so someof their views are personal, some are evil, Christians follow Christ not a man made view of things. Its very tragic how anti-Christian most Christians are in a world looking for better answers the ones that are supposta help are often the ones that are the enemy, and some enemies got helping hands.

[Blevunly]

I'm trying to understand your point and this is what I've come up with. Tell me if I'm understanding you correctly or not:

It sounds like you're saying "God created our souls and defined each and every variable and parameter of their nature, therefore as the ultimate creator, he's responsible for any behaviour we exhibit. By creating souls different from one another, he's also responsible for the fact that different people behave differently."

Yes that's basically the just of it.

[Blevunly]

Im not really sure of the question on that one. Yes different souls, different environmental influences.
x
Two cars, two different engines, but the more powerful engine might overheat or use up too much gas while the slow and steady can take the curves and the long haul. There never has been two people in the same exact circumstance, although they may do the same exact thing.


Ok your not getting what I'm saying and for the record I was talking about a drag race no turns and they would have enough gas to finish. But that's not important it's just an example to try and get you to understand.

The reason I use the same life scenario is to try and get you to think about what makes up someones "free will". Most people just assume it is there, but that is alittle ignorant because with any choice there must be a reason for it. Something must've made them want to choose it and there is where we have the three factors of Environment, Body, and Soul.

When God creates a soul it's like someone making a computer program they desgn every aspect of it and then stick it in the computer or it's environment. Now they know exactly what the program is going to do because they made it to do that. They know if they've made it a good program or a virus. So how can they blame the program when it reacts exactly how they programmed it to react.

God knows what will happen if he makes a soul a certian way. He knows if he would've made something different the person would've passed his test yet he chooses not to. He makes souls that he knows are not compatible with their environment (in other words won't choose him) and then he wants to pretend like it's their fualt but it isn't it's his.

Now your refusing to look deeper, but I can't really blame you a couple of years ago when I was a christian I would've done the same thing. Because I had been told something since I was little and nothing could be right if it opposed it. So I hope you understand this, but if you don't I will keep trying until you do.

[CosmicFish]

Yes that's basically the just of it.
Cool. Then I pretty much agree with you. And with your next post. :)

[Blevunly]

Cool. Then I pretty much agree with you. And with your next post. :)

Thanks :D

[Capt Ann]

He knows if he would've made something different the person would've passed his test yet he chooses not to. He makes souls that he knows are not compatible with their environment (in other words won't choose him) and then he wants to pretend like it's their fualt but it isn't it's his.Look at this in detail.

Start with your final statement - ...'he wants to pretend like it's their fault but it isn't it's his.So, are you saying that everything that you do is 'God's fault'? Of if you choose not to believe in God, that 'it just happened' because that is the way you are? Sounds like a serious cop-out to evade personal responsibility. It's a nice-sounding lotion to butter over bruised consciences, but I don't think anyone really believes it. Certainly, no one I have ever met actually lives like they believe it. We routinely assess the actions of other people: We put criminals in jail. We give recognition and awards to good citizens. We admire heroism. We despise cowardice. None of these things makes any sense if those peoples' actions were not the result of free will. In the same way, we expect a raise or promotion when we do well on the job. We feel a sense of accomplishment when we persevere through difficulty. We feel guilty when we know we've messed up. None of these things make any sense, if our own actions are not the result of free will.

Back up to your first statement, and break it into smaller pieces:
1. He knows if he would've made something different the person would've passed
2. his test
3. yet he chooses not to.

Again, work from the back first:
3. yet he chooses not to. If free will is impossible for you, then how is it possible for God? OTOH, you seem to admit that God has free will (otherwise it wouldn't make any sense for you to be angry at Him for His actions). If God can have free will, when His character is immutable (unchanging), then what makes you think you don't?
2. his test What would this test be?
1. He knows if he would've made something different the person would've passed You only arrived at this conclusion because you started with the assumption that you are a computer program: enter input variables, get an output. Change the input, get a different output. This makes no sense, though, withoutn starting with the assumption you're seeking to prove.

Your 'will' is what defines who you are. The only thing God could have changed to 'force' you to make a different choice would be to have made someone else instead, and not make 'you' at all. That is the nature of choice and freedom of will - it is not predictable and not 'forced'. Although it can be influenced by environment and culture, it is not 'controlled' by anything.

[Blevunly]

Look at this in detail.

Start with your final statement - ...'he wants to pretend like it's their fault but it isn't it's his.So, are you saying that everything that you do is 'God's fault'? Of if you choose not to believe in God, that 'it just happened' because that is the way you are? Sounds like a serious cop-out to evade personal responsibility. It's a nice-sounding lotion to butter over bruised consciences, but I don't think anyone really believes it. Certainly, no one I have ever met actually lives like they believe it. We routinely assess the actions of other people: We put criminals in jail. We give recognition and awards to good citizens. We admire heroism. We despise cowardice. None of these things makes any sense if those peoples' actions were not the result of free will. In the same way, we expect a raise or promotion when we do well on the job. We feel a sense of accomplishment when we persevere through difficulty. We feel guilty when we know we've messed up. None of these things make any sense, if our own actions are not the result of free will.

Back up to your first statement, and break it into smaller pieces:
1. He knows if he would've made something different the person would've passed
2. his test
3. yet he chooses not to.

Again, work from the back first:
3. yet he chooses not to. If free will is impossible for you, then how is it possible for God? OTOH, you seem to admit that God has free will (otherwise it wouldn't make any sense for you to be angry at Him for His actions). If God can have free will, when His character is immutable (unchanging), then what makes you think you don't?
2. his test What would this test be?
1. He knows if he would've made something different the person would've passed You only arrived at this conclusion because you started with the assumption that you are a computer program: enter input variables, get an output. Change the input, get a different output. This makes no sense, though, withoutn starting with the assumption you're seeking to prove.

Your 'will' is what defines who you are. The only thing God could have changed to 'force' you to make a different choice would be to have made someone else instead, and not make 'you' at all. That is the nature of choice and freedom of will - it is not predictable and not 'forced'. Although it can be influenced by environment and culture, it is not 'controlled' by anything.

Ok let me start by saying that we do have will I'm just pointing out the variables that make up what it is. Ok that whole thing about people who do different things has nothing to do with free will, giving people awards and putting them in jail has nothing to do with free will unless you mean we do that because of their free will in which case I would ask you how do you know they have free will?

3.Free will is possible to God because in the beginning there was only God he had no environment and no body and no soul made by another being these are the things that make up our will.

2.His test is to do what is needed to get into Heaven.

1. Ok so now your saying that our souls have nothing to do with our decisions in which case I think your alone. But if you think they have something at all to do with our decisions then you must admit since God created them that he must know that by making them a certian way how it would effect peoples decisions so agian he choose their fate since he is in complete control of how the soul is made.

Ok now do me a favor and tell me why I don't like God, but you do why do I choose one thing and you choose another. I figure about a couple more posts from each of us and we'll have this broken down enough to bring back up my equation. Cause there is always a reason behind your actions and something has to make up that reason and the something is your environment your soul and your body. Hopefully you will eventually realize this.

[Strafio]

We routinely assess the actions of other people: We put criminals in jail. We give recognition and awards to good citizens. We admire heroism. We despise cowardice. None of these things makes any sense if those peoples' actions were not the result of free will.
Then can make sense without free will.
You assume free will to award determined actions.
It would be determined will awarding determined actions.
We'd be determined to despise cowardice (well, I more pity it personally) or determined to think to feel. The idea is that everything has cause and chose causes have causes and those causes have causes. What happens in the world is just a chain of events governed by cause and effect.

Ofcourse, we can only perceive the smallest fractions of these causes, so we don't naturally see it. It's only if we believe that everything must have a cause and every cause has an effect that we work out that it must apply to our thoughts, feelings and will. Having said that, apparently the latest studies in quantum physics has given evidence that not everything has direct cause and effect... or so I've heard... :confused:

Your 'will' is what defines who you are. The only thing God could have changed to 'force' you to make a different choice would be to have made someone else instead, and not make 'you' at all. That is the nature of choice and freedom of will - it is not predictable and not 'forced'. Although it can be influenced by environment and culture, it is not 'controlled' by anything.
If determinism is true then God made us knowing exactly what our outcomes would be, what choices we'd make etc... it would follow that he would give us a chain of events where it all worked out and we ended up happy (if that's what he wanted).

Although when the outcome is determined, it does make doing it seem kind of pointless... :D

[CanuckMA]

Considering that there was no evidence of that in Egyptian records or history I'm inclined to answer 'No.'

There is also virtually no Eguptian record of their military defeats either. AAMOF, none of those cultures recorded defeats. The absense of Egyptioan record of the Exodus is not a proof of no Exodus.

[CosmicFish]

Capt Ann, If I've understood Blevunly correctly, he's not using that argument as a cop out for himself. Rather, he's accusing God of making that cop out. A (presumably) all-knowing God has created all of creation from nothing. Doesn't this mean that he's created free will also, and defined it's parameters? Not only that, but he's the ultimate authority on how much free will we each get, and of our ability to use the limited amount we are given in our lives?

As an analogy: if I were to create a load of tiny robots and program them all with the ability to respond to environmental stimuli in certain ways, is it my fault or the fault of the robots if they end up doing things I'm not happy about?

If God really did make everything out of nothing then how can he not be responsible for each and every action that occurs inside his creation? The only way I can think of is if he's either not all-powerful or he's not all-knowing. A God who does not know the outcome of his own creation surely must concede that there are powers or forces outside of his control acting upon it?

[CKava]

Have I heard of evolution? of course. The debate ends in a gridlock because no one gives an inch and listens to the other man. ONe thing I see too much are the people that say if you dont belive in their belief you dont belive in any science. What happenes is you got two people who say it is one way and they both say the other is too stubborn.
Then you go to the scientific community and look at what the scientific consensus is, science has developed quite alot in the past 100 years and you'll find that theories like evolution and gravity are basically beyond reproach (though modification in details frequently occurs). Science doesn't work by personal prefence... an overwhelming amount of evidence points to evolution and there is no viable alternative explanation that fits all available evidence and constantly makes predictions which are proved correct, so why would you doubt it? Unless you also doubt ALL the other equally respected scientific theories... do you? If not then the reason you don't believe in evolution has nothing to do with science. Thats fine and its your choice but you shouldn't dress up a religiously motivated decision as being scientifically motivated. There is no scientific reason to doubt evolution.

There are good religous teachings in all religoius, even some things devil worshippers do could be advantageous to society, but still none of these people made the rules in life which we have.
There is no evidence that Christianity created 'the rules' either, similiar rules exist in practically every society even when they had little or no interaction with Christianity. 'Moral' behaviour is necessary for the maintenance of large social communities and since Christianity was founded in such communities its not surprising it contains some moral guidelines... though personally I would not like to have been alive at any time when people were advised to follow the OT moral guidelines.

if you don't believe in evolution you dont believe in science altogether. Wrong.
Actually its fairly accurate. If you pick and chose to believe only science that conforms with your religious views then you are not really respecting the scientific method. If you admit this bias then fine and dandy but if you try and dress it up as evolution not being a convincing theory then Im afraid your argument collapses unless you also refuse to accept ALL OTHER equally as respected scientific theories. And personally Ive never met anyone who takes this position or any non-religious person who has problems with evolution.

Doctors are scientists, extensive training and years of schooling, Ever heard of anyone suing for malpractice because the doctor did something wrong? Ever heard of a doctor giving the wrong perscription? Ever heard of an approved medication having deadly side effects. So this science is not 100 percent accurate.
This is one of the silliest arguments against science I have ever heard. Humans are animals composed of ridiculously complicated internal systems which are like all biological systems subject to disease, ageing and various kinds of trauma. Doctors are also humans and like all other humans are even with years of study capable of making mistakes. Add these 2 facts together and its quite a testament to the scientific method and training that modern medicine uses that the kind of incidents your mentioning above are as rare as they are.

So what we have are fields of sceince where scientists are not getting 100 percent success and their words are gold to the younger students. If all science can't achieve 100 percent than that means there are errors, if Christians don't accept part of science than they can accept other parts. If you dont have 100 percent success you dont have 100 percent understanding.Period! This goes for religion and science, there is no 100 percent knowing everything!
Endeavour no scientist to my knowledge has suggested that we now know 100% of all information. So your argument is spurious. I imagine you don't have problems with the theory of accept gravity but why not? Given your argument it would seem it isn't any less a valid target for disbelief than evolution. Afterall science never gets things 100% so anyone who disbelieves in gravity is justified in doing so and can rightly argue that they still do respect scientific study. Oh and the world being round (still using your logic)... people are also justified in not believing in that either, I mean it might have tonnes of evidence and to the entire scientific community be beyond question but science has never been 100% correct so in the end who are we to say that all those who disagree are wrong I mean those pictures from space aren't just optical illusions! In the end as is always the case with this topic disbelief in evolution comes down to one thing and one thing only... refusal to accept a scientific theory PURELY due to religious conviction.

[Capt Ann]

giving people awards and putting them in jail has nothing to do with free will unless you mean we do that because of their free will in which case I would ask you how do you know they have free will?My point is that it makes no sense AT ALL to reward people for some behaviors or punish people for other behaviors if they do NOT have free will. The fact that we both punish and reward (and honor/admire and reject/despise) show that we live our lives, in practice, as if we believe people have free will. In other words, by punishing/rewarding peoples' behavior, we are either assuming they have a free will, or we are living as hypocrites, because it makes no sense to 'punish' or 'reward' a computer program or a robot.

2.His test is to do what is needed to get into Heaven. Which is....?

1. Ok so now your saying that our souls have nothing to do with our decisions ...Not 'nothing' to do with it, but the way God made our soul does not control[i] or [i]dictate our decisions. You can choose to change your personality and choose to change your perspective, and choose to change your opinion. Certainly, if that were not the case, all debate on these forums would be pointless (Whether or not it is pointless, independent of the discussion of free will, is open to debate).

Affecting a decision, influencing a decision, contributing to a decision, and controlling a decision are all different things. God chooses not to control our decisions.

Ok now do me a favor and tell me why I don't like God, but you do why do I choose one thing and you choose another. BECAUSE you and I have free will. We can choose. We can choose for any reason. We can choose for no reason. We can choose in spite of reason. Just look on these forums for all the debates on every topic imagineable (whether it's the existence of God, the nature of the will, the nature of truth, TMA vs. MMA, 'flaws' in mathematics, Chi/Qi, or how to talk like a pirate). You DO NOT require a reason or a cause to make the choices you make. THAT is the nature of free will. Ideally, your choices will be grounded in reasons that you find compelling, but unlike with robots, that is not necessarily the case with human beings.

....all-knowing God has created all of creation from nothing. Doesn't this mean that he's created free will also, and defined it's parameters? Dear Mr. Cosmic, (We've both posted enough on these forums that I think we're OK to be on a 'first-name' basis :D )
Yes, God created free will, and defined its parameters, and for our own good put a large fence around our ability to carry out many of the decisions that we make.

As an analogy: if I were to create a load of tiny robots......THAT is the whole point to this discussion: we are NOTHING like little programmed robots. WE have free will. The whole point of the debate is that we are not constrained only to respond to stimuli in a pre-programmed fashion.

A God who does not know the outcome of his own creation surely must concede that there are powers or forces outside of his control acting upon it?Of course He knows the outcome. But that doesn't negate free will.

[ray8285]

I take exception to the post that there is no viable alternative to evolution. First you need to define evolution. If you mean we evolved from single cells to the complex organism of today then there is little to know "proof" of such an occurrence. If you are talking about Darwinism, then there is virtually NO PROOF of such an evolution. However, there is evidence of change (evolution) WITHIN any given species.

Using the Evolutionary timeline not enough time has occurred for all of the changes to have occurred from ape like to human like alone let alone single cell to modern man.

If you are curious about other evolutionary theories juxtaposed with intelligent design I would highly recommend The Case for a Creator by Lee Stroebel.

Until I read his book I had alot of questions about the evolution VS ID debate.

[Endeavor]

Mr/Ms C-Kava: rules existed before the Bible indeed, this is even said in the Bible, it wasn't until the time of Moses when people got the 10 Commandments, but there was sin from the first two people, because they were told and some things dont need to be told for all of us to know they are very bad.
x
Blevunly, let's just dismiss this free will and say you are who you are, and your fate is your fate, which is what I said all along. People do change, some for better some for worse, everyone knows this. I made this thread to answer religious questions: to direct people towards a Biblical answer. If you have non-Biblical answers you should start a thread expounding them. Youre saying there is no free will your fate is known all along, Im saying, yes I agree. But I dont know my fate and Im gonna claw my way outta any situation ever to rise above any distance from being with God in the end.
x
Excellant point Canuck: there are other examples in life, some Germans dont want other people in Germany to know about the holocaust. American slaves were tortured and killed and their mistreatments hidden from history. Every country surely knows it has had its own cover ups and downsizing to minimize violent repercussions. Even severl years down the road.Did you know America had consentration camps which starved and killed people? I'll give you a clue it included non-Jewish white people.
x
Mr/Mrs C-kava, I made this thread to answer questions people have about what the Bible says, Please refrain from pushing your views on people who have a genuine interest in what the Bible says. You dont have to follow me, or any religion, that is your choice, but this room is for questions not non-Biblical answers. The purpose of this thread is to help reduce the common assumptions people have about what the Bible says, not wheather anyone believes a certain way. Micro-evolution, yes. Change from one species into another, not 100 percent proven. Massive amounts of doctors, lawyers, even preachers are experts but that doesnt mean they know every thing about anything. So for 1 billion people who are Hindo and think a cow is sacred their thoughts are gold? How about the millions of Christians, or the millions of Buddists, so the number of people doesnt really matter in argueing facts. If God were real then the "Big Bang" theory isnt true, unless God said "bang"
Everyone will see in the end, and some along the way, be it me, you, or someone else, someone will get it right :)
x
The suggestions of Christians not understanding or contributing to anything in the science world isnt really how it is at all. If a Christian wants to be a doctor and help repair people, so what if they dont believe in evolution. If a Christian wants to be a microbiologist and study disease to find cures, so what if they dont believe in evolution? If evolution was never spoken on earth, people would just live and die anyway, just as they have done since the word first was spoken until today, no one has been saved by evolution, it does not have a role in the afterlife. Please dont explain evolution to us, we will search it out for ourselves or ask you in a non-Biblical thread. Thank You!
This is not a thread to disprove Christianity or push it on anyone, it's simply to answer questions Christians and non-Christians may have about the Bible.
x
If anyone has a question please ask for a Biblical response: that is the purpose of this thread. :)
x
Mr. Ray, thanks for the information.
x

[CKava]

Endeavour I respect the point of the thread you've made I also expect that you understand people are going to question the responses you provide. You can say what you want about the bible but you veered off and started commenting on the validity of evolution. It's like someone starting a thread for people to ask questions to a WC guy and then after spending 2 posts bashing Karate training (which they seem to misrepresent) complaining when they are corrected. If you don't want people to question you on that particular topic or point out the spurious nature of some of your arguments then it's simple, don't comment on it. Also I never said Christians can't contribute to scientific progress I was suggesting particularly that Creationism and ID do not, there are probably thousands if not hundreds of thousands of devout Christian scientists who do very good work.

And since this is a thread to educate people on religion:
Hindo= Hindu
Buddist= Buddhist

P.S. Ray if your honestly interested in finding out about evolution then I recommend looking around a bit more and perhaps buying a scientific book published by a biological scientist. Failing that you could just spend 5 minutes looking round the net and read some of the in depth scientific refutations of Stroebel's 'case'.

Carry on Endeavour...

[Aegis]

If you are curious about other evolutionary theories juxtaposed with intelligent design I would highly recommend The Case for a Creator by Lee Stroebel.

Until I read his book I had alot of questions about the evolution VS ID debate.

If I remember rightly, Lee Strobel is a journalist. Why exactly would you go to a journalist over a scientists to find scientific information?

I already posted a review (http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/paul_doland/creator.html) of this book in another thread on a similar topic.

[Strafio]

My point is that it makes no sense AT ALL to reward people for some behaviors or punish people for other behaviors if they do NOT have free will.
That's only if the punishing/rewarding is done with free will.
The reason why it doesn't make sense is because you've mixed free will and determinism into the same situation. It's either both determined or both free. So we freely punish people for freely bad behaviour or we are determined to punish people for determined behaviour.

Compatibilists claim that free will is defined by following our determined desires. The idea is that if our will has no reasons then it is random. Anyway, I'm not trying to say that everything is determined, but I'm trying to show that it could make sense and could be the case, even if it isn't.

Of course He knows the outcome. But that doesn't negate free will.
But would he have designed us in a way which would lead to us upsetting him, even though he knew in advance that designing us in free will would? So if we've done anything to offend God then he not only designed us that way, but designed us that way knowing that it would lead to us offending him. It makes me think that if God made us the way we are then nothing we can do can "offend" him.

So instead of punishment we require discipline which might seem like punishment sometimes. The difference is that punishment is about hurting us because we "deserve" hurting, discipline is about teaching us lessons that will benefit us in the long run, even if they seem really harsh at the time.

So I can understand the hardships of life, being character building, something for us to grow through. Judgement and eternal punishment at the end of life, for being as God made us to be? I think that's the only conclusion that any of us are arguing against here. I can take responsibility for my actions. I believe in karma? Do I believe I could possibly be responsible for landing myself in hell for eternity? How could that be my responsibility? Because I put my faith in the wrong theology?

[CosmicFish]

Dear Mr. Cosmic, (We've both posted enough on these forums that I think we're OK to be on a 'first-name' basis )
Aye aye Captain! :)

Yes, God created free will, and defined its parameters, and for our own good put a large fence around our ability to carry out many of the decisions that we make.
Oddly enough, this serves as a good example for my point. The fact that you feel God has put a fence around our ability to carry out our decisions implies that we're defective or lacking in some way. Where did that defect or lack come from? Did God put it there, or has it crept in by some outside influence beyond his control?

THAT is the whole point to this discussion: we are NOTHING like little programmed robots. WE have free will. The whole point of the debate is that we are not constrained only to respond to stimuli in a pre-programmed fashion.
Of course He knows the outcome. But that doesn't negate free will.
The problem I have is that the above two quotes seem to be mutually exclusive:
* If we have free will and can make our own decisions then surely we're unpredictable? Therefore God cannot know what we'll do.
* If God does know what we'll do, then at some level our actions have already been decided. Who makes that decision? If it's already been decided then surely it's not us - we're just the created beings reacting in our predicted way.

You say that God knowing the outcome doesn't negate free will. I don't understand how that can be. Could you elaborate how you personally reconcile this?

[Endeavor]

Hey friend, I didnt veer off to go on about evolution, somone came into a Bible study to bring in their monkey wrench to throw in the cogs. Its like going to a group of vegetarians who are making an organic garden and saying, hey I really enjoy eating cows, especially the ones who are fed brain stems which brings about mad cow, want to share my steak?
x
This thread is a about what the Bible says, when somome wants to change it because of their own personal belief expect me to respond, I didnt innitaite the conversation.
x
Mr/Ms C-kava, this thread isnt to educate people on the variey of religion, this thread is to resolve Biblical Assumptions. Your questions are welcome, you are welcome to read the posts, please if you are going to be a teacher on the subject than teachif you dont believe the Bible you dont need to be Teaching the Bible in a Bible class. I dont go up to Michael Jordan and say, hey man you gotta learn how to shoot a 3 pointer, or you gotta learn how to dunk. Im not the teacher there, If we wanted to know about what people thought about evolution perhaps you would be the expert.
x
Mr/Ms aegis: many people find scientific discoveries without being educated the same ways. If someone doesnt believe in evolution and they find the cure for AIDS their contrubtion to science is as good as any other. Journalists like scientists can expose fraud and verify truth. When independant tests are done against an accepted truth than sometimes accepted things are no longer accepted.
x
Mr Cosmic Fish, If free will is our choice to make choices and God knows the fate of us all, what is the question? Our fates are known and we do not know what choice we will make tomorrow or what fate we will see tomorrow. Either way choice or fate all we can do is do the best because tomorrow seems likely to happen.
x
Yes strafio, if our will is random we are in anarchy. But this is the reason we have the Bible. To know the laws and expectations of us all. Im a man and Ive dated more than a few women, The free will is to risk disease and punishment for lust or seek a straight relationship as described in the Bible. I could go sleep with alot of women but its against my teachings. And because I have invested time and heart into the Bible my cravings have been really honestly diminished. I still am tempted, meaning women still approachme and want me, but I see through it and am not interested because I have a good one and Im really happy ;)
x
We have limited choices, we do have choices, we also have an ending judgement. We're not in a state of chaos, we can decide today what we will try to accomplish and what we will want to express. When we interviene with people we make fast decisions how to teach and how to respond. We dont know our destiny but we cant sit around and say I'll do whatever I want, because their are consequences ,wheather you are of a religion or just subject to the laws of the land you live, whereever you are you will find an eventual if not a more sudden cause and effect for actions and words

[CosmicFish]

Mr Cosmic Fish, If free will is our choice to make choices and God knows the fate of us all, what is the question? Our fates are known and we do not know what choice we will make tomorrow or what fate we will see tomorrow. Either way choice or fate all we can do is do the best because tomorrow seems likely to happen.
No offense mate, but this is really hard to understand. I've done my best to translate it - you'll have to let me know if it's not what you meant:

"If we have free will but God knows our fate, what is the question?"
The question is how do you reconcile this apparent contradiction.

"Our fate is known (by God) but not by us."
So you believe that God knows what we'll do, and presumably will have known even before he created us?

"Either way, whether we have free will or our actions are predetermined, all we can do is our best."
I'd agree with that. But what's your point?

[Aegis]

Mr/Ms aegis: many people find scientific discoveries without being educated the same ways. If someone doesnt believe in evolution and they find the cure for AIDS their contrubtion to science is as good as any other. Journalists like scientists can expose fraud and verify truth. When independant tests are done against an accepted truth than sometimes accepted things are no longer accepted.

Oh very true, some scientists have not been educated in science, but throughout history they are probably the minority. However, they all have one thing in common when they make great discoveries: they follow the scientific method. This means that they observe a phenomenon, come up witha hypothesis to test the phenomenon, then perform the tests, revising the hypothesis if necessary and repeating ad nauseum.

This has happened with serveral different hypotheses to do with evolution, and eventually those hypotheses were bound together into a theory: the best explanation for all of the current data.

Intelligent design has made no falsifiable predictions, has performed no tests and has therefore got no scientific credibility, no matter how many "experts" believe in it. Until some of these scientists do something other than try their hardest to falsify evolution (which they generally fail at quite spectacularly), they're not furthering their own cause at all, because the elimination of the theory of evolution would not lead to acceptance of ID. That is referred to as a false dichotomy. If they somehow managed to disprove a bit of evolution, it would be replaced by another theory which better explained the data.

[Endeavor]

Mr Fish: if you have children, they have free will, but they also have rules. they can decide to kill you or to accept punishments by agreeing they are wrong and you have punished them because they did wrong and deserve it. They have choices, more than to say they have free will. The Bible doesnt say you have free will do what you want, it tells you rules and to love your neighbor.
x
Ok aegis, what phenonom did scientists observe in evolution? They sure didnt see one species become another. This hasnt been tested, it cant be, thats why it hasnt. Your own words betray you, if scientists were proved parts of evolution were false they would just "replace it by another theory which would explain the data" this is the problem the theory explains the data rather than the data supporting the theory. also the difference in micro and macro evolution. Like interbreeding animals with like animals to produce desired traits and grafting apple trees to bare 3 types of apples from one apple tree (which has been done and is mention in the Bible)
x
DAta exists, but not explainations for all that data in most things. We know the sun shines, we know the sun is hot, we dont know how the sun became into being other than the big bang or God put it there and flicked the on switch :)

[Topher]

also the difference in micro and macro evolution.
The difference is time...

Microevolution x thoudends/millions of years = Macroevolution

[Aegis]

Ok aegis, what phenonom did scientists observe in evolution? They sure didnt see one species become another.

Speciation (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html) and macroevolution (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/) evidences. We can observe evolution in short-lived species. We can sometimes genetically identify what causes the differences. We can observe the fossil record. We can observe that we have a chromosone which looks like 2 chimp chromosones fused together, right down to the inactive termination points. We can examine Endigenous Retroviral Insertions to the DNA.

Only evolutionary theory has come up with explanations for all of these.


This hasnt been tested, it cant be, thats why it hasnt. Your own words betray you, if scientists were proved parts of evolution were false they would just "replace it by another theory which would explain the data" this is the problem the theory explains the data rather than the data supporting the theory.

Theories are based upon the data and also explain the data with relation to other data. They are the highest form of scientific explanation and knowledge.

[Blevunly]

My point is that it makes no sense AT ALL to reward people for some behaviors or punish people for other behaviors if they do NOT have free will. The fact that we both punish and reward (and honor/admire and reject/despise) show that we live our lives, in practice, as if we believe people have free will. In other words, by punishing/rewarding peoples' behavior, we are either assuming they have a free will, or we are living as hypocrites, because it makes no sense to 'punish' or 'reward' a computer program or a robot.

So what I can conclude from that is that everyone believes they have free will. That doesn't necessarily make it true though. Someone could sell me some fools gold and everyone around me could want to pay me alot of money for it cause we all thought it was real gold, but it wouldn't change the fact that it's not. Just because people believe something doesn't make it true.

Which is....?

There are so many different answers depending on your religion. I don't think anyone knows for sure which is correct.

Not 'nothing' to do with it, but the way God made our soul does not control[i] or [i]dictate our decisions. You can choose to change your personality and choose to change your perspective, and choose to change your opinion. Certainly, if that were not the case, all debate on these forums would be pointless (Whether or not it is pointless, independent of the discussion of free will, is open to debate).

If a soul has anything at all to do with decision making then God controls your decision since he made your soul and had forsight to know what it would do.Yeah sure you can change your personality, but why would you want to there has to be a reason if theres no reason for the decisions you make then it's all just a random process a flip of a coin a roll of the dice a card drawn from a deck. If it's random then we don't really control it either so agian there is still no such thing as the ability to control our will.

The reason God can control his will is because he has no premade soul by an all seeing being he has no human body to limit him and he has no environment except the one he makes. Now how many humans can change anything and everything and control everything they want? the answer is no one we arre limited by variables and those variables end up deciding our fate.

BECAUSE you and I have free will. We can choose. We can choose for any reason. We can choose for no reason. We can choose in spite of reason. Just look on these forums for all the debates on every topic imagineable (whether it's the existence of God, the nature of the will, the nature of truth, TMA vs. MMA, 'flaws' in mathematics, Chi/Qi, or how to talk like a pirate). You DO NOT require a reason or a cause to make the choices you make. THAT is the nature of free will. Ideally, your choices will be grounded in reasons that you find compelling, but unlike with robots, that is not necessarily the case with human beings.

Ok you cannot choose something for no reason there is always a reason. Give me one thing anybody ever did for no reason at all.

THAT is the whole point to this discussion: we are NOTHING like little programmed robots. WE have free will. The whole point of the debate is that we are not constrained only to respond to stimuli in a pre-programmed fashion.

Ok you need to sit down and ask yourself how free will works because you don't seem to get it you think it's like some magical force. But if none of the variables I listed effect your free will then it's not really you deciding since my variables are the basis of your entire life.

Of course He knows the outcome. But that doesn't negate free will.

Yes it does it's like me knowing the outcome of a race because I destroyed a piece of someones car. Because God knows what your going to do because he created your soul knowing the route it would take because he created it to take that route not necessarily that its a robot as much as he knew by adding in the other variables it would end up at a certian point and since he made the deciding variable he choose your fate.

[Endeavor]

I think we have alread established that we have a fate, so ask yourself about free will, Can you gou go rob a bank right now? Yes because you have that option. But you wont because of your fate would likely be prison, so you have told yourself you dont want that fate although it is free money.
x
so what is your opinion on free will or fate, whichever it is how will it effect what you do and dont do? The answer doesnt need to be for me but for yourselves. If it is free will then choose the best thing to do, the right thing. If it is fate choose the best thing to do, the right thing.
x
Mr/Ms Aegis: please dont flood this thread with your religious views, this is a thread for Christians and non-Christians to ask questions about what the Bible says about religion as opposed to what non-Christian answers are.
If the thread was called Non-Christian assumptions in detail, we would check out your answers. Any one can go to a search engine on their computer and write Evolution and see alot of information. People arent here to get information on evolution, they are here to get information on the Bible, wheather they believe or not, they want to know what a believer thinks.
x
You dont go to a Metallica concert and pull the plug on the speakers and tell them how much you enjoy Celiene Dion, so why act that way here?! You dont play football during a golf game so why do it here? When people want to learn about the bible they go to a Biblical thread, and when they want to learn about evolution they can go elsewhere. Please show some respect despite your personal beliefs. No one in here is told what to do about their religoin or lack of it, they are given Biblical answers to question about the Bible and life in general. Please dont try to teach when you are not qualifed, if we want to learn about evolution you are more qualifed to give your two cents. You are very welcome to stay but stay as a student not a teacher, this isnt a thread on evolution.
x
Blevunly: I dont think it is so much about free will but instead choices, You can go on a killing spree or you can grind your teeth and try to contribute to society to be the person you wished everyone else was. God knows your fate, this is what the Bible says, all my days were made when as yet there were none of them. This being King David. And another example is Christ who knew what would happen to Himself, and another example The Book of Isaiah who 600 years before the Birth knew the death of Christ. So God knows our fates and its not all going to be good. We already know this. So we deal with the bad being among the good. There is no thinking that it should just be a nice world for everyone because it is far too late for that. If God wanted it to be perfect He wouldnt not created humans,and therfore we accept it is not an easy life but it must please God when some people contribute good things and work according to His pleasure. He doesnt ask anything too hard, most of us just assume you got to be an angel and that keeps most of us from trying because our good conscious is aware of our bad drive.
x
Yes God knows the decisions you will make but they are still decisions. You know you make decisions daily. Some decisions are to refrain from violence when you are mad, some decisions are to not help people, some decisions are not to hurt yourself, some decisions are to not over punish your kids when they dont listen, some decisions are to make the most of a bad situation. We have decisions, and fates. OUr fate is at the end of our decisions so our decisoiins must recognize real consequences.
x
Aegis: only evolutionary therorys can give explainations for that stuff? Not even close. If a species looks like another species or is related to another species, you wont find in the Bible that God said al species are unrelated. I like this example because it is in the Bible, about grafting fruit trees. One tree bares different fruits. Like one apple tree has 3 differeent brands of apples on it. This is man made, scientific, proof of a change to an original thing. Like having a black dog with floppy ears and breeding it with a short legged pointy eared dog. These changes are accepted and the results seenand accepted, what is not accepted to the Christian is that humans became out of another species. We dont need to go into detail all we need to do is say God made people or people appeared, neither one of us are going to convince the other and both of us will tell the other that the other is blind to the facts. If evolution were true you would be telling the truth, if evolution were 100 percent right, which over 99 percent of science can admit it isnt if you bring up examples.
x
Before you ask, doctors, geologists, meteorologists, astrologers and all types of scientists do not fully know the "why" about their subjects. They can observe data and collect data, but they cannot explain all the data and perdict the future. If we had known exactly what the wheather would be like in 10 days, we would act accordingly but we dont know exactly so we give a suggested forecast which is almost never exact. We dont know what is going to happen tomorrow and we know everything about 4 billion years ago? Everyone cranes their neck to examine it but it is too far out of reach.
x
We have data, yes :) but explainations for all our data are not known by any top scientist non any student of science that wants to teach it here. Evolution is the only field of science where people try to express that they know everything, when the data is limited. You cant go to the end of the universe with the strongest telescope and tell us it is expanding, maybe it expands then goes back in like a big pair of lungs breathing. maybe it goes through 1,000 year cycles? Insufficient study, insufficient time, insufficient data.
x
If God is real than what He says could be what happened. If you can admit to this let it be, because if God were real it would explain life itself. We accept this explaination wheather you like it or not and we know and dont like your accepted explaination so we dont need to get in each others face, I made this thread not for you to teach me about evolution but that people wanting to know about Biblical accounts could feel free to ask someone not biased by religious groups. I can explain about religion more than religous people who follow their man made traditoins. I am not the standard example of someone to copy in society but I can tell you painful lessons we learn if youre not into going through that and learning the hard way, which I did.

[CosmicFish]

Mr Fish: if you have children, they have free will, but they also have rules. they can decide to kill you or to accept punishments by agreeing they are wrong and you have punished them because they did wrong and deserve it. They have choices, more than to say they have free will. The Bible doesnt say you have free will do what you want, it tells you rules and to love your neighbor.
OK, now you've completely lost me. I don't wish this to sound rude, but I'm having more and more difficulty relating your answers to the questions I've asked. I don't mind the preaching tone of your writing too much but it does make continuing a debate quite difficult. Unless you can be more clear I'll have to knock our banter on the head here.

I'll watch this thread to see if Capt Ann or someone similar can get back to me with an answer I can make sense of.

x
x

[Endeavor]

Sorry to lose you mr fish? :)
please explain your explaination of free will, does anyone have it? Free will to me is the ability to make decisoins. Fate, and free will are different. Your fate is your final end. Your free will is your road to your fate. Your choices are like forks in the road that may lead away into Nebraska or loop around back to the road you started on.
x
God knows your fate, you dont. So along the road of life we have a multitude of choices and you have got to have an insturction manual or map like the Bible, a good mechanic or repair guide, like an HONEST Christian or the Bible, and you have got to have a destination or you will just drive till the wheels fall off. So our exits are like morals, gas stations or bars, fill up and keep truckin or party down and hope to recover, our road is just time and the end point B is death. Our free will is the ability to kill or steal and do it or not do it, this is different than from our fate, which God knows. He didnt make everyone to get to the same place in life. We already know this. I think you are asking why dont we all go to the same place? We dont decide that. I think you are asking if we have free will why do we choose to do wrong? because we follow our own lusts or are tempted away.
x
We dont all have the same souls or the same environment or the same amount of good and evil trying to pursuade us one way. Not all men are created equal. You dont find that in the Bible, but you find that all men are different and their fates differ. Some people are here just to try to convince us to do wrong, some people are here for unknown reasons, some people are here to change to make other people change, not that we ourselves have done this, but God has worked through us.

[thepunisher]

God knows your fate, you dont. So along the road of life we have a multitude of choices and you have got to have an insturction manual or map like the Bible, a good mechanic or repair guide, like an HONEST Christian or the Bible, and you have got to have a destination or you will just drive till the wheels fall off. So our exits are like morals, gas stations or bars, fill up and keep truckin or party down and hope to recover, our road is just time and the end point B is death. Our free will is the ability to kill or steal and do it or not do it, this is different than from our fate, which God knows. He didnt make everyone to get to the same place in life. We already know this. I think you are asking why dont we all go to the same place? We dont decide that. I think you are asking if we have free will why do we choose to do wrong? because we follow our own lusts or are tempted away.


Actually Endeavour I think most humans do know their final fate. We all die at one point. One reason everyone tries to achieve everything they can before that happens, if they can make sure they have some heirs to themselves and something left for them to have as a base. By the way, I'm not sure if an HONEST Christian is necessarily a good guide to life. Most ppl can find their route they desire in life without having to look to god, I think. Concerning heaven & hell: well, as a non-believer those choices don't exist Endeavour. We as atheists try to do the good we can for ourselves and this world without thinking about that kind of consequence. In fact, the only person who would be telling us that their is this kind of consequence is a theist.

Personal question: how come you have chosen MAP to talk about the bible Endeavour ? Is it the ppl here or a different reason ?

Christian

[Aegis]

Mr/Ms Aegis: please dont flood this thread with your religious views, this is a thread for Christians and non-Christians to ask questions about what the Bible says about religion as opposed to what non-Christian answers are.

I was on topic enough. I should know, I moderate this forum after all. However, sicne you feel this is off topic, let me assure you that it isn't...

From the OP: "How about a thread where non-Christians can ask a Christian, not about their own beliefs but what they are taught." I'm essentially asking you how you are taught to reconcile the difference between what science and mathematics is telling us and what you believe. Most christians I know do so by assuming that parts of the bible are allegorical and that the creation of god can speak for itself much more directly than the ancient words of the bible, written by men, who are known to be fallible. Those who don't accept this and feel that every word of the bible is true have to have been taught to either ignore the evidence or interpret it to fit their own beliefs.

Now, "God did it" might satisfy you, but it certainly doesn't satisfy many of the christians I know, who want to further investigate the creation around them in order to better understand its creator. Words written by a tribal people with little understanding of the world around them are not going to be as useful when examining the world as first hand investigation using modern methods.

If the thread was called Non-Christian assumptions in detail, we would check out your answers.

Exactly what assumptions have I made in this thread? I've asked questions about the science and the records of events that literalist christians assume happened, so if anything I'm questioning the assumptions, not making them myself.

Any one can go to a search engine on their computer and write Evolution and see alot of information. People arent here to get information on evolution, they are here to get information on the Bible, wheather they believe or not, they want to know what a believer thinks.

I don't actually recall writing much specific information about evolution in this thread actually. My first post was to point out that Lee Strobel isn't actually a good source for information on evolution, but someone else brought up the subject. My second post was in response to yours, and contained one sentance with anything to do with evolution, the rest being a critique of Intelligent Design as a science, again on topic with what others had been saying. My third post WAS on evolution, but it was a short post answering a direct comment from you about what has and hasn't been observed. My 4th is this one. Really, I've hardly mentioned evolution at all, and only in response to what other people have said.

You dont go to a Metallica concert and pull the plug on the speakers and tell them how much you enjoy Celiene Dion, so why act that way here?! You dont play football during a golf game so why do it here? When people want to learn about the bible they go to a Biblical thread, and when they want to learn about evolution they can go elsewhere. Please show some respect despite your personal beliefs. No one in here is told what to do about their religoin or lack of it, they are given Biblical answers to question about the Bible and life in general. Please dont try to teach when you are not qualifed, if we want to learn about evolution you are more qualifed to give your two cents. You are very welcome to stay but stay as a student not a teacher, this isnt a thread on evolution.

You talk about giving respect after the attitude you've shown the owners of this forum when confronted with a simple question? "And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?" Or one I prefer: "Respect is earned, not given."

First and foremost, this is a discussion forum. As long as I stay within the rules of the forum (which I know quite well), you have absolutely no right whatsoever to expect me to run this place the way you want to. If you want to have a captive audience where skeptics aren't allowed to ask questions, then go to a christianity-only forum instead. This place is primarily for martial artists, not for religious preachers. And as a member here, I have as much right as you do to post as long as I stay on topic, which I have just demonstrated that I have done.


Aegis: only evolutionary therorys can give explainations for that stuff? Not even close. If a species looks like another species or is related to another species, you wont find in the Bible that God said al species are unrelated. I like this example because it is in the Bible, about grafting fruit trees. One tree bares different fruits. Like one apple tree has 3 differeent brands of apples on it. This is man made, scientific, proof of a change to an original thing. Like having a black dog with floppy ears and breeding it with a short legged pointy eared dog. These changes are accepted and the results seenand accepted, what is not accepted to the Christian is that humans became out of another species. We dont need to go into detail all we need to do is say God made people or people appeared, neither one of us are going to convince the other and both of us will tell the other that the other is blind to the facts. If evolution were true you would be telling the truth, if evolution were 100 percent right, which over 99 percent of science can admit it isnt if you bring up examples.

So, how does this explain away any of the following, which is what you were supposedly addressing just there: "We can observe evolution in short-lived species. We can sometimes genetically identify what causes the differences. We can observe the fossil record. We can observe that we have a chromosone which looks like 2 chimp chromosones fused together, right down to the inactive termination points. We can examine Endigenous Retroviral Insertions to the DNA."

Before you ask, doctors, geologists, meteorologists, astrologers and all types of scientists do not fully know the "why" about their subjects. They can observe data and collect data, but they cannot explain all the data and perdict the future. If we had known exactly what the wheather would be like in 10 days, we would act accordingly but we dont know exactly so we give a suggested forecast which is almost never exact.

Most doctors are not scientists. NO astrologers are scientists. Meterologists suffer from a little problem called the butterfly effect, which is why they have difficulty predicting weather patterns. Look up Chaos Theory if you actually want to know why weather is so difficult to accurately predict. Weather is actually a very well-understood science, but the tiny changes in initial conditions of a system can cause widespread change, and since these small perturbances are almost undetectable, there are problems. This is something specific to problems involving chaos, and as such doesn't have much bearing on sciences like geology.

We dont know what is going to happen tomorrow and we know everything about 4 billion years ago? Everyone cranes their neck to examine it but it is too far out of reach.

Where did anyone claim we know everything about the last 4 billion years? No scientist in their right mind would claim that. However, we have some exceedingly good evidence that certain events happened, and equally that certain events didn't happen.

We have data, yes :) but explainations for all our data are not known by any top scientist non any student of science that wants to teach it here. Evolution is the only field of science where people try to express that they know everything, when the data is limited. You cant go to the end of the universe with the strongest telescope and tell us it is expanding, maybe it expands then goes back in like a big pair of lungs breathing. maybe it goes through 1,000 year cycles? Insufficient study, insufficient time, insufficient data.

We can observe what the universe was doing millions of years ago directly. Light takes that long just to reach us from many stars, and we can tell that the expansion has been constant as far as we can see. As such, we have absolutely no reason to believe that at some point in the past, the opposite was true. In any case, this would require a new force to be introduced to the universe, something that science doesn't accept without reason.

If God is real than what He says could be what happened. If you can admit to this let it be, because if God were real it would explain life itself. We accept this explaination wheather you like it or not and we know and dont like your accepted explaination so we dont need to get in each others face, I made this thread not for you to teach me about evolution but that people wanting to know about Biblical accounts could feel free to ask someone not biased by religious groups. I can explain about religion more than religous people who follow their man made traditoins. I am not the standard example of someone to copy in society but I can tell you painful lessons we learn if youre not into going through that and learning the hard way, which I did.

Feel free to teach people whatever you want, but if others don't like it they will debate with you. In any case, I'm the wrong person to have a go at, as in each of my posts in this thread I was responding to others and staying within the subject mater included in their posts.

[Endeavor]

The religious room to post on religion is one reason Im here. To further my education in martial arts is the original reason. I believe in self defence, mainly weapon based opposed to a match. Im in this to protect not to do much else. If I dont have a gun I want to be able to use what I do have for defence in a need to situation.
x
I actually made this thread to further peoples enlightenments on religion. Non religious people are welcome to ask questions and just view the thread. Our own opinions we can elaborate on in our own threads. We all have the option to make a thread on our own beliefs.
x
To every martial artist there is a time when the martial arts skills of fighting do not equal the needed strength for real life problems, like cancer, aids, abortion, abduction, away from the martial artist violence, wars, poverty, name calling, and on and on, you know, real issues everyone knows about that more than your skills can fix or prevent on the larger side of life. Every martial artist must have morals and be a postitive person regardless of where they get their rules.
x
Most humans dont know their fate, unless your fate is just death and you dont consider the possibility of an after-that reality. Most peoples fates change because we go through good and bad times, sometimes we are the victom sometimes we are the cause, in both times we can change and can change others, sometimes time just takes time :)
x
I read alot of posts I didnt respond to so I wanted to start my own threads
There are alot of people with curiosity and threads that deal with your style of martial arts. If a non-Christian will agree that the actions of an individual that do not reflect the teachings of the Bible: if those individuals will be held accountable for their own actions, not the teachings, then my work is done.IF ONLY ONE PERSON can see this that couldnt see it, how HAPPY I would be :) and the over 1200 that have visited my two threads in religion reflect an interest so I want to stay to provide answers even if those posting are not the ones with the questions! and even if the ones fighting me are answering other peoples questions and seeing when people just try to destroy what they agree with as a reflection on their deceptions.
x
I agree with some of what you say, very real. The difference is I dont believe the good things that you do are from yourself, but God works through you and me and at times the evil works through you and through me. If you worked through yourself you would rob a bank for the money, but you know it is moraly wrong more than you know it could get you into prison. When your parents made you do or not do something that made you mad it was your morals that kept you from hurting them to overcome their ruling not that you couldnt do anything. so you have morals and Im telling you these morals are not something you have created, hey I cant hurt my parents or rob a bank, nor has society enforced it because some people do hurt their parents and some rob banks: but the spirit of good has guided you when you even fought.
x
This world will discourage many good things and encourage the bad, all you got5 to do is watch a movie or tv or listen to the radio, you'll find several people having fun hurting people and cheating and doing drugs and etc.. yet in real life these things dont work like that, not for very long anyway.

[Endeavor]

Ms aegis: my last post wasnt for you. this one is, you just wrote yours before I could post this one :)
x
you can have your own views, I agree, but are you really having fun teaching Christians? I mean, it is a Christian thread and you very well know youre trying to put your own thoughts in.
x
you can talk about fishing or about statue worship or making pancakes !
but why talk about it in here? This thread is to help people with the Bible, you have already made up your mind you dont believe it so youre not here to learn, youre here to teach. Please dont teach, I have several people reading what we write and they dont come here to learn about evolution. That is all over the internet. Christianity as I teach it, isnt all over the internet, there are the majority of Christian claimed religions that contradict the Bible.
x
Please make a thread on evolution or do me the favor of letting me teach this.
Im asking you not telling you :)
x
This is not a thread on evolution: you have no absolute proof, you already said that, and I said many times Christians cant prove everything to even other Christians like if God made us able to fly one night, who would believe it the next day?
x
You already know what you think about evolution, so why try to runaway truck it into the middle of a Christian debate. If a Christian is someone who believes in Christ and the Bible they dont believe man came from or is an ape. If a church or individual accepts anti-Biblical teachings they are not people who believe the Bible. this is a thread for questions for people who want to know about the Bible. You already have counter-answers for the Christian so why try to disrupt things?
x
Im asking for your respect, and this means not saying I need your respect and staying here preaching to me, I was preaching to start with and you stopped my preaching to preach yourself, I preached to the room, stay or leave for anyone, I welcome all to learn, I ask that no one else wants to preach unless they want to prove a question by the account of the Bible.
x
Please if anyone doesnt want to know about the Bible, please avoid this thread. If you believe something different start a thread and invite non-believers into it, if you want to convince them.
x
Aegis :) we dont try to so much examine the world but the spiritual side of it. not the physical age and texture but the drive we all have, the love and the pursuasion of good and bad upon mankinds' hearts and minds. You look at the world we look at the hands that spin the world. You admit scientists dont know everything. they dont have all the explainations they dont have all the data, some data and explainations they cant have because of time and destruction and changes. Keep this in mind, if God is real than the explainations of Him creating everything and the instructions in life are adequate for everyone. Not believeing in God they are obvioulsy not enough or even a start. but believeing in God they are enough.

[thepunisher]

Please make a thread on evolution or do me the favor of letting me teach this.
Im asking you not telling you :)

Im asking for your respect, and this means not saying I need your respect and staying here preaching to me, I was preaching to start with and you stopped my preaching to preach yourself, I preached to the room, stay or leave for anyone, I welcome all to learn, I ask that no one else wants to preach unless they want to prove a question by the account of the Bible.


Oouch ! Endeavour, I hope you just realized who you are actually addressing this to. Aegis is a topic mod, meaning she has the nearly the same powers as an admin. As for preaching, its mainly you doing that, not anyone else on here. We are actually all questioning what you are "preaching" nothing more. As for teaching: This isn't a classroom for bible teaching Endeavour, this is an internet forum. People don't come on here to be taught, ppl come on here to discuss. So I think you better start watching what you are actually doing on here. As for the questions I asked you: I would have appreciated you actually answering them.

Chrisitan

[Strafio]

No one's making us read his topics.
Although I wish he'd stop with the x's...

[Topher]

I think we have alread established that we have a fate, so ask yourself about free will, Can you gou go rob a bank right now? Yes because you have that option. But you wont because of your fate would likely be prison, so you have told yourself you dont want that fate although it is free money.
x
so what is your opinion on free will or fate, whichever it is how will it effect what you do and dont do? The answer doesnt need to be for me but for yourselves. If it is free will then choose the best thing to do, the right thing. If it is fate choose the best thing to do, the right thing.
Your confusing “fate” with “determinism.” Your example about robbing is determinism, not fate. With determinism your choice to not rob the bank would be determined (ie. influenced) by another factor, namely, knowing you will probably go to prison. On that note, I can’t think of anything we can do that is not determined in some way.

Fate on the other hand would mean that you “decision” to not rob the bank would have always been the predetermined outcome, which means you never had a decision in the first place, although subjectively it may have appeared to have been a decision making process.

If fate is true, free will [i]cannot exist. They are mutually exclusive, you can’t have both.

If evolution were true you would be telling the truth, if evolution were 100 percent right, which over 99 percent of science can admit it isnt if you bring up examples.
Pathetic argument. :rolleyes: You can state this about anything, but what's it trying to achieve. If the Bible were true would be telling the truth. If you weren't talking rubbish you wouldn't be talking rubbish. See.

Anyway, if you state evolution isn't true, why. What's your evidence?
And what's you source that 99% of scientists can't admit it's false?

Before you ask, doctors, geologists, meteorologists, astrologers and all types of scientists do not fully know the "why" about their subjects. They can observe data and collect data, but they cannot explain all the data and perdict the future. If we had known exactly what the wheather would be like in 10 days, we would act accordingly but we dont know exactly so we give a suggested forecast which is almost never exact. We dont know what is going to happen tomorrow and we know everything about 4 billion years ago? Everyone cranes their neck to examine it but it is too far out of reach.
x
We have data, yes :) but explainations for all our data are not known by any top scientist non any student of science that wants to teach it here. Evolution is the only field of science where people try to express that they know everything, when the data is limited. You cant go to the end of the universe with the strongest telescope and tell us it is expanding, maybe it expands then goes back in like a big pair of lungs breathing. maybe it goes through 1,000 year cycles? Insufficient study, insufficient time, insufficient data.
This is because if we don't know the answer to something, we just say we don't know.

If God is real than what He says could be what happened. If you can admit to this let it be, because if God were real it would explain life itself.
And how to you verify that what he said actually happened and for that matter, if he even said it?

Using the ‘Godidit’ plea actually raises more questions!

I can explain about religion more than religous people who follow their man made traditoins.
Are you saying you can explaine thing better that people of other religion and that their religions are man made? Not only it that show complete arrogance your assuming that your religion isn't man made

[Topher]

Our free will is the ability to kill or steal and do it or not do it, this is different than from our fate, which God knows
Using your definition of "fate", your logic fails as are our choices/free will would eventually dictate our "fate". If our "fate" is already known then the path to it would also have to be know, hence no free will. Understand that even what appears to be minor decisions and choices in our life can completely alter not only our life, but the lives of others, if not the world (I think that’s chaos theory if i'm correct.) So for God to know our "fate" would mean we don’t have free will because if we actually did have free will, our fate would be a consequence of it, and therefore unknowable.

Of course, that’s based on your definition of fate. I don't see that either fate or absolute free will exists.

[Capt Ann]

The fact that you feel God has put a fence around our ability to carry out our decisions implies that we're defective or lacking in some way..'Free Will' implies that I might actually choose something that would be contrary to what is 'right' or 'good' or even just less than 'best'. By limiting my ability to carry out my actions, my ability to injure others (or myself) is also limited. This would allow me to make different/better choices in the future, sort of the way a good parent allows children the opportunity to 'fail' in a safe environment, where the consequences of their poor choices won't cripple them for life.

.......two quotes seem to be mutually exclusive:
* If we have free will and can make our own decisions then surely we're unpredictable? Therefore God cannot know what we'll do.
* If God does know what we'll do, then at some level our actions have already been decided. ........

You say that God knowing the outcome doesn't negate free will. I don't understand how that can be. Could you elaborate how you personally reconcile this?Thank you very much for wording it this way. I really appreciate that, even though you disagree with my conclusions, you assumed that I had some reason behind why I came to them. Whether we ever agree, I wouldn't mind discussing any topic when we can each show the other this degree of personal respect.

The way I personally resolve this is through my understanding of the nature of God, time, and eternity. Since God created all of space-time, he is outside both (i.e., not limited or bound by either). He existed before space-time did, and He will exist after it ends. I tend to view our dimensions, including time, as sort of a bubble God created just for us. For some reason, we can travel freely in any spatial direction, but only monotonically forward in time. God on the other hand, just 'IS'. He doesn't travel forward or backward in time, but exists, uniformly filling all of space-time. Just like there is no 'place' where God isn't, there is no 'time' when God isn't. So, while we are traveling forward in time, making decisions as we arrive at different points along the path we are traveling in time, God exists uniformly and sees every point along the line simultaneously. From our point of view, we are making decisions every day, that in a real sense change the direction we are heading. From God's POV, all of our actions and decisions 'ARE', and He can see them , so He knows what we chose, what we will choose, and where we will end up. In this sense, we have a 'destiny' or 'fate' that God knows, but that destiny is the product of our free choices.

If you have heard of a moebius strip, imagine a line drawn along the 'length' of the strip. You, standing outside the strip, can see both 'sides' at the same time. Whatever is drawn on this infintely long strip, you can see all together, in one instant.

So what I can conclude from that is that everyone believes they have free will. That doesn't necessarily make it true though. Excellent point, and entirely true. But since everyone believes it to be so (or at least everyone intuitively lives as if it is true), it seems reasonable to assume it is until proven otherwise, instead of vice versa.

Give me one thing anybody ever did for no reason at all. Obviously, you don't have small children.

God knows what your going to do because he created your soul knowing the route it would take because he created it to take that route not necessarily that its a robot as much as he knew by adding in the other variables it would end up at a certian point and since he made the deciding variable he choose your fate.You are assuming that if he threw other variables your way, you would have made a different decision. I think that there are some people that, no matter what you tell them, show them, plead with them, or demonstrate to them, will choose to be selfish. You are familiar with Milton's Paradise Lost? The only thing God could have done to change this person's ultimate destiny would have been to choose not to have created them at all. BendzR made the point that denying someone existence because of their choices would not necessarily be love. I need to examine this one more, because it is a whole different debate - why did God create those He knew would ultimately reject Him and everything 'good'?

[Aegis]

Ms aegis: my last post wasnt for you. this one is, you just wrote yours before I could post this one :)
x
you can have your own views, I agree, but are you really having fun teaching Christians? I mean, it is a Christian thread and you very well know youre trying to put your own thoughts in.

Yes, I have fun getting my own views across and discussing them.

you can talk about fishing or about statue worship or making pancakes !
but why talk about it in here? This thread is to help people with the Bible, you have already made up your mind you dont believe it so youre not here to learn, youre here to teach. Please dont teach, I have several people reading what we write and they dont come here to learn about evolution. That is all over the internet. Christianity as I teach it, isnt all over the internet, there are the majority of Christian claimed religions that contradict the Bible.

Your original post said ""How about a thread where non-Christians can ask a Christian, not about their own beliefs but what they are taught." That's what I'm doing now, I'm asking questions about your beliefs, specifically with regard to how they are reconciled with the evidence that comes (by your beliefs) from god's own creation rather than a book written by men.

As Saz has mentioned elsewhere, this is not a place where you can teach whatever you like without people disagreeing with you; this is a forum. If someone posted on the general area of the forum claiming to be in a Japanese art 5000 years old, or to be able to knock people over without touching them (both have happened) then I'd be there to argue against that much more vehemently than I'm doing so now. I have a real love of the scientific method and the advances it generates, so I will form part of the other side of any debate where the scientific evidence is essentially ignored in the name of religion. If you can learn enough about the science to truthfully inform your followers about the evidence that the earth is old, that geologically speaking there is no record of a global flood, etc, then all's well and good. Like I said, I (and perhaps a few others here) may well be quite curious as to how you explain the available evidence away, as in this instance "God did it" implies that god is a trickster, wanting to decieve us into believing that the earth is older than it is by actually leaving evidence that it is, or that there wasn't a flood, as there are no sedimentary deposits consistent with flooding that appear at the same time throughout the fossil record.

Please make a thread on evolution or do me the favor of letting me teach this.
Im asking you not telling you :)

Exlained above

This is not a thread on evolution: you have no absolute proof, you already said that, and I said many times Christians cant prove everything to even other Christians like if God made us able to fly one night, who would believe it the next day?

There is no absolute proof in science. Demanding it would actually show an ignorance of the scientific method, as nothing outside of mathematics has proof, rather it is based on the evidence.

You already know what you think about evolution, so why try to runaway truck it into the middle of a Christian debate. If a Christian is someone who believes in Christ and the Bible they dont believe man came from or is an ape. If a church or individual accepts anti-Biblical teachings they are not people who believe the Bible. this is a thread for questions for people who want to know about the Bible. You already have counter-answers for the Christian so why try to disrupt things?

I dated a girl a while back who was both a christian and an evolutionist. You can't convince me that she wasn't a christian, and there are a fair few people here who will probably get really offended if you follow this line of thought. As far as I can see, to become a christian is to believe in Jesus as the path to salvation and to ask forgiveness for any and all sins commited. As far as my own religious studies at school went, I certainly never saw a passage where Jesus said "If you don't accept all of the bible as literal, you're not really my follower." Which I guess means that someone can be a christian without accepting all of the words of the bible as they literally stand.

Im asking for your respect, and this means not saying I need your respect and staying here preaching to me, I was preaching to start with and you stopped my preaching to preach yourself, I preached to the room, stay or leave for anyone, I welcome all to learn, I ask that no one else wants to preach unless they want to prove a question by the account of the Bible.

Tough luck then. I will respond to what I feel is non-scientific, and I will continue to ask questions if I deem them appropriate. As I have already pointed out, my posts on this thread have been 100% on topic with other people that you've had no issue with, and in fact most of them have been directly in response to yourself, without straying far from your own comments.

First and foremost, this is a discussion forum.

Secondly, it's primarily a martial arts discussion forum.

Nowhere in the terms of service do we guarantee rights to preach whatever you want to people without argument. Personally the last thing I want to see is more people converting to fundamentalism of any description, especially if they're doing so because certain evidences are being kept from them. I've met loads of christians in my life, and almost all of them have happily accepted both christianity and science.

Please if anyone doesnt want to know about the Bible, please avoid this thread. If you believe something different start a thread and invite non-believers into it, if you want to convince them.

You invited non-believers in with your first post, remember? ""How about a thread where non-Christians can ask a Christian, not about their own beliefs but what they are taught."

Aegis :) we dont try to so much examine the world but the spiritual side of it. not the physical age and texture but the drive we all have, the love and the pursuasion of good and bad upon mankinds' hearts and minds. You look at the world we look at the hands that spin the world. You admit scientists dont know everything. they dont have all the explainations they dont have all the data, some data and explainations they cant have because of time and destruction and changes. Keep this in mind, if God is real than the explainations of Him creating everything and the instructions in life are adequate for everyone. Not believeing in God they are obvioulsy not enough or even a start. but believeing in God they are enough.

Those explanations clearly weren't adequate for the majority of christians I've met, as they accept that god created through science, and therefore consider themselves to be learning how god did something, not just that he did. Acceptance of a non-explanation leads to a stifling of scientific development and a halting of knowledge increase. Heliocentrism took an exceedingly long time to make it into mainstream knowledge precisely because the church at the time interpreted the bible to mean that the earth was at the centre of creation. We now have difficulty finding anyone who believes that the sun goes round the earth, despite the fact that at one time anyone who didn't was a heretic/non-christian.

Sooner or later, Young Earth Creationism will go the same way, at least that's my prediction.

[Aegis]

Oh, and I'm a guy for anyone concerned

[CosmicFish]

'Free Will' implies that I might actually choose something that would be contrary to what is 'right' or 'good' or even just less than 'best'. By limiting my ability to carry out my actions, my ability to injure others (or myself) is also limited. This would allow me to make different/better choices in the future, sort of the way a good parent allows children the opportunity to 'fail' in a safe environment, where the consequences of their poor choices won't cripple them for life.
Fair enough. I don't let my son play by the road or with sharp objects for the same reason. However, it still doesn't answer my original question: "Where did that defect or lack come from? Did God put it there, or has it crept in by some outside influence beyond his control?"

The essential point I'm trying to make is, given that God is all-powerful, he must (IMO) therefore be ultimately responsible for the way we are, including our "free will" and how we use it. And, if God is all knowing, then surely what appears as free will to us would merely be a highly complicated but ultimately predictable equation to him.

Thank you very much for wording it this way. I really appreciate that, even though you disagree with my conclusions, you assumed that I had some reason behind why I came to them. Whether we ever agree, I wouldn't mind discussing any topic when we can each show the other this degree of personal respect.
:) Not all us atheists (or agnostic, in my case) come here to bash. :)

The way I personally resolve this is through my understanding of the nature of God, time, and eternity. Since God created all of space-time, he is outside both (i.e., not limited or bound by either). He existed before space-time did, and He will exist after it ends. I tend to view our dimensions, including time, as sort of a bubble God created just for us. For some reason, we can travel freely in any spatial direction, but only monotonically forward in time. God on the other hand, just 'IS'. He doesn't travel forward or backward in time, but exists, uniformly filling all of space-time. Just like there is no 'place' where God isn't, there is no 'time' when God isn't. So, while we are traveling forward in time, making decisions as we arrive at different points along the path we are traveling in time, God exists uniformly and sees every point along the line simultaneously.
OK, I have no problem visualising that (at least I think I don't :confused: ) Basically what I think you're saying is - we see and experience three spatial dimensions and one temporal dimension from the inside, but God sees the whole in one glance. This reminds me of "Flatland", where a 3D solid is able to see the whole of Flatland just by being outside of it in the third dimension. However, this . . .

From our point of view, we are making decisions every day, that in a real sense change the direction we are heading. From God's POV, all of our actions and decisions 'ARE', and He can see them , so He knows what we chose, what we will choose, and where we will end up. In this sense, we have a 'destiny' or 'fate' that God knows, but that destiny is the product of our free choices.
. . . still strikes me as a contradiction. If God knows what we will choose and where we will end up, then I don't see how we can change the direction in which we are heading in any real sense at all. With God knowing the final outcome, surely it is, therefore, predetermined?

Hope the above makes sense. I've tried to make it as clear as possible and my brain now hurts! http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/hmm.gif

[Shrukin89]

When is everyone's assumptions going to be resolved? :confused:

[Strafio]

Assumptions come from what people have seen of Christians, so they'll be resolved when Christians stop mis-representing themselves! ;)

[ray8285]

I have read some, not all, of the information against Mr. Stroeble. Usually it takes the information out of context. I believe it is out of context becuase the person quoting the book does not include the whole passage. Also, Mr. Stroeble is not the only person I have read in regards to darvwinism. Another point, many of the things I was taught in biology class has been proven to be wrong yet is still taught in schools.

The fact is there is not and never will be 100% proof of either ID or darwinism. It is up to each person to study and decide for themselves. But, I do so enjoy the discussion.

[ray8285]

Mr. Aegis, obviously your review was wrong. I can say that because had you actually read the book you would have known he interviewed leading scientists in many fields including physics, astronomy, geology, etc, etc. This was not a printing of his opinion (he agreed with them obviously) but it was the presentation of facts from these scientists. Many were atheists but became agnostic or christian AFTER they began in depth study of their fields.

[Blevunly]

Excellent point, and entirely true. But since everyone believes it to be so (or at least everyone intuitively lives as if it is true), it seems reasonable to assume it is until proven otherwise, instead of vice versa.

Ok I'm proving it otherwise right now I'm like the guy coming to town with the real gold and showing it to you, but you don't want to believe me because someone else told you that the fools gold was real.

Obviously, you don't have small children.

Obviously you like avoiding questions.

You are assuming that if he threw other variables your way, you would have made a different decision. I think that there are some people that, no matter what you tell them, show them, plead with them, or demonstrate to them, will choose to be selfish. You are familiar with Milton's Paradise Lost? The only thing God could have done to change this person's ultimate destiny would have been to choose not to have created them at all. BendzR made the point that denying someone existence because of their choices would not necessarily be love. I need to examine this one more, because it is a whole different debate - why did God create those He knew would ultimately reject Him and everything 'good'?

Ok so your telling me if I grew up in China and was a girl and was autistic I would turn out the same? If you agree with this then I think your a loner, but if you dissagree then you admit that variables of life shape who you are.

Ok lets look at my variables that you say don't shape your life. The Body the Soul and your Environment. Ok now lets switch your body to a guys body and say that you have polio. Your life would be much different right now, would you agree? Now lets switch your environment we'll put you in an Iraqi family that is muslim and hates the US. Agian your life would be much different, would you agree? Ok now lets change your soul you would make different choices. Would you agree? If you've agreed to any of the past three questions then you do admit that there are variables that shape the choices that we make. Now if you admit there are variables then if someone else was in the same situation they would make the same choices. If you don't believe in variables then free will would just be a random process that we wouldn't control.

[Poop-Loops]

. . . still strikes me as a contradiction. If God knows what we will choose and where we will end up, then I don't see how we can change the direction in which we are heading in any real sense at all. With God knowing the final outcome, surely it is, therefore, predetermined?

Hope the above makes sense. I've tried to make it as clear as possible and my brain now hurts! http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/hmm.gif

This has been my question all along.

They have told me that YOU still pick it, therefore it is your own fault. I say whatever, I don't care, but God created me knowing he would just put me in Hell.

[Endeavor]

MR agegis! Im sorry about the ms/ I promice you I thought someone hinted you were a woman at one time. Or somone said all the contorllers of MAP were female or something like that? I do apoligize sir for that one ;)
x
Punisher, we answered your questions tme and time again, I dont even see what you dont understand. I told you the actions of one person don't justify condemning another for the first persons action. There is corruption among all faiths and non-faithful people.
x
Mr Simpson I never said robbing a bank is anyones fate: I said fate is the end of the road, your fate is your ending in the way I describe it. The day of your end on earth. Your free-will does not dictate your fate. I never said that either. Ive given several examples why this untrue. If youre sorry for robbing the bank and you are a changed person your fate can be a good one, although you made the choice in the first place.
x
this is a forum entitles BIBLICAL ASSUMPTIONS RESOLVED. it is to tell people what the Bible says about the questions they have about it, being the majority of the people that write dont know what the Bible says, then you are learning, and my friend I am teaching. In another room I can be the student
x
Mr aegis, yes a thread for non-Christians and Christians to ask questions, not offer your own explainations. If you want to ask does the Bible say man is an ape or decended from apes, I'd tell you no, and we would move on. I didnt create this thread to discuss alternatives to explainations, but instead to give Biblical teachings when asked questions pertaining to is something in the Bible or not.. That is the basic point of it.
x
Shruken89: the assumptions resolved are not to give you the meaning of life, they are to give you direct direction to wheather something is Biblical or just a man made tradition. What is your assumption or question and I'll help you resolve it. If you want to know are people really supposta do this, or will they end up like that or how can this be or what happened here, those are the questions.
x
Here is an assumption, people think the people that lived to be so old couldnt actually have lived such a grand age. Did they measure time different? Heres what we have, Abraham and Sarah. When he was 90 I believe and she was 80 she bore a son when she was "well stricken in years" So to be 80 is wayyy to old, a MIRICLE to have a child, so obviously they knew living over 100 was very old. So wheather you belive any of it or not you have the assumption of time resolved being they were known to be too old to have any children before 100.
x
There are no absolutes in science? So if I expect water to freeze at 32o F or 0c it wont work? I think it will because it has been done billions of times. If you heat water to (I forget) degrees it will boil, we'll leave room for elevation differences and such variations that would alter it. Basically you heat half a gallon of water and it boils at (blank) temperature and later you heat the other half and they boil at the same temperature and undergo the same change, evaporation. The problem with science is you want absolutes but you have very few, and Christians have the Absolute where all data is answered and accounted for.
x
Mr ray, the ever problem is the data is here, but the explainations for the data are contravercial. We all agree there is data in the physical world but the reasons behind it are east and west. An example is the discussion we had about the world flood. Obviously if God made water He could flood the earth and remove the excess water. To have someone say it has been proven there never has been a flood isnt really proven, even if the flood is unproven, the flood never occuring is also unproven.
x
Strafio, what you said has so much logic if you knew it you'd be given somekind of crown perhaps. Yes when Christians stop mis-representing Christianity, which Ive tried to explain so many times. You cant condemn one person for the actions of another. If you grow up wanting to be president and the job of being president is a good place to do much good, but you dont condemn the nation by the president or king or the actions of a few. If you want to be a police officer, and the reason we have police are to uphold laws, like we dont want people raping or robbing or being dangerous. But some police are crooked, but you still call the police if someone has a crack house next door or someone stole your car. The basis of this thread is to explain the teachings of the Bible as opposed to the actions misrepresenting Christianity. And Christians dont just mis-represent themselves, they are mis-represented by the general thoughts of the public who see and hear lies probably everyday. Most of the lies people dont even know are lies because they assume them to be the truth, a big reason is lies have been handed down among the truths so the corruption of "followers" is as bad and worse than the lies of the enemies against them.
x
Mr aegis you never heard any part of the Bible say you need to actualy belive what the Bible says, how about "if any man shall add to these words of this book, ..or take away from them" ? So you dated a girl that believed in Jesus but didnt believe in anything He said? How is this not possible guess what Jesus taught???
The books of the Bible, from Moses to the Psalms to Jonah to Isaiah, Jesus preached the Bible.
x
By the way the fossil record is very limited and you have never excavated the entire earth not even 1/100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000th of one percent of it to check for fossils. If the flood rapidly came and rapidly left that doesnt mean it would leave fossile evidence like the years of living and dying most things deposit.. Youre assuming the flood lasted millions of years and are looking for a starfish on mt.Everest, but the flood was only a few days and a long long long time ago. God never left evidence of the earth being older than He said it was, you have data but no way to compare age. If you dont have an exact calibration system you cannot calibrate! If something is known to be 5,000 years old and you calibrate to that then you can tune in to 5,000 years and more recent. To know an object 5,000 years old and calibrate your dating techniques to that, then 4 billion years leaves a big question of accuracy, Temperature, radiation, and unknown circumstances can change the detection of the true age. No one has witnessed the full start and finish, the half lifes and such you can talk about to us are only partial data. Just like the origin of the sun and it becomming a black giant. You really cant put a date on when it is going to happen because you really dont know it is going to happen, you have data but you explain the data with unacceptable reasoning, just as you say we do :)
x
Can we move on from the topic of evolution because neither side is going to agree with the other. If you want to know what the Bible says, it says God made everything, and scientists are less than .0000001 percent of the worlds population so they are going to tell us why things are, no. They can tell us that things are, like this physical thing and that physical thing, and this physical reaction and that physical reaction, but they cant tell us everything, certainly much less that man is just an animal who just got here at random.
x
When your parents or your children die you wont stand at their grave and say hey you are just a monkey with no destiny, you will feel the spirit move upon you and face the truth that you cant evolve above life. So why hasnt anyone escaped life? Why do people and trees and animals die? When you face real things in life there is no time for BS so why is the time now considered a good time for it? Sorrow and regret are not chemicals in your brain they are longings of the heart. Say what you will but we all have our chances daily until the day we run out of chances to have peace with God.
x
He want you to come to Peace and you dont have to go to great lengths only let go of the ways of the world.

[Endeavor]

mr Loops, it is a free ride whichever way you want to go> so you can make your choice, and if you dont die tonight you will have the choice tomorrow to decide if you want to re-consider your choice, and if there are such choices someone needs to ask for help with the people that keep making wrong choices.

[Topher]

Since God created all of space-time, he is outside both (i.e., not limited or bound by either). He existed before space-time did, and He will exist after it ends.
This is a point I cannot to understand as, many argue that nothing can just “exist,” that there must have been some kind of creator, with God being that creator. This raises the issue of who created God and who created the area outside space-time/universe? If you exempt God and the ‘outside’ from a creation/creator, the argument that here must be a creator for everything is rendered self contradictory. If God can just exist without creation why even bring him into to it in the first place? Just say the universe exists without creation or rather exist because of a natural ‘creation.’

God on the other hand, just 'IS'. He doesn't travel forward or backward in time, but exists, uniformly filling all of space-time. Just like there is no 'place' where God isn't, there is no 'time' when God isn't. So, while we are traveling forward in time, making decisions as we arrive at different points along the path we are traveling in time, God exists uniformly and sees every point along the line simultaneously.
If God is everywhere simultaneously how can he have emotions or even think? Emotions are reactionary but God being omnipresence and omniscient would not need to react as he would have always known, even before what he has known even happened. How could he have an emotional reaction to something he always knew was going to happen.

And thinking! Does he know his thoughts before he thought them? Thinking is a temporal process but God is atemporal. God cannot be everywhere simultaneously/timeless (omnipresence) and all knowing (omniscient). To be omnipresence would mean he has no perception of past, present or future, but to be omniscient would mean he has to know past, present and future. He cannot be both.

Excellent point, and entirely true. But since everyone believes it to be so (or at least everyone intuitively lives as if it is true), it seems reasonable to assume it is until proven otherwise, instead of vice versa.
It’s not something I don’t think anyone can prove. But it can be exampled why absolute free will cannot logically work.

Obviously, you don't have small children.
Everyone does something for a reason, even small children. “Just to see what happens” is still a reason. ;)

I don’t think I’ve ever heard of someone doing something which wasn’t done with a reason.

[Topher]

Another point, many of the things I was taught in biology class has been proven to be wrong yet is still taught in schools.
Like what?

The fact is there is not and never will be 100% proof of either ID or darwinism. It is up to each person to study and decide for themselves. But, I do so enjoy the discussion.
There is an abundance of evidence supporting evolution. However there is none for intelligent design. The only evidence they purport is alleged problems with evolutionary theory. These supposed problems have however been refuted.

I don't think there will ever be 100% proof of evolution as it is a constant progression. No matter how far we get there will always be new developments.

Mr. Aegis, obviously your review was wrong. I can say that because had you actually read the book you would have known he interviewed leading scientists in many fields including physics, astronomy, geology, etc, etc. This was not a printing of his opinion (he agreed with them obviously) but it was the presentation of facts from these scientists. Many were atheists but became agnostic or christian AFTER they began in depth study of their fields.
Did you even read the review and/or look into the scientists refered to in the book....

He goes on to explain that his approach will be to cross-examine authorities who are doctorate-level professors. By some amazing coincidence, all of his authorities happen to be Christian theists and apologists known ahead of time for arguing that the "current arrow of science" is pointing to God! And yet, if you really want to find out whether science confirms the "God theory," you don't only pick people that you know ahead of time are going to say "Yes, Lee, that is exactly right." That's like saying, "I'm going to get to the bottom of this Buddhism stuff, I'm going to interview a bunch of Buddhist monks and see if they tell me that Buddhism is all that it's cracked up to be." I can tell that Strobel is smart enough to know this, so I can only conclude that his pretense of playing the skeptic is pure deception.

Similarly, while Strobel's interviewees are credentialed, they hold minority opinions in their fields. Of course, minority opinions can and do become majority opinions. But if you are conducting an investigation concerning a particular field of study, you don't simply interview those with minority opinions and treat their opinions as representative of that field. This provides further evidence that Strobel's pretense of playing the skeptic is a complete farce. Even disregarding everything else I say in this review, Strobel's masquerade as a skeptic should arouse the suspicion that there is more to the story than Strobel would have you to believe.

Maybe you can explain that.

[Endeavor]

Mr Simpson, you are trying to fathom knowing all thoughts when you only know your own and what others express to you. God's mind is much bigger than everyone in the world, it would have to be if He created everyone in the world? God knows the past, present and future, this is the blink of an eye in the consideration of eternity.
x
If you think we got here by the "big bang" how did it exist? Its like which came first the chicken or the egg? The amount of particles and amount of radiation and temperature of the universe, if it was compact to start, why pick 14 billion years ago to start the universe. Lets go back 100 billion years before the start of the big bang. For there to be a bang there had to be a CHANGE, one chemical or whatever had to mix with something or something had to happen? A reason for the Bang. So aside from the reason for the bang there had to be movement of the whatever that made the explosion right? If whatever A mixed with B to cause the Big Bang, then A had to move into B.
x
Mr simpson , there has to be a start of time, not just man made observance and method of recording, but a definite start to time. If the big bang happened 14 billion years ago today. than one day before the big bang there were just the potential whatevers that caused it. So where did they get their start and what moved them, were they here for eternity? Either God is eternal or matter is eternal because gases and chemicals and radiations are all possible to measure. So why would anything change after eternity has come so far to produce the big bang? You cant honestly believe that the chemicals or gases just moved after billions of years when the universe was compact, according to the thought of expansion having the last mile marker the edge of the universe. Or do you really think if you stood on the edge of this "expanding universe" that you could hold a tape measure out to the 7 foot mark and say, thats 7 foot from existance? I think it is known existance not final existance. Saying the universe is contianed in a ball then expands and is still expanding is like saying the earth is square and you fall off, we really just have some vivid imaginations that are held as gold.

[Capt Ann]

The essential point I'm trying to make is, given that God is all-powerful, he must (IMO) therefore be ultimately responsible for the way we are, including our "free will" and how we use it. And, if God is all knowing, then surely what appears as free will to us would merely be a highly complicated but ultimately predictable equation to him.Just my opinion here, but I see God as taking ultimate responsibility for His creation, and the overall choices we make, in the sense that He is the One who came up with the whole plan of redemption. And if you really want to hurt your brain, think about this: He came up with the plan of redemption before there was a need for it. I think there's a fine line though, between acknowledging that God is in control and claiming that God is to blame. That is the whole point of the 'free will' debate. If God made me in such a way that I don't have free will, then yes, I can blame God for the way I am. But if free will means anything, then God gave me the opportunity to make real choices that would alter who/how I am.

Basically what I think you're saying is - we see and experience three spatial dimensions and one temporal dimension from the inside, but God sees the whole in one glance. This reminds me of "Flatland", where a 3D solid is able to see the whole of Flatland just by being outside of it in the third dimension. Exactly. And you said it better and shorter than I did!

However, . . .
. . . still strikes me as a contradiction. If God knows what we will choose and where we will end up, then I don't see how we can change the direction in which we are heading in any real sense at all. With God knowing the final outcome, surely it is, therefore, predetermined?
{emphasis added}Predetermined is a temporal word - the word itself is part of the problem and part of the debate. Something 'predetermined' was 'determined before'. You have to ask, "Determined before what?" It wasn't determined before you made the decision, because if you are making real choices, then you are the one determining. And from God's POV, there is no 'before' (or 'after' or 'during', for that matter) but things just 'are'.

....my brain now hurts! http://smiley.onegreatguy.net/hmm.gifYours and mine both, bro! This is one of my favorite topics to discuss and think about. It hurts my head and keeps me humble. Anytime I think I've got things 'figured out', it serves as a good reminder of how finite I am.

[Topher]

Your free-will does not dictate your fate. I never said that either.
I know you never said that, I’m say it. The choices you or others make in your life will ultimately affect it.

Example: Seth MacFarlane (the guy who created family guy) missed Flight 11 – the one that flew into the WTC – by 10 minutes as he was late. If his fate was to never get on the plane, he would never have gotten on it under any circumstance and there would have been no free will involved whatsoever. However, if his free will caused him to be late then it is an example of an action which would have totally changed the life of him, his family and probably thoudends of others. Him being on the plane would have created a new ‘branch’ on the tree, an entire string of sequences.

In order to arrive at a predetermined fate/end, the path to it would need to be uninterrupted, thus free will could not exist. Having free will would almost certainly change the path of your life, meaning you cannot arrive at the predetermined fate/end, therefore fate would not exist.


There are no absolutes in science? So if I expect water to freeze at 32o F or 0c it wont work? I think it will because it has been done billions of times. If you heat water to (I forget) degrees it will boil, we'll leave room for elevation differences and such variations that would alter it. Basically you heat half a gallon of water and it boils at (blank) temperature and later you heat the other half and they boil at the same temperature and undergo the same change, evaporation. The problem with science is you want absolutes but you have very few, and Christians have the Absolute where all data is answered and accounted for.
Those are the facts of science. The theories explain those facts.

As for Christians having the absolute and answers. That’s the problems, you don’t. You cannot have absolutes without absolute evidence, and we just don’t have that. It’s a constant development. And religion usually makes claims which cannot be proven false which makes the claim useless. And contest that you don’t have all the answers. If you did you could easily explain them and how they actually answer anything. If Christianity did have all the answers, they would be used.

[Poop-Loops]

mr Loops, it is a free ride whichever way you want to go> so you can make your choice, and if you dont die tonight you will have the choice tomorrow to decide if you want to re-consider your choice, and if there are such choices someone needs to ask for help with the people that keep making wrong choices.

God knew I was going to make the wrong choice before I was even born. Why did he let me be born, knowing that He will just throw me in Hell when I die?

[Poop-Loops]

By the way the fossil record is very limited and you have never excavated the entire earth not even 1/100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000th of one percent of it to check for fossils. If the flood rapidly came and rapidly left that doesnt mean it would leave fossile evidence like the years of living and dying most things deposit.. Youre assuming the flood lasted millions of years and are looking for a starfish on mt.Everest, but the flood was only a few days and a long long long time ago. God never left evidence of the earth being older than He said it was, you have data but no way to compare age. If you dont have an exact calibration system you cannot calibrate! If something is known to be 5,000 years old and you calibrate to that then you can tune in to 5,000 years and more recent. To know an object 5,000 years old and calibrate your dating techniques to that, then 4 billion years leaves a big question of accuracy, Temperature, radiation, and unknown circumstances can change the detection of the true age. No one has witnessed the full start and finish, the half lifes and such you can talk about to us are only partial data. Just like the origin of the sun and it becomming a black giant. You really cant put a date on when it is going to happen because you really dont know it is going to happen, you have data but you explain the data with unacceptable reasoning, just as you say we do :)

Please, leave the science to the scientists. I hate, HATE it when non-scientists try to use pseduo-science to prove their point. This includes Christians as well as new-age hippies (chi is quantum physics!).

Carbon dating only lets us date up to 50,000 years. Afterwards, it gets funky. What do we do, then? Use other elements, with longer half-lives. First we measure the half life MULTIPLE TIMES. It is still not very accurate, but it's a rough estimate. Then we date something. So, whereas carbon dating would give you funky results, these other elements all seem to point in the same direction.

Also, you are saying science has flawed techniques of measurement, but you are going to trust a book with INCREDIBLY far-fetched stories? Please.

Why the hell would God want to trick humanity like this?

"Oh, I will make the Earth 5000 years old... but make them THINK it's like a billion years old! Yeah! Then I can add some weird bones to make them think there used to be other beings before them... and some "plate techtonics"... and and... and layers of the Earth's crust... umm... what else? Oh! I can make it so that if they believe in all of this, they end up burning in Hell until I feel like stopping. Yeah, this will be sweet."

Seriously, that is one messed up God.

[Aegis]

Mr aegis, yes a thread for non-Christians and Christians to ask questions, not offer your own explainations. If you want to ask does the Bible say man is an ape or decended from apes, I'd tell you no, and we would move on. I didnt create this thread to discuss alternatives to explainations, but instead to give Biblical teachings when asked questions pertaining to is something in the Bible or not.. That is the basic point of it.

If I started another thread claiming that christianity was vampirism and devil worship but acked christians not to contradict me because I had my own theory on the religion, do you expect for one minute that I'd be left to preach my "message"? Not too likely.

So why expect the same when all I've really done so far is respond to bad science and to ask questions about unexplained phenomena.

After all, my questions on post-flood life still haven't been answered in a rational way. I asked why marsupial mammals only made it to remote locations without placental mammals, how carnivores survived after the flood due to a lack of food, how herbivores survived after the flood, how human population grew rapidly enough to repopulate the earth so quickly, etc. The only answer I god was "god can do things the way he pleases" or thereabouts. To which I responded that it seems illogical to require boats, floods, etc if he's just going to have to use a series of miracles anyway. Plus there's the question of why an infinite being would require humans to repopulate quickly rather than at a standard pace. It's not like god would supposedly run out of time waiting for us to repopulate.

So As I've asked, why the illogical behaviour? And the other questions of course.


There are no absolutes in science? So if I expect water to freeze at 32o F or 0c it wont work? I think it will because it has been done billions of times. If you heat water to (I forget) degrees it will boil, we'll leave room for elevation differences and such variations that would alter it. Basically you heat half a gallon of water and it boils at (blank) temperature and later you heat the other half and they boil at the same temperature and undergo the same change, evaporation. The problem with science is you want absolutes but you have very few, and Christians have the Absolute where all data is answered and accounted for.

No, there aren't. Fluctuations in atmospheric pressure, water purity, heat distribution can affect the (apparent) boiling point. As such, we have to use a series of approximations to predict the temperature that water will boil at for a given pressure, starting with the really bad approximation of the Ideal Gas Law and moving up to some really tricky calculations based on molecular interaction, asphericity, etc.

Boiling and condensation is far from an absolute fact, and science does not recognise absolutes. All science bears in mind that things can change.

And I have to disagree and say that some Christians, like many other religions, believe that they have the Absolute on their side. Belief by its very nature means it can't be used as an absolute, and the fact that christians disagree on many details further adds to the reasons why.


Mr aegis you never heard any part of the Bible say you need to actualy belive what the Bible says, how about "if any man shall add to these words of this book, ..or take away from them" ? So you dated a girl that believed in Jesus but didnt believe in anything He said? How is this not possible guess what Jesus taught???
The books of the Bible, from Moses to the Psalms to Jonah to Isaiah, Jesus preached the Bible.

And where exactly does that state that you have to believe in the bible 100% literally? After all, in the gospels Jesus teaches through the use of parables on several occasions. Are you required to believe that Jesus spoke absolute truth even when teaching? If not, why does the same rule not apply to things like the flood, where we have some pretty good evidence that it never happened.

And my ex most definitely was a christian. Just because she didn't conform to your standards doesn't mean she was excluded by Jesus.


By the way the fossil record is very limited and you have never excavated the entire earth not even 1/100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000th of one percent of it to check for fossils. If the flood rapidly came and rapidly left that doesnt mean it would leave fossile evidence like the years of living and dying most things deposit.. Youre assuming the flood lasted millions of years and are looking for a starfish on mt.Everest, but the flood was only a few days and a long long long time ago.

The volume of the earth is 1,097,509,500,000,000,000,000. According to your "source" we've never looked at more than 0.0001097509500 m^3 of it. The lesson here: don't make up numbers with science, I know how to check them. Fact is that geologists know how to look for a flood in the geological record. Fact is also that a global flood should leave eveidence all over the fossil record. More facts are that we have rocks identified with apparent ages older than life on earth, and we still haven't found a layer that would correspond to a global flood. And yes, a global flood lasting around 5 months would most definitely leave a layer of evidence (your bible says it's more than a few days, after all it supposedly rained/prevailed upon the earth for 40 days and nights, then receded over 100 days later.

God never left evidence of the earth being older than He said it was, you have data but no way to compare age. If you dont have an exact calibration system you cannot calibrate! If something is known to be 5,000 years old and you calibrate to that then you can tune in to 5,000 years and more recent. To know an object 5,000 years old and calibrate your dating techniques to that, then 4 billion years leaves a big question of accuracy, Temperature, radiation, and unknown circumstances can change the detection of the true age. No one has witnessed the full start and finish, the half lifes and such you can talk about to us are only partial data. Just like the origin of the sun and it becomming a black giant. You really cant put a date on when it is going to happen because you really dont know it is going to happen, you have data but you explain the data with unacceptable reasoning, just as you say we do :)

I covered this in a recent thread. If you want to talk about this, first look up some of my later postings where I discussed the use of converging first order differential equations to demonstrate accuracy in 2 overlapping range methods, then come back to me with your own mathematics and let me know how you're going to refute what I said.

Until then, stay clear of science you clearly don't understand.

Can we move on from the topic of evolution because neither side is going to agree with the other. If you want to know what the Bible says, it says God made everything, and scientists are less than .0000001 percent of the worlds population so they are going to tell us why things are, no. They can tell us that things are, like this physical thing and that physical thing, and this physical reaction and that physical reaction, but they cant tell us everything, certainly much less that man is just an animal who just got here at random.

Fortunately scientific knowledge isn't subject to a worldwide vote. Oh, and by the way, 0.0000001 percent of the world's population is a total of 6 people. Fancy another guess?

When your parents or your children die you wont stand at their grave and say hey you are just a monkey with no destiny, you will feel the spirit move upon you and face the truth that you cant evolve above life. So why hasnt anyone escaped life? Why do people and trees and animals die? When you face real things in life there is no time for BS so why is the time now considered a good time for it? Sorrow and regret are not chemicals in your brain they are longings of the heart. Say what you will but we all have our chances daily until the day we run out of chances to have peace with God.


I think ranting on about when my family dies is hardly likely to win me to your cause. I know full well what it feels like to lose a relative, and I'm still an atheist.

And I suspect that when you say "evolve above life" you;re once again talking about a science that you don't understand.

I further suspect that while you may know your bible well, you do not know science well enough to deal with genuine questions from non-believers about how to reconcile science with the bible.

I'd also like to remind you that once again, this post is entirely in reply to your own, I just corrected your use of bad scientific reasoning.

[Strafio]

God knew I was going to make the wrong choice before I was even born. Why did he let me be born, knowing that He will just throw me in Hell when I die?
Endeavor has actually said that there is no hell.
You just miss out on eternal life is all! ;)

I will make one point though, is it really a choice if you don't know what you're choosing between? If I gave you two identical sweets, except one was poisonous, and you had to eat one, would you have a genuine choice between life and death? It seems that the real choices God has given us is choosing between whether to believe the Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, Pagan, <insert belief set/truth claim here> etc...

So who's word do we take for it... hmmm...
Somehow I don't think God designed it so we could "get it right".
Christians say it's a simple choice between accepting Christ or rejecting him, but that's only if you've already chosen to believe that they have the absolute truth. Sure, the Bible has some evidence, every claim to truth has its evidence. Thing is, it requires a leap of faith, which is fair enough as most belief systems do, but how do you make an informed choice in what system to put your faith into? You don't. You just give something a go and see if it works out for you.

So God requiring for a person to guess the correct religion seems a little daft to me...

[thepunisher]

Guess it all comes down to the question then: Do you take the blue or the red pill. lol :D

Either you believe in the bible and have faith in it and everything it says and forget anything else around that counters it or you take the red pill and open yourself to a completley new, logical world. A world where maybe some things said in the bible are coming out as complete bogus and you have to readjust your thinking that maybe some higher being (if it even exists)might actually be wrong completley. It might shock you, might make you want to go back to your old self but you will have to deal with it.

But of course if you take the blue pill nothing of that ever has to happen.

Christian

[Endeavor]

Mr aegis: the flooding of Katrina, you expect fossils to be left of that? What about the other floods on the earth in the last 100 years, wheres those fossils? Having something preserved in fossile state isnt very likely when a flood comes and goes in a few days. And youre assuming that God cant create some new plants and new people to populate the earth? The Bible never says Noah had to replant and repopulate the earth, it just says that Noah and his crew were kept alive in the flood. If God can make people God can make more people. If the slow process of evolution were true the size of the population couldnt exist in such a large number either. All science bares in mind that things can change? Then how could you determine the exact date of the earth and if there is any room for error, you could believe that in the year 3,006, 1000years from now, that scientists could prove the earth is 2 billion years old? And if they could prove it to be 2 billion, then they could prove it to be 9,000 years old, but they cant prove any of those because there is no standard of measure. You would have to have something that you knew the specific origin of, the birthday, and then you could compare younger things against the oldest age you could determine.
x
What is this evidence you have that the flood never happened? Please enlighten us. And you asked why would God want us to repopulate so quick, maybe because there are so few people that can appreciate God that He wanted them to be born to experience life in 2006 and overcome the ways of the world. Why make people in the first place?
x
Mr loops, mr loops, mr loops.. :) out of all the elements, none of them have been recorded in deteriation except in the last few hundered years. So you cant say this element will fade to black in yada years and blah blah blah element will change in x number years because you dont know how their stability will be in the process of time and exposure to the other elements.
x
I did like one thing said, those are the facts, theories explain the facts... This is my point... facts dont explain theorys, facts explain facts.
x
Strafio, if you gave me two candies and said one is poison and the other is just a sugar mint, I wouldnt choose because I dont like candy that much. If I didnt know one was poison I might choose on flaver or looks, but I would be choosing flavor or visual appeal, I wouldnt know it was possible death. Its like saying hey you can jump in that river holding a big rock till you die or just go on about your life. If you offered the candy you would be making the choice for us, or tempting us.
x
God isnt having you guess, thats why Christians are so hated, they dont accept other explainations. They love all people but dont accept decisions that are contrary to the teachings of God. If God is real and God made all people, than couldnt God control the Bible. Copies of the texts have been found that even by using your dating methods are proven to be ancient, and guess what they say? the same as in todays Bible :)
x
Mr Simpson you dont have free will to change your fate, you have free will in the sence that you have choices. You can go on a killing spree or you can see what happens tomorrow or you can go to your job or go play baseball. Your free will is your choices. YOur fate already written. Only you arent aware of it. The man that missed the plane that crashed, his fate was not to die that day. YOu make choices and others make choices for and against you. YOu drive a road twice a day and then one day you wreck, your free will was every time to drive, but your circumstances changed outside your free will, or your free will didnt know about the flat tire you would get.
x
I like facts, not changing explainations. I think we're getting sidetracked too much about why this and why not that?! I made this thread not to debate how things came to be, but to give people explainations that they cant get everywhere they turn. Evolution is an explaination you can find on the internet. Finding what the Bible really says as opposed to what false followers make up or pass man made traditons even unknowingly.
x
Mr loops I think you were born to deserve Hell and not want it, thus rising above the world. Dont you know that the bad things you have done in your life have been exceeded by most of the people in the Bible??? Look at the Apostle Paul, he killed Christians! Look at king David, he killed his neighbor to get to his wife! These men changed and you cant? God doesnt work like that, He has the world like a chess board and when they got you checkmate, He just flicks the subversive piece onto the floor because He can.
x
The amount of time you spend reading posts and writing them proves that you believe in God. All of you, or you would just find an atheist room. And you arnt here to teach because you dont know the absolute answers so you believe In God, just not the right way to approach Him and have peace with Him because you know the ways of the world are very grevious. Mr Simpson, Ive read several of your threads and you are going to be a leader one day. You have the ability to lead, just not the direction. You remind me of myself because I made your arguements against Christians years ago, and all that time I believed in God, I was just afraid of His followers because they were in disguise. But when you seek out God you dont harbor the anger and blame because He told you all along how it was and is. "if the world hates you, ye know that it hated Me before it hated you" and the world will preach love and not yield it, until you meet a real Christian.
x
People talk bad about the United States like we are white Christians attacking and governing the world. But when we spend multi-billions in disaster relief and food for the worlds starving and clothes for the people in poverty and shelter for the homeless and hundreds of thousands of hours in free labor, where is the thanks?
x
I once had the attitude, I didnt ask to be born so I dont have to do anything anyone tells me, but you have been born and you dont make the rules. So God doesnt have to give you anything either but He does, He gives everyone multiple blessings, when your parents or your children die you realize you HAD blessing only then it is too late to appreciate them. When you get in a wreck and you get paralized you remember how good it was to walk and do for yourself! but it's too late, and the ultimant too late will be when we die and never recoginze God helped us so much in a world that is against us.
x
I know some of you would like to explain evolution and how you think, but I didnt create this thread to explain everything you wonder about life. I made this thread to refute the false claims and suspicions people have. I know because they were told to me, From Santa claus, to Hell to divorce to mans' power, to how to be saved, to what you can and cant do, to what is expected of you. Almost everything anyone ever said about God was just mixed with man made ideas. If you think the Bible is man made you realize that no man, not the most famous poets or philosophers come anywhere near close to the logic and grace in the Bible, they simply use Biblical ideas and construct from them their own. Men did write the Bible, but they were directed by God what to say, they even tell us this in the Bible. Moses wasnt a big speaker, he had to have help to say "let my people go" and another prophet says, but "I am just a child" and another says that God told him to "write these things down"
x
Look at the deciples, a bunch of fishermen! They weren't taught to read, they werent taught to speak different languages, and their writings are the most famous of all the writings in the world.
x
Mr aegis, if you started your own thread, I wouldnt go there and tell you this way or that. This thead was not intended to explain everything in life or religion or science. This thread was made by me just to tell anyone what the Bible says about things. Does it say man is an ape or evolved from an ape, no it says man was made first, created by God. Then the question is answered for The Bible has answered it. Thats the point of the thread. If you believe otherwise then so be it, but you dont stop a basketball game to tell them that hockey is a better sport. I didnt post this thread to ask, I posted this thread to tell, and when a question is asked and answered we need to ask another question. Yes God made man, yes there was a flood. Wanting proof is something everyone in here knows cant be furnished by writing it happened. You cant prove your beliefs either because you have not invented the forms of measuring devices you believe nor have you calibrated them, nor are they calibrated because there is not any standard in the world to comare them to. Things we know the age of are all less than 10,000 years old. If there is any room for error in measuring beyond that, then the error could be greater than you think because you have only a partial glimpse at the timeline.
x
Mr simpson if we say you have free will you say you dont, if we say you dont you say you do. so you tell us if you do or dont. Your fate is what happens in the end, your choices are along the way until you make the choice of death or someone does for you or you just pass in age or accident or youre a victom. Your free will is just your ability to decide your physical reactions. You rob a bank or you try to stop a robber or you decide to try to talk to someone out of hurting someone else, or you try to talk to someone into doing something bad. Your environment and temptations are what brings your free will into play. If you see something or hear something or are around something or remembersomething you can act upon accordingly

[Endeavor]

I feel like we're writing so much personal explainations and questions that the thread is on the back burner. I dont want this to be another thread about peoples accounts for what happened in order for us to be here today.
x
If anyone has a question about what the Bible identifies as the reason, please ask just what the Bible says about it, if you want to know a hindu view or a vampire view or an evolutionarry scientists view or a alian abductees' view you can find those all over. If you dont want to know what the Bible says about your questions why are you here? If you do want to know what the Bible says, not what me or jack or diane says about their favorite color then feel free to ask. If you make your own threads on your own preferances and ideas you treasure than ride it out. I did ask for questions, not for answers, I already have answers, you already have answers, but some people out there dont have the answers they want to hear out of the Bible to consider. If a lot of people claim to be this and that and contradict other people of the same claim, then to tell who is really legit requires going to the source. In this case the instruction manual for life.
x
If you dont believe it why be here? because most of us already have had evolution taught to us, but most of us who have been to church or heard about God have heard very little out of the Bible! that is ironic and very sad so I am here to help you resolve the conflicting stories man has sprouted against the Bible.

[thepunisher]

I think Endeavour, you should actually start to wonder if anyone wants to be taught by you, because to be honest, I don't. I don't like preachers and I have my own reasons not to choose god and they don't concern you nor can you convince me to change my mind.

Also, your attitude smells of arrogance. Seems you don't seem to care who you are talking too, be it an admin or a topic mod. You don't make the rules on here, they do. I hope you don't get sin binned or banned soon.

Christian

[Aegis]

Mr aegis: the flooding of Katrina, you expect fossils to be left of that? What about the other floods on the earth in the last 100 years, wheres those fossils? Having something preserved in fossile state isnt very likely when a flood comes and goes in a few days.

I've called in someone with a degree in geology to explain fossilisation to you. However, even you must be able to appreciate the difference between the floods from Katrina, which were fairly shallow in comparison to a global deluge and also fairly short term too. After all, like I already mentioned, the bible states that the flood was present for over 5 months, not just a few days, so all in all you're comparing 2 very different events.

And youre assuming that God cant create some new plants and new people to populate the earth? The Bible never says Noah had to replant and repopulate the earth, it just says that Noah and his crew were kept alive in the flood.

Then why bother saving any animals in the first place? What's the point in taking animal on a giant boat if a god is just going to recreate their entire species after they disembark. This is again totally illogical and makes god actually sound either petty or stupid.

If God can make people God can make more people. If the slow process of evolution were true the size of the population couldnt exist in such a large number either.

You've already demonstrated that you can't deal in numbers, why should I take your word for this?

However, just for the sake of argument, why not take a look at the population function, P(t)=P(0)*(1+r)^n, where P(t) is the population at time t, r is the population growth rate and n is the number of reproductive generations in time t, then show me why exactly humans couldn't populate the earth. Or was it just something you wanted to say to discredit science without actually doing any work?

All science bares in mind that things can change? Then how could you determine the exact date of the earth and if there is any room for error, you could believe that in the year 3,006, 1000years from now, that scientists could prove the earth is 2 billion years old?

I can't say for absolute certainty that they won't, but it would require a large number of scientific fields to be wrong, nuclear physics, radiometric dating, geology, probably cosmology as well. Chances of this happening enough to mean that we've been as wrong as 3 billion years out in the "older than thought" direction are very slim indeed, simply because the amount of real supporting evidence for these fields is huge.

Just another point about science here: it doesn't deal in proofs, but in well-evidenced theories.

And if they could prove it to be 2 billion, then they could prove it to be 9,000 years old, but they cant prove any of those because there is no standard of measure.

They won't prove that the earth is 9000 years old, as there are cave drawings and artifacts older than that being uncovered in various sites around the world. In order for those to be incorrectly dated, even more dating methods would have to be incorrect, including dendrochronology and varve dating.

You would have to have something that you knew the specific origin of, the birthday, and then you could compare younger things against the oldest age you could determine.

No, like I already mentioned, when you have overlapping-region first order differential equations, you can calibrate 2 methods against each other. They can still both be wrong until you make a reading with both returning meaningful results. Once this happens, in order to refute the methods you'd have to explain how 2 radioactive decay constants were individually altered (i.e. altering the laws of physics specifically for a certain decay chain) just the right amount to still calibrate against another method while giving a flase reading.

What is this evidence you have that the flood never happened? Please enlighten us.

Hopefully my pet geologist will answer this one. However, for my own evidence in addition to the lack of evidence in the geological record, species population isolations, population growth models, the illogical nature of the whole story, the lack of starvation throughout the voyage, the lack of space, the lack of manpower for the voyage, etc. There's more than enough to support the non-literal interpretation here.

And you asked why would God want us to repopulate so quick, maybe because there are so few people that can appreciate God that He wanted them to be born to experience life in 2006 and overcome the ways of the world. Why make people in the first place?

Why would an infinite being be so impatient that he couldn't wait a few hundred/thousand years longer, instead having to increase the populations artificially? Again, it's illogical.


I did like one thing said, those are the facts, theories explain the facts... This is my point... facts dont explain theorys, facts explain facts.

Facts don't explain facts. As an example: FACT, things fall down at a rate of 9.8 m s^(-2) in a frictionless environment on the surface of the earth. What does this explain? Nothing. Facts are just bits of data until a theory explains them.

I like facts, not changing explainations.

If you like facts so much, why did you make up some statistics in the last post of yours I responded to? You know, the ones that showed that you believed less than a litre of the earth's surface has been examined and that there are only 6 scientists on the planet?


The amount of time you spend reading posts and writing them proves that you believe in God.

Don't you dare tell any of us what we believe. I argue in these sorts of threads because I hate the fact that science is having to actually do battle with religious people who seem to want a return to the Dark Ages in terms of scientific discovery.

All of you, or you would just find an atheist room.

For the last time, this is a forum for discussing religion on a MARTIAL ARTS FORUM, it is not a christian only section. Every single one of us is surrounded by people from many different faiths on a daily basis, why wouldn't we be interested in talking about religion, especially when some are doing their best to throw out the tried and tested methods of scientific understanding?


People talk bad about the United States like we are white Christians attacking and governing the world. But when we spend multi-billions in disaster relief and food for the worlds starving and clothes for the people in poverty and shelter for the homeless and hundreds of thousands of hours in free labor, where is the thanks?

America spends less per capita than damn near every other developed country in the world. What makes you think you deserve any more thanks than the rest of the world?


I know some of you would like to explain evolution and how you think, but I didnt create this thread to explain everything you wonder about life. I made this thread to refute the false claims and suspicions people have.

You shouldn't complain when we come in and do the same then :D

If you think the Bible is man made you realize that no man, not the most famous poets or philosophers come anywhere near close to the logic and grace in the Bible, they simply use Biblical ideas and construct from them their own.

Logic? You are kidding me!

The Norse mythologies are as logical and likely from my perspective, and a lot more entertaining to boot!


Mr aegis, if you started your own thread, I wouldnt go there and tell you this way or that. This thead was not intended to explain everything in life or religion or science. This thread was made by me just to tell anyone what the Bible says about things. Does it say man is an ape or evolved from an ape, no it says man was made first, created by God. Then the question is answered for The Bible has answered it.

Jesus told several parable according to your gospels. Did he identify beforehand that they were just stories to be taken allegorically, or did he speak them as though they were fact? Now, if Jesus spoke allegorically, why couldn't some of the authors of the bible? Once you accept that, the bible fails to become an absolute source for physical events and starts to become a guide to being spiritual, specifically with regard to christianity. As such, the bible most definitely hasn't answered the question, only your interpretation has.

Thats the point of the thread. If you believe otherwise then so be it, but you dont stop a basketball game to tell them that hockey is a better sport. I didnt post this thread to ask, I posted this thread to tell, and when a question is asked and answered we need to ask another question. Yes God made man, yes there was a flood. Wanting proof is something everyone in here knows cant be furnished by writing it happened. You cant prove your beliefs either because you have not invented the forms of measuring devices you believe nor have you calibrated them, nor are they calibrated because there is not any standard in the world to comare them to. Things we know the age of are all less than 10,000 years old. If there is any room for error in measuring beyond that, then the error could be greater than you think because you have only a partial glimpse at the timeline.

We have artifacts older than 10000 years. We can tell because of how they're buried and how much radioactive decay has occured in them, or how many layers of ice/rock they're buried under. It's really not that difficult to get really wide estimates of the age of objects just by their location, but in addition to that we have corroborating evidence from other methods. Put simply, there is ample evidence to support an old earth, and none whatsoever supporting a young one.

[Moony]

Mr aegis: the flooding of Katrina, you expect fossils to be left of that? What about the other floods on the earth in the last 100 years, wheres those fossils? Having something preserved in fossile state isnt very likely when a flood comes and goes in a few days. And youre assuming that God cant create some new plants and new people to populate the earth? The Bible never says Noah had to replant and repopulate the earth, it just says that Noah and his crew were kept alive in the flood. If God can make people God can make more people. If the slow process of evolution were true the size of the population couldnt exist in such a large number either. All science bares in mind that things can change? Then how could you determine the exact date of the earth and if there is any room for error, you could believe that in the year 3,006, 1000years from now, that scientists could prove the earth is 2 billion years old? And if they could prove it to be 2 billion, then they could prove it to be 9,000 years old, but they cant prove any of those because there is no standard of measure. You would have to have something that you knew the specific origin of, the birthday, and then you could compare younger things against the oldest age you could determine.
x
What is this evidence you have that the flood never happened? Please enlighten us. And you asked why would God want us to repopulate so quick, maybe because there are so few people that can appreciate God that He wanted them to be born to experience life in 2006 and overcome the ways of the world. Why make people in the first place?

Oh the urge to throw heavy objects at you.....(i've not had a great start to my week - live with it).....

Fossilisation is something that can only really be lightly covered here. Partly because of the detail I'd need to go in for a proper explanation and partly because i suspect you lack even basic scientific knowledge for me to work with. However, i'll see what i can do. For Katrina to have caused fossilisation you'd need to have had some bodies/plant remains dumped somewhere that they could not be got at by aerobic bacteria, you'd need them to then be burried by some sediment, next would come a few million years to allow geological processes to remove pretty much all trace of the soft tissues (soft tissue is a female dog to fossilise but it does happen in some cercunstances) whilst mineralisation processes convert the bone material into rock. This process takes millions of years, and can't be reproduced in a few months. Yes you can get some superficial mineralisation and petrification but neither of those if fossilisation. For what seems like a reasonable account understandable by the lay person clickie here.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossilisation
And how likely a flood is of preserving something will depend on that something really. If your taking the example of a few twigs and some leaves etc then i'd say chances of them getting their foot in the door of the initial stages of fossilisation are fair too good. all they need is for a few centimeters of mud to be burried on them and they're for the immidiate moment, then it's just a case of not getting too disturbed, so in a city that is to all intence and purpose dead for now with respect to human activity they arn't likely to be disturbed. In general though the odds are stacked fairly against fossilisation, the fact that we find so many fossils of plant and animal species is a clear piece of evidence to what can only be a veritable mountain of life that has existed on this ball of rock.

There was no biblical flood. There are no fountains of the deep. Water did not just magically appear from the sky in volumes to submerge everest. The bible is not a Scientific textbook unless your are a spaced out intergalactic tramp on some sort of weird drug. And that's not being being offensive that's me pointing out that getting scientific material is about as likely as aegis is of giving birth to flying monkies.

Sir James Hutton back in the 1700's happily debunked the frankly farcical idea that there was a global flood. Even for the time being ignoring the date for the world as derived by radiometric the world needs more than a measly 6000 years for the rock formations that we have to have been formed. Ice cores and varve's in lake deposites show that the world is over 6000 years. However if you have some evidence over than the bible please go ahead and share it, if it's actually real you'd be a scientific wonder and even skeptics would want to speak with you, however i suspect that that is very unlikely. Even in the day's of Pangea when there was but a single continent the environments on the land mass were different, and that's the closest you can get to most of the world covered in water, you've only got one big ocean. however that's not the point if this bit, how do i know that there's never been a global flood? Easy, there is not one single shred of evidence to suggest it! Yet there is a whole he-ouge (huge) phat (fat) mountain to say the oposite! Amazing this geology is, truely amazing.

Did you know that the Stratographic Column doesn't exists as one great big sequence? (For those interested here's a link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geologic_timescale ). Lots of hard working geologists like Willaim Smith (another link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Smith_%28geologist%29 ) dragged themselves from one place to another looking at the rocks and correlating what they saw at one location with another. They had to work out all sorts of things like deformation events, intrusive events, erosional periods and sedimentation periods. "Is there a massive gap between these rock types (known as an unconformity to those of us in the trade) because the rock was there then eroded away or because id didn't exist in the first place?" and "Eeby ekey guv look at the mangled state of this!" may or maynot have been some of the questions they had to ponder. Do you want to know the short version of the outcome of all this work? No flood. who would have believed it? Sir James Hutton for one....and many other famous/sensible people.

Oh and from your little once sentence remark on evolution you clearly don't seem to understand that concept either, and by the look of the rest of your post what is meant when scientists talk about Theories. Now if you don't mind i've got the delightful tast of having to finish off a piece of work for a lecturer that can't mark it due to a bad case of being dead.

Moony

[Topher]

the flooding of Katrina, you expect fossils to be left of that? What about the other floods on the earth in the last 100 years, wheres those fossils? Having something preserved in fossile state isnt very likely when a flood comes and goes in a few days.
Sorry why are you assuming fossils are caused by floods. The evidence that there was not a worldwide flood is not to do with fossils. And the “worldwide flood” was not a few days long.

I did like one thing said, those are the facts, theories explain the facts... This is my point... facts dont explain theorys, facts explain facts.
Please don’t make silly comments.

When you have a number of observations and facts, you create a theory in order to explain it. So it is a fact we are related to Chimpanzees and it is a fact that organisms change over time… and so on. You really cannot deny this scientific evidence. What we then have to do is formulate the best explanation for all these facts. One of them being evolutionary theory, another being “god did it.” Of these two, evolutionary theory is by far the best explanation. In fact, “god did it” doesn’t actually explain anything.

God isnt having you guess, thats why Christians are so hated, they dont accept other explainations. They love all people but dont accept decisions that are contrary to the teachings of God.
Christians would never change there mind? Nor really a surprise, but what would it take for a Christian to actually change their mind?

Also, please explain why are other religion are not as correct as Christianity.

Mr Simpson you dont have free will to change your fate, you have free will in the sence that you have choices. You can go on a killing spree or you can see what happens tomorrow or you can go to your job or go play baseball. Your free will is your choices. YOur fate already written. Only you arent aware of it. The man that missed the plane that crashed, his fate was not to die that day. YOu make choices and others make choices for and against you. YOu drive a road twice a day and then one day you wreck, your free will was every time to drive, but your circumstances changed outside your free will, or your free will didnt know about the flat tire you would get.
But my point is these choices, not matter how insignificant, will alter your life. Each fate it unique therefore each path to it is unique. Even a slight interruption of this path would affect the ultimate end, therefore you cannot have fate.

If you have fate everything you do is predetermined in order for you to reach that fate.

I’ll say it again, with fate you appear to have free choices, but you would always have made them. It was never free will, not matter how much it appears to be.

I like facts, not changing explainations.
The facts remain, but the expiations of these facts may change should a better explanation be formulated.

Finding what the Bible really says as opposed to what false followers make up or pass man made traditons even unknowingly.
The Bible is a man made tradition. It was made by man, it’s traditional.

The other point you said is complete arrogance. Are you saying your interpretation of the Bible is the correct one and anyone who has a different interpretation is a fake? What if they say there interpretation is correct and yours is fake? How do you know your view is the correct one?

The amount of time you spend reading posts and writing them proves that you believe in God.
Logic at a new level!

You remind me of myself because I made your arguements against Christians years ago
Interesting. When was you brainwashed?

I made this thread to refute the false claims and suspicions people have.
Where are these refutations then? Start here and explain this:

GE 1:24-27 Animals were created before man was created.
GE 2:7, 19 Man was created before animals were created.

If you think the Bible is man made you realize that no man, not the most famous poets or philosophers come anywhere near close to the logic and grace in the Bible, they simply use Biblical ideas and construct from them their own. Men did write the Bible, but they were directed by God what to say, they even tell us this in the Bible.
Do you realise you just contradicted your own claim only a few words apart from each other! As for biblical logic, please! The bible is about the most illogical book on the planet.


Finally, why not reply to each persons post, not all in one post?

[Endeavor]

YOUVE ANSWERED YOUR OWN QUESTION!!! thank you!!! it takes millions of years.. and the flood is less than 5,000 years ago.. next question to be resolved ;)
x
Yes many calibrations are inaccurate, they are calibrated to each other, what is the first method that is calibrated against an ACTUAL STANDARD. only the oldest things in histroy can be used as a standard and beyond their age, which is less than 10,000 years old, beyond that is out of logic. If you are wrong by one day in 10,000 years to get the EXACT age of something, which you cant get the age within one exact week of even a humans age !!!
One week in 14 billion years leaves the calibration very distorted the further back you try to use it.
x
Again the point of this thread is to help people find Biblical answers, so dont get mad. You dont have to post here you dont have to read here, but you are welcome to do so :)
x
5 months of flooding is about 60 days.. a few days.. and if God flooded the earth to destroy stuff would he leave stinking rotting carcass or make it nice?
Why did God save those animals and Noah if He was going to make more? Why not just make noah the only person in the world right? Just one person no animals no other people,, thats not logic, and beyond that He did what He wanted to do and He wanted Noah and the animals he brought. You say it's not possible to have the manpower to survive in the ark? Who said manpower, we're talking about God destroying most of the worlds population and sparing a handful, I think if He can create everything He can keep the ark afloat???
x
facts are bits of data until something explains them? what does the rate of falling have to do, if youre on a ledge 10 stories up and you fall you might get a boo boo :) Facts are everywhere, explainations too. facts can be independent and opposite of explainations.
x
YOU HAVE FINALLY ASKED ME A QUESTION PERTAININT TO THE TOPIC AEGIS!!! yay!!! gold star!!! you asked if Jesus told us He was speaking in Parables!!! you assumed no, but here is your Biblical Assumption Resolved!
"I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world' So YES, yes He did tell us He was using parables :)
x
Look you people already know the origin of time and everything so why not let people who dont know everything talk, youre just getting mad and spending too much time in this thread,
x
I was telling you a near amount about the amount of earth excavated and studied and the quite small number of scientists compared to the population. Give or take a few.. and its not much more compared to the mass of earth and the volume of people dead and alive. I still like facts :) Im not for sure on the grain by grain count of dust that has been researched, its like a litre compared to the over 99 percent unresearched, OVER 99 percent : fact
Scientists equal less than 1 percent of the population. Less than half of one percent.. less than half of half and less...
x
I hear you talk about science like it's an absolute fact so why not say it is, because you say it isnt, so why argue what you dont know, becaues you have agreement among a few people? The problem is you are told facts and you dont want them to be facts because you would have to admit not just the potential for error which you do admit, but error that is pointed out.
Its not your fault though, I know you didnt calibrate the methods and didnt invent the methods and data recognition.

[thepunisher]

People talk bad about the United States like we are white Christians attacking and governing the world. But when we spend multi-billions in disaster relief and food for the worlds starving and clothes for the people in poverty and shelter for the homeless and hundreds of thousands of hours in free labor, where is the thanks?


Care to explain what this has to do with anything ? And just to state a fact Endeavour, the US also is involved in more wars than any other developed country on this planet...Afganistan and Iraq, just as examples. Do you know how much money the US apparently spends each week on their War in Iraq ?
2.5 billion $ Do you know what you could do with that money just alone in countries like Africa or the countries involved in the Tsunami ?

Also, its not the "white" (interesting you brought that up actually, how come you distinguish between the white and coloured Christians if god is all loving ?)Christians that are responsible for funding relief to other countries its the government. And just another fact to make you think: Do you know how much money the US wanted to give for relief after the Tsunami last year ? 3.5 million $. They only upped this after protests from other countries to 350 million $. In contrast the UK government gave 75 million pounds (131 million $) additionally to the 75 million pds. already donated by ppl in the country.

So lets not talk about how "generous" the US is, okay. Especially as it doesn't have much to do with your bible teaching either.

Christian

[Moony]

Before you ask, doctors, geologists, meteorologists, astrologers and all types of scientists do not fully know the "why" about their subjects. They can observe data and collect data, but they cannot explain all the data and perdict the future. If we had known exactly what the wheather would be like in 10 days, we would act accordingly but we dont know exactly so we give a suggested forecast which is almost never exact. We dont know what is going to happen tomorrow and we know everything about 4 billion years ago? Everyone cranes their neck to examine it but it is too far out of reach.
x
We have data, yes :) but explainations for all our data are not known by any top scientist non any student of science that wants to teach it here. Evolution is the only field of science where people try to express that they know everything, when the data is limited. You cant go to the end of the universe with the strongest telescope and tell us it is expanding, maybe it expands then goes back in like a big pair of lungs breathing. maybe it goes through 1,000 year cycles? Insufficient study, insufficient time, insufficient data.

Excuse me but i AM a Geologist. What sort of mystical and jumped up why are uyou claiming that i don't know?

Moony

[Strafio]

Strafio, if you gave me two candies and said one is poison and the other is just a sugar mint, I wouldnt choose because I dont like candy that much.
You missed the point. :)
The point is, if you have a choice between two options that seem identical to you then you don't really have a choice between them. Only if someone knows what it is to be/not be a Christian and believe that it is true make a choice between accepting or rejecting God. Otherwise, where's the choice?

So say you have a choice between two identical sweets and you have to eat one of them. (hypothetical situation - about making a choice)
If one is poisoned and the other has the elixir of eternal life, have you made a choice between life and death? Not really. You made a choice between which sweet to guess. So there's only a choice if people trully understand what they're choosing between, and believe that the choice has to be made.

So, if there is a choice between accepting and rejecting God as Christians believe, they're the only ones who can make it.

[Moony]

YOUVE ANSWERED YOUR OWN QUESTION!!! thank you!!! it takes millions of years.. and the flood is less than 5,000 years ago.. next question to be resolved ;)
x
Yes many calibrations are inaccurate, they are calibrated to each other, what is the first method that is calibrated against an ACTUAL STANDARD. only the oldest things in histroy can be used as a standard and beyond their age, which is less than 10,000 years old, beyond that is out of logic. If you are wrong by one day in 10,000 years to get the EXACT age of something, which you cant get the age within one exact week of even a humans age !!!
One week in 14 billion years leaves the calibration very distorted the further back you try to use it.
x
Again the point of this thread is to help people find Biblical answers, so dont get mad. You dont have to post here you dont have to read here, but you are welcome to do so :)
x
5 months of flooding is about 60 days.. a few days.. and if God flooded the earth to destroy stuff would he leave stinking rotting carcass or make it nice?
Why did God save those animals and Noah if He was going to make more? Why not just make noah the only person in the world right? Just one person no animals no other people,, thats not logic, and beyond that He did what He wanted to do and He wanted Noah and the animals he brought. You say it's not possible to have the manpower to survive in the ark? Who said manpower, we're talking about God destroying most of the worlds population and sparing a handful, I think if He can create everything He can keep the ark afloat???
x
facts are bits of data until something explains them? what does the rate of falling have to do, if youre on a ledge 10 stories up and you fall you might get a boo boo :) Facts are everywhere, explainations too. facts can be independent and opposite of explainations.
x
YOU HAVE FINALLY ASKED ME A QUESTION PERTAININT TO THE TOPIC AEGIS!!! yay!!! gold star!!! you asked if Jesus told us He was speaking in Parables!!! you assumed no, but here is your Biblical Assumption Resolved!
"I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world' So YES, yes He did tell us He was using parables :)
x
Look you people already know the origin of time and everything so why not let people who dont know everything talk, youre just getting mad and spending too much time in this thread,
x
I was telling you a near amount about the amount of earth excavated and studied and the quite small number of scientists compared to the population. Give or take a few.. and its not much more compared to the mass of earth and the volume of people dead and alive. I still like facts :) Im not for sure on the grain by grain count of dust that has been researched, its like a litre compared to the over 99 percent unresearched, OVER 99 percent : fact
Scientists equal less than 1 percent of the population. Less than half of one percent.. less than half of half and less...
x
I hear you talk about science like it's an absolute fact so why not say it is, because you say it isnt, so why argue what you dont know, becaues you have agreement among a few people? The problem is you are told facts and you dont want them to be facts because you would have to admit not just the potential for error which you do admit, but error that is pointed out.
Its not your fault though, I know you didnt calibrate the methods and didnt invent the methods and data recognition.

Sorry but what answered question are you driveling on about? I asked no question and attempted to answer none. I can't seem to find a single shred of a reasoable argument to follow in this post and i think i'd have better luck stricking up a conversation with my family pet back home.

Here's a biblical assumption for you.

The World is 6000-8000 years old.

That's not even long enough to cover the time span between the present day and the end of the last glacial period. Which is marked by the Devonian Ice sheet i think....

I think it's time to break out the sheet music and play the reality waltz don't you think?

Moony

[Aegis]

YOUVE ANSWERED YOUR OWN QUESTION!!! thank you!!! it takes millions of years.. and the flood is less than 5,000 years ago.. next question to be resolved ;)

Well, if you accept that as an answer, then you must also accept that by your biblical assumptions, ie young earth, ALL fossilisation to date was actually impossible and therefore that fossils don't really exist.

Either that or you have to have a whole other explanation for fossils. There's another branch of science you'd have to explain away in order for the bible to be literally true.

In any case, fossilisation and sediment layer formation are two different events. A sediment layer can easilt be caused by a large long-term flood, fossils within that layer would take a long time to form.

No no, not resolved, not by a long shot.

Yes many calibrations are inaccurate, they are calibrated to each other, what is the first method that is calibrated against an ACTUAL STANDARD. only the oldest things in histroy can be used as a standard and beyond their age, which is less than 10,000 years old, beyond that is out of logic. If you are wrong by one day in 10,000 years to get the EXACT age of something, which you cant get the age within one exact week of even a humans age !!!
One week in 14 billion years leaves the calibration very distorted the further back you try to use it.

I swear that this paragraph made no sense whatsoever.

In any case, did you read what I said about first order differential equations? You can either accept that the methods used are correct, or you have to believe that the laws of physics changed individually for each dating method in order to create a standardised illusion of age. It doesn't require an object of a known age, just one which gives meaningful results for each of 2 overlapping methods, of which we have more than a few.

Are you seriously claiming here that just because we can't identify something to within a week of its true age, we don't have a good method? Because a method that could date something to within a week over 10000 years would be an amazingly accurate method.Normally you'd be expecting an error of maybe +/- 5% or thereabouts, which is perfectly acceptable as an age measuring tool.

Again the point of this thread is to help people find Biblical answers, so dont get mad. You dont have to post here you dont have to read here, but you are welcome to do so :)

Is this the same guy who was telling me recently not to post in your thread?

5 months of flooding is about 60 days.. a few days..

Have you seriously got this much of a problem with numbers? Every single numerical example you've given so far has been wildly incorrect... Even assuming that a month is only 28 days (i.e. 5 februaries), the 5 months is 110 days. However, since I've just looked this up, I know that genesis states that the waters rose for 40 days and the flood "prevailed on the earth " for 150 days, totalling over half a year for sediment layers to form at the bottom of the water, something we find no evidence for.

and if God flooded the earth to destroy stuff would he leave stinking rotting carcass or make it nice?

If he wanted stuff to be "nice" why would he use something as destructive and "nasty" as a global flood? Again, this makes no logical sense!

Why did God save those animals and Noah if He was going to make more? Why not just make noah the only person in the world right? Just one person no animals no other people,, thats not logic, and beyond that He did what He wanted to do and He wanted Noah and the animals he brought. You say it's not possible to have the manpower to survive in the ark? Who said manpower, we're talking about God destroying most of the worlds population and sparing a handful, I think if He can create everything He can keep the ark afloat???

I'm not arguing about whether he could, I'm arguing about why he would do so. It's illogical to ask someone to build a big boat then render it useless by doing everything for him. It's illogical to ask someone to gather food for the animals then not need it to feed them. It's illogical to save 2 or 7 of every creature if you're just going to recreate them after the destruction.

An all-powerful being should not be so illogical!

facts are bits of data until something explains them? what does the rate of falling have to do, if youre on a ledge 10 stories up and you fall you might get a boo boo :) Facts are everywhere, explainations too. facts can be independent and opposite of explainations.

Facts are the "what" of science. If you step of a ledge, you'll fall. That's a fact.

Theories are the answer to the "whys" of science. "Why do I fall?" "Because the matter that makes up your body is gravitationally attracted to every other bit of matter in the universe by a not-as-yet-fully-understood force"

The understanding of our surroundings comes from theories.

YOU HAVE FINALLY ASKED ME A QUESTION PERTAININT TO THE TOPIC AEGIS!!! yay!!! gold star!!!

Don't patronise you. I've been asking relevant questions for a while, you're just excited because you can finally answer one well.

you asked if Jesus told us He was speaking in Parables!!! you assumed no, but here is your Biblical Assumption Resolved!
"I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world' So YES, yes He did tell us He was using parables :)

Does he specifically identify when he is speaking parables and when he is speaking literally? If not, why should we expect that the author of genesis was speaking literally the whole time, and not giving allegorical stories to help explain things like human sufferent, the nature of god, etc?


I was telling you a near amount about the amount of earth excavated and studied and the quite small number of scientists compared to the population. Give or take a few.. and its not much more compared to the mass of earth and the volume of people dead and alive. I still like facts :) Im not for sure on the grain by grain count of dust that has been researched, its like a litre compared to the over 99 percent unresearched, OVER 99 percent : fact
Scientists equal less than 1 percent of the population. Less than half of one percent.. less than half of half and less...

I don't believe you. You say you like facts, yet you were caught supplying "facts" that you'd conjoured up from thin air to try and bolster your own position. At least apologise for that, then move on. Until then I am personally not going to accept anything you say without research of my own, as to me it now seems that you were caught in a pair of lies that you are unwilling to admit to.

Lying is not a good tactic when trying to either preach, discuss your beliefs, or discuss science.

I hear you talk about science like it's an absolute fact so why not say it is, because you say it isnt, so why argue what you dont know, becaues you have agreement among a few people? The problem is you are told facts and you dont want them to be facts because you would have to admit not just the potential for error which you do admit, but error that is pointed out.
Its not your fault though, I know you didnt calibrate the methods and didnt invent the methods and data recognition.

What facts have I ignored? A bullet point list will do, I'll go through and address all of them.

And like I said, I will not trust any "facts" coming from you without my own research, as you've clearly shown that you're more than happy to exagerate statistics, outright lie about them or use things you've been told without fully understanding (or even checking) them yourself. Not sure which is the case, but it makes you extremely unreliable when it comes to facts, especially since you haven't even admitted that you were wrong and that it was a mistake.

[CosmicFish]

Just my opinion here, but I see God as taking ultimate responsibility for His creation, and the overall choices we make, in the sense that He is the One who came up with the whole plan of redemption. And if you really want to hurt your brain, think about this: He came up with the plan of redemption before there was a need for it. I think there's a fine line though, between acknowledging that God is in control and claiming that God is to blame. That is the whole point of the 'free will' debate. If God made me in such a way that I don't have free will, then yes, I can blame God for the way I am. But if free will means anything, then God gave me the opportunity to make real choices that would alter who/how I am.
The main sticking point for me is "God gave me the opportunity to make real choices that would alter who/how I am". Having the ability to make alterations implies that you have a power outside of God's control. Even if that power is fenced in to keep it within certain limits, it's still, presumably, an unknown quantity. And if it isn't an unknown, then where did it come from?

Predetermined is a temporal word - the word itself is part of the problem and part of the debate. Something 'predetermined' was 'determined before'. You have to ask, "Determined before what?" It wasn't determined before you made the decision, because if you are making real choices, then you are the one determining. And from God's POV, there is no 'before' (or 'after' or 'during', for that matter) but things just 'are'.
Then perhaps "predetermined" is the wrong word to use. Since we're trapped in time our words will reflect this fact. I really want a word that means the same thing but from a standing-outside-of-time perspective. I don't think we have a word to describe quite what I'm trying to get at. Not so much meaning "decided before (in time)" but "decided before (outside of time)"

[Endeavor]

To start with, Mr Simpson, you asked a good question. Genesis doesnt say in the 1st chapter that the animals were made first, it says..."AND...ANd..And... not then then then, Its like saying Mr simpson is smart and nice and a male.
See you were a male before you were smart, but the word "and" can link things not always in order of first appearance.
x
Mr strafio, there isnt a choice in accepting God, you are chosen, you are called, you are not a Christian from birth, but in due time you are called, and many are called, but few chosen. God tells us He made even the people who dont believe.
x
Let me explain this as quick as possible and as simple as possible about how things are calibrated. If we take a ruler that is a foot long. 12 inches. Lets say we decided to measure things against an actual foot hence the name and decided that was the standard so if you said something was 10 feet tall or 100 feet long you would be able to re-create the same measurements. Now lets say we decided a foot wasnt what we wanted, lets say it was too small and we wanted 2 feet to be the standard foot so we change all our measuring tapes and rulers.24 inches now is equal to what 12 once represented. So an object from (------------to-----------) may be 4 inches in one system of measurement and 1 foot in another.
x
Here's some modern actual examples. Temperature. You take the freezing point for water. 32oF and OoC so 32, and 0 are two different numbers for the exact same temperature, it is the numbers that are different.
x
Here is a brief description of how time is calibrated. The positions of the sun and stars relevant to the earth. We have 365 days, and a few hours, for the earth to complete it's rotation around the sun. A year. To calibrate this we have 24 hours in a day. We know this is the same because in most places there are night hours and daytime hours. There are also seasons to calibrate this. In the summer it is a time of more consistant heat. In the winter it is colder. In the fall the leaves change. In the spring flowers and buds emerge, new leaves. If we lost our calanders and clocks we could still tell time by the positions of the stars. You can even travel by the positions of the stars at sea.
x
So we measure time in hours, days, months, and years. This is the calibration of time. Days added, months added, years added. When you calibrate measuring with a different method you cant be sure. You can have 32 degrees and 0 degrees being the exact same temperature, but they are named different and measured differently, but the temperature is the same. The fact is the temperature, and the numbers are the different representations of the same temperature. So when you say the earth is billions of years old youre not really using the calibrated system of measurement that is a fact, you are using a calibrated system to calibrate itself against itself.
x
Mr fish, having power to alter who you are and how you are isnt beyond God. He wants you to be beyond what everyone else expects you to do, just go with the flow. You really dont alter who you are, just what you will do or not, and you dont alter that, you just do it or dont do it.The only thing outside of time is God, and those that He enpowers to live above the boundaries of time at the final end of earth. Time doesnt exist to someone that lives for eternity. Events exist but time is no longer substantial. A day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day. According to the Bible.
x
Back to my last paragraph, you can take the point of freezing 32F or 0F and make your own up, 176L, and all three would still represent the same temperature. So you recognize they are the same you need to have a formula to convert one representation to the other, this is a way to translate the differing numbers. When you do that you have calibration between the different numbers. YOu cant calibrate hours, days, months, years against anything and get 4 billion years regarding the age of the earth because you dont have the days months years recorded to calibrate any other type of measuring beyond 10,000 years. If you say hey we got this cave art, well you dont know the day, month, year, that it was made, if you cant take something you do know and get the same result as the new style of measurement, than the flaws are insidious.
x
Yes, I did make up some numbers to show how little of the earth has been explored and how few scientists there are among the population of earth. But less than 1 percent of the surface of earth has been inspected by scientists not counting the less than 1 percent of the oceans, and underground, and yes scientists make up less than 1 percent of the population of the world. So I apologize for not giving you a definite number, the earth is explored more each day and scientists are created in schools and some of them die, so using your non-absolute method of not being exact I gave a good idea, only mine is upheld against other known measurments, if you have different statistics of how many scientists there are that refute mine or how many acres of land that have been excavated in the name of science against the virgin earth, enlighten us all.
x
I didnt tell anyone not to post. I did write the thread purpose. Non-Christians can ask what the Bible says about something. I didnt want people posting things just to be rude and disrespectful. You dont have to agree, but if you dont agree make your own thread. If you post a thread about vampires and say I welcome questions. People could write, do they really exist, how many people claim they are vampires today, do wooden stakes really kill them, does sunlight hurt them, has anyone seen one.. but you dont go in there and tell them how you believe in werewolves instead of vampires and go on about how werewolves do this and that. You can say you dont believe in them, but you dont need to make waves.
x
And hey, we go through this time and again, I never said fossils didnt exist, I said how you measure their age is in question and if God were cleaning the earth of the unwanted would He just leave the dead bodies of the population of the earth on the land for Noah to see when he stepped off the ark? I dont think God would show Noah hundreds of thousands of dead people and animals, that is illogical. You think Noah being in an ark is illogical and animals being in it is illogical too? What is logical? Would you rather have it a different way, like 1,000 bigger boats in the year 2006 with enough frozen brains and sperm to make a nice population in the near future.
x
God made a handful of men show us that the whole world can be destroyed and the true believers be spared. Do you think that the world was just a mud ball after the flood or could God make the earth new again, full of life and plants and a fresh start? Youre thinking like a human, making assumptions but there is logic if you look a little deeper, and all of a sudden, pow, it all becomes more clearly to you about a multitude of things in your life.
x
Mr strafio, no Christian makes the choice, NON-CHRISTIANS make the choice and they are then Christians when they accept that they believe, non-Christians already believe they just dont know how to go about being free from their guilty conscious. They just dont believe the freedom is so easy so they condemn themselves and others who dont make the choice and when your back is against the wall you try to fight but its more like drowning and you are fighting the people trying to help. And some are just out there pouring more water on you while you are going under.
x
One more time with the calibration discussion, if you cant get the exact age of a known age then youre not calibrated to the standard measure of time.

[Aegis]

Let me explain this as quick as possible and as simple as possible about how things are calibrated. If we take a ruler that is a foot long. 12 inches. Lets say we decided to measure things against an actual foot hence the name and decided that was the standard so if you said something was 10 feet tall or 100 feet long you would be able to re-create the same measurements. Now lets say we decided a foot wasnt what we wanted, lets say it was too small and we wanted 2 feet to be the standard foot so we change all our measuring tapes and rulers.24 inches now is equal to what 12 once represented. So an object from (------------to-----------) may be 4 inches in one system of measurement and 1 foot in another.

Actually this wouldn't be calibration, this would be changing the measuring system. It's referred to as "coding" in statistics, and "conversion" in many other sciences (i.e. converting one unit to another). However, no matter how you measure something, no matter what units the measurement is in, you can convert back to the metric system or any other units you want to use. As such, no matter what units you use to measure time (seconds or half lives for example) you can still get to years if you convert from one unit to another correctly.

This isn't even close to being a valid example. A more valid example here would be comparing, say, a 20 metre ruler with 0.5 metre increments with a 1 metre ruler with 0.01 metre increment, then using both to measure something around a metre long. However, since in this case only one variable is involved in the measurement process (i.e. there is essentially only one measuring method) the two measurements could both be out if somehow distance was stretched locally (i.e. only one breach of the laws of physics). With a decay series, if the two methods overlap there are 2 constants that would need to be altered by two local distortions of the laws of physics, something which is pretty difficult to explain away by any means. Now picture more of these overlapping, until there have to be special cases for the decay of every element used to measure age.

This is why overlapping calibration is accurate. In order to explain it away, you must explain how two methods which scientifically should overlap at a certain age band according to their decay rates can actually still overlap for an object of a much lower age. It's impossible to even begin to explain that.

Here's some modern actual examples. Temperature. You take the freezing point for water. 32oF and OoC so 32, and 0 are two different numbers for the exact same temperature, it is the numbers that are different.

Conversion, not calibration.

Calibration of a thermometer would be to check that, for example, the temperature at which water boils at 1 atmosphere of pressure is 0 Centigrade. As long as that reading is correct, you know that the thermometer is calibrated for that temperature at that pressure.

Here is a brief description of how time is calibrated. The positions of the sun and stars relevant to the earth. We have 365 days, and a few hours, for the earth to complete it's rotation around the sun. A year. To calibrate this we have 24 hours in a day. We know this is the same because in most places there are night hours and daytime hours. There are also seasons to calibrate this. In the summer it is a time of more consistant heat. In the winter it is colder. In the fall the leaves change. In the spring flowers and buds emerge, new leaves. If we lost our calanders and clocks we could still tell time by the positions of the stars. You can even travel by the positions of the stars at sea.

Or we could go with the vibrational frequency of a quartz crystal, or the time taken for light to travel around 3x10^8 metres. Those are much more modern methods of defining a fundamental unit of time than an orbit around the sun.

So we measure time in hours, days, months, and years. This is the calibration of time.

Those are definitions of units, not calibrations. You calibrate a measuring method, not a unit. You can calibrate a clock based on the vibrational frequencies of certain atoms, which is about the most reliable way to determine a second available. But that's not calibrating time, it's calibrating timekeepers.

Days added, months added, years added. When you calibrate measuring with a different method you cant be sure. You can have 32 degrees and 0 degrees being the exact same temperature, but they are named different and measured differently, but the temperature is the same. The fact is the temperature, and the numbers are the different representations of the same temperature. So when you say the earth is billions of years old youre not really using the calibrated system of measurement that is a fact, you are using a calibrated system to calibrate itself against itself.

Because you've not actually being discussing calibration so far, the conclusion there is a non sequitur. In any case, I've already explained to you how two decay series can be calibrated using each other and the predictions made by a good understanding of the decay itself.


Back to my last paragraph, you can take the point of freezing 32F or 0F and make your own up, 176L, and all three would still represent the same temperature. So you recognize they are the same you need to have a formula to convert one representation to the other, this is a way to translate the differing numbers. When you do that you have calibration between the different numbers. YOu cant calibrate hours, days, months, years against anything and get 4 billion years regarding the age of the earth because you dont have the days months years recorded to calibrate any other type of measuring beyond 10,000 years.

Once again this has almost nothing to do with calibration.

If you say hey we got this cave art, well you dont know the day, month, year, that it was made, if you cant take something you do know and get the same result as the new style of measurement, than the flaws are insidious.

When science dates an object, it returns a range of dates that the object will fall into a certain percentage of the time, or a confidence interval. This is a very common technique when there are random elements in an analysis, in this case the fact that the number of atoms decaying in a sample is a probability function rather than a fixed value. However, with a large sample this random error tends to smooth out. By the way, this explains why methods have an upper limit for measuring age: past that limit and the decays become much less predictable due to the smaller radioactive sample.

Yes, I did make up some numbers to show how little of the earth has been explored and how few scientists there are among the population of earth. But less than 1 percent of the surface of earth has been inspected by scientists not counting the less than 1 percent of the oceans, and underground, and yes scientists make up less than 1 percent of the population of the world. So I apologize for not giving you a definite number, the earth is explored more each day and scientists are created in schools and some of them die, so using your non-absolute method of not being exact I gave a good idea, only mine is upheld against other known measurments, if you have different statistics of how many scientists there are that refute mine or how many acres of land that have been excavated in the name of science against the virgin earth, enlighten us all.

You didn't know, so you made stuff up to support your argument. You didn't even make an educated guess, which I could have more easily forgiven, you literally just plucked some numbers out of the air. You're just lucky you didn't pick one order of magnitude higher for one of your denominators or you would have been saying that there were 0.6 scientists on the planet.

The fact that you were so happy to make up statistics to support your position really doesn't make the rest of your arguments sound convincing. In fact, I imagine that you've lost most of your scientific credibility with that little slip alone.

And hey, we go through this time and again, I never said fossils didnt exist, I said how you measure their age is in question

You essentially denied that we had millions of years for fossilisation to occur, then when Moony told you that fossils take millions of years to form, you used that to stop having to talk about the flood forming the fossils. You can't on one hand say that the dating methods are wrong and the earth is young, then turn around and say that because fossils formed milliosn of year before the flood, you don't have to explain how they were formed during the flood. If (and it's a big if) the biblical account is literally true, then the largest event responsible for sedimentation and burial of animals would be the flood, and all other events would pale in comparison. As such, if you take the bible literally, you need to put forward a proposal for how fossils were formed in about 4500 years when geology experts claim that it needs a lot longer.

and if God were cleaning the earth of the unwanted would He just leave the dead bodies of the population of the earth on the land for Noah to see when he stepped off the ark? I dont think God would show Noah hundreds of thousands of dead people and animals, that is illogical.

You think god would happily inform Noah that everything on the planet, friends, extended family, animals, plants, etc is going to die, wipe it all out using a really messy method, then suddenly get squeamish about Noah seeing the aftermath? Now THAT is illogical. If god was going to make everything disappear after the flood anyway, why not just make it all disappear rather than using such a strange and unbelievable method? Yes, disappearing would have been just as unbelievable, but at least it would have been more logical!

You think Noah being in an ark is illogical and animals being in it is illogical too? What is logical? Would you rather have it a different way, like 1,000 bigger boats in the year 2006 with enough frozen brains and sperm to make a nice population in the near future.

Se my disappearing act description above.

God made a handful of men show us that the whole world can be destroyed and the true believers be spared.

Equally effective with the disappearing act, at least that shouldn't leave evidence of its passing anywhere for the evidence to then be completely absent years later. What's the point of such a demonstration if you then proceed to wipe out all the evidence?

Do you think that the world was just a mud ball after the flood or could God make the earth new again, full of life and plants and a fresh start? Youre thinking like a human, making assumptions but there is logic if you look a little deeper, and all of a sudden, pow, it all becomes more clearly to you about a multitude of things in your life.

I did look deeper, and I found it to be indicative of primative tribes beefing up their deity with exagerated stories that they had no idea would actually leave evidence if they really happened.

One more time with the calibration discussion, if you cant get the exact age of a known age then youre not calibrated to the standard measure of time.

You don't know about calibration OR dating methods now. Really, you should do some research next time, because at the moment you have nothing to debate with other than rhetoric, which doesn't stand up well to a little scientific research.

[thepunisher]

Mr strafio, no Christian makes the choice, NON-CHRISTIANS make the choice and they are then Christians when they accept that they believe, non-Christians already believe they just dont know how to go about being free from their guilty conscious. They just dont believe the freedom is so easy so they condemn themselves and others who dont make the choice and when your back is against the wall you try to fight but its more like drowning and you are fighting the people trying to help. And some are just out there pouring more water on you while you are going under.


Guilty conscience ? Thats a joke, right ? I'm, as an atheist supposed to have a guilty conscience because I didn't choose god ? You know Endeavour, have you ever been an atheist or agonist or always been a Christian ? Because I started off being a person of faith-although not through choice but my real parents-and it was my own choice not to have anything to do with god or religion anymore. And sorry to say this, there have been numerous moments in my life that have reinforced me not joining a religion. Including, to be honest, some of the stuff you have written on here.

But do I have a guilty conscience about it ? NO ! Why not ? Because it was my own choice and I know the reasons for doing it. Also, luckily I didn't have someone drilling into me the whole time that its a bad thing not to worship god or tell me that I would go to "hell" for it. Thats the good thing about having adoptive parents that are open-minded (in fact my dad recently decided he also doesn't want anything to do with the church anymore).

Kind of ironic that you actually seem to claim that you're trying to help non-Christians from drowning. Drowning from what ? Not having been brainwashed into believing in god ? That once you have been 'converted' you seem to literally have to suddenly find others to 'convert'. No thanks, I like my life how it is even though its not perfect.

Maybe you should learn to respect that. Instead of going around trying to find victims to teach.

Christian

[Poop-Loops]

The only thing I feel guilty about is wasting my time with Catholicism for the past 18 years.

I have plenty of bushes in my backyard. If God wants to talk to me, he can use them. Otherwise I assume that he either doesn't care about me enough to show me he is real, or doesn't exist. Some Father, huh?

[Moony]

I was going to post a reply to some of the drivel in Endevours last posting, concentrating on some of his/her's more inane points. However Aegis seems to have dealt with it in a satisfactory fashion.

It's not that i don't like people that arn't scientists discussing such things and posing their questions etc it's just that people that have no clue about science and lack even a basic understanding irritate me. Which is why Endevours post goes under Moony's classification as inane drivel. I swear the guy would lose a battle of wits with a stuffed Iguana!

Moony

[Aegis]

I was going to post a reply to some of the drivel in Endevours last posting, concentrating on some of his/her's more inane points. However Aegis seems to have dealt with it in a satisfactory fashion.

It's not that i don't like people that arn't scientists discussing such things and posing their questions etc it's just that people that have no clue about science and lack even a basic understanding irritate me. Which is why Endevours post goes under Moony's classification as inane drivel. I swear the guy would lose a battle of wits with a stuffed Iguana!

Moony
"What's an Iguana?"

[Moony]

"What's an Iguana?"

*collapses on the floor giggling in histerics*

So when are those flying monkeys due Mr A?

Moony

[thepunisher]

"What's an Iguana?"

I think one of those animals that was on board of the ark. Ask god, he will know. He knows everything. ;) :D

Maybe even what happened to my keys ?

:Angel:

Christian

[Moony]

I think one of those animals that was on board of the ark. Ask god, he will know. He knows everything. ;) :D

Maybe even what happened to my keys ?

:Angel:

Christian

You clearly don't get it....

That's it!

Two hours of W.O.O. for you!

That'll teach you......

Moony

[Aegis]

You missed out the "to be fruitloops" bit :p

[Moony]

Indeed. I was adapting to suite the needs of this....

And besides, i now know what to get you for christmas....

10 Rolls of padded wallpaper
1 double labotomy

;)

Moony

[CosmicFish]

Mr fish, having power to alter who you are and how you are isnt beyond God. He wants you to be beyond what everyone else expects you to do, just go with the flow. You really dont alter who you are, just what you will do or not, and you dont alter that, you just do it or dont do it.The only thing outside of time is God, and those that He enpowers to live above the boundaries of time at the final end of earth. Time doesnt exist to someone that lives for eternity. Events exist but time is no longer substantial. A day is like a thousand years and a thousand years is like a day. According to the Bible.
Mate, no offense, but you're not making any sense. I have absolutely no idea what you're saying here!!

"He wants you to be beyond what everyone else expects you to do, just go with the flow."
What?

"You really dont alter who you are, just what you will do or not, and you dont alter that, you just do it or dont do it."
Again, what??

"The only thing outside of time is God, and those that He enpowers to live above the boundaries of time at the final end of earth."
Once again, what???

The impression I'm getting from you is that you're more interested in preaching than debating. Aside from the fact that your statements don't make a whole lot of sense, you're just telling me "this is how it is" with no explanation of why it is, or how you came to know this yourself. That's not helpful to someone who's trying to understand your point of view.

This is why I gave up replying to you. I'm not being nasty, but unless you try to make more effort to make sense you're either going to get torn to pieces by the opposition (which is precisely what's happening right now) or ignored by those who might be inclined to try to take you seriously.

If your reasons for coming here were evangelical then you need to know that your efforts have been counterproductive. For many non-believers, an attitude like yours only reinforces their reasons for steering clear of religion.

Once again, apologies for the overly critical post. I've tried to make the criticism as constructive as possible, however.

[Strafio]

Mr strafio, there isnt a choice in accepting God, you are chosen, you are called, you are not a Christian from birth, but in due time you are called, and many are called, but few chosen. God tells us He made even the people who dont believe.
As you don't believe in eternal suffering for non-Christians, this God isn't too bad. Not quite the absolute source of love and understanding that some people claim him to be though.

Mr strafio, no Christian makes the choice, NON-CHRISTIANS make the choice and they are then Christians when they accept that they believe, non-Christians already believe they just dont know how to go about being free from their guilty conscious.
What do non-Christians already believe in? That life has problems?
That's not the necessary beliefs to be a Christian. You have to believe that the Bible is the word of God, the concept of "sin", that you have sins that need forgiving, that Jesus is the name of the one you should pray to...

You can't make this choice without believing in them.

[tekkengod]

Endeavor, i suggest you look into some discorvery channel programs, the myth of the great flood and the 10 plagues has been disproven


Mr Simpson you dont have free will to change your fate, you have free will in the sence that you have choices.



I like facts, not changing explainations




The amount of time you spend reading posts and writing them proves that you believe in God. All of you, or you would just find an atheist room.


Well aren't you an optimist.

that 2nd statement is just ironic considering your previous posts.

No, you presume too much, it proves that A.How much religion disgust us {me in particular} and B.We enjoy debate

You know, i reccomend a book for you

The End of Faith: Relgion, Terror and the future of reason

by Sam Harris

[Endeavor]

Ok, let's talk about decay. Lets use an example anyone could understand. Death of a human, in their first minutes after death they are still warm, still flexable, still can smell nice, as time elapses in hours they stiffen and their eyes sink, they can be bloated and the contents of their bowels can drain. In more time their skin shrinks.. more time all thats left the skeleton. Now you see how decay changes, gradual at first then a massive almost unrecognizable difference from the original state of the person.
x
So when you try to talk about the decay of radiation or carbon, you dont have a clue how the process of decay can "evolve" during the process of time. Lets take another example of how things change. Water. It rains drops, and they collect. The sun shines and the water turns to steam, a not too exciting change because its such common knowledge, but in reality it is really amazing. So water has evaporated. This is just an example of how things can change. No one has observed an atom, gaseous cloud, or rock and how time effects the changes upon it. Also weather, other elements and unknown circumstances can alter how something is. Look at how scientists view the sun. At one time they said it would become a "red giant" or "black giant" and eventually collapse in on itself.. So now you have the sun as it is today eventually to undergo a very massive totally different outcome than just being what we see today, so you think things can change like that but that the process of time is absolute and never has changed the earth or the elements?
x
Hey, no one can take a human, look at their atoms and tell exactly how old they are. But you can tell how old a human is if you know when they were born. Time was calibrated from the sun and stars and the rotation of the earth. 24 hours in a day, 7 days in a week, 365 and a few hours in a year.
x
Mr strafio, no you cant make that choice if you dont believe, you are chosen or not. If God is eternal why should people that hate Him matter in 20 billion years, so why not destroy them at the end of their chances and love the ones that didnt let the others decieve them and keep them.
x
Most non-Christians believe in God, it is just that they are misled by humans so they dont have that confidence and peace with God. Most non-Christians just blame God and then they have low self esteem because they think not even God loves them, but thats an assumption pushed on us through all time. All you have to do to see it is just read how people respond. Anger and insults and confusion. Im happy and God has blessed me with many things after a self-destructive life which should have left me crucified long ago. Im not here for me Im here for anyone that wants to know to help them decide if man makes the answers to his own questions or if we have a Helper.
x
Mr. Fish, sorry to loose you again :) what I was saying is God doesnt want you to go with the flow, He wants you to overcome the world.
You again asked for something outside of time, God exceeds time, it is not a boundary for Him. And he gives people the power to exceed time by giving them life after this temporary life, or He ends the ones that have hated Him without reverance to the blessings He continually gives them. Mr fish how it is / is what we have, we dont have explainations for everything in life, and you will see many explainations change in your life, First they will tell you this is good and this is bad then the good is bad and the bad good. An example is floride/florine in public water, this was put there to "help prevent tooth decay" but in reality it damages your enamel and can weaken your bones in the process of time and exposure. If you ask me why do people sing I cant give you a definition of why except they are happy or sad or angry or I could say they exhale more air across our larnyx or whatever makes our voices.
x
God tells us many things and also that there are many mysterys, you can observe how many things are done like a spider making a web, but you really dont know why, You could say well to catch insects, but that isnt the best explaination for the marvel. I could tell you God made Adom and Eve but I couldnt tell you how He did it because Im a human and I cant pop a human out of thin air. I dont understand how He made the trees and the stars and how He has put believers and non-believers together. But because I dont know why isnt going to stop me from enjoying the enlightenment and good fortune I have since I realized how precious life is. Dont let any of these other people tell you that you are an ape and just a random nobody in the world because when your mom or dad or children die evolution isnt going to change them into a new person with the same soul, and evolution isnt going to comfort you or protect you. When you realize people are misled and even with good intentions you will want something more in life and you can find it in abundance. If you dont believe you can at least tell yourself, hey maybe since humans make so many mistakes on a daily basis, just maybe they dont really know everything about evolution even if pieces of it are true and the concept is interesting.
x
If the Bible was considered a Fact for over 2,000 years and millions believed it, and it has been proven false, and every religion which is the majority of humans living or dead, if all of them are wrong youre telling me humans have the absolute answer and absolute knowledge of the creation of the earth 14 billion years ago? Youve got to be joking, that is so far fetched it is hard to disprove because you cant prove or disprove what someone says. If you dont believe in God you still know you cant disprove Him, and if you do believe you already have the proof.
x
Mr loops, I agree with you about wasting time with catholisism, because that is a human series of traditions and laws outside the teachings of the Bible.
What I cant seem to get across to most of you is that you cant blame the actions of individuals on the instructions. If you study the Bible you'll be able to seperate catholicism and other additions and subtractions to the Bibles' teachings.
x
Mr punisher I didnt ask you or anyone to join a church. Thats why I posted this thread so people wouldnt be taken in by man kinds traditoins. And like I said about one of your ex girlfriends, you blame God for her wrong doings, and you blame God for the wrong doing of the priest that she cheated with. Here is the example the Bible says, "a person got wounded, robbed and lay to die, a Priest went to the other side of the street and passed, so did another man, and a Samaritan(which the Jews considered unclean and didnt associate with them) the Samaritan helped the man and got him a shelter and gave them money to take care of him and said I'll return and if you need more money I'll give you more" this is where the term good Samiritan comes from, and He further asks "which of these did the will of God"
x
Do you not understand He was saying the preacher was the bad guy? Look at who had Christ crucified, the church. Its all about the people in the world who lie so much and have no love for you. They say they are good people and inside they are very bad. This is a hard lesson to learn about people that they really do lie and say they are really good. Call a thief a thief and he gets mad, call a liar a liar and he gets mad, because of pride. Catch them red-handed and in prison they will almost all lie and say they were set up or didnt do it. And even more than those that lie are the people taken in by others peoples lies, sure she said she would be loyal to you, but it was just a lie, not your fault.
x
yes aegis, changing the measuring system, thats what Im talking about, changing the known measurments of time in history to having a false starting point so far outside the blueprints that there are no blueprints to see. You didnt make the methods of determining time nor can you calibrate time accuratly outside the day, month year method. YOu can calibrate the age of a person to the minute by observing time but you cant take their atoms and tell us their birthday, nor can you explain the world.
x
now you have taken so much time about evolution does anyone have a question they would like to know if the Bible has anything to say about, hence the topic of this thread. Im not here to prove things to you , Im just here to tell you what is told to us all. :)

x
4 star site, yay, please feel free to ask questions, not questions you have already answered. If you dont want to learn I suggest other forums on topic similiar to your thoughts and beliefs.

[CKava]

4 star site, yay, please feel free to ask questions, not questions you have already answered. If you dont want to learn I suggest other forums on topic similiar to your thoughts and beliefs.
Endeavour you would do well to follow your own advice I don't see many people being swayed by your 'lessons' and in fact I think at best all you've managed to do is put 'a few' more people off Christianity not solve any assumptions or answer any questions with answers people havent already heard thousands of times already.

Also please get down off your high horse you think Catholicism isn't true Christianity good for you but there are hundreds of millions of people who disagree and going by how you judge whether information must be true or not (if alot of people believed it for a long time) this means your wrong. Believe it or not your not the only Christian out there who thinks he knows what 'true' Christianity is...

If the Bible was considered a Fact for over 2,000 years and millions believed it, and it has been proven false, and every religion which is the majority of humans living or dead, if all of them are wrong youre telling me humans have the absolute answer and absolute knowledge of the creation of the earth 14 billion years ago? Youve got to be joking, that is so far fetched it is hard to disprove because you cant prove or disprove what someone says. If you dont believe in God you still know you cant disprove Him, and if you do believe you already have the proof.
The nicest way to describe this paragraph is inocoherent babble. Most of the sentences bear only a passing connection to the previous ones and some change subjects mid way through. Please learn how to construct coherent arguments before trying to 'enlighten' people, you will find it helps people take you more seriously. The only bizarre point I can seem to wrest from this babble is that your suggesting that if you say people got things wrong in the past then its silly to believe they could get them right now. This is such a ludicrous argument it is astonishing, thank you for astonishing me.

[pj_goober]

I pity you.

However i hope that your beliefs make you happy, Why do you feel the need to prove and debate them in such a manner though?

You have blind faith in something, fine, whoopdy-do! have a gold sticker and a lollypop..
Believe me when i say that it will not stand up to rational debate. Frankly if it did it wouldn't be blind faith it'd be a demonstration of fact, which it isn't. Accept that people who don't believe are not going to be converted by your pathetic ill-educated attempts at psuedo-science and walk away. You don't have to rationalise your beliefs, it serves no purpose, you demean yourself and other christians y attempting to do so.. No-one with common sense is ever going to be convinced by you but again thats fine. You believe in God in spite of everything, well done have a medal - maybe you'll even get a front row seat in heaven, but for all thats good and sane in the world please stop trying to convince rational sane people with your complete cow excrement attempts at debate.

Thanks.

Just think - Would Jesus really be sitting on an internet forum using made up science to debate with sane logical people? (well no - he'd make up some random proverb that left a suitable amount of room for misunderstanding.. Well ACTUALLY he'd probably have said something indecipherable in Aramaeic eaten a barbequed rat and shouted at some desicples to leave him alone - then hundreds of years later some scribe somewhere made up a proverb and pretended that Jesus said it ..but thats not the point...So the question you need to ask is "what would [the guy pretending to be] Jesus [want me to] do [when he wrote the bible nearly a millenium after Jesus died]? )

[Moony]

*~snip~*

I think it's fair to say that even Hovind manages more science than you. And I wouldn't trust Hovind to spell the word Science without a few hours of coaching, some promt cards on hand and a dictionary on standby.....

For your own sake stop posting your watered down version of pseudo-science and go pick up some real science textbooks and have a read befor you try posting again.

Moony

[Poop-Loops]

Endeavor cares more about "being right" than seeing the truth.

You are saying science is far fetched, but the BIBLE is believable? Wake up, man.

[Aegis]

Ok, let's talk about decay. Lets use an example anyone could understand. Death of a human, in their first minutes after death they are still warm, still flexable, still can smell nice, as time elapses in hours they stiffen and their eyes sink, they can be bloated and the contents of their bowels can drain. In more time their skin shrinks.. more time all thats left the skeleton. Now you see how decay changes, gradual at first then a massive almost unrecognizable difference from the original state of the person.
x
So when you try to talk about the decay of radiation or carbon, you dont have a clue how the process of decay can "evolve" during the process of time.

There's nothing fundamentally different about the decay of a human right after death to the point where a skeleton forms. Only the extent of the decay is different, and this is what forensic scientists can use to work out how long a body has been dead for.

Similar argument with radioactive material. We know how the decay process works, we've been observing radioactive decay for many years, and not once have we seen anything which leads us to believe that the process is capable of changing. As a matter of fact, when you have a collection of unstable atoms in a stable chemical bond, it's pretty hard to even come up with a plausible explanation for how things could be different in the past. This then gets on to needing to explain how different methods can change and still give corresponding results, something I notice that you have completely failed to address so far, leading me to believe that once again you aren't interested in facts, just in trying to be right.

Lets take another example of how things change. Water. It rains drops, and they collect. The sun shines and the water turns to steam, a not too exciting change because its such common knowledge, but in reality it is really amazing.

Not really. Diffusion isn't that amazing, it's just a general principle allowing material to pass across a solid or liquid interface with a gas, with molecules tending to flow from high to low concentrations due to somewhat random motion paths and also the amount of available energy. What's so amazing about that?

So water has evaporated. This is just an example of how things can change. No one has observed an atom, gaseous cloud, or rock and how time effects the changes upon it.

Time isn't some mystical force able to completely change the laws of physics you know. In any case, this is a great time for using Occam's Razor. Scientifically, if you have 2 explamaions for a phenomenon, then the one requiring the fewest unjustified assumptions/entities is more often accepted. In this case we know a lot about radioactivity and how the decay chains work, so we use it as a method for looking into the past. Now, we can either assume that the laws of physics that we've never observed to be false were somehow changed in the past (but not uniformly, changed specifically for each decay series, sometimes several times) or we can accept that the laws of physics haven't been tailored to make the earth and objects on it appear older than they are.

Long and short of it, if you don't have some evidence that the laws of physics were different in the past, you can't use it to support an argument for decay series being different in the past. Even if you had such evidence, you'd have to then explain how multiple methods would be affected individually by these changes rather than uniformly.

Also weather, other elements and unknown circumstances can alter how something is. Look at how scientists view the sun. At one time they said it would become a "red giant" or "black giant" and eventually collapse in on itself.. So now you have the sun as it is today eventually to undergo a very massive totally different outcome than just being what we see today, so you think things can change like that but that the process of time is absolute and never has changed the earth or the elements?

That's again just astrophysics and cosmology. Rather than harp on about what a major change this is, why not actually look into the processes by which this happens. I don't know for certain, but I suspect the changes occur when the star switches fuel ratios drastically by running out of light elements for fusion reactions (Hydrogen, Helium, etc) and therefore demonstrates different properties when other elements are forming. Not exactly difficult to hazard a guess as to why stars might change.

Hey, no one can take a human, look at their atoms and tell exactly how old they are. But you can tell how old a human is if you know when they were born. Time was calibrated from the sun and stars and the rotation of the earth. 24 hours in a day, 7 days in a week, 365 and a few hours in a year.

Again, you messed up your terminology after much correction. Timepieces are calibrated, time itself is measured. And yes, originally timepieces were calibrated by the motion of the earth, but it's more efficient now to calibrate them by other methods,. as I already spent some time telling you.

Not being able to correctly work out the age of a human using radiometric dating isn't exactly a problem for science. First of all, I'm not aware of any active radioisotopes that we pick up as kids and never exchange with the environment, secondly I'm not immediately aware of any radioisotopes with a short enough half life to be used as such without also being lethal.

Methods have their limitations, but this isn't news to science. Scientists know their methods extremely well, including where the limitations are and how accurate an age estimate is.

Most non-Christians believe in God, it is just that they are misled by humans so they dont have that confidence and peace with God. Most non-Christians just blame God and then they have low self esteem because they think not even God loves them, but thats an assumption pushed on us through all time. All you have to do to see it is just read how people respond. Anger and insults and confusion. Im happy and God has blessed me with many things after a self-destructive life which should have left me crucified long ago. Im not here for me Im here for anyone that wants to know to help them decide if man makes the answers to his own questions or if we have a Helper.

Do you have evidence that most non-christians believe in god? I suspect that if you include Islam and Judaism, that might just about be the case, but most of the rest just genuinely don't believe in the same god as you, if they believe in any. Rather than speaking for them though, why don't you cough up either som evidence or some statistics, or even a plausible explanation for what you're saying? After all, you like facts that much, right?

An example is floride/florine in public water, this was put there to "help prevent tooth decay" but in reality it damages your enamel and can weaken your bones in the process of time and exposure.

Evidence? Or is this just something that you believe again, and are therefore going to pass off as fact regardless of the real evidence? You like facts, let's see some!


God tells us many things and also that there are many mysterys, you can observe how many things are done like a spider making a web, but you really dont know why, You could say well to catch insects, but that isnt the best explaination for the marvel. I could tell you God made Adom and Eve but I couldnt tell you how He did it because Im a human and I cant pop a human out of thin air. I dont understand how He made the trees and the stars and how He has put believers and non-believers together. But because I dont know why isnt going to stop me from enjoying the enlightenment and good fortune I have since I realized how precious life is. Dont let any of these other people tell you that you are an ape and just a random nobody in the world because when your mom or dad or children die evolution isnt going to change them into a new person with the same soul, and evolution isnt going to comfort you or protect you. When you realize people are misled and even with good intentions you will want something more in life and you can find it in abundance. If you dont believe you can at least tell yourself, hey maybe since humans make so many mistakes on a daily basis, just maybe they dont really know everything about evolution even if pieces of it are true and the concept is interesting.

Biologically we are apes. I've mostly been avoiding talking about evolution at your request in this thread. Here's a warning: I probably know more about evolution than I do about radioactive dating, so if you start coming out with silly "facts" about evolution, I'm going to correct them.

For example, the theory of evolution says nothing about a human soul or the relationship with god. If a god exists and created the universe knowing that eventually humans would arise through purely natural processes, then first of all that's much more impressive sounding than having to actively create everything, and secondly it doesn't preclude the introduction of a soul when the first truly human population appeared.


If the Bible was considered a Fact for over 2,000 years and millions believed it, and it has been proven false, and every religion which is the majority of humans living or dead, if all of them are wrong youre telling me humans have the absolute answer and absolute knowledge of the creation of the earth 14 billion years ago?

Nope. Current science shows it to be at least 4.6 billion years old. Not 14 billion. The fact that the bible has been believed for so many years means absolutely nothing, especially when you consider that most of the believers over the years have known precisely nothing about science, while others remained woefully ignorant, sometimes on purpose. Now that we're entering the age where scientific education is becoming much more available to anyone who wants it, fewer people are left believing the bible literally. Most have instead opted to support both science and christianity, and that's fine by pretty much everyone.


Youve got to be joking, that is so far fetched it is hard to disprove because you cant prove or disprove what someone says. If you dont believe in God you still know you cant disprove Him, and if you do believe you already have the proof.

Science doesn't deal in proofs.
Science doesn't accept the burden of proof/evidence for negatives.
Most atheists adopt the scientific approach to investigation.

You can't disprove invisible pink unicorns or the flying spaghetti monster either, but I don't see a case for believing in them, or accepting that they changed things in the past.


yes aegis, changing the measuring system, thats what Im talking about, changing the known measurments of time in history to having a false starting point so far outside the blueprints that there are no blueprints to see. You didnt make the methods of determining time nor can you calibrate time accuratly outside the day, month year method. YOu can calibrate the age of a person to the minute by observing time but you cant take their atoms and tell us their birthday, nor can you explain the world.

For the last time, look up some scientific definitions before you try to argue science with me. Specifically look up calibration, conversion and units. Then come back and count the errors just in this paragraph!

In any case, you still haven't explained the convergance of methods.

now you have taken so much time about evolution does anyone have a question they would like to know if the Bible has anything to say about, hence the topic of this thread. Im not here to prove things to you , Im just here to tell you what is told to us all. :)

I've still barely mentioned evolution, and only to correct you.

[thepunisher]

Endeavor cares more about "being right" than seeing the truth.

You are saying science is far fetched, but the BIBLE is believable? Wake up, man.

Thats the thing that worries me Poop-Loops, if Endeavour actually doesn't even go as far as being able to accept science as prove to the contrary of the bible than how badly has he been brainwashed ? Thats the thing that annoyed me on another religion thread before, a person actually using the bible as facts , even though the scientific prove has been there for years. He basically reinforces one reason I avoid religions which is that sometimes ppl get so brainwashed in believing something they don't even accept true evidence as the truth anymore. Its frankly scary ! :eek:

My ex turned out that way. First she was able to use logic when she was talking, a year later suddenly god was "prove" for everything, from the ignition key in her car to the reason her bf (aka husband now)was in iraq.

Christian

[Strafio]

Mr strafio, no you cant make that choice if you dont believe, you are chosen or not. If God is eternal why should people that hate Him matter in 20 billion years, so why not destroy them at the end of their chances and love the ones that didnt let the others decieve them and keep them.
No reason why he shouldn't, but I was told that God was the ultimate source of love and loved everyone. Perhaps I was mis-informed again.
Besides, who hates God?
Sure, some people might but they're hardly all the non-Christians.

Most non-Christians believe in God, it is just that they are misled by humans so they dont have that confidence and peace with God. Most non-Christians just blame God and then they have low self esteem because they think not even God loves them, but thats an assumption pushed on us through all time.
You make heavy assumptions about non-Christians here.
If non-Christians were really like that then maybe people would see Christianity as the only truthful religion, but it isn't so we don't.

All you have to do to see it is just read how people respond. Anger and insults and confusion. Im happy and God has blessed me with many things after a self-destructive life which should have left me crucified long ago. Im not here for me Im here for anyone that wants to know to help them decide if man makes the answers to his own questions or if we have a Helper.
They've responded to you and the "religion" you are preaching.
I don't think any of them have anything against God. Some of them are even Christian. (Punisher is Christian but that's not what I meant! ;)) Even the anti-Christian crew on here don't hate God, they just don't believe he exists and hate the fact that people use the "myth" to confuse, manipulate and control people (although I think they're a bit naive in this - making religion a scapegoat for all the religions in the world).

Christianity claims to know the God of all people, who loves all people, but his plans are only for Christians. That seems fairly contradictory to me...

[thepunisher]

Mr strafio, no you cant make that choice if you dont believe, you are chosen or not. If God is eternal why should people that hate Him matter in 20 billion years, so why not destroy them at the end of their chances and love the ones that didnt let the others decieve them and keep them.

Who says I hate god Endeavour ? If I don't believe in him how can I hate him ? Whos him ? Maybe you should apply logic to what an athesist is about Endeavour: atheists don't believe in god, most of the time because there is no prove he is around. BECAUSE we don't believe in god we also don't believe in hell or heaven or ever going there. Hence logically god may condemn as there according to you but since we don't believe in god, why should we believe we go to hell ? Also, this above just shows one of these idiotic views I've picked up so many times. God chooses ppl, god makes sure these ppl get their chances BUT god actually loves everyone. Makes me wonder if god has a screw loose or something.


4 star site, yay, please feel free to ask questions, not questions you have already answered. If you dont want to learn I suggest other forums on topic similiar to your thoughts and beliefs.

Actually, its gone down to three stars Endeavour and I wouldn't be surprised because the way you're handling the conversations on here trying to preach and ignoring what everyone else is saying to you it probably will go down to two soon.

Also, mr. teacher: Who says we even want to learn from you ? Did you designate yourself now as the official bible teacher of MAP or something ? We didn't ask for you to post something on here or to preach. Seriously makes me wonder what you do when you're away from the internet. I can imagine you walking around with a speakerphone and trying to preach to ppl on the street.

Christian

[Capt Ann]

Similar argument with radioactive material. We know how the decay process works, we've been observing radioactive decay for many years,....The process of radioactive decay is an extremely well-modeled, predictable process. For different time scales, you can use carbon dating, argon dating, and several in-between materials. The radioactive decay process hasn't changed, unless someone would argue that the fundamental laws of physics have changed.

The one area where there is legitimate reason for debate about or critique of radioactive dating methods is in the assumption of a steady-state of the amount of the radioactive isotope present. For insatnce, if in the past the earth's atmosphere were significantly thinner, or significantly thicker (and there is some amount of credible biological evidence for this), then the starting percentage of various radioactive isotopes would be different than they currently are. However, any attempt to make corrections for this, or to say that radioactive dating methods are incorrect, should start by modeling exactly how the atmospheric conditions were differnt, and to what extent this affected the atmospheric constituents.

regarding flourides in water affecting bone densityEvidence? Or is this just something that you believe again, and are therefore going to pass off as fact regardless of the real evidence? You like facts, let's see some!This is a topic I was planning on doing a paper on, a long time ago (and it has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand, but I thought it was really interesting, and you brought it up, so I'll bore you with the details ;) )

Flouridation in drinking water helps prevent tooth decay through a reaction that alters the crystal structure of the exterior of the tooth. Absorbed fluoride ions replace calcium ions in the tooth material, creating a surface that is stronger, but much more brittle. The two ions are of differnt sizes, which changes the stress in the surface, and changes the amount of space left in the structure. It was a long time ago that I looked into this, but I *think* I recall that the fluoride eventually leached out of the structure, leaving neither flouride nor calcium in the vacated sites.

Osteoporosis occurs when calcium ions leach out of bone material, leaving empty spaces. The resulting structure is far less dense, and has less ability to support compressive stress.

Based on my (limited) review of the literature at the time, there had been no studies, data, or analysis of the possible correlation between flouridation levels in drinking water and onset of osteoporosis. However, there is extensive data on osteoporosis (age, gender, location), and it could be possible to correlate this, using only subjects who have stayed in the same location for prolonged periods, with local flouridation levels in water.

So, in answer to Aegis' comment: no, at this time there is no evidence linking flouridation to osteoporosis. However, it hasn't been thoroughly examined to exclude the possibility, and there is chemical reason to consider it as a possible factor.

[Endeavor]

The fact that science doesnt have absolute knowledge justifies questioning it. The fact that the Bible has absolute knowledge makes certain people angry because they dont want people to do evil and die and face punishments.
x
Yes timepieces are calibrated, computers, watches, clocks. We got you there, we understand. Youre responding to a responce you thought in your head and was never told to you by me. I said those things were calibrated in regards to the position of the celestrial constants. These things are in constant check, the seasons verify this: thus a year is constructed of examples of the seasons in case you loose your calandar or stop measuring time you can pick it up through observation.
x
I never said if people were wrong in the past no one could be right today, I said if people could be wrong in the past then today new things could also be wrong.
x
If you know about forensic science then you could also know that many factors can prohibit the ability to determine the time of death, like HEAT and COLD and SAL****ER submersion, just to name a few. I agree they have alot of input and see similiar examples of known death times and can observe decay against those but there is still room for error.
x
Again for probably the millionith time this year Christians dont repel all science. We question absolute knowledge. We accept chemical change, process in which plants make food, medical science, and most things that are part of life and can contribute to making things better. The bad among the good is what everyone argues about. You can agree with the concepts and instructions of the Bible like, love thy neighbor and dont kill or steal but you question the history. Christians agree with most things in science except the history.
x
If evolutionary scientists admit there is room for error, you cant really preach that religion, because it is the religon of time worship. Just like many other religions this type of brain washing is claimed to be the true way. Just because methods were made to compliment each other and explain each other they do not give exact answers against things that are proven. If you take someone dead on July 14th 1956 and try to measure their carbon or atomic vibration or whatever method you want to use, you will NOT get the date of 49 years and roughly 4 months since this person died unless you use the calander. So if you know exactly when this person died through the calander and know that about 50 years have passed from 1956 to 2006 then you can date how long they have been dead. And if you knew when they were born lets say 1856, you would know they were 100 years old when they died, and neither how long they have been alive nor how long it has been exactly since they were dead cannot be determined by your uncalibrated methods, that is they have not been calibrated against the concept of hours days months and years, which are measurments but calibrated measurements. A day has 24 hours, the sun can set earlier and later in cycle due to position but the day can still be measured at 24 hours and the calibration is proven when the seasons change and the sun sets earlier or later, this is longer periods of light and shorter periods of light, longer periods of darkness and shorter... but the same 24 hour cycle which compliments it self each year.
x
Mr strafio, mr punishers name is Christian I think, he is not a Christian because he doesnt accept Christ. and people do hate God because they think life is unfair, thats why people can say it is illogical because they want everyone to be happy and live forever, me too!!! but its not that way so we deal with the way it is and we can be cold or we can give it all we got to push for the day when it is all good. We have this hope.
x
What I dont understand is how people can say they dont believe in God and dont want to be preached to, yet they spend hours and days and part of their life reading these posts and responding to them. If they wanted to further their education in science they could devote their time to it instead of being preached to. I dont devote my time to other threads on MAP that are anti-Christian because I dont need anything they say to explain to me things I already know. So why do people come here, not to teach beacause it is quite obvious to anyone it isnt accomplishing anything. When someone says there is not absolute truth in science and if there was science wouldnt continue investigating they would already know.
x
If someone doesnt want to be preached to or hear anything I write you have got to be the local town idiot if you keep coming to my thread. I dont seek you out, you come to my thread. I want you here but you are the student because science doesnt hold absolute answers, so at least you could admit you are a student of science because you want absolute answers even if those answers arent sought from religion you want answers. But most of you think you already have the answers and can retalliate saying I think I have the answers, but that is not the point.
x
Mr punisher I preach to people who want the knowledge, look at the first post in this thread and the name of the thread. The purpose of this thread is to tell people what the Bible says about the questions they have. Very simple:
You have already explained so much to me that has magnified my faith and you were trying to do something else. Like saying your girlfriend and a priest did you wrong and blaming religion for it. This yet again confirms what the Bible says about certain preachers, "listen to what they say, but dont do after their works" Jesus said these preachers were like "graves which you dont see and youre standing on them" He actually called them sepulchers but I quoted a translation calibrated to that.
x
Mr strafio most people on here havent responded to me, and I have preached little on religion because the topic has swayed to assumptions in science. People mostly have responded to their own beliefs on history and evolution instead of asking questions about what the Bible says. If you want to know the age of the earth and if evolution is how man came from an ape and is an ape then I could say less than 10,000 years old and no, man was made before apes, then we would ask different questions, but people insist on being right and then say everyone else that doesnt agree with them insists on being right. So who is right when everyone says they are right? Cannibals think they are right, serial killers think they are right, people who worship statues think they are right, people who think a cow is sacred think they are right.
x
Mr punisher, did you love your girlfriend that turned on you? If you did why did she turn on you? Then ask yourself again if God loves everyone and how many times they have turned on God. We love God becaue He first loved us and has forgave us for turning to our own ways. If you had a teenage child and you told them not to party too hard and they went out and got drunkand wrecked although they disobeyed you ,you would visit them in the hospital. So love isnt conditional but it is magnified when your kid learns a lesson and says they are sorry because they now know you told them not to party too hard for their own good. So God tells us things to protect us from AIDS and being in trouble with the Police and to keep us from being thought of as liars and theives and not be trusted people reflecting their morals obtained from His teachings. If you dont believe the history you can at least see the good in the morals.
x
The lessons in the Bible dont just identiy what to do and what not to do, but they give in detail elaborate thoughts that people have admitted in life that didnt know the Bible explained. Proof of this is the thougts I had not knowing what the Bible said about them, and proof that other people have said things and done things not knowing what the Bible said that I knew all along. Like people that get jealous of the things you have and act like they care about you while they really want what you have.
x
Mr punisher, you are not an expert scientist nor is anyone in this thread that has posted. There are students of science but they did not construct the methods they talk about nor their own methods of determining the age of the earth. No one here has run their own tests or anyone elses tests and gotton the conclusion that the universe if 14 bililion years old. What did they step out on the edge of the Universe? And the people here that have studied science for years have admitted their knowledge is not absolute fact. They say this because of examples like I give, you take something you know the exact age of within the last 10,000 years and try to date these objects/people and you cant get an exact date that is equal to the true date which is absolute knowledge :)
x
If science was 10,000 years in study you still couldnt tell the age of the universe. Do you think we know all the elements in the universe. Do you think it is possible that a wave of radiation unknown to scientists exists in the universe. Do you think radio waves and energy like that released in an atomic bomb could change anything on the earth. If you go to the moon and take a speck of dust and come back to the Atlantic ocean and put that dust in, althought with the naked eye you cant see it, but the ocean really rises a billioneth of a billioneth of a billioneth of an inch (give or take) So how much more could a massive change effect the earth and the elements?
x
Anyone who thinks they know everything about the universe when they dont even know everything about the human body or the oceans or the mountains or North America or China or German Shepards or lizards or rain or 2,000 years ago, YOU EXPECT ME TO BELIEVE THEY KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT THE ORIGIN OF EARTH AND THE UNIVERSE??? youre kidding me, and its very painful to think you feel this way.
x
Quickly aegis, we DONT know how radioactive decay works,and we have not studied it for many years, Have we studied it for over 500 years? and you want to compare that speck of time against 14 billion years, and tell me you know it decays the same no matter what else in the universe acts upon it?
What happenes when the decay is complete if it is changing what will its' end result become or will it just fade to black. You cant take something and have it just dissappear, it just transforms, like people, we eat plants/animals/fruit and eventually die and our bodies feed bugs, plants animals and the plants/animals insects are eaten or die and other things feed on them and it is a cycle, everything we eat existed in another form thousands of years ago,
x
If the universe was just gaseous clouds and then the big bang just happened for nor reason, you could say that other great changes could happen. I mean if life began because of this bang and people and animals are the result of it on earth than you could say other mysterious things could happen in the universe even on earth

[thepunisher]

The fact that science doesnt have absolute knowledge justifies questioning it. The fact that the Bible has absolute knowledge makes certain people angry because they dont want people to do evil and die and face punishments.

You know Endeavour, you have a way of twisting words just so it fits right for you. No, the bible doesn't have absolute knowledge, thats why it gets questioned. And no, science doesn't have absolute knowledge either but the answers are a bit more believable than anything the bible claims. Not only that Endeavour, they are provable. Wake up, smell the roses, Endeavour, its called reality !


Mr strafio, mr punishers name is Christian I think, he is not a Christian because he doesnt accept Christ. and people do hate God because they think life is unfair, thats why people can say it is illogical because they want everyone to be happy and live forever, me too!!!

Seems your brain is a bit slow today Endeavour. Strafio was playing a word game using my Name, which has happened lots of times in my life actually. My Name is Christian and no, even though I grew up as a Christian catholic it was my own choice to become an atheist. And it has nothing to do with life being unfair that atheists choose not to accept Christianity, it has to do with the limited logic thats in it.


Mr punisher, did you love your girlfriend that turned on you? If you did why did she turn on you? Then ask yourself again if God loves everyone and how many times they have turned on God.

Care to tell me where this question is leading to Endeavour ? Yes, I loved my girlfriend, in fact I loved her probably more than she ever did me. It wasn't me who cheated on her, remember ? And just to correct you on something: She chose god at the time she met the cheater. So the only thing that proves to me is that he was an incredibly good preacher and that she was naive enough to believe every word he said. And if you are implying I lost my gf because I turned on god you are probably the biggest bastard I met since I met this preacher who she cheated on me with. Get a life !


Mr punisher, you are not an expert scientist nor is anyone in this thread that has posted. From what I read here you aren't an expert scientist at all. And at least two of the ppl that have answered on here are experts in their fields that have directly to do with science. Would do you some good to read up on things yourself Mr. Endeavour before you start getting into another science conversation with them. As for me, I'm not an expert but I used to have huge interest in Biology/Physics and animals and nature while in high school and uni so I do know about the basics of our evolution. And my dad has a Phd in Chemistry. Looks like you are way out of your league here.

Christian

[Moony]

The fact that science doesnt have absolute knowledge justifies questioning it. The fact that the Bible has absolute knowledge makes certain people angry because they dont want people to do evil and die and face punishments.

Science doesn't deal in absolutes. And if the bible is so absolute then how come science has proven it to be incorrect on many counts? What heinus acts people chose to do or not do has nothing to do with a book that is alledgedly written about a being that may or may not exist.


Yes timepieces are calibrated, computers, watches, clocks. We got you there, we understand. Youre responding to a responce you thought in your head and was never told to you by me. I said those things were calibrated in regards to the position of the celestrial constants. These things are in constant check, the seasons verify this: thus a year is constructed of examples of the seasons in case you loose your calandar or stop measuring time you can pick it up through observation.


What are you waffling on about?


I never said if people were wrong in the past no one could be right today, I said if people could be wrong in the past then today new things could also be wrong.


You are correct, people can be wrong today as readily as in the past. However science is very thorough in spotting material that is incorrect and usually jumps on it gleefully. Look at the guy that thought he'd got away with his fake evidence of human cloning in south korea.


If you know about forensic science then you could also know that many factors can prohibit the ability to determine the time of death, like HEAT and COLD and SAL****ER submersion, just to name a few. I agree they have alot of input and see similiar examples of known death times and can observe decay against those but there is still room for error.


There is some rull for error your correct, but it's down to the number of minutes etc and fairly decent estimates of time of death are given and they are accepted because they are reliable. Me thinks your trying to build a strawman here


Again for probably the millionith time this year Christians dont repel all science. We question absolute knowledge. We accept chemical change, process in which plants make food, medical science, and most things that are part of life and can contribute to making things better. The bad among the good is what everyone argues about. You can agree with the concepts and instructions of the Bible like, love thy neighbor and dont kill or steal but you question the history. Christians agree with most things in science except the history.


Evolutionary Theory was constructed using the same Scientific methods as the things that you accept. So you either accept everything produced with that method or rehect everything. There's no middle ground cos it doesn't sit with your book of faerie stories.


If evolutionary scientists admit there is room for error, you cant really preach that religion, because it is the religon of time worship. Just like many other religions this type of brain washing is claimed to be the true way. Just because methods were made to compliment each other and explain each other they do not give exact answers against things that are proven. If you take someone dead on July 14th 1956 and try to measure their carbon or atomic vibration or whatever method you want to use, you will NOT get the date of 49 years and roughly 4 months since this person died unless you use the calander. So if you know exactly when this person died through the calander and know that about 50 years have passed from 1956 to 2006 then you can date how long they have been dead. And if you knew when they were born lets say 1856, you would know they were 100 years old when they died, and neither how long they have been alive nor how long it has been exactly since they were dead cannot be determined by your uncalibrated methods, that is they have not been calibrated against the concept of hours days months and years, which are measurments but calibrated measurements. A day has 24 hours, the sun can set earlier and later in cycle due to position but the day can still be measured at 24 hours and the calibration is proven when the seasons change and the sun sets earlier or later, this is longer periods of light and shorter periods of light, longer periods of darkness and shorter... but the same 24 hour cycle which compliments it self each year.


Evolution is not a fricken religion! Granted a non-scientist may have to but in a bit of 'faith' as it where that the scientists are not lieing to them but that is far from Evolution being a religion. Religions give people guidence to lead a good life and some rules to live by and comfort in bad times, Evolution does NONE of that.

And your chaff on days is wrong, a day is not spot on 24 hours, if it was we wouldn't have to factor in an extra day in every four years. Oh and we'v got good evidence that shows that the length of a day has changed over time, so the length of a day isn't constant.


Mr strafio, mr punishers name is Christian I think, he is not a Christian because he doesnt accept Christ. and people do hate God because they think life is unfair, thats why people can say it is illogical because they want everyone to be happy and live forever, me too!!! but its not that way so we deal with the way it is and we can be cold or we can give it all we got to push for the day when it is all good. We have this hope.


Hope isn't a god given thing, everyone has it. Like i hope one day you might read a text book or two...but is that likely to happen?


What I dont understand is how people can say they dont believe in God and dont want to be preached to, yet they spend hours and days and part of their life reading these posts and responding to them. If they wanted to further their education in science they could devote their time to it instead of being preached to. I dont devote my time to other threads on MAP that are anti-Christian because I dont need anything they say to explain to me things I already know. So why do people come here, not to teach beacause it is quite obvious to anyone it isnt accomplishing anything. When someone says there is not absolute truth in science and if there was science wouldnt continue investigating they would already know.


One reason why read these threads and devote time to replying to them is because of the tosh that is peddled as science by those that don't understand what they're on about and try to use that to argue against science. It's frightenly easy some days. And even if the likes of you don't bother to listen and look into the correct science our efforts are not wasted as others benifite from such postings.

And for the record i'm an Agnostic not an Atheist, on some days i'm more of a believer and on some days not.


If someone doesnt want to be preached to or hear anything I write you have got to be the local town idiot if you keep coming to my thread. I dont seek you out, you come to my thread. I want you here but you are the student because science doesnt hold absolute answers, so at least you could admit you are a student of science because you want absolute answers even if those answers arent sought from religion you want answers. But most of you think you already have the answers and can retalliate saying I think I have the answers, but that is not the point.


How can i look like a town idiot when i've repeatedly egged you in the face? Really, honestly, you've posted less science than can be found in a mouldy copy of the beano and your calling me the idiot? Pot/Kettle syndrome me thinks. No one does science for absolute answers, we do it for facts and to develope our understanding of the natural world. If i wanted absolutes i'd pick up a religious book and leaf through it for the bits that seemed reasonable.


Mr punisher I preach to people who want the knowledge, look at the first post in this thread and the name of the thread. The purpose of this thread is to tell people what the Bible says about the questions they have. Very simple:
You have already explained so much to me that has magnified my faith and you were trying to do something else. Like saying your girlfriend and a priest did you wrong and blaming religion for it. This yet again confirms what the Bible says about certain preachers, "listen to what they say, but dont do after their works" Jesus said these preachers were like "graves which you dont see and youre standing on them" He actually called them sepulchers but I quoted a translation calibrated to that.


Oh my sweet jesus.....what sort of waffle was that? And how in gods name can you calibrate a translation???

Can you tell me what the bible says about:
Cold Fusion
Organ Transplant
Weather Prediction
Developing an Economically stable Nation
The physical constants that drive/dictate Planetary motion


Mr strafio most people on here havent responded to me, and I have preached little on religion because the topic has swayed to assumptions in science. People mostly have responded to their own beliefs on history and evolution instead of asking questions about what the Bible says. If you want to know the age of the earth and if evolution is how man came from an ape and is an ape then I could say less than 10,000 years old and no, man was made before apes, then we would ask different questions, but people insist on being right and then say everyone else that doesnt agree with them insists on being right. So who is right when everyone says they are right? Cannibals think they are right, serial killers think they are right, people who worship statues think they are right, people who think a cow is sacred think they are right.


For questions see above. Man is an Ape, although sometime i wonder about some men in particular but that's neither here nor there. And 10000 years ago was only entering the present interglacial period. Take your nose out of the bible and read up on what science has allowed us to work out. Or are you just going toignore the brain god gave you and let it grow weeds of relgious ferver and blinkered thought?

Right....i have to be somewhere and i'm already running late. I'll finish this off when i get back.

Moony

[CKava]

What I dont understand is how people can say they dont believe in God and dont want to be preached to, yet they spend hours and days and part of their life reading these posts and responding to them. If they wanted to further their education in science they could devote their time to it instead of being preached to. I dont devote my time to other threads on MAP that are anti-Christian because I dont need anything they say to explain to me things I already know. So why do people come here, not to teach beacause it is quite obvious to anyone it isnt accomplishing anything. When someone says there is not absolute truth in science and if there was science wouldnt continue investigating they would already know.
Endeavour you really don't seem to grasp the point of the religious forum. This is not a 'preaching forum' it is a discussion forum. If you want to post long rambles about your beliefs but don't want people to disagree with you or question your silly claims then go make a webpage and stop posting on a discussion forum. And as for people discussing religion, you don't have to be religious to find religions and the way people act because of beliefs interesting... I study religions at university and I'm not religious. So sorry... but the people replying have just as much right to comment as you do: making a thread does not make you a moderator nor does it make your posts untouchable or anymore valid than those responding to you.

Another point you might find suprising is that I personally have actually been inspired by many of the discussions on this section of the forum to spend more time researching specific areas of science (imagine researching before typing a reply!!!). So in my experience contrary to what you assume posting replies actually CAN further someone's knowledge of science it all depnds on how much effort you put into your replies. Judging from your posts its clear that researching your 'facts' is not really how you operate so its understandable that you missed this.

If someone doesnt want to be preached to or hear anything I write you have got to be the local town idiot if you keep coming to my thread. I dont seek you out, you come to my thread. I want you here but you are the student because science doesnt hold absolute answers, so at least you could admit you are a student of science because you want absolute answers even if those answers arent sought from religion you want answers. But most of you think you already have the answers and can retalliate saying I think I have the answers, but that is not the point.

Endeavour may I ask if you have found one person on here who seems happy or interested in having you preach to them?

Anyway besides that, yes its your thread but its not your forum and most people are only responding to the various erroneous claims you make and the pseudo-science you use to back them up. If you stop waffling about things you clearly have little knowledge of you'll find most people will leave your thread alone and then you can sit and 'preach' comfortably to the huge amount of people who you seem to believe are just itching to listen to you. You keep posting fallacious arguments about science and then complaining when people respond... but the simple solution is just for YOU to stop posting such things YOURSELF rather than whining because your being corrected. If you don't want people to discuss science then stop posting nonsense about it!

Your basically coming across like a child crying because the other kids wont do what he says; you can comment on science but others shouldn't respond because its your thread, you can comment on Christianity (such as saying Catholicism is that is "a human series of traditions and laws outside the teachings of the Bible") but others aren't allowed because its your thread... and so on. You just came to this forum and you've already had several moderators explain the function of this section of the forum and the forum in general to you, how are you still not grasping that a thread in the religion forum is not a free preaching space?

[pj_goober]

Stop feeding the Loon!

He's deluded. He believes something you don't. fine, let him waffle about "calibrated translations" and "10000 year old species" and what have you to himself. All you do by arguing with him is give him more ammunition to talk bull..

Who cares what he believes, you know, I know, and 99% of Christians would know that this nutjob is wrong. but if thats what he believes who cares?

[Endeavor]

Mr punisher buddy, IM not against you. I agree with alot of what you say. You misunderstood what I was saying. Frist I corrected strafio about Christian being your name. and then I asked you if you loved your ex and if loving your ex was enough to keep her loyal. This is how Christianity works too. God loves everyone like you loved your ex and your ex still cheated on you and people cheat on God. So it really doesnt matter is you love someone in regards to their loyalty and their loving you back. I didnt blame you either, I think she is to blame and the preacher that fooled her or went along with her, either way it wasnt right. I blame them like you do, but you blame God for the actions they went through which God never told them, but rather told them not to be like that. I never said you cheated on her. I believed she did you wrong, dont you remember me telling you I had the same problem in my life when I got cheated on by a girl that said she was a Christian, and a virgin and didnt want anything to do with drugs/alcohol/or sex outside of marriage: then she was poppin pills, drunk driving and sleeping with alot of people... and she can still go to church and not feel bad like the loser she is. and I loved her and never cheated on her, but she decieved me and was decieved herself, but I know other people like myself who have options to be like her and dont do them, we have morals and they are with us no matter if we believe one religion or another or no religion, but the morals are not made by us, they are hints about something more than the physical world. We could go rob a bank and even if we were caught they money gain would still be more than working at Mcdonalds when we got out of prison. But we dont refrain from robbing a bank because we think we will get caught but because of morals, we think in due time we will find a way to something honest and we can suffer along the way because you got cheated on you dont have to cheat on your next girlfriend, but you seek the same morals as yourself.
x
The first thing I want to establish with all of you is Im not some joker who claims they know everything. Im a real person who goes through the same stuff you do and your friends do and your parents do and strangers do, Only different amounts and the names are different. But basically you'll find people in the world know what its like to go through the same stuff, only they handle it different ways. Please dont blame me for the breakup you had with your ex, and please dont blame me for the actions of the preacher or whatever he was that helped her do you wrong. Im a Christian and Ive never cheated on any girl and Ive dated about 50. Ive been done wrong time and time again and Ive only found one that has done me good out of all those. Even before I was a Christian I never cheated on girls.
x
Another thing I want you to understand is that preachers are also talked about in the Bible. From John to Revelation you'll find that they are often the cause of evil when they say they are good. You know people say they are good and dont reflect that in how they live, so the Bible also tells you this. You agree with the Bible even if you dont agree with the history of it. You dont believe Noah and the Ark story,but you do believe people shouldnt decieve each other, lie, cheat, steal, kill each other. The thing I want to tell you Mr punisher is that you cant blame the actions of individuals on their teachings because they go outside of and contradict their teachings. Let me give you this example about the police. I wanted to be one because I wanted to protect citizens and help out by putting away the crack dealers who poison people and protect people from getting raped or robbed. So the idea of being a cop can have many good intentions. When a cop steals evidence or condems a person who is innocent or lets a girl go who is speeding and gives a man a ticket, one who could steal money they find in a drug house or sell the drugs to make more money for themself, these things are what makes a crooked cop. So you have the people who are the police wanting to do good and you have the people who abuse the power for their own lusts. But when you swear in to be a cop you should say something like I will do my best to uphold and enforce the law. Some people lie and do wrong and you cant blame me for them or them for me. Im preaching and I say be loyal in a relationship or end it. Dont lie and drag out misery. And another will say dont lie and yet they will lie. So dont blame me for what someone else does because Im on your side when it comes to alot of things. I blame your ex and I blame the preacher but I dont blame you and I dont blame God.
x
If you have love and your girlfriend turns on you. Love isnt enough for her. And when God loves people and people turn than Gods love isnt enough. But for me I would meet a new girl and love again because I got alot of love to give and all women have beauty :its just hard to find the honest ones. The Bible says their value is far above rubies. and the proof is the women you will date who are fun for awhile but turn on you in time. It would be alot eaiser if people didnt lie about themselves and their feelings and thoughts.
x
If nothing else please dont think I blamed you for your dark times in life. I could tell you things about wanting it all to end and the real things in life that are so much stress on us, but believe it or not all those times were worth going through because of the love it gave me, everytime I got cheated on it hurt but I realized that was why I didnt cheat and I could replace those girls with more love each time because I was on the giving end, it was only recent that I was on the recieving end. If I could go back I would have waited and the times would not have been so hard but the hard times made the good times so much better, the hugs much tighter and the people that just stared right through the teardrops and were not phased, they built my heart insted of breaking it, because I love with much more passion.
x
However you feel about me, dont give up in life and dont blame one person for the actions of another because you need to view people as individuals. The saying all men are created equal is not in the Bible and is not true. People got different definitoins of who they are and what is expected of themselves and others. Good luck and best wishes, as a man who is no better than you I tell you this. My life changed for the better and it once was a wreck, and it was a wreck for several years and almost killed me several times. I went through alot of bad times and people didnt feel my pain or comfort me. So now I counsil people who have been damaged, not by a chemical inbalance or hereditary genetic information but people that have trauma from events in their life that are valid and I dont make up sugar stories to comfort them I agree with them most times and that makes them feel better knowing they can feel bad and not think anything is wrong with them. not in all cases.
x
anyway please dont get mad at me because I dont pretend to know how you feel and never blamed you, I only asked if you loved her to show you that people can turn on God because love isnt enough for most people, but the ones that think love is the best thing in the world get the most out of life even in a world that tries to change your morals and encourage filth.

[Endeavor]

well pjgoober if they didnt care they wouldnt be here, and if you dont care why are you here? this is my thread and I didnt ask anyone to come in or make anyone come in, out of their own curiosity and questions they came and why do they stay? Surely you could devote your time to someone smarter so go ahead, dont read or post stuff here since it's wasting your time.
you contradict yourself by comming here and reading if you think there is no intelligence here. If I dont know what Im talking about why read what I write why not find someone smarter because you only have so much time in life why waste it? Its examples like this that establish what I say not refute it.
x
any of you who are wasting your time are bigger fools because you think you are wasting your time yet you CONTINUE to be here. So are you wasting your time, you really dont think so, I dont think so, but if you think you are you gotta be the real idiot for comming back like a dog getting kicked and then comming back. I want people here and enjoy talking to people, if youre mad or get your feelings hurt you need to find a thread that supports your own belief. You have brought yourselves in a relioius forum undera Christian topic and you want to say youre tired of being here yet you wont leave.
and you want me to think you are smart and teach me?
x
all are welcome to stay but dont stay and have a bad attitude you make yourself look dumb. I dont need anyones approval on what I say because I already know where Im headed in life. I made this thread for people who wanted to know what the Bible said about certain questions they had, if you come here to teach me youre gonna fall on your face and waste your own time, you wont waste my time because I see the conflict within you and the frustration where Im at peace and once was where you were to remind me how thankful I am I dont feel like that. No one on here frustrates me, or wastes my time, because many kinds of people and religions claim to be right and have facts and explainations so why should about 5 people upset me?
x
I dont need to go to a forum for Christian support because Im already a Christian and most "Christians" dont know the Bible or reflect it or even know what they are supposta do in life to reflect it, but the Bible is clear about it.
Most people want proof but proof doesnt satisfy the afterlife or the life now.
YOu tell your kids not to drink or use drugs They say make reality a better place and I wont need to drink or use drugs. So the proof of accidents and self-destruction are well documented proof but not enough. That is where faith makes a difference and morals.
x
If youre mad at me just dont come back, if you want to talk to me like a man or a woman I'll listen to you because I dont need to say youre stupid or dont know anything because that isnt the truth. yet you can attack like that, it dont phaze me, it confirms my thoughts. I can say I believe most science and yet people will say you dont believe any science if you dont believe all science. that is just a lie to make you think that the proven things in science are disputed. The age of the universe isnt proven, what did you measure to get this age and have you found the edges of the universe to know their boundaries? you have no proof only explainations of some of the proof we have. the explainations of why things are vary, same evidence different translations of data. Its like a murder mystery where johnny holds the smoking gun but he says he didnt pull the trigger, and in the end there was a second shooter but johnny went to prison when he tried to stop the real killer. Oh for you know it alls who want to talk about bollistics of bullets we'll just say they both used shot guns. :)
x
Education and wisdom are not the same. You can study the worship of statues and know years of history and be an expert, but that doesnt mean the worshipof statues can save your life. When you study in school youlearn what they teach and CAN but most people dont... you can do your own research. Anyone who studies something can learn about it but not all are qualified to teach. I know the Bible so I feel Im qualifed to teach, none of you have ever tested the age of the universe or formed the methods to do so, nor have you explained how you can take the known age of something or someone and test it with your methods and not get the same exact age,except admit you dont have absolute knowledge of how to measure time except with the ways Ive told you. 24 hours in a day, 365 and a few hours in a year, seasons answer seasons: the proof is it is spring where I am and even through late snow we see trees budding and plants springing up and when it is summer it will be hot and whenit is fall the leaves will change and drop and the process is repeated as it has for the place I live. travel to alaska where the hours of dark and light are different but the yearly changes come back around, its not full of surprises.

[pj_goober]

riiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhtttttt....* backs away slowly, never to return*

[Moony]

Mr punisher, did you love your girlfriend that turned on you? If you did why did she turn on you? Then ask yourself again if God loves everyone and how many times they have turned on God. We love God becaue He first loved us and has forgave us for turning to our own ways. If you had a teenage child and you told them not to party too hard and they went out and got drunkand wrecked although they disobeyed you ,you would visit them in the hospital. So love isnt conditional but it is magnified when your kid learns a lesson and says they are sorry because they now know you told them not to party too hard for their own good. So God tells us things to protect us from AIDS and being in trouble with the Police and to keep us from being thought of as liars and theives and not be trusted people reflecting their morals obtained from His teachings. If you dont believe the history you can at least see the good in the morals.


More ramble....what are you on about?


The lessons in the Bible dont just identiy what to do and what not to do, but they give in detail elaborate thoughts that people have admitted in life that didnt know the Bible explained. Proof of this is the thougts I had not knowing what the Bible said about them, and proof that other people have said things and done things not knowing what the Bible said that I knew all along. Like people that get jealous of the things you have and act like they care about you while they really want what you have.


Have you been taking drugs? This makes no sence


Mr punisher, you are not an expert scientist nor is anyone in this thread that has posted. There are students of science but they did not construct the methods they talk about nor their own methods of determining the age of the earth. No one here has run their own tests or anyone elses tests and gotton the conclusion that the universe if 14 bililion years old. What did they step out on the edge of the Universe? And the people here that have studied science for years have admitted their knowledge is not absolute fact. They say this because of examples like I give, you take something you know the exact age of within the last 10,000 years and try to date these objects/people and you cant get an exact date that is equal to the true date which is absolute knowledge :)


Please define an expert scientist. Not that this may not have entered the tiny thing that passes for a brain but the further one goes down the path of a specific specialism the narrower their field of expertise gets. So in that respect with my humble degree and other complemantary scientifict studies i can clearly say that i can run circles around you with my knowledge. Admittedly i may not have done much in the way of any actual radiometric dating (that's the realm of those currently active in research) i am conversant with the methodology used, also as part of my studied this year i've done a calculation of the age of the universe as part of my work. Admittedly it was using a program and some instructions but it was still me doing it and my calcualted date was only out by a small percentage. so I *know* that the science works thank you.


If science was 10,000 years in study you still couldnt tell the age of the universe. Do you think we know all the elements in the universe. Do you think it is possible that a wave of radiation unknown to scientists exists in the universe. Do you think radio waves and energy like that released in an atomic bomb could change anything on the earth. If you go to the moon and take a speck of dust and come back to the Atlantic ocean and put that dust in, althought with the naked eye you cant see it, but the ocean really rises a billioneth of a billioneth of a billioneth of an inch (give or take) So how much more could a massive change effect the earth and the elements?


See above. The age of the universe is about 13 billion years, and the date i calculated it to was about 15 billion. Yes 2 billion years difference but i got full marks as it was about understanding the process. A wave of radiation that is presently unkown to science may well exist, but the fab thing about science is that it's always gaining new ground and new knowledge.

And i think those people that have experience hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl will be able to tell you fully the amount of chnage that occurs with the release of that much energy. And you tangent about moon dust and change is just going off on one. again i suspect a strawman.


Anyone who thinks they know everything about the universe when they dont even know everything about the human body or the oceans or the mountains or North America or China or German Shepards or lizards or rain or 2,000 years ago, YOU EXPECT ME TO BELIEVE THEY KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT THE ORIGIN OF EARTH AND THE UNIVERSE??? youre kidding me, and its very painful to think you feel this way.


I might not know everything about everything, but if i did then i'd be god (not a bad sounding idea though). There are a lot of people in the scientific community, i'm one of them even if only a small cog in it's workings, and each has their own area of expertise. So although individually we might not know everything between us we know one heck of a lot about the universe. And if we knew everything we'd not need science anymore, not that i can remember us saying we knew everything. And i have no pity for your alledged pain, your advocating a return to ignorance by following a literal interpretation of the bible. And that *is* a painful thought, not to mention an insult to all those that have pioneered scientific work, many of whom believed in god, and those that lost their lives or suffered in other ways because of it.


Quickly aegis, we DONT know how radioactive decay works,and we have not studied it for many years, Have we studied it for over 500 years? and you want to compare that speck of time against 14 billion years, and tell me you know it decays the same no matter what else in the universe acts upon it?
What happenes when the decay is complete if it is changing what will its' end result become or will it just fade to black. You cant take something and have it just dissappear, it just transforms, like people, we eat plants/animals/fruit and eventually die and our bodies feed bugs, plants animals and the plants/animals insects are eaten or die and other things feed on them and it is a cycle, everything we eat existed in another form thousands of years ago,


We *KNOW* how radio active degay works! Marie Curie died of cancer caused by excessive exposure to the radioactive materials that she was working ok. If we didn't know how it works do you think we'd be using it as a source of power? What about the Manhatten Project? If we didn't understand the science then Hiroshima and Nagasaki wouldn't have been bombed. Over time many people have worked on radioactivity and we've ammased a lot of knowledge, your argument about the length of time we've been working on it and the age of the universe is a non-sequeter (sp) and therefor a strawman. You also have no understanding of the basics or radioactive decay if your assuming that when a radioactive isotope decays that it ceases to be an atom, your gravely mistaken if you think that. It just becomes another element, which may or may not be radioactive and if it is it degays again into another element.....this continues until the atom is a stable element.

And your right about the cycles, ove my scientific career i've learnt a few:
Rock Cycle
Water Cycle
Nitrogen Cycle

There are probably more but those are the big ones that i can think of. Also here something to think on.... In genesis adam and eve are made from dirt fully formed..... In science (ignoring the weirdness that is abiogenesis) we formed from organic compounds that came about after their constituents were liberated from the rocks. The main thing to note here is that dirt comes from the breakdown of rocks.... So in effect the bible is saying we've come from the same place but it's said 'ugh....this bit makes my brain hurt....god made us!' where as science isn't afraid to think about it.


If the universe was just gaseous clouds and then the big bang just happened for nor reason, you could say that other great changes could happen. I mean if life began because of this bang and people and animals are the result of it on earth than you could say other mysterious things could happen in the universe even on earth

So because science has an explanation there must be some supernatural stuff happening......oooookaaaaaaay.......NEXT!

Moony

[Endeavor]

C-kava you asked if one person is interested in me preaching to them, cant you tell by the vast number of people who have view this thread or do I need to write that number for you? Youre here so youre interested if youre not interested in the preaching why are you here are you a masochist? If youre not interested I wont demand you stay so you know your options, adimit you are interested or prove you are not by leaving, but I welcome you to stay.
x
you have again answered your own made up logic. I never said stay away from science, only certain areas. You like many want people to think Christians think all science is fraud because of the proven things in science that would make us liars if we said it was all wrong. I dont discourage being a student of science but I encourage peoples own research, not just being a student but becomming someone who can prove and disprove assumptions in science. Scientists have been wrong before and accepted many things that were not proven and changed their acceptance when disproved. You reflect the work of others not of your own findings in the science world, you havent measured time to show the age of the earth or the universe and you expect anyone to believe you hold the knowledge of such things? You can fool someof the people some of the time, but you cant fool all of the people all of the time.
x
I never said no one could respond silly, read my first post, I welcome questions about the Bible, what I dont need are people trying to teach when they are students, and even science teachers are students of science because science doesnt have absolute truths remember? so the point is I wanted non-believers not ANTI-Christians to respond. I said to ask questions not tell us all about how you think about science. If you do follow science explainations you can still ask a question to see if you believe the Bible because only a part of the science world betrays the teachings, one part being animal came before mankind another part being the universe was formed 14 billion years ago.
x
Moony science hasnt disproven anythng about the Bible, not having certian proofs like having the actual boat Noah was in, this doesnt disprove therre wasnt a boat, and like I said if God destroyed so many humans and animals He probably wouldnt leave them to decay on the earth for Noah to see and smell, Hed probably remove them to non-existance or another planet or bury them, something logical that you assume they would just decay because you are thinking like a human not as someone having power to create life and destroy life. We're not talking about science as a whole, but like Christians and religions we deal with individuals only most of us have biased arrogant judgemental things we harbor and we talk about others but dont consider our own actions and words being like those we accuse. If you say science has room for error dont talk to me like it has no errors just becaue you have yet to learn them doesnt mean they dont exist wheather we ever learn about them or not. When you dont have absolute knowledge you dont need to stand on that like its solid because its not.

[Moony]

The process of radioactive decay is an extremely well-modeled, predictable process. For different time scales, you can use carbon dating, argon dating, and several in-between materials. The radioactive decay process hasn't changed, unless someone would argue that the fundamental laws of physics have changed.

The one area where there is legitimate reason for debate about or critique of radioactive dating methods is in the assumption of a steady-state of the amount of the radioactive isotope present. For insatnce, if in the past the earth's atmosphere were significantly thinner, or significantly thicker (and there is some amount of credible biological evidence for this), then the starting percentage of various radioactive isotopes would be different than they currently are. However, any attempt to make corrections for this, or to say that radioactive dating methods are incorrect, should start by modeling exactly how the atmospheric conditions were differnt, and to what extent this affected the atmospheric constituents.

Hmmm....the crust of the Earth and the Atmosphere (although both are highly important to us) are esentially a surface layer of scum on the Earth. If you took a football (or Soccar ball for the Americans reading this) the crust of the earth would have a comparative thickness of a sheet of paper, i'm not sure how the atmosphere would measure but i know that the crust ranges from 3KM to about 80KM thick. So the only radioactive isotopes that would be effected by this is probably just the C14 ones, i am going slightly outside the realms of my subject knowledge but i'm fairly certain i'm on the money about this enough to not be waffling.

The only thing i can think of as a Geologist that would allow the crust to effect the inner workings of the planet is adiabatic melting (which i think i've spelt wrongly and can't find on wiki), this the proces by which melting occurs in the crust/asthenosphere allowing magma to be formed and released when the pressure is let up. It a bit like getting a bottle of pop, shaking the living stuff out of it, and then opening it up and getting covered. And to my knowledge there is little about that that could effect radioisotopes.

And the stuff on flourine was interesting :)

Moony

[thepunisher]

C-kava you asked if one person is interested in me preaching to them, cant you tell by the vast number of people who have view this thread or do I need to write that number for you?

Interested in preaching implies interested in listening to the garbage you are writing. What the ppl on here are actually doing is questioning that garbage..there is a difference Endeavour. The first post might have been you preaching but ever since then you've been trying to gain land again in your mission to preach the bible here. And sorry, it looks to me like your boat is slowly sinking.


I never said no one could respond silly, read my first post, I welcome questions about the Bible, what I dont need are people trying to teach when they are students, and even science teachers are students of science because science doesnt have absolute truths remember? so the point is I wanted non-believers not ANTI-Christians to respond.

Guess for you it means, as you are a preacher, you are no longer a student, is that correct ? You know ALL the answers because you have the bible, correct ? Just a little general fact about us humans and one incredible quality we have: We never know enough and always can learn new things. Difference is (hell, this really reminds me of my ex now)some ppl believe they know everything. And no longer need to learn. Sad really.

Noticed once again by the way, that you ignored my questions to you. Guess you really don't like someone who doesn't have the same point-of-view as you to respond.

Christian

[pj_goober]

science hasnt disproven anythng about the Bible, not having certian proofs like having the actual boat Noah was in, this doesnt disprove therre wasnt a boat

no, but common sense does tell us that such a boat would be a logistical impossibility. I assume you don't believe in evolution - this measn every species that is alive now or has ever been alive was present (in two genders) on this boat of noahs. Ok so i don't know (can't be bothered to look) how many individual species this is (and its not really fair to assume Noah was stupid enought to try and put any sea dwelling creatures on his boat, after all the whales alone would be a pain in the proverbial) but i think considering the diversity of life on earth its fair to assume we're talking in the billions rather than millions. (lets be fair - thats probably just the beetles - so its an underestimate) so not only does Noah have to gather 2 of every one of these creatures (which would probably take more time than you think the universe has been in existance) but he has to house and feed them (how long was this boat supposedly on the water) now bear in mind that the vast majority of the animals on board only eat each other - but they can't can they cos then the one that got eaten would die out...dammit. (oh and thats just the animals - what about plants, bacteria, protozoa, diseases, fungi etc?)

Then theres the simple matter of people. The bible claims that only Noah and his family are on the boat - what about all the ethnic diversity in the world (or do you deny the existance of Black, Oriental, Asian & American indian people to name but a few) where did they all come from?

Theres two of a possible myriad of problems that could be attirbuted to the Noahs arc story - and this literally only took me the time taken to type to think it up. its not like i've spent years debating this stuff. Imagine how problematic a small amount of common sense and thought can be to your view point.

Oh and before anyone points it out - yes i said i was leaving never to return, but this thread is fun (more fun than my dissertation at least.)

Endevour - the reason people are here (i can speak only for myself but i expect its true of others) but open minded, intelligent people enjoy the act of debating, in its own right. we could be disscussing any of a number of things, but the act of debating itself is what keeps people coming back...

"we come to mock the religious nutcase, but we stay for the lively debate (and the chicks)"

[Moony]

Endevour, i read a lot of rambling in post#165. and if that's the best you can do in adebate then i'm going to forewarn you that you'll get jumped on and trounced pretty much anytime. You are clearly quite devout and in general i would respect you for that. However i can't find it in me to respect you for it because you've got a massive set of blinkers on for everything that doesn't fit into how you think things should work.

With respect to the age of the universe the piece of work i did used the redshift values of other galaxies. I used the red shift values to work out how fast the galaxies were moving away from us and then calcuate how long ago they would have been at the same spot. The red shift it's self is the same as the doppler effect on sound but just with light wavelengths. It's opposite is the blueshift which shows how fast other galaxies are moving towards us. and it's ballistics not bollistics. A fair number of people have spent a great deal of time developing the science of Astronomy, so i'm not going to argue with them about it, you can if you l;ike but i'll be on their side and happily pull your arguements apart.

re:post#168

Science HAS proven the bible wrong. The Stratigraphic column shows not one single rock type that would support the hypothesis of a global flood, and infact it supports the hypothesis that there was no flood to such an extent that i can say:
The Biblical Flood myth is shash.

Even if we ignore the dates produced from radio carbon dating there is ample evidence against a young earth model. In fact Sir James Hutton one of the founders of Geology, and notably a daist, postulated and found supporting evidence of an old earth. He debunked Neptunism supreamly and replaced it with Plutonism, with Neptunism being theories related to a global flood myth.

The biological science, supported by geological science, has massess and massess of evidence and proofs for Evolutionary Theory which completely counterbalances the '6 days of wand weaving' senario. So please tell me something that can be derived from science that proves the biblical account is correct?

Moony

[Moony]

Oh and before anyone points it out - yes i said i was leaving never to return, but this thread is fun (more fun than my dissertation at least.)

I've got popcorn at mine, if you weren't sop far away i'd offer to share!

Moony

[Capt Ann]

Hmmm....the crust of the Earth and the Atmosphere (although both are highly important to us) are esentially a surface layer of scum on the Earth. If you took a football (or Soccar ball for the Americans reading this) the crust of the earth would have a comparative thickness of a sheet of paper, i'm not sure how the atmosphere would measure but i know that the crust ranges from 3KM to about 80KM thick. So the only radioactive isotopes that would be effected by this is probably just the C14 ones.......It's been quite a while since I looked into this in detail, but my (limited) understanding of the radioactive isotope dating methods is that they rely primarily on the content of the atmosphere at the time of death and/or reaction. For instance, a plant living xxx million years ago would have been 'breathing' CO2 and exhaling O2. The carbon isotopes in the plant tissue at the time of death would have exhibited a mix similar to the mix present in the atmosphere at the time. (Likewise, nitrogen and trace argon, or carbon present in a piece of wood that had been partially burned in air xxx million years ago). So, the proportions of the different radioactive isotopes found in the fossils would depend on a). the rate of radioactive decay for the given isotopes (which is a uniform exponential decay), b). the length of time since the fossil died/stopped breathing/reacted (which is the variable for which you are trying to solve), and c). the starting ratio of radioactive isotopes in the atmosphere (which could be affected if there were significant variations in the thickness of the atmosphere and solar activity).


And the stuff on flourine was interesting :)Thanks!

[Scarlet Mist]

We *KNOW* how radio active degay works! Marie Curie died of cancer caused by excessive exposure to the radioactive materials that she was working ok. If we didn't know how it works do you think we'd be using it as a source of power? What about the Manhatten Project? If we didn't understand the science then Hiroshima and Nagasaki wouldn't have been bombed. Over time many people have worked on radioactivity and we've ammased a lot of knowledge, your argument about the length of time we've been working on it and the age of the universe is a non-sequeter (sp) and therefor a strawman. You also have no understanding of the basics or radioactive decay if your assuming that when a radioactive isotope decays that it ceases to be an atom, your gravely mistaken if you think that. It just becomes another element, which may or may not be radioactive and if it is it degays again into another element.....this continues until the atom is a stable element.

And your right about the cycles, ove my scientific career i've learnt a few:
Rock Cycle
Water Cycle
Nitrogen Cycle

There are probably more but those are the big ones that i can think of. Also here something to think on.... In genesis adam and eve are made from dirt fully formed..... In science (ignoring the weirdness that is abiogenesis) we formed from organic compounds that came about after their constituents were liberated from the rocks. The main thing to note here is that dirt comes from the breakdown of rocks.... So in effect the bible is saying we've come from the same place but it's said 'ugh....this bit makes my brain hurt....god made us!' where as science isn't afraid to think about it.



So because science has an explanation there must be some supernatural stuff happening......oooookaaaaaaay.......NEXT!

Moony

This is the part where Scarlet gets his crosspost on, though I think the mods will forgive as I think it is particularly relevan to the ongoing discussion here:

Science cannot disprove the existence of God. Science can be viewed as an arbitrary system constructed to help explain the world. It does not have to be true. Classical mechanics is a great model for motion, it gives useful, functional results that can be relied on to build massive structures etc. It's also completely wrong according to more modern science and quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is just a model, classical mechanics is just a model, Biochemistry is just a model. There is nothing that is truly understood in science, it is arbitrary. If an innacurate model can lead you to correct answers, the fact that the answers observed are "correct" (meaning functional) does not me the model is accurate. Elementary.

Have you ever seen an electron, or a photon, or just the bands at the end of the double split experiment. Yet many believe unquestioningly in the existence of the electron, because the lab coats said they have evidence.

You're saying that if we don't understand radioactive decay we can't use it as a power source? Garbage. If classical mechanics was an error - filled model how were we able to use it to figure out the required thrust for Jet propulsion engines and whatnot? I can kill you via cyanide poisining without knowing that it inhibits the electron transfer chain in respiration. I bet the first few cats that died from cyanide use didn't know it had jack to do with respiration.

"Curie died from exposure to radioactive sources" is different from "the radiation to which she was exposed inhibited cellular division which lead to cell death in the intestinal track, brain damage, and cancer". And we could go much deeper. It all depends on what level of understanding one is prepared to accept. Do YOU understand how radiation kills someone, or are you just eating up everything the lab coats say because you think they have evidence?

Science explains some things, God theoretically explains all things. People can understand science, so they trust it. People can't understand God, so they don't trust Him. Stupidity on the part of believers, or cowardice on the part of non - believers? It's all a matter of perspective.
Get your perspective on, playa.

[pj_goober]

This is the part where Scarlet gets his crosspost on, though I think the mods will forgive as I think it is particularly relevan to the ongoing discussion here:

Science cannot disprove the existence of God. Science can be viewed as an arbitrary system constructed to help explain the world. It does not have to be true. Classical mechanics is a great model for motion, it gives useful, functional results that can be relied on to build massive structures etc. It's also completely wrong according to more modern science and quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is just a model, classical mechanics is just a model, Biochemistry is just a model. There is nothing that is truly understood in science, it is arbitrary. If an innacurate model can lead you to correct answers, the fact that the answers observed are "correct" (meaning functional) does not me the model is accurate. Elementary.

Have you ever seen an electron, or a photon, or just the bands at the end of the double split experiment. Yet many believe unquestioningly in the existence of the electron, because the lab coats said they have evidence.

You're saying that if we don't understand radioactive decay we can't use it as a power source? Garbage. If classical mechanics was an error - filled model how were we able to use it to figure out the required thrust for Jet propulsion engines and whatnot? I can kill you via cyanide poisining without knowing that it inhibits the electron transfer chain in respiration. I bet the first few cats that died from cyanide use didn't know it had jack to do with respiration.

Science explains some things, God theoretically explains all things. People can understand science, so they trust it. People can't understand God, so they don't trust Him. Stupidity on the part of believers, or cowardice on the part of non - believers? It's all a matter of perspective.
Get your perspective on, playa.

I agree with almost everything you say, problem is whilst neither are unquestionably infallible - scientififc theory hold up to rational thought and questioning, whilst still providing testable, provable hypotheses about the universe, Religion neither stands up to common sense nor attempts to provide rational, testable hypothese about the universe. Science says "heres a theory - prove it wrong" whereas Religion says "Heres a fact - accept it or burn"

[Scarlet Mist]

I agree with almost everything you say, problem is whilst neither are unquestionably infallible - scientififc theory hold up to rational thought and questioning, whilst still providing testable, provable hypotheses about the universe, Religion neither stands up to common sense nor attempts to provide rational, testable hypothese about the universe. Science says "heres a theory - prove it wrong" whereas Religion says "Heres a fact - accept it or burn"

You're missing a key point of my argument. The scientific methods of testing are unreliable. Like I said, the only way you accept a theory is by the results it gives, and these results though they may be what you expect, are very likely not a direct consequence of what your theory says it is. Hey, it's like the uncertaintly principle.

Case in point, in 1664, we have a big slab of cork. In 1665, we have - oh my word, there are little blocks in here. By 1700 everything is made up of cells. Then we have inheritance and what not - oh my word traits pass in this manner from parents to offspring. And in the 1950's - dear lord DNA's is the culprit - it must be. We can manipulate DNA and what not. Guess who will not be surprised when they find something beneath the DNA.
Doubtful? I guess Hooke thought he was on the cutting edge when he was looking at Cork with a magnifying glass

[Moony]

It's been quite a while since I looked into this in detail, but my (limited) understanding of the radioactive isotope dating methods is that they rely primarily on the content of the atmosphere at the time of death and/or reaction. For instance, a plant living xxx million years ago would have been 'breathing' CO2 and exhaling O2. The carbon isotopes in the plant tissue at the time of death would have exhibited a mix similar to the mix present in the atmosphere at the time. (Likewise, nitrogen and trace argon, or carbon present in a piece of wood that had been partially burned in air xxx million years ago). So, the proportions of the different radioactive isotopes found in the fossils would depend on a). the rate of radioactive decay for the given isotopes (which is a uniform exponential decay), b). the length of time since the fossil died/stopped breathing/reacted (which is the variable for which you are trying to solve), and c). the starting ratio of radioactive isotopes in the atmosphere (which could be affected if there were significant variations in the thickness of the atmosphere and solar activity).


This is probably right on the C14 side but it is possible to calibrate it to an extent. It's not something i covered in as much detail because C14 doesn't work on rocks and it's half life is relativly short and in geological terms it has an 'early' cut off date for it's usefulness. Also if we're talking fossils here as in dinosaur bones and anything over a million years old we can't use C14 to date them. The dates would have to be derived from bedding/lithogy relationships and radiometic dating of any near by igneous bodies. Again my understanding of the dating of fossils is a bit ropey as i've not really done that much paeleontology. The areas i covered in geology were harde rocks with some sedimentary and surficial stuff to fill out my module requirements.

Thanks!

;)

Moony

[Endeavor]

This is a Bible thread in the religious forum and Mr Punisher can you be man enough to agree with what I said about individuals, because this thread is not about the history of the universe alone, it is about today and tomorrow which are unaddresed for the most part.
x
pjgoober why would noah put a whale in the ark if there was a flood and whales can swim?
x
Noahs job was not to reproduce the world or the plants or to make everything new, Noahs job was to sit tight while the earth was being washed. You assume noah replaned every tree and plant? No, God made every tree and plant and human so God cant make more? You assume the process of reproduction but dont consider Creation, reproduction through seed is different than creating from scratch so to speak. If God made the animals you dont think maybe God helped Noah a bit with having them fed and not attacking Noah or each other, again youre thinking like a human, not thinking anything is above a human.
x
mr punisher, I am not a student in some subjects and I am a student in others.
x
moony, you wrote a quote from our friend captanne, but havent realized what it said.. you cant model exactly how the atmospheric pressures were different because there is no recored history , do you have history of this over 200 years, even over 100 years? ANd the extent that it effected conditions are also unknown because there is no recoreded history of the earth over 10,000 years old, and please dont say you found an artifact or painting because those are not dated exactly. You can use your watch against my watch and in a race we both measure runners. I say number 21 has won the race you say 23 crossed the finishline at an earlier time. We have a snapshot that shows you were right. Why was I wrong because I stated or ended my stop watch one-onehundreth of a second too soon and the difference in the top 5 was all under 2 seconds. So this is how something can be an honest mistake.Which if I were judgeof 1 million races the actual time lost due to error could be years. Now you take the study of time where you cant give me an exact date on something we know the exact date of and the error for beyond that known time cannot be compared to known time because you can never have that knowledge..
x
Im glad I could help you about florine moony :) see? Im not against science, I can use it in my life and encorage people to use what is beneficial. so if I tell you I dont agree with one part please dont say I dont agree with any just to make me look like a dummy. The problem with certain realms of science is when we question them instead of saying things might be different than we think or there is room for error, we just want to get mad and call names. People that say things like I dont believe in anything in science or I have no intelligence dont really have any clue what they are talking about they only further establish things for me, and Im glad they do!
x

mr punisher I did answer your last post. If I missed a question please repeat it, because I thought I did respond to everything you posted. If you loved your girlfriend, which I think is the reason for your anger in here, I believe you did love her, I think you just dont want to say she was the guilty one, not yourself not me, not God. If you loved your girlfriend and she turned on you than you should see why I say that God loves everyone and most people turn on God, because love isnt enough for most people. If your girlfriend had been loyal to you, returning the love and feeling it, than things would obviously be different, so it is with God and the people He loves.
x
I do learn everyday mr PUnisher, some about science and some about misconceptions of it. I learn about places, people, ideas, cars, trains, systems, religions, money, dogs, history, perdictions, plants, herbs...etc..
When Im talking about learning science that is a different story because of the unknowns and absolute proof that I question, regarlessof faith or religion you cant hold something that admits it might contain errors as gold. You cant kill your kids for being so stupid they dont believe the earth is 4 billion years old because of your morals, but if they said the earth contains no water, you'd think your kid had a serious problem. Things that are in question need to remain in question. sure it sounds grand to say it is this way. but in reality we dont even know enought about humans and disease and havent searched out every forest or ocean to even have enough data to begin to search that data, and you believe we know everything outside earth and outside history?
Some people mean well but they realy dont understand the things beyond their control.
x
hey ms science, the people at chernoble and in japan dont know the full effects of radiation because the effects are still changing things, long term effects and unknown factors. Plants, animals, people still getting abnormalities, and you think the atomic bombs just lasted a day or so then all is back to normal, no the radiation still has danger and unknown longevity and unknown duration. If durations change or occur and the universe expands and the earth travels through the universe it couldnt pass through a field of radiation or pick up on a comets radiation, or some unknown to history factor? undocumented but not improssible and not proven but not proven to be improssible. You assume that things continue to go at the same rate through all eternity or 15 billion years anyway? When the rate of things have only been studied for comparison for how long *cough* less than 200 years... that is logic to you?

[Moony]

This is the part where Scarlet gets his crosspost on, though I think the mods will forgive as I think it is particularly relevan to the ongoing discussion here:

Science cannot disprove the existence of God. Science can be viewed as an arbitrary system constructed to help explain the world. It does not have to be true. Classical mechanics is a great model for motion, it gives useful, functional results that can be relied on to build massive structures etc. It's also completely wrong according to more modern science and quantum mechanics. Quantum mechanics is just a model, classical mechanics is just a model, Biochemistry is just a model. There is nothing that is truly understood in science, it is arbitrary. If an innacurate model can lead you to correct answers, the fact that the answers observed are "correct" (meaning functional) does not me the model is accurate. Elementary.

Have you ever seen an electron, or a photon, or just the bands at the end of the double split experiment. Yet many believe unquestioningly in the existence of the electron, because the lab coats said they have evidence.

You're saying that if we don't understand radioactive decay we can't use it as a power source? Garbage. If classical mechanics was an error - filled model how were we able to use it to figure out the required thrust for Jet propulsion engines and whatnot? I can kill you via cyanide poisining without knowing that it inhibits the electron transfer chain in respiration. I bet the first few cats that died from cyanide use didn't know it had jack to do with respiration.

"Curie died from exposure to radioactive sources" is different from "the radiation to which she was exposed inhibited cellular division which lead to cell death in the intestinal track, brain damage, and cancer". And we could go much deeper. It all depends on what level of understanding one is prepared to accept. Do YOU understand how radiation kills someone, or are you just eating up everything the lab coats say because you think they have evidence?

Science explains some things, God theoretically explains all things. People can understand science, so they trust it. People can't understand God, so they don't trust Him. Stupidity on the part of believers, or cowardice on the part of non - believers? It's all a matter of perspective.
Get your perspective on, playa.

As it happens i'm a trainee Science Teacher and some of what i've been doing in the Education module i've been doing in this semester is on the History, Philosophy and Ethics of Science. So i know the limitations of science in that certain things arn't provable and that although to joe bloggs public (and the kids i'll be teaching) science seems to have 'the truth' and that it's all wooly and fluffy to a certain extent. I also fully appreciate the use of models and that at various time science uses various models depending on what it's talking about, and always using the simplest one for the matter at hand.

And at what point did i say science disproved god? Please tell me and i'll correct what i said. I know i said that science disproves the bible but disproving the bible is far from disproving god. Science is agnostic towards god. If god is there how can we ever prove it scientifically? And if god isn't there how in gods name do we prove that scientifically??

Dabating the philosophy of science is all good and well but it's a dead ender if there are people involved that are proven to be scientifically illiterate, which is very much the case with Endevour.

Moony

[thepunisher]

mr punisher I did answer your last post. If I missed a question please repeat it, because I thought I did respond to everything you posted. If you loved your girlfriend, which I think is the reason for your anger in here, I believe you did love her, I think you just dont want to say she was the guilty one, not yourself not me, not God. If you loved your girlfriend and she turned on you than you should see why I say that God loves everyone and most people turn on God, because love isnt enough for most people. If your girlfriend had been loyal to you, returning the love and feeling it, than things would obviously be different, so it is with God and the people He loves.


So now you are accusing me that all I wanted was love ? I certainly have had enough relationships in my life Endeavour that I wouldn't blame god for my lack of love. And yes, of course she was the guilty one, except for one thing Endeavour, a person who claimed to be a wanna-be-priest talked her out of going out with me. And his reason: I don't believe in god so of course I must be bad. Yes, she believed it and was naive enough to follow along with it but she was influenced by someone who should have known that supposedly god loves all. He has proven and even you have proven that apparently god doesn't. And to be honest, me being an atheist wasn't only influenced by what happened with my ex but it was a good prove for why I was right not to turn to religion. I can quote you numerous examples where I spoke to her a year after and wondered what was going on in her brain.

This is the thing you don't seem to get Endeavour: I don't blame god for the things that have happened to me. How can I if I don't even believe in him ? But what majorly bothers me is that ppl who claim to be preachers or persons of god are actually inside them sometimes the cruellest of ppl. And you know what it shows me: that often searching for god has nothing to do with what he can maybe offer you but actually simply an excuse for these ppl to continue doing what they do. But be seen differently and in a different light just because they are part of the church.

Christian

[Scarlet Mist]

And at what point did i say science disproved god? Please tell me and i'll correct what i said. I know i said that science disproves the bible but disproving the bible is far from disproving god. Science is agnostic towards god. If god is there how can we ever prove it scientifically? And if god isn't there how in gods name do we prove that scientifically??

Dabating the philosophy of science is all good and well but it's a dead ender if there are people involved that are proven to be scientifically illiterate, which is very much the case with Endevour.

Moony

The post was mostly imported from another thread and is as such quite generalized.

Your point about scientific illiteracy brings me to something else which bothers me. It is obvious that most of the people who say that "Science disproves God" have very little understanding of science, and I won't call any names, except for Tekkengod, who merits mention. My understanding of science is also quite limited, but what is clear to me is that someone who believes in something that they don't understand because some people say they found evidence of it has misplaced credence more so than a person who believes in something he thinks he has direct contact with.
How can you say something like "Science is replacing God" without understanding science, or God for that matter. Seriously. Carl Sagan said "it is suicidal to build a society based on science and technology, when very few have an understanding of science and technology".
Gentlemen, get your suicide on.

[CKava]

Overall I agree with the sentiment your expressing Scarlet but I can't say I agree with most of your points; the phenomena your describing i.e. gaining deeper levels of understanding as time goes by is simply scientific progress and this hardly invalidates modern scientific discoveries nor does it make it at all analogical to a religion. Your talk about arbitrary system and so on is also very valid but ultimately its irrelevant; since when you take such sentiment to its logical conclusion things like language and the concepts and objects they identify can also be distinguished as ultimately arbitrary but useful systems. Taking such a reductionist stance never really leads to any useful discussion, its just a critique on how humans groups and ultimately individual brains function and offers no alternative. Furthermore, like you said classical mechanics is a great functional model for motion but then how wrong was it really? Didn't Einstein's theory of relativity only really matter when dealing with things approaching the speed of light which in ordinary human life doesn't really happen that often and don't quantum mechanics only come into play when you get down to the quantum level? Maybe Im wrong and if I am please enlighten me but its my understanding that since the modern scientific era began scientific knowledge has not been characterised by a series of 'etch a sketch moments' were new discoveries completely invalidate all previous discoveries but more a series of 'adding new layers to an ever rising tower' moments were new discoveries are made possible because of the previous discoveries and sometimes lead to renovations of the floors below. This is very much the process evolution has undergone with Darwin not even knowing about genes compared to how evolution is understood in modern science today.

[pj_goober]

pjgoober why would noah put a whale in the ark if there was a flood and whales can swim?
x
Noahs job was not to reproduce the world or the plants or to make everything new, Noahs job was to sit tight while the earth was being washed. You assume noah replaned every tree and plant? No, God made every tree and plant and human so God cant make more? You assume the process of reproduction but dont consider Creation, reproduction through seed is different than creating from scratch so to speak. If God made the animals you dont think maybe God helped Noah a bit with having them fed and not attacking Noah or each other, again youre thinking like a human, not thinking anything is above a human.

you seem to struggle with english a little, so i'll keep this as simple as possible:

1) i wrote and its not really fair to assume Noah was stupid enought to try and put any sea dwelling creatures on his boat, after all the whales alone would be a pain in the proverbial Which implies that Noah WOULD NOT be putting whales (or any other sea dwelling creatures) in his boat. This doesn't cover the issue of creatures that need both access to freshwater and land in order to survive IANAZ (zoologist) but i think this includes sea otters, many turtles and amphibians, maybe even crocodiles and aligators, probably Kaimen, to name but a few.. Not sure how you'd deal with this in a boaty context, unless we're supposed to believe that there was a fresh water lagoon, on the arc, big enought for two of all the freshwater species on the planet?

2)I'm not making any ridiculous assumptions here. The reason that God cause the flood - kill wipe out people. This action would also wipe out land based animals no?

- The biblical claim is that Noah collected 2 of every animal and sustained them on his boat for an amount of time while the floods subsided (where did all the water come from or go by the way?)

- In order to balance the fact of Noah's arc with your lack of "belief" in evolution, it would be nessecary for noah to have had one of every species (and in fact one of every variety of every species) collected and put on his boat. (by this rather than having one male butterfly and one female butterfly - there would have to be one male and one female of every differant type of butterfly [simply as an example])

- There are immediately millions of flaws with this premise. so answer me just these two:
Were Noah and his family the only humans on the boat - if so where did Black, oriental, asian, jewish, caucasian, celtic, aboriginal, indian, american indian, eskimo people come from - or where there 2 black people, 2 jews, 2 chinese, 2 eskimos etc?

How did the arc manage to support so many species requiring differant environments. this boat needs to be able to support everything from golden bromeliad frogs (which only survive in one kind of bromeliad [tree] in one small area of the equator) to polar bears (which only live in the arctic circle) via wildebeast (that need miles of free savanha to roam in). Was the arc some form of transdimensional spacecraft? how else are we supposed to believe this is possible? (if you say "god did it" you need some kind of explaination as toi WHAT god did, and why the miracle of building an arc that could support both otters, tapir and penguins wasn't mentioned in the bible at all. Noah takes most of the credit for building the thing as far as i remember.)


I can think of more flaws with the whole Noahs arc thing, but for the time being lets see you answer just those two..

[Scarlet Mist]

Overall I agree with the sentiment your expressing Scarlet but I can't say I agree with most of your points; the phenomena your describing i.e. gaining deeper levels of understanding as time goes by is simply scientific progress and this hardly invalidates modern scientific discoveries nor does it make it at all analogical to a religion. Your talk about arbitrary system and so on is also very valid but ultimately its irrelevant; since when you take such sentiment to its logical conclusion things like language and the concepts and objects they identify can also be distinguished as ultimately arbitrary but useful systems. Taking such a reductionist stance never really leads to any useful discussion, its just a critique on how humans groups and ultimately individual brains function and offers no alternative. Furthermore, like you said classical mechanics is a great functional model for motion but then how wrong was it really? Didn't Einstein's theory of relativity only really matter when dealing with things approaching the speed of light which in ordinary human life doesn't really happen that often and don't quantum mechanics only come into play when you get down to the quantum level? Maybe Im wrong and if I am please enlighten me but its my understanding that since the modern scientific era began scientific knowledge has not been characterised by a series of 'etch a sketch moments' were new discoveries completely invalidate all previous discoveries but more a series of 'adding new layers to an ever rising tower' moments were new discoveries are made possible because of the previous discoveries and sometimes lead to renovations of the floors below. This is very much the process evolution has undergone with Darwin not even knowing about genes compared to how evolution is understood in modern science today.

Very insightful. I think you're exactly right, I also think you're misunderstanding me. I am in no way saying that scientific discoveries of today are invalid. They are certainly very useful, what I'm saying is that they in no way lead us to the "truth" and even if we did get to the "truth" we wouldn't know it and we would have no way to prove it. Will anyone ever be able to percieve an electron with one of the five senses? And even then we wouldn't know. When you look up you see a blue sky. A sky that does not even exist. We are limited by perception, science is limited by perception, understanding is limited, the world already has a head start and we will never catch up.
When do you understand something? You're right about quantum mechanics and classical mechanics. We use quantum mechanics when we get to the atomic level, using the schrodinger equation to describe the motion of a tennis ball is a bad idea. The two schools of thought are related by the correspondence principle, it says that when the quantum system is large you approach classical behavior. But it was thought that classical mechanics would hold for all systems. Quantum mechanics and experimental evidence says no. Therefore classical mechanics is an inadequate explanation, erroneous at certain levels, therefore wrong. We didn't "understand" we just found a working model.
The model is more than enough to build what we need get what we need do what we need. But we still don't understand completely, and we never will. And even if we do, we won't know.

[Scarlet Mist]

Also, I'm not saying that science is analogous to religion. All I'm saying is that if it's an explanation you're looking or as to why the world is the way it is, how it came this way and what not, and you really want a complete explanation. Science is the wrong place to look.
God on the other hand, gives you all the answers.

[pj_goober]

You're missing a key point of my argument. The scientific methods of testing are unreliable. Like I said, the only way you accept a theory is by the results it gives, and these results though they may be what you expect, are very likely not a direct consequence of what your theory says it is. Hey, it's like the uncertaintly principle.

Case in point, in 1664, we have a big slab of cork. In 1665, we have - oh my word, there are little blocks in here. By 1700 everything is made up of cells. Then we have inheritance and what not - oh my word traits pass in this manner from parents to offspring. And in the 1950's - dear lord DNA's is the culprit - it must be. We can manipulate DNA and what not. Guess who will not be surprised when they find something beneath the DNA.
Doubtful? I guess Hooke thought he was on the cutting edge when he was looking at Cork with a magnifying glass

Your evidence is proof of why the scientific model is superior - it changes as time goes on, as you say science is only a method of explaining what we see and knw to be true. However science is not only accepting of change, but actively seeks it out.

Once again science says "heres a theory prove it wrong" Religion says "heres a fact believe it or burn for all eternity" which is the more likely method to yeild real explainations of the universe?

(the way a theory becomes accepted is by the very fact that despite their best efforts to try the best scientists in the world cannot come up with a failing in the theory. when they do this new theory makes the previous one superfluous. Its called change (you could call it the evolution of scientific ideas) and its a good thing.)

[tekkengod]

Science is the wrong place to look.
God on the other hand, gives you all the answers.

Yeah, real reliable too! :bang: :D

[Scarlet Mist]

Your evidence is proof of why the scientific model is superior - it changes as time goes on, as you say science is only a method of explaining what we see and knw to be true. However science is not only accepting of change, but actively seeks it out.

Once again science says "heres a theory prove it wrong" Religion says "heres a fact believe it or burn for all eternity" which is the more likely method to yeild real explainations of the universe?

(the way a theory becomes accepted is by the very fact that despite their best efforts to try the best scientists in the world cannot come up with a failing in the theory. when they do this new theory makes the previous one superfluous. Its called change (you could call it the evolution of scientific ideas) and its a good thing.)

There is nothing wrong with change. The change is not necessarily for the better however. The change will keep happening for the lifetime of the universe and will never ever take us any closer to the "truth". Because we can't get there.
Again:
1) We are limited by perception. The uncertaintly principle. They we look up, the sky is blue ... but there is no sky. Just blue light flashing around.
2) The fact that the theory is consistent with observation does not make the theory correct. The fact that we keep coming up with what seems to be newer, "better" and "more complete" thereories doens't help the understanding at all, because the very observations we're basing our theory on may be wrong.
3) We can therefore scarcely avoid the inference that the scientific method is intesely flawed when it comes to us "understanding" the world we live it. It is insuffiecient. Not enough. It comes up short.

Change or no change, improvements or no improvements, we will never ever make it there. With God, we have already made it there.

It's like taking a half step from point A to point be, then taking a step that covers half the distance of your initial step, and continuing in that manner. One cannot make it to point B in this way. After you've taken a million steps and are standing an infinitesimal fraction away from point B you are still not there and will never get there, no matter how close you think you are. No matter how close you think you are getting. Progress can be deceiving.

[Scarlet Mist]

Yeah, real reliable too! :bang: :D

What are you, the press? You can't just excise the conclusion of my argument and leave out all the reasoning that got me there. Read it.

[Moony]

This is a Bible thread in the religious forum and Mr Punisher can you be man enough to agree with what I said about individuals, because this thread is not about the history of the universe alone, it is about today and tomorrow which are unaddresed for the most part.


Why don't you be a man and appologise for the down right insulting things you said earlier.


pjgoober why would noah put a whale in the ark if there was a flood and whales can swim?


Do you have a problem with reading comprehension? It might be worth getting yourself checked for it. If my memory serves Goo was discounting Whales cos they swim.....


Noahs job was not to reproduce the world or the plants or to make everything new, Noahs job was to sit tight while the earth was being washed. You assume noah replaned every tree and plant? No, God made every tree and plant and human so God cant make more? You assume the process of reproduction but dont consider Creation, reproduction through seed is different than creating from scratch so to speak. If God made the animals you dont think maybe God helped Noah a bit with having them fed and not attacking Noah or each other, again youre thinking like a human, not thinking anything is above a human.


Hmmm.....more wand waving.....having to invoke a miracle to promote your arguement doesn't make it stand up will in a debate. We Geologists haev a saying about people who build houses on sand..... Looks to me like you need to look at the ground your building your arguement on.


mr punisher, I am not a student in some subjects and I am a student in others.


What subject do you study? and is it a structured program or something your reading out of self interest?


moony, you wrote a quote from our friend captanne, but havent realized what it said.. you cant model exactly how the atmospheric pressures were different because there is no recored history , do you have history of this over 200 years, even over 100 years? ANd the extent that it effected conditions are also unknown because there is no recoreded history of the earth over 10,000 years old, and please dont say you found an artifact or painting because those are not dated exactly. You can use your watch against my watch and in a race we both measure runners. I say number 21 has won the race you say 23 crossed the finishline at an earlier time. We have a snapshot that shows you were right. Why was I wrong because I stated or ended my stop watch one-onehundreth of a second too soon and the difference in the top 5 was all under 2 seconds. So this is how something can be an honest mistake.Which if I were judgeof 1 million races the actual time lost due to error could be years. Now you take the study of time where you cant give me an exact date on something we know the exact date of and the error for beyond that known time cannot be compared to known time because you can never have that knowledge..


Your comments about the race are irrelevent. I've seen on one of the many field trips i've been on strata that was deposited not long after the end of the last iceage some 10,000 to 12,000 years ago, in this layer the material is much more peaty than todays soil. This is down to higher temperatures at it's time of formation, which i believe was pointed out to be down to a temperature slightly above todays temperature, which in turn could well be down to higher CO2 level in the atmosphere.

I personally would be the worst person to hand some sort of artifact to if you wanted to know info about it and the time it's from, but rocks are another matter. And seeing as i'm a Geologist i could tell you all sorts of things about a rock thsat was handed to me, and even more if i knew it's relationship to other rocks in the area. I only did one lecture of it befor i left but there was a module avaibalbe to people on my course called 'paeleoecology and paeleoenvironmental field analysis', a module which covered all the sorts of things for a good an proper indepth anaylsis of rocks to determine the past climate. So we can get a pretty good idea of what past climates where like. Like the fact that there's good evidence to suggest that the atmosphere was denser due to greater CO2 concentration during the time of the dinosaurs which aided the evolution of flight.


Im glad I could help you about florine moony :) see? Im not against science, I can use it in my life and encorage people to use what is beneficial. so if I tell you I dont agree with one part please dont say I dont agree with any just to make me look like a dummy. The problem with certain realms of science is when we question them instead of saying things might be different than we think or there is room for error, we just want to get mad and call names. People that say things like I dont believe in anything in science or I have no intelligence dont really have any clue what they are talking about they only further establish things for me, and Im glad they do!


Don't try to buddy up to me playing the nice guy. I'm not out to make you look a dummy, your doing that all by yourself! The scientific method is the same for all the sciences, so to discount one part of science because you don't like it or get it then say another works is just plan crazy. The trouble is some of the people that do the questioning do it from an illinformed stand point and assume that the science if flawed because of their lack of comprehension. I'm happy to explain everything i know to someone even if they bearly understand science so long as they've got an open mind and time enough for me to cover the basics befor i get to the meaty parts.

But there is a big difference between someone questioning because they don't understand and want to and those that question because they don't understand and are pushing their psuedo-science tosh.


mr punisher I did answer your last post. If I missed a question please repeat it, because I thought I did respond to everything you posted. If you loved your girlfriend, which I think is the reason for your anger in here, I believe you did love her, I think you just dont want to say she was the guilty one, not yourself not me, not God. If you loved your girlfriend and she turned on you than you should see why I say that God loves everyone and most people turn on God, because love isnt enough for most people. If your girlfriend had been loyal to you, returning the love and feeling it, than things would obviously be different, so it is with God and the people He loves.


Here's a piece of honest advice that i really hope you take up. End this line of conversation now! Leave the guy alone and stop hassling him over it. You can't ever understand the dynamics of this because you were never there and i don't think you could ever understand it. So leave it alone. You claim to be a christian so out of christian goodness just shut up already!


I do learn everyday mr PUnisher, some about science and some about misconceptions of it. I learn about places, people, ideas, cars, trains, systems, religions, money, dogs, history, perdictions, plants, herbs...etc..
When Im talking about learning science that is a different story because of the unknowns and absolute proof that I question, regarlessof faith or religion you cant hold something that admits it might contain errors as gold. You cant kill your kids for being so stupid they dont believe the earth is 4 billion years old because of your morals, but if they said the earth contains no water, you'd think your kid had a serious problem. Things that are in question need to remain in question. sure it sounds grand to say it is this way. but in reality we dont even know enought about humans and disease and havent searched out every forest or ocean to even have enough data to begin to search that data, and you believe we know everything outside earth and outside history?
Some people mean well but they realy dont understand the things beyond their control.


So you want us to go back to religous ignorance because we can't fully explain every detail of science?? That's what it's sounding like. Science doesn't claim to know everything about everything, it does claim to have a model that even if it's not always super acurate it works enough to explain most things and is open to be adapted and/or changed as required. When scientists are talking properly to each other you'll find that they use phrases such as:
'from this evidence it looks like X might happen'
'from the data available it seems that X has a reasonable chance of happening/not happening'

This sort of knowledge again comes down to the levels of literacy people have with respect to science. and your level seems to be low from the evidence that is present in this thread.


hey ms science, the people at chernoble and in japan dont know the full effects of radiation because the effects are still changing things, long term effects and unknown factors. Plants, animals, people still getting abnormalities, and you think the atomic bombs just lasted a day or so then all is back to normal, no the radiation still has danger and unknown longevity and unknown duration. If durations change or occur and the universe expands and the earth travels through the universe it couldnt pass through a field of radiation or pick up on a comets radiation, or some unknown to history factor? undocumented but not improssible and not proven but not proven to be improssible. You assume that things continue to go at the same rate through all eternity or 15 billion years anyway? When the rate of things have only been studied for comparison for how long *cough* less than 200 years... that is logic to you?

When did i say that the atom bombs only had a day long effect? The on going problems that are suffered by those people living in the effect areas is precicly what i was on about. The effect of the radiation is well documented, as is the fact that the contaminated area around Chenobyl has doubled in size due to the radioactive decay of the material that is the source of the contamination. The area is going to be contaminated for a long time untill there the radiation levels have returned to background levels, and seeing as i'm not clued up on the current research i've no idea how long that is, and the same will apply to the areas of contamination around Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I think you slip back into ramble/waffle mode at some point. However comets and other bodies do pose a radiation hazard. The Tungusta blast of 1908 was put down to being a bolide exploding above the treeline befor it impacted and there is an observed increase in the background radiation.

And your incorrect in your assumption about an assumption that i might make. If you must know i take a punctuated approach to how things have occured, that is that things generally do take place over time slowly or at least at a constant rate interspersed at random times are catastophies and other disasters.

Moony

[CKava]

C-kava you asked if one person is interested in me preaching to them, cant you tell by the vast number of people who have view this thread or do I need to write that number for you? Youre here so youre interested if youre not interested in the preaching why are you here are you a masochist? If youre not interested I wont demand you stay so you know your options, adimit you are interested or prove you are not by leaving, but I welcome you to stay.
I'd say the majority of replies to this thread have been people telling you A) that you got some things wrong and B) that they don't really want/need someone to preach to them.

Oh and I don't accept the two choices you offer me... Im not interested in your preaching one jot, sorry but Im not. Your probably one of the least convincing 'preachers' I've ever encountered. So thats option 1 gone. And I dont actually feel any need to prove this to you and until you stop posting nonsense about subjects you clearly don't understand I think I'll continue to stick around ;). So option 2 Im afraid Im not all that interested in either. Hows about I give you some options instead? Either 1) admit your views on science are based on religious not scientific concerns or 2) prove you really want to discuss religion and not science by not posting about scientific topics anymore.

Your also in no position of authority to be offering people options if they want to reply...

You reflect the work of others not of your own findings in the science world, you havent measured time to show the age of the earth or the universe and you expect anyone to believe you hold the knowledge of such things? You can fool someof the people some of the time, but you cant fool all of the people all of the time.
May I ask how you know the earth is round? Have you constructed a spacecraft and viewed it from space? Pictures could easily be falsified remember. What about Ireland ever been there? If not how do you know it exists then? I mean people say its there and sure there are Irish people who claim to come and live there and there are pictures and stuff but again if you haven't experienced it directly how can you be sure? I mean your just taking the words of others as truth. Hmmm... wait I guess alot of people could have been to Ireland and the earth well after all there are simple logical tests we can all do that show the earth is round so lets go on better. How about the bible in particular the old testament nobody is still around from then and we have no proof for the events therein so how can you believe it? If every human had to discover every single piece of information then there would be no progress. Culture would never have developed, language certainly would be a bit of a problem and science would be at a dead end... your argument again is spurious and is a tried and tested nonsense argument of religious people when discussing science. The fact is science has methods for checking the validity of others research mainly by peer review of research and by the repetition of tests. Science doesn't have to conflict with religion its just some people don't seem to realise that.

And Scarlet think we are on the same page, sorry if I misinterpreted some of your points!

EDIT: Before someone jumps on me Im sure there are some historically accurate things in the old testament but Im talking about the document as a whole. Plagues... smiting... floods... arks and so on.

[Moony]

There is nothing wrong with change. The change is not necessarily for the better however. The change will keep happening for the lifetime of the universe and will never ever take us any closer to the "truth". Because we can't get there.
Again:
1) We are limited by perception. The uncertaintly principle. They we look up, the sky is blue ... but there is no sky. Just blue light flashing around.
2) The fact that the theory is consistent with observation does not make the theory correct. The fact that we keep coming up with what seems to be newer, "better" and "more complete" thereories doens't help the understanding at all, because the very observations we're basing our theory on may be wrong.
3) We can therefore scarcely avoid the inference that the scientific method is intesely flawed when it comes to us "understanding" the world we live it. It is insuffiecient. Not enough. It comes up short.

Change or no change, improvements or no improvements, we will never ever make it there. With God, we have already made it there.

It's like taking a half step from point A to point be, then taking a step that covers half the distance of your initial step, and continuing in that manner. One cannot make it to point B in this way. After you've taken a million steps and are standing an infinitesimal fraction away from point B you are still not there and will never get there, no matter how close you think you are. No matter how close you think you are getting. Progress can be deceiving.

Yes, your correct about the limits in peoples perceptions. However one of the things that make people like Einstein the geniuses that they are is their ability to percieve the weird, wonderful and whacky new theories and then slowly dumbing down so the rest of us can understand them. Everyone has a different pattern of learning styles with individual strengths and weaknesses.

Personally i tend to try and visualise things as if they were animations or something like that. I find it really helps me understand whats going on, this may or may not be due to how my brain works as a dyslexic but i find it really good for remebering some of the more 'interesting' parts of science.

Moony

[pj_goober]

Mrs Scarlett, you are a far superior debater to Endevour and i credit you with that, but you are still debating based on a flawed premise.

Science doesn't claim to be prefect, it simply aims to be the best availiable approximation. The approximation changes in an attempt to better itself ( i like your ever decreasing footsteps example, its a nice analogy for the way science can get as close as it likes to understanding the universe but never turely acheive its goal. The problem lies that Religion is truely static in this analogy - as a believer you place Religion as the goal that science is aiming towards but never reaching (the ultimate truth) as a non-believer i don't think that the "word of God" is the ultimate truth, and nothing either of us say is going to convince the other.

The differance between science and religion is the application of each - what science does is (despite its flaws) it allows us to make hypothesese about the way the world works. Such hypothese allow humanity to grow and develoup. The debate as to whether the theory is perfectly true doesn't stop it being useful. Now we all accept that newtonian mechanics are not a perfect representation of the way the physical world actually works, but it does allow simulations to be run on the way airplane wings are formed in the manufacturing process, so that when you fly around the world the wing of your plane doesn't fall off. There are identifiable and proveable benifits even of the flawed aspects of scientific thinking - because it enables us to open our minds and understand on varying levels how the world works. If everyone just accepted the bible as the ulitmate truth of the universe and creation and rejected science as Endevour does then we'd not have progressed since the middle ages and would be living in stone castles with big fires unable to communicate with the outside world. Believe the exact intricacies or not - science betters humanity - religion only stifles it.

[Strafio]

Mr strafio, mr punishers name is Christian I think, he is not a Christian because he doesnt accept Christ.
Yep. It was a little joke. ;)

and people do hate God because they think life is unfair, thats why people can say it is illogical because they want everyone to be happy and live forever, me too!!! but its not that way so we deal with the way it is and we can be cold or we can give it all we got to push for the day when it is all good. We have this hope.
There's probably some people who hate God, although no one here.
No one's said they hate God here, just that they don't believe, and that the idea of God seems illogical to them. What they do hate is people saying that they speak the word of God, because they see it as nonsense but still a way of manipulating impressionable people.

What I dont understand is how people can say they dont believe in God and dont want to be preached to, yet they spend hours and days and part of their life reading these posts and responding to them.
Yeah. As it happens, I'm kind of enjoying this talk with you. :)

Mr strafio most people on here havent responded to me, and I have preached little on religion because the topic has swayed to assumptions in science. People mostly have responded to their own beliefs on history and evolution instead of asking questions about what the Bible says. If you want to know the age of the earth and if evolution is how man came from an ape and is an ape then I could say less than 10,000 years old and no, man was made before apes, then we would ask different questions, but people insist on being right and then say everyone else that doesnt agree with them insists on being right. So who is right when everyone says they are right?
You made a scientific claim and the scientists have corrected you.
Science isn't my area of interest (I'm more of a philosopher) so I leave the scientific talk to the scientists. That means I get a basic idea of what the likes of Aegis and Moony are saying, but I'm kind of taking their word for it. My reasoning is that I trust those who have done extensive university study to know their stuff.

You can make the point that science doesn't deal with absolutes, and that it isn't "definite proof" but more "good reason to believe". But I don't think you can criticise evolution for it's use of science.

Scarlet, good point in someways, but you waaaaay overstated your point.
Science unreliable? Not 100% absolute certain, sure, but unreliable?
Bad choice of words if you ask me, especially when you relied on science to bring this message across the world to us! ;)

[Poop-Loops]

You're missing a key point of my argument. The scientific methods of testing are unreliable. Like I said, the only way you accept a theory is by the results it gives, and these results though they may be what you expect, are very likely not a direct consequence of what your theory says it is. Hey, it's like the uncertaintly principle.

Case in point, in 1664, we have a big slab of cork. In 1665, we have - oh my word, there are little blocks in here. By 1700 everything is made up of cells. Then we have inheritance and what not - oh my word traits pass in this manner from parents to offspring. And in the 1950's - dear lord DNA's is the culprit - it must be. We can manipulate DNA and what not. Guess who will not be surprised when they find something beneath the DNA.
Doubtful? I guess Hooke thought he was on the cutting edge when he was looking at Cork with a magnifying glass

GET YOUR PSEUDO-SCIENCE OUT OF THIS THREAD NOW!!!!!!!!

Don't even say the words "uncertainty principle" in the same sentence if you have NO IDEA what it is.

The fact that you don't even know how a scientific experiment works means you need to shut the *explitive* up. They are DESIGNED to only have one variable.

Seriously, When Capt. Ann started argueing with me, I thought she might have been on to something. I had my doubts. But seeing your replies and Endeavor's pretty much ensured that I will never talk to a Christian again. It's hit and miss with you people. Mostly miss.

"Science is flawed, it hasn't explained EVERYTHING yet. I will instead believe a book that tells me that the garden of Eden is protected by two hovering flaming swords."

[Capt Ann]

Seriously, When Capt. Ann started argueing with me, I thought she might have been on to something. I had my doubts. But seeing your replies and Endeavor's pretty much ensured that I will never talk to a Christian again. It's hit and miss with you people. Mostly miss.Ouch!

PL, the door is always open to friendly debate on whatever subject, any kind of discussion, or just plain 'small-talk'. I seriously hope nothing I said to you would be taken as argumentative.

I sincerely hope that you will remain open-minded to the possibility of a loving God who cares for you and has a plan that includes your good........... in spite of anything I might have said ;)

[Poop-Loops]

Arguements aren't all bad. When 2 people disagree, and try to talk about it, I call that an arguement. ;)

No, no. What I meant was YOU were starting to make me doubt my own beliefs. The other two posters, however, totally reversed any effects you had on me. :P

First I was raised a Catholic, and even though I didn't do church stuff often, I was a strong believer in Catholicism. Then I started having my doubts, but still believed in some sort of god. Maybe the Bible was just off, is all? But eventually I stopped believing at all.

For example: Back in the Bible Days God would turn you into salt for so much as looking at Him. Now where is he? God caused the flood, and all those other miracles. Where did He go?

I think humanity has to depend on itself. Instead of saying "God will protect me." and "The Devil makes me do evil things.", we have to start watching each other's backs and taking responsibility for our actions. People have evil in them, we don't need the devil to help us in that department.

If God came down and told me I was going to hell for saying all of this, I'd still be happy, becuase then at least I'd know He exists. I'd know that people like Hitler are being punished for what they did, and I'd know that people like my grampa are being rewarded for what they did. I would LOVE to believe that now, but I just can't. I believe that all I can do in my life is never stand for any bull**** and help those who need it. I'll fail, but I need to try my damndest. Who knows, maybe I'll start to believe in God again one day, but from what I read and understood in the Bible, God is NOT the type of being I would want to worship.

[taescharnhorst]

Here it is and some may not agree but thats okay because Im entitled to my opinion too. I would first like to start by saying that I am a strong believer in God. Second I feel that most of you on this thread believe that there is a God but just a little confused over a lot of details of the Bible and stuff.

It is not my place to say "what religion" is the right or best one, or condemn anyone for not being a Christian, to me that is your own personal preference.Im sure you've seen them and heard them, " this is the way to go", or " Being this way will get you into heaven". I mean everyone has their own interputation of the Bible. However I am a christian and believe in God 110% but do not belong to a specific faith or church. It amazes me how everything was created including us. We did not just evolve or come from apes, no how no way. I will not argue this point either because like I said we are all entitled to our own opinions and own religous beliefs. Just my thread and the way I see things. Hope I didn't offend anyone, if so then I am sorry. thanks for reading this

[Poop-Loops]

It amazes me how everything was created including us. We did not just evolve or come from apes, no how no way. I will not argue this point either because like I said we are all entitled to our own opinions

Except that it is not an opinion, it is a fact. We have PROOF of it. You saying "no we didn't" has absolutely no evidence to support it.

[thepunisher]

I sincerely hope that you will remain open-minded to the possibility of a loving God who cares for you and has a plan that includes your good........... in spite of anything I might have said ;)

You know Capt Ann, sorry to say this but this sentence is about as irritating as what ScarletMist or Endeavour has said before. Before anyone can prove that god loves all I don't think anyone wants to be open-minded concerning the possibility of him. I constantly hear "preachy" words on this thread and it seriously feels as if we have ppl on here who simply won't accept that a person might not want to believe the same as them.

And sorry to say this, is it indoctrinated in theists to constantly search out new ppl to become part of god ? By trying to convince them of god ? It sure feels like it.
:bang:

Christian

[CKava]

ARGHHHHHH!

We did not just evolve or come from apes, no how no way.
We ARE APES! We are in the great apes category along with gorillas, orangutangs, chimpanzees. Specifically our family name is Hominidae meaning Great Apes. Your mother was an ape, I am an ape you are an ape and any children you have/had will be/are apes. Your argument is like saying 'humans did not come from mammals, no way no how' when we ARE mammals!

GET YOUR PSEUDO-SCIENCE OUT OF THIS THREAD NOW!!!!!!!!
PL I don't think SM was using much pseudo science I can't comment on the uncertainty principle but he certainly seems to have a better grasp of certain scientific theories than many others on here. It seems to me that he is just playing devils advocate and as such theres no reason to get so wound up.

And sorry to say this, is it indoctrinated in theists to constantly search out new ppl to become part of god ? By trying to convince them of god ? It sure feels like it.
Missionary work is a big part of Christianity as Im sure your aware but regardless of this punisher while I agree with you about the preachiness of some replies (Im looking at you Endeavour) being rather irritating trying to convince someone of your argument is something both sides are guilty of. And on MAP in particular many atheists are just as virulent and pushy about their views as theists are traditionally labelled.

[Endeavor]

PJ goober: if God made all people, and all animals and everything, You dont think He could make a whale survive the flood in the days of NOah or just make new whales, who says whales were even created in that time?
x
Mr punisher, I dont think you understand that I agree it was your ex girlfriends fault, and the wanna-be preachers fault. And you sure dont understand that I said I never cheated on anyone and I preach. So if I would never betray your trust and take your girlfriend why treat me like the slime that does? And to say he was part of the church shows you dont listen to what I say much less the Bible . THE BIBLE TELLS YOU ABOUT THE PEOPLE IN THE CHURCH. Guess who crucified Jesus, listen carefully: it was the religoius leaders that had Him put to death, The Book of John is probably the most in depth look at how Christ loved sinners and the "good" religous leaders were just liars and did horrible things against God. So the Bible agrees with you too.
x
Can any of you science "experts" tell me the amount of radiation at the start of the big bang until now, so we can know the decay and level has been at the same exact rate. Also we need to know the amount of radiation before the big bang sent the universe into expansion. We also need to know how the dinosarus were wiped out and any possible energy from collsions from comets or meteroites?
x
The problem with measuring time is the translation of data. If we were building a house and I gave you a tapemeasure and said mark a place for 30 feet so that will represent the back wall of the house. You measure it exactly 30 feet. Only I show you my tape measure which shows you measured 55 feet because yours wasnt accurate in terms of feet. So years are likewise not calibrated with your measurment techniques of time. If you try to get the age of a man who died in 1984 who was 100 years old, you could not tell us how long he lived nor how many years passed since he died. If you could get it to within a month, which you couldnt. One month of error times 15 billion years since the origion of the universe, hey thats alot of months, actually years of off caculation. Now lets say you dont know the radiation levels to compare how things on the earth were 10,000 years ago, which you dont have that information. So you assume nothing has ever changed in the atmosphere for 4 billion years, no fields of energy in space, no new elements introduced to our atmosphere, no change in radiation since before the big bang during the big bang and now, so the universe just expands at the same rate as it did on day one of the big bang, same energy same speed, no change, and youre an expert scientist with this information, please dont make me cry, you want people to think you have absolute knowledge but you say you dont have absolute knowledge so when we question that knowledge you want us to think you have it again, either you do or you dont. At least just say you are working to get it, and we can appreciate that much.
x
People that come on here saying they dont want to hear about religion in a religous forum in a religious thread started by a religious man.. Youre like people that go to a basketball game and jump in the middle of the game..STOP! you dont know what youre doing!!! Hocky is the best sport! and the players just play anyway, then you show up at the next game..STOP I love HOcky!!! and you keep going to the basketball games telling everyone how much you like hocky.
x
Mr punisher why would a person not accept another not believing the same as him, maybe because they give a crap about you? Maybe we can donate to charity not because we know who will recieve the money but we give just so that someone might have something better? Why would I spend hours telling you not to blame God and to blame the false preacher! because I support the false preacher? No brother, it's because your frustration isnt unique to you, Ive felt it, others feel it, and Jesus Christ felt it when the religious leaders claimed they worshipped God and really were very horrible people who hated God. If you dont believe the history that is one thing, but you can agree with the morals because youve already shown us that.
x
Pooploops: you said "people have evil in them, we dont need the devil in that department" this is a very common assumption by people. You think that Christians think Satan is a man in a red suit with a pitchfork and a pointy tail.
Thats a bunch of BS and NOWHERE in the Bible. Guess what Jesus said to one of HIs deciples when they said they wouldnt let Him die for sinners. He said "GEt thee behind me SAtan" So satan isnot a man that tells us to do bad, it is a spirit that goes into a man. Yes we have good and evil inside us, Ive been telling you this. These are your morals, which you dont need religion to tell you not to kill your mother if she yells at you. You dont need the police to threaten you not to kill your mother, all you need is morals which are in you. Wheater you believe in yin and yang or whatever religion they can tell you there are both good and bad working in your life. The thing is there is a way to diminish the bad, even to control your thoughts towards these temptations. But you have to understand outside temptations and inner lusts are different. Your temptation is what the world offers you that is wrong and you lust is what you wanna take that is wrong. You will ever be tempted but the temptations wont be effective when you understand certain things.
x
Mr loops: God turned one person into salt in the old days. Let me ask you this, if God delivered His people out of Egypt and showed them miricles to believe that He really existed and then they went and partied and said God forgot them and didnt provide for them and they had it better as slaves, dont you understand that God proving His existance isnt enought to stop people form sinning? Like I said before if God made you fly for one night and you could write about it or video tape it and talk about it, but everyone would just say you were a liar and used tricks and wouldnt believe you or even if they did they wouldnt convert and quit sinning. The blessings are on those that dont need the proof but have the faith, and in their faith they have proof to give them evidence of good reasons for faith, FIRST COMES THE FAITH THEN THE PROOF, Proof first doesnt really change people. Ive never cheated on any girl, not before I was a Christian not now, the proof is Ive never cheated but that isnt enough for a girl. when she sees what kind of person I am and trusts me, then she has that faith in me. The proof already exists, and is given supported evidence everyday I dont cheat, especially in my mind and in my temptations which are other women wanting me when I go to the store or drive down the road or at my work. This is proof and faith, the time apart and the time together only the faith in my case is proof and the faith in other peoples can be their downfall, because people lie.
x
Christians dont show you our faith by our proof we show you our proof by our faith, then you see the proof. There are many liars that know this power and the thorns grow up among the wheat. That is a part of life. The Bible lets you see throught the false religious leaders, dont blame the religion for the false leaders, the Christian leader is Christ not the church. If you read the Bible you'll find almost every religion is proven to include hate and anti-Christian man-made self-aggrandizements. When I hated the way most of His "followers" acted on the inside while they claimed to be "good" people I learned from reading the Bible that God loves sinners, not people who dont need HIm. Sinners need Christ, good people dont need jack, guess what? how many good people are there? YOu can count them on one hand.
x
science can better humanity, Christians agreee Mr Loops, saying Christians dont believe in science or they hate it, is just an attempt to make them look uneducated. Christians believe in science, Christians use science, Like the example to fly in a plane with the wings not falling off. The wings not falling off a plane however have nothing to do with thinking the universe is 15 billion years old, nor that man is an ape or descended from apes. Flight isnt part of evolutinary science, that is a part of science that Christians dont believe, and we need to seperate that part of science to our discussion, because saying Christians dont believe in anything to do with science is so far from the truth, but it does amplify Christian arguement that people constantly seek bogus ammunition to disavow God.
x

[pj_goober]

PJ goober: if God made all people, and all animals and everything, You dont think He could make a whale survive the flood in the days of NOah or just make new whales, who says whales were even created in that time?

thats your answer to post # 184. thats shocking. You didn't answer any of my points at all..


I was specifically talking about non-aquatic animals and the logical problems with the arc.

Please actually answer these questions:

Do you actually think think that there were 2 of every animal on the arc?

Where Noah and his family the only humans on the arc?

Where does the diversity of human ethinicity come from, if there were only Jewdeo-Christian (white or arabic) people on the arc?

Oh and are you seriously suggesting that god created loads of new species after the flood?

[CosmicFish]

You know Capt Ann, sorry to say this but this sentence is about as irritating as what ScarletMist or Endeavour has said before. Before anyone can prove that god loves all I don't think anyone wants to be open-minded concerning the possibility of him. I constantly hear "preachy" words on this thread and it seriously feels as if we have ppl on here who simply won't accept that a person might not want to believe the same as them.
Got to disagree with you on that one mate. I read that as her hoping that we'll remain open-minded. Surely that's a good thing? I'd like to think I'm open-minded enough that, if someone one day could prove Christianity true beyond a reasonable doubt, I wouldn't just clam up in denial.

And sorry to say this, is it indoctrinated in theists to constantly search out new ppl to become part of god ? By trying to convince them of god ? It sure feels like it.
AFAIK, yes. Part of a Christian's belief is that they should "spread the good news". I don't think that in itself is a bad thing. Look at it from their point of view. If you really believe people will go to hell if they don't convert, why would you not try to convert them?

The only issue I have with it personally is those Christians who lack the open-mindedness to admit the possibility that they may be wrong. They will usually try to force their beliefs at all costs and not listen to opposing arguments. However, not all Christians are the same (surprise surprise). E.g. I've now given up on Endeavor because he's being annoyingly preachy, only selectively answering questions, and not making much effort to be coherent. On the other hand, Capt Ann's responses are intelligent, well thought out, clearly expressed and directly address the questions that are asked. Also, despite being a self-confessed fundamentalist*, I've yet to see her get preachy.

(* I think I saw you say this somewhere, Capt Ann, correct me if I'm wrong.)

[Topher]

To start with, Mr Simpson, you asked a good question. Genesis doesnt say in the 1st chapter that the animals were made first, it says..."AND...ANd..And... not then then then, Its like saying Mr simpson is smart and nice and a male.
See you were a male before you were smart, but the word "and" can link things not always in order of first appearance.
In Genesis 1:24-27 it states God made the animals before he made man. It notes that man is to have dominance over all the other creatures, which suggests the animals must have already been created in order for man to have been made with dominance over them in mind.

In Genesis 2:7 it states man was made out of dust. Then in Genesis 2:18-19 it states that man should not be alone, therefore the animals were created.

Yes, “and” is used but it’s irrelevant. The account of the creation of man clearly illustrates that man was made after the animals in Genesis 1 but before them in Genesis 2.

In addition to this there is another contradition. Genesis 1:24-27 states man and women were created together, while Genesis 2:18-22 states man was created, then the animals, then woman.

(biblegateway.com, King James Version)

[Poop-Loops]

Mr loops: God turned one person into salt in the old days. Let me ask you this, if God delivered His people out of Egypt and showed them miricles to believe that He really existed and then they went and partied and said God forgot them and didnt provide for them and they had it better as slaves, dont you understand that God proving His existance isnt enought to stop people form sinning? Like I said before if God made you fly for one night and you could write about it or video tape it and talk about it, but everyone would just say you were a liar and used tricks and wouldnt believe you or even if they did they wouldnt convert and quit sinning. The blessings are on those that dont need the proof but have the faith, and in their faith they have proof to give them evidence of good reasons for faith, FIRST COMES THE FAITH THEN THE PROOF, Proof first doesnt really change people. Ive never cheated on any girl, not before I was a Christian not now, the proof is Ive never cheated but that isnt enough for a girl. when she sees what kind of person I am and trusts me, then she has that faith in me. The proof already exists, and is given supported evidence everyday I dont cheat, especially in my mind and in my temptations which are other women wanting me when I go to the store or drive down the road or at my work. This is proof and faith, the time apart and the time together only the faith in my case is proof and the faith in other peoples can be their downfall, because people lie.

First comes faith then comes proof? Do you not understand that that makes no sense? If I believe that mice can talk, guess what? I will eventually become so dilusional that they WILL be talking to me.

I see Christianity as being no different than Scientology: some guy wrote a book and people are suckers, so they believe it.

The stories in the Bible are so far-fetched that it's ridiculous.

As for the Moses thing: He let them escape slavery, for what? They were in the desert for FOURTY years. I'd say that's forgotten.

I don't undestand how you can say God loves people if he keeps killing them with "miracles".

[pj_goober]

The stories in the Bible are so far-fetched that it's ridiculous

This is because the stories in the bible are nothing more than allegorical farie tales. Even most forwards thinking christians accept this.

The simple fact of the matter is that the majority of biblical stories defy logic - take the Noahs arc example that i raised earlier and that Endevour has conveniently ignored. Common sense says that it could not have happened literally - dito Adam and Eve. There are flaws in all the stories some because they are not meant to be taken literally, others (the virgin birth) due to mistranslations.

[thepunisher]

Got to disagree with you on that one mate. I read that as her hoping that we'll remain open-minded. Surely that's a good thing? I'd like to think I'm open-minded enough that, if someone one day could prove Christianity true beyond a reasonable doubt, I wouldn't just clam up in denial.

I'm sure if that would happen Endeavour would jump up and celebrate. Especially if you would 'clam up in denial'.

Christian

[Moony]

As a public service I have attempted to abridge Endevours last post, this is to aid those that may not be able to puzzle out what was written.

Moony

Something random that doesn't adress a question raised by someone else in another post.
x
Semi-incoherent religious babble used to repeatedly go on about something that should long have been left alone.
x
~*AWOOGA-AWOOGA-STRAWMAN-ALERT*~
x
Incoming strawman/non-sequiter has landed.
x
Chewbacca defence applied
x
Waffle
x
More waffle with some quasi-religious filler
x
Logic suspended here
x
More religious waffle
x
Vein attempt to justify the use of Pseudo-Science
x

[CosmicFish]

As a public service I have attempted to abridge Endevours last post, this is to aid those that may not be able to puzzle out what was written.

Moony
I see you've left the x's in. I wonder what they're there for?

[thepunisher]

I see you've left the x's in. I wonder what they're there for?

I think they're there to distinguish between each person/subject he replies to as Endeavour doesn't like addressing each member on his own but instead puts all replies in one post. Or because he simply can't find a cross on here. I think its: alt + t = † :D

Christian

[CosmicFish]

I think they're there to distinguish between each person/subject he replies to as Endeavour doesn't like addressing each member on his own but instead puts all replies in one post. Or because he simply can't find a cross on here. I think its: alt + t = † :D

Christian
You
†
might
†
well
†
be
†
right
†
there
†
young
†
man!
†
:D

[Aegis]

As a public service I have attempted to abridge Endevours last post, this is to aid those that may not be able to puzzle out what was written.

Moony
And people* wonder why science doesn't even acknowledge the creationist arguments ;)




By "people" I think it's clear that I meant creationists :D

[Moony]

:cool:

Nice to see that I've managed to help you all out.

Moony

[thepunisher]

Mr punisher, I dont think you understand that I agree it was your ex girlfriends fault, and the wanna-be preachers fault. And you sure dont understand that I said I never cheated on anyone and I preach. So if I would never betray your trust and take your girlfriend why treat me like the slime that does?

Well, I'm glad you see that Endeavour, thats a progress. And by the way, I'm not treating you like him at all. In fact, what you don't seem to be getting is that you are treating everyone like slime on this thread that doesn't seem to agree with you. Hence you're getting it back. And not only from me. You are showing huge amount of disrespect by taking digs at ppl of knowledge themselves on here. As well as showing no openmindedness whatsoever towards what we say because your bible seem to have all the answers. But asking all of us to have it towards you. By the way, I would appreciate you dropping the subject concerning my ex. Thanks.

Christian

[Poop-Loops]

This is because the stories in the bible are nothing more than allegorical farie tales. Even most forwards thinking christians accept this.

The simple fact of the matter is that the majority of biblical stories defy logic - take the Noahs arc example that i raised earlier and that Endevour has conveniently ignored. Common sense says that it could not have happened literally - dito Adam and Eve. There are flaws in all the stories some because they are not meant to be taken literally, others (the virgin birth) due to mistranslations.

So should there even being a God not be taken literally, either?

[Endeavor]

Mr punisher I'll be glad to stop about your ex as long as you can agree its not my fault or the fault of my religion that she betrayed you, then I'll know you understand the actions of individuals dont reflect the instructions.
x
Mr Simpson please, we already established that there were not 2 of each animal in the ark. 2 of the unclean animals 7 of the clean. We have also established that man was created first, and woman was the "help" for man, not the animals. Let me say it again we could say Mr simpson is 20 years old and lives in Montana and is a male. I dont know your age or where you live this is just to show you something. Saying you were 20 years old is the first thing I said and that you were male the third, yet the fact you are male came first in your life. So the point is the fact that animals were created and you dont find in Genesis that it says, First animals were created THEN man and woman.
x
THANKS TO ALL YOU SCIENCE "EXPERTS" FOR ENLIGHTENING US ALL ABOUT HOW WE HAVE KNOWN THE AMOUNTS OF RADIATION AT THE DAY OF THE BIG BANG, BEFORE THE BIG BANG AND THE EVER STEADY PROOF OF THAT AMOUNT NEVER CHANGING. How about if I ask you a question you answer it instaead of just making fun of me, because you really dont know the anwsers to my questions you just have far fetched fairy tales about men being apes and yet we know the origin of life and the day we just poped into here by some unknown explosion where the universe was all coalesed in one place.
Sad sad joke. MOst of you dont even know anything about the dating methods so how do you think you can jump on the wagon and claim it to be realistic, you have no proof, evidence, or even any part of your lives in determining the age of the universe or the earth so why not let the "experts" battle the experts and you just talk about the things you know.
x
Mr fish, when more than one post asks me questions or insults me You want me to answer each with an individual post? Id rather utilize the space better.
x
How about someone answer my last post in scientific brilliance or admit you dont know because I already know that you dont know and you know that you dont know, how about admitting you dont know. :) The proof you dont know is obvious.
x
Yes mr loops, faith comes first. If you believed mice could talk where are the witnesses to introduce this faith? When you have faith it is like faith in santa claus, you never seen santa bring the presents but you heard the talk about him and you belive other peoples witness. The witness of multitudes of people who wrote the Bible, not just one author, PROVEN by the different years which the books were written, even by scientific methods, like the book of Isaiah being written about 600 years before Christ and the New Testament. We believe these witness' and proof after proof is further established along our walk of faith. We dont ask for proof, we ask for faith, and eventually faith turns into proof. All Christians understand this. You ask not believing or dont ask at all, and you see the results, and wonder why?
You dont have faith in talking to mice so why bring up that question unless you want to see if they have communication towards each other?
x
Mr punisher IM treating everyone like slime? look at the responces to my last post. Youll see NO scientific evidence just BS and insults. I dont call any of you dumb because I dont play that game. The United States Military has already given me an ASVAB test and Ive had my IQ tested a few different times so I already know how I rank on terms of intelligence, and someone on the internet is going to tell me they know me? No way jose. I can see the intelligence among most of you, so I just use the mis-information some of you say. And if you say something wrong Im not supposta question it? I dont treat anyone like slime my friend, even among those that have done it to me.
I already jump for joy, I already have the proof :) Im just hopeing if nothing else you can understand the actions of individuals are not equal to the remainder of the population nor the instruction manual. A good example is the muslims which these idiots make fun of their leader and people rioted and killed other people. not the entire faith is killing and rioting. so I dont blame everyone just the idiots that made fun of someones life, in reality that can bring the death penalty and high consequences, except for Christians, because we are willing to die to be right and God makes all things right for us.
He will repay, and I already have proof If I told you things that happened to me you wouldnt believe so when you believe you will see the proof and then you could ask me and you would know the proof, because if I just told you, you would say I was lying or it was a coincidence I would have to probably mail you proof that I suffered greatly and was condemned and freed and guilty and let go because of my faith, even among the non-faithful who recieved faith.
x
No one is born a Christian, Christians are made, thats the term born again, because one day you realize you cant win and decide you need to do something, you want to be happy and you want to consider an afterlife plan for you and your family, you want to ask to be accepted and your loved ones to be accepted because they didnt ask and you know all of us are going to die.
x
Who is dumber the person who says Im so dumb or the people who say that and keep comming back here to read what I write day after day? So either Im not dumb or youre dumber so please hold the insults and ask questions and talk to me like men and women and we'll all get along better :)

x
pjgoober, the Bible is very old, and people try to translate it in modern times, guess what??? it says the same thing. The Bible is a big big book saying mostly the same stuff, most books of the Bible talk about other Books in the Bible so they are all translated wrong when they agree with each other? Please tell us the true translations since you know Hebrew. Oh yea, you dont Im guessing, you just assume it has changed wording through time, ever heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls, hmmm... they say the same thing as guess what? the Bible... better get your facts straight first then just say you dont believe because saying it has changed translation isnt solid ground to argue, saying you just dont believe is more appropriate.
x
and mr pjgoober, you think that God cant create new animals? why wipe out the old animals anyway? were these the dinosaurs and the beasts mentioned in older times? You dont think that God just told Noah to gather animals and feed them and took a nap do you? Maybe God maybe helped the animals behave and not fight each other or hurt Noah maybe? Maybe Hes got that kind of power, to feed and ensure Noahs safety. And God cant make new people on the earth? Sure He can, out of all the people He choose to keep Noah and his crew and introduce a new world to them, kinda makes you wonder if when we're all dead if any of us would be worthy. You talk about logical problems with the ark, well the ark isnt logical, why not just make noah fly and the animals fly? Either God has all power or no power at all, If He created everything He cant make the ark float and the animals have enought to eat, He cant create food for them and keep them alive? Please
youre thinking like a human regarding a mirical and the power of God.
x
Mr loops you would rather be a slave than in the desert or wilderness? They didnt have it easy being slaves ya know? it was actually killing them, hard bondage, poverty and oppression. Id rather be set free, religion or not. they actually were killing children to prevent a leader to deliver them, sounds kinda depressing to stay with that kind of people... to me anyway. God made all people, all people return to God. You have chance after chance to value your blessings and consider that one day you will die, be it in a wreck today or of old age or disease or gunshot.. so think about the now and the future because apes and big bangs wont save your family and loved ones or yourself and there is an easy escape from that burdon, because the burdon is upon you today or in time.

[Poop-Loops]

I find it funnier that God decided to kill some firstborns, too. Not the people who actually did something wrong, but people who did NOTHING wrong.

Why won't God save my family? Because I don't believe in Him? I shouldn't have to pray for him to protect my family. He's not a mob boss, is he? "Oh Don Yahweh, please spare my family! I will give you Protection prayers in return!"

Imaginary beings won't save my family. If and when bad things happen, I can only depend on myself and my fellow humans to help me. If God cared, he would help regardless. I tutor people at school expecting nothing in return. But I guess God likes Tsunamis and Hurricanes, instead.

[Scarlet Mist]

GET YOUR PSEUDO-SCIENCE OUT OF THIS THREAD NOW!!!!!!!!

Don't even say the words "uncertainty principle" in the same sentence if you have NO IDEA what it is.

The fact that you don't even know how a scientific experiment works means you need to shut the *explitive* up. They are DESIGNED to only have one variable.

"Science is flawed, it hasn't explained EVERYTHING yet. I will instead believe a book that tells me that the garden of Eden is protected by two hovering flaming swords."

Playa please, hold the aggression and restrain yourself. Not ony does it not do anything to further the discussion, it's also reduces your credibility, especially when there is no reason for it. Have you read any of Heisenberg's texts in which he expounds the principle? If you have how useful would it be to use terms from his papers? Not very, because not many people would understand. If I stated it mathematically as "The product of the uncertainties (or standard deviation) in change in momentum and the chage in position of a particle must be greater than or equal to planck's constant divided four times pi" how useful would it be to someone who hasn't studies quantum mechanics?
As for variables in experiments - the only experiments that have one thing kept absolutely constant are thought experiments. You can attempt to restrain all you want, but you can't keep some feature actually constant if you can't read it exactly. Why do you think results keep changing all the time? Oh dear lord, the chamber is the same today as it was yesterday, why are we only getting 25mV when yesterday we had 27? The van der waals equation for gases has corrections for intermolecular forces because the guys who came up with the ideal gas theory did not consider intermolecular forces, I doubt they considered molecules. How can you tell what's being kept constant it you barely know what's there? What I'm trying to say is that the experimental method is in a word .... uncertain ... to an extent.

I was aiming at a more qualitative description of the uncertainty priciple - it is impossible to know exactly, the momentum and position of the particle - in theory. In practice, you also have to consider that the radiation you use to observe also takes time to get there and time to get back to you, the methods you use to measure further increase your uncertainty. This is of course fundamental to quantum mechanics. All I was doing was trying to show how fundamental lack of certainty is to science.
Experiments are based on observations, if handicapped if your observations are off.


Mrs Scarlett, you are a far superior debater to Endevour and i credit you with that, but you are still debating based on a flawed premise.

Science doesn't claim to be prefect, it simply aims to be the best availiable approximation. The approximation changes in an attempt to better itself ( i like your ever decreasing footsteps example, its a nice analogy for the way science can get as close as it likes to understanding the universe but never turely acheive its goal. The problem lies that Religion is truely static in this analogy - as a believer you place Religion as the goal that science is aiming towards but never reaching (the ultimate truth) as a non-believer i don't think that the "word of God" is the ultimate truth, and nothing either of us say is going to convince the other.

The differance between science and religion is the application of each - what science does is (despite its flaws) it allows us to make hypothesese about the way the world works. Such hypothese allow humanity to grow and develoup. The debate as to whether the theory is perfectly true doesn't stop it being useful. Now we all accept that newtonian mechanics are not a perfect representation of the way the physical world actually works, but it does allow simulations to be run on the way airplane wings are formed in the manufacturing process, so that when you fly around the world the wing of your plane doesn't fall off. There are identifiable and proveable benifits even of the flawed aspects of scientific thinking - because it enables us to open our minds and understand on varying levels how the world works. If everyone just accepted the bible as the ulitmate truth of the universe and creation and rejected science as Endevour does then we'd not have progressed since the middle ages and would be living in stone castles with big fires unable to communicate with the outside world. Believe the exact intricacies or not - science betters humanity - religion only stifles it.

As you have said, science is not perfect. It certainly is not. It does go a long way to explaining many things. But still, you know there are some questions it can never answer.
Science is an approximation, a good one, but it still a very limited one. It is as if the distance from A to B is infinitely large. And science has the disadvantage of not knowing where neither A nor B is. Truth is you do need a perfect theory, science does not claim to be perfect, and therefore does not fit the bill. God claims to be perfect, and therefore does. This is why science cannot replace God.

Of course science is glorious, of course human would still be wandering the wild if it wasn't for curiosity and ingenuity and science and whatnot. I am not disputing that. All I'm saying is that if you want the big answer science cannot give it to you. Religion can. The case for religion being true and whatnot is for another, time, all I'm saying is that science is not, and cannot be the answer to all our questions.

[Poop-Loops]

So you're saying that since science cannot be super-precise, it must all be bogus? You should ask God what he thinks about this subject. Let me know when you get an answer. Meanwhile, I'll actually be contributing to society.

[BendzR]

SM is one of very few people who I do not neccessarily agree with, but I can actually accept why they think the way they do, based on certain reasoning.

Unlike most of the people who make ridiculous claims on here regarding God, and the Bible, he can actually back his beliefs up with a certain ammount of reasoning.

And unlike him, I doubt most people on here with their little rants - which includes the celebrity troll in this thread - can actually provide any reasoning to why they believe some things, and why they love to preach on online forums, even if they get pathetically debunked into oblivion.

You, and all of these philosophy/religion trolls come on here, not trying to discuss your religions/beliefs, but to preach, and end up making a joke out of yourself.

So, Endeavor, please explain [read preach] to me how Kangeroos got to Australia after the global flood ?

[Poop-Loops]

I disagree that SM is using good reasoning.

He is simply saying: "Science isn't perfect, therefore I will believe in something else. Nevermind the fact that the other thing I will believe in has ZERO proof or credibility."

I see absolutely no logic in this reasoning.

[BendzR]

I would disagree with you, if that was what he was saying. Although I don't think he's saying that. Far from it.

He is pointing out that Scientific Models - even as acurate as they are - are still subject to perspective. This is true.

So they do not really have room for Faith, nor are they absolute. Still true.

Faith driven belief would allow for potentially absolute truth.

Thus, he accepts his Faith with open arms.

That does not mean he rejects Science as a whole or suggest its flawed. It does explain his reasoning - although maybe not entirely logically sound to the skeptical/scientific mind (as a result of dealing with Faith related concepts) - his reasoning is still logically valid.

Pointing out the incompatible (at comparison) nature of Science and Religion, shows his thinking, and deserves some respect.

His views, in their nature, would also prevent him from being a preaching-troll. Which makes it totally acceptable to my standards. No one has ever been hurt from someone else having faith, or someone else believing in God. The problem comes when people are trying to convert others, or preach their nonsense with force.

[Poop-Loops]

Science is not absolute because we still haven't discovered all of it yet. Hey, we only had like what, 500 years, for real science to develop? Religion has been around since the beginning of time and hasn't helped us ONE BIT. It has caused a lot of wars, though.

Besides, faith is something human. "The Truth" has to go beyond humanity and our lives. It has to apply for every situation and every person. That is what science is trying to find. All religions have their set philosophies and instead try to bend The Truth around to fit it. It doesn't work that way, I'm sorry.

Besides, he's so confident in Christianity. How does he know it's not Islam or Bhuddism which is true? Or some yet-unknown religion from another planet?

[BendzR]

Science is not absolute because we still haven't discovered all of it yet. Hey, we only had like what, 500 years, for real science to develop? Religion has been around since the beginning of time and hasn't helped us ONE BIT. It has caused a lot of wars, though.

Science is not absolute, not only because it's young. You will never be able to prove you are/aren't in a Matrix. Because as soon as you do, you have to prove that you are/aren't in a second Matrix. It goes on forever.

You cannot prove that reality is real. You cannot prove that everything you experience isn't just imaginative.

So, ultimately, everything, including the accuracy of Science, comes down to perspective.

Science will never be Absolute. It is impossible by definition. It cannot deal with things such as God - wether they are potentially real, or not - and never will.

Now, personally, I don't really care. I think Science is as absolute or "real" as it needs to be. I personally think it is irrelevant.

Unfortunately, that is just my opinion on the matter. There is no logical law or reason why someone else may not find it important.

In this case, SM, finds that the impossible absoluteness (that does not mean wrong, so don't misquote him) of Science, matters to him. Which, results in him, accepting a faith driven belief.

Besides, faith is something human. "The Truth" has to go beyond humanity and our lives. It has to apply for every situation and every person. That is what science is trying to find. All religions have their set philosophies and instead try to bend The Truth around to fit it. It doesn't work that way, I'm sorry.

You are entirely missing his point. Science cannot find that "truth" that you are refering to. Science is restricted to perspective, and observation in the real world. The "truth" that Science can uncover, is only that which is material, by definition. It does not deal with philoshopy. That is SMs' entire point.

For something that goes beyond humanity and our lives, we would need to accept things via faith. I personally wouldn't need to do this, because I don't really care. But for those who do, it would be impossible to find this absolute reality via a limited Science.

I'm not sure what you mean by "faith is a human thing". Faith is simply a way for someone to believe in the potential of something, via ultimate optimism. Sort of how you and I have faith that the pictures of the Planet are real, and that the earth isn't really flat.

It may sound crazy, but I have literally got no reason to believe the earth is round, unless I have faith. I have not seen the planet myself, nor do I have any genuine personal proof. I do however have faith in something which seems logically sound. Even if it is limited to perspective.

I believe SM is trying to point out, that Faith is an important part of understanding anything. Faith is needed to believe in Science, it is needed to believe in almost everything. And it should also be needed to find an absolute truth.

Besides, he's so confident in Christianity. How does he know it's not Islam or Bhuddism which is true? Or some yet-unknown religion from another planet?

Now, this I agree with.

His logic regarding the need for Faith, I can understand.

Earlier he said he would leave the specifics regarding Christianity for another thread and day. So I take him those premesis.

[Poop-Loops]

Everybody being trapped inside a matrix: REALLY farfetched.

God existing: EVEN MORE farfetched.

[thepunisher]

Mr punisher I'll be glad to stop about your ex as long as you can agree its not my fault or the fault of my religion that she betrayed you, then I'll know you understand the actions of individuals dont reflect the instructions.


No, actually Endeavour, you will simply stop talking about her altogether. No conditions from your side to it. I don't have to agree to anything in order for you to stop. Get my drift ? And to be honest, what are you trying to do, defend your whole religion based on that incident with my ex ? It might have been an individual Endeavour but she still got brainwashed by someone very much like you. And that individual decided to judge my own character based on me being an atheist. Thats the keypoint and one thing I know, you won't be able to defend this. So don't bother trying.

I was actually personally offended by that response of yours concerning this on post #165 and the only thing that kept me from reporting you is you subsequently showing understanding. So either you show understanding now in stopping talking about her or I will report you.

Like someone else said before, you have no idea what really happened so basing your own judgment on it like you did is frankly out of line.

Christian

[Aegis]

THANKS TO ALL YOU SCIENCE "EXPERTS" FOR ENLIGHTENING US ALL ABOUT HOW WE HAVE KNOWN THE AMOUNTS OF RADIATION AT THE DAY OF THE BIG BANG, BEFORE THE BIG BANG AND THE EVER STEADY PROOF OF THAT AMOUNT NEVER CHANGING. How about if I ask you a question you answer it instaead of just making fun of me, because you really dont know the anwsers to my questions you just have far fetched fairy tales about men being apes and yet we know the origin of life and the day we just poped into here by some unknown explosion where the universe was all coalesed in one place.

With all the questions by people in this thread that you've evaded because you didn't know the answer, what makes you think that as soon as you ask a fairly nonsensical question people are going to rush to answer it?

How do we know the amount of radiation present at the big bang? As far as I can remember from the science I've done, we don't. Since we don't need to know this value for anything else we do, this isn't a problem.

"Before" the big bang actually makes no sense unless you redefine time, as the current knowledge of relativity and cosmology actuallys shows that at the point where all matter was coming together into an infinitessimal region, the dimension of time would actually become infinite, meaning that from the perspective of being in the universe, you could go back another billion years or 2 and not even notice much movement. Of course, that would require something to be alive in that mess, which is incredibly unlikely. Absolute measurement of time ignoring dilation gives the age of the universe, but it is my understanding that from within the universe, the universe is actually infinitely old because of the nature of the singularity and the asymptotic time dimension "in the beginning".

Any cosmologists want to correct me?

As an addition, I imaging we could get a rough approximation by observing the background radiation of the universe and making the assumption that this background radiation is equal throughout the universe, then multiply the count by the current volume of the universe over the volume you want to find the background count for. This completely ignores any absorption and emission effects, but I imagine it would do as an initial assumption if you really wanted to find this out.

Sad sad joke. MOst of you dont even know anything about the dating methods so how do you think you can jump on the wagon and claim it to be realistic, you have no proof, evidence, or even any part of your lives in determining the age of the universe or the earth so why not let the "experts" battle the experts and you just talk about the things you know.

Why not take your own advice then? I've asked you questions on dating methods that you've ignored time and time again, instead going off on a tangent with your "calibration" argument, which I'd actually anticipated and told you to read up on before you even made it. You are not an expert, I am not an expert, but I demonstrate a lot more expertise when it comes to actual scientific research.

In fact, this was my aim to begin with: to demonstrate that while you claimed to be able to explain beliefs and why you believe them to non-christians, it is with ignorance of other explanations rather than a well-rounded knowledge base. Would you trust a scientist to explain why Genesis doesn't fit in with modern science if he'd never actually read the book? If not, then why should anyone trust someone to explain how science really fits their beliefs (or is wrong) when they clearly don't understand the theories and hypotheses that they're arguing against?


How about someone answer my last post in scientific brilliance or admit you dont know because I already know that you dont know and you know that you dont know, how about admitting you dont know. :) The proof you dont know is obvious.

It's equally obvious that you know an awful lot less about science than most people on this thread. In addition, since none of us claim to know everything about science, and since scientists don't claim to know all there is to know about everything, why wouldn't an "I don't know" be appropriate here? After all, you've not even explained why we would even need to know the radiation levels at the big bang, especially when we have such nice expansion rate models to use to calculate the age of the universe rather than radiometric dating...

But you knew that we don't use radiometric dating to find the age of the universe, right?

Who is dumber the person who says Im so dumb or the people who say that and keep comming back here to read what I write day after day? So either Im not dumb or youre dumber so please hold the insults and ask questions and talk to me like men and women and we'll all get along better :)

Wow, what poor logic. Nice little false dichotomy you have there.

Of course, you missed out the possibility that a) people like debates, and b) that people care enough about science to counter the claims of someone who seeks to poison the scientific knowledge of others to further their own beliefs.

and mr pjgoober, you think that God cant create new animals? why wipe out the old animals anyway? were these the dinosaurs and the beasts mentioned in older times? You dont think that God just told Noah to gather animals and feed them and took a nap do you? Maybe God maybe helped the animals behave and not fight each other or hurt Noah maybe? Maybe Hes got that kind of power, to feed and ensure Noahs safety. And God cant make new people on the earth? Sure He can, out of all the people He choose to keep Noah and his crew and introduce a new world to them, kinda makes you wonder if when we're all dead if any of us would be worthy. You talk about logical problems with the ark, well the ark isnt logical, why not just make noah fly and the animals fly? Either God has all power or no power at all, If He created everything He cant make the ark float and the animals have enought to eat, He cant create food for them and keep them alive? Please
youre thinking like a human regarding a mirical and the power of God.

Do you not think that a second creation event would warrant some mention in the bible. And if not, then uh-oh, you're adding to the words of the bible!

"Every word of God is PURE: He is a shield unto them that put their trust in Him. ADD YOU NOT unto His words, lest He reprove you, and you be found a liar"

See, if you believe that the bible is infallible and literal, you cannot consistently believe in a second creation event because that would be interpreting the bible to mean something that isn't stated, thus adding to god's words.

So, are you a bible literalist, or do you think that you can add/subtract from the bible where you think it's appropriate?

[thepunisher]

All I'm saying is that if you want the big answer science cannot give it to you. Religion can. The case for religion being true and whatnot is for another, time, all I'm saying is that science is not, and cannot be the answer to all our questions.

Neither can the bible ScarletMist. In fact, looking at Endeavours answers so far it doesn't seem to give any substantial answers whatsoever. In fact, what it seems to give is conditions we have to live by in order not to end up in hell. One of which is to have faith in god.

Science doesn't give all the answers but at least the answers it does give are given without any added conditions. I don't have to worry about not believing in evolution if I don't want to as the scientists won't send me to hell for it.

Christian

[Moony]

With thanks to Aegis for addressing the conent of the most recent of Endevour borderline rabid dribblings I will now repeat my public service for you all with his most recent thread. NB: The X's are left in so that people can correlate between the abridged post and the original.

Enjoy

Moony

Trying to back peddle out of using something that should have been left alone. Not includes an attempt at self justification.
x
Sweeping insult to all women and seemingly changing things in the bible. Waffle used in an attempt to prove a point that is unclear.
x
Whinge about having errors corrected and proof exemplar that the writer is scientifically illiterate.
x
Mr fish, when more than one post asks me questions or insults me You want me to answer each with an individual post? Id rather utilize the space better.
x
Attempt to look smart by claiming to know the answers and demanding the answer from Scientists dispite having demonstated that it won't be understood even if simple language is used.
x
Semi coherent quasi religious ramble about putting faith first then getting proof.
x
More ramble and attempts to justify position. Claim at having had Intelligence rated by the military and assumes that others are concerned about this. More faith related religous waffle.
x
Relion related ramble
x
Trying to look smart but missing the point of why people are involved.
x
Attempts to make a point about validity of the Bible, challenges someone about comparing different versions without being able to complete said task himself.
x
Logic suspended as super natural being is called upon to explain away logical issues that arise from sticking to much stuff on a lifeboat.
x
Ramble about something that may or may not have happened in an attempt to guilt trip a person or persons about their accpetance of something that the writer has demonstated lack of understanding about.

P.S. Oh Endevour, about the IQ thing....i had mine done in november as part of something else. I was given the result as an absolute score that relates to that test only and as a percentile so it can be compared acuratly with other IQ tests. As it is i scored in the 98th percentile, whivh means in a room of 100 people there are only 2 people there that are smarter than me.

[pj_goober]

1)pjgoober, the Bible is very old, and people try to translate it in modern times, guess what??? it says the same thing. The Bible is a big big book saying mostly the same stuff, most books of the Bible talk about other Books in the Bible so they are all translated wrong when they agree with each other? Please tell us the true translations since you know Hebrew. Oh yea, you dont Im guessing, you just assume it has changed wording through time, ever heard of the Dead Sea Scrolls, hmmm... they say the same thing as guess what? the Bible... better get your facts straight first then just say you dont believe because saying it has changed translation isnt solid ground to argue, saying you just dont believe is more appropriate.
x
1) Actually most theologians will agree that the word "virgin" in the context of the virgin birth was a mistranslation. The Hebrew word used in Isaiah is almah (http://www.biblicalheritage.org/images/DTB/HA+ALMAH%20Box.jpg ) Which as you can see translates as "young woman" (which i'm sure you argee is no definition of virginity, especially in biblical times) The Hebrew for virgin is bethulah which is more directly considered as a translation of virgin (although the word maiden is more appropriate, you can already see why confusion might arise).

The change in translation from one ot the other is know to be when the hebrew was translated into greek (Septuagint) where almah was translated into parthenos (which DOES mean virgin). Matthew (the gospel writer not the desciple) translated back from the greek (the evidence for this is catagorical) which became :

'Now all this was done, that it might be fulfiled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold,a vigrin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel'

It is widely accepted by Christian scholers that the story of the virgin birth was a mistranslation...this is but one example.

(in a debate NEVER assume the person you're arguing with doesn't know something..little freindly tip there)


2)and mr pjgoober, you think that God cant create new animals? why wipe out the old animals anyway? were these the dinosaurs and the beasts mentioned in older times? You dont think that God just told Noah to gather animals and feed them and took a nap do you? Maybe God maybe helped the animals behave and not fight each other or hurt Noah maybe? Maybe Hes got that kind of power, to feed and ensure Noahs safety. And God cant make new people on the earth? Sure He can, out of all the people He choose to keep Noah and his crew and introduce a new world to them, kinda makes you wonder if when we're all dead if any of us would be worthy. You talk about logical problems with the ark, well the ark isnt logical, why not just make noah fly and the animals fly? Either God has all power or no power at all, If He created everything He cant make the ark float and the animals have enought to eat, He cant create food for them and keep them alive? Please
youre thinking like a human regarding a mirical and the power of God.


Ok. so then if God could have done all that you mention, why did he bother with the whole arc thing in the first place? Surely the only point of the arc is to save all the animals so they can start again, as humanity needs wiping from the earth (except Noah). If the arc is not actually needed (God just going to create new animals out of the air) why bother getting Noah to build it in the first place?
Also - you are claiming that the Bible is the be all and end all document of exact factual accounting of what happened - right? Why then does the Bible say that Noah built the arc (therefore it is a man made non-supernatural arc) and gathered 2 of every animal (which is physically and temporally impossible, but whatever), if what you think actually happened is that god re-created all life on earth after the flood? why is there no mention of this in the bible...you can't just go making up new biblical stories if you're also claiming the bible is a literal truth of what happened..

[pj_goober]

As you have said, science is not perfect. It certainly is not. It does go a long way to explaining many things. But still, you know there are some questions it can never answer.
Science is an approximation, a good one, but it still a very limited one. It is as if the distance from A to B is infinitely large. And science has the disadvantage of not knowing where neither A nor B is. Truth is you do need a perfect theory, science does not claim to be perfect, and therefore does not fit the bill. God claims to be perfect, and therefore does. This is why science cannot replace God.

Of course science is glorious, of course human would still be wandering the wild if it wasn't for curiosity and ingenuity and science and whatnot. I am not disputing that. All I'm saying is that if you want the big answer science cannot give it to you. Religion can. The case for religion being true and whatnot is for another, time, all I'm saying is that science is not, and cannot be the answer to all our questions.

I can't disagree with any of that. I personally don't think that Religion holds all the answers, but as neither of us can ever know for certain (beyond personal faith) theres little point in arguing it. Simple fact is you believe in something i don't, doesn't change anything. Of course someone with faith believe that God is the holder of the ultimate truth, but at least you're sane enough to accept that science serves a purpose within that. I totally respect the fact that you're humble enough not to try and push that belief on anyone, or try and use made up science to disprove what is accepted as fact.

I hope you don't think i am anti-relgion or faith, just because i don't have either, but surely you agree that endeavor is spouting a crock of poo?

[CosmicFish]

With thanks to Aegis for addressing the conent of the most recent of Endevour borderline rabid dribblings I will now repeat my public service for you all with his most recent thread. NB: The X's are left in so that people can correlate between the abridged post and the original.

Enjoy

Moony
Nice summary!
x
It's interesting that the only one you didn't "translate" is the one where he's replying to me.
x
Here's my translation:
x
Original text: Mr fish, when more than one post asks me questions or insults me You want me to answer each with an individual post? Id rather utilize the space better.
x
Translation: Lame attempt to dodge the fact that he's ignoring serious questions by pretending that it's all too much for him.
x
p.s. I love the way he calls me "Mr Fish" and Homer "Mr Simpson", like he's respectfully addresing us by our real surnames.

[CKava]

Endeavour take heed of SM and PJ Goober's interaction and compare it to how people are responding to you. Now do you see its not religious vs. non-religious but rational vs. rather silly?

[Moony]

Nice summary!
x
It's interesting that the only one you didn't "translate" is the one where he's replying to me.
x
Here's my translation:
x
Original text: Mr fish, when more than one post asks me questions or insults me You want me to answer each with an individual post? Id rather utilize the space better.
x
Translation: Lame attempt to dodge the fact that he's ignoring serious questions by pretending that it's all too much for him.
x
p.s. I love the way he calls me "Mr Fish" and Homer "Mr Simpson", like he's respectfully addresing us by our real surnames.


So sorry! It was a short waffle and i missed it with my other summeries and mutlitasking....

However so as not to disabout you here is my version:


The Writer is lazy, and doing something like that takes away preaching time.

You get Mr {section of user name treated like surname} and all i get if Ms Science or some such....i'm modestly offended. Maybe it links back to the bible saying i'm only here to assist men...*snorts*

Moony

[Martial Mark]

Reading the opening post of this forum it was easy to see where this would end up, it happens everytime, it is imposible for a Christian to convert anyone if they have made the decision to not even concider what is written, and every non beleiver falls into self justification and attack things which they feel are contradictory in the bible, and finally ends up with insults thrown both ways.

The non beleiver attacks the beleiver cus they think they are stupid for beleiving.

And the beleiver attacks the non beleiver because they cant see from the same viewpoint.

Where do I stand on this? im sat on the fence, painfully watching the exchanges get more and more insulting, the first thing people have to understand is once a person becomes a Christian they dont automatically understand everything, thats why it is called born again, they are born spiritually to understand things in the spiritual realm, but it takes many years to even understand some of the basic doctrines.

All Endeavor wanted to do was perhaps help some people that are thinking about life and whats life all about, and perhaps clear up some of the misconceptions of Christianity these days, but I think some of the questions have been approached in the wrong way, to give an answer to such doctines as the flood, noah, etc requires a lot of insight and knowledge in the what happened and why, its imposible to just quote scripture and get people to understand from that.

Ask me a couple of years back and I would'nt even give this kind of thing a hearing, I seen it in such a bad light, thinking it was the cause of wars, and thought it was something which would hold a person back from living life, a freind of mine started getting into it and talked to me a few times about what he beleives and it sounded far fetched and really couldnt understand why he had this viewpoint, so I made it my mission to try and disprove what he beleived as I thought it was gonna hold him back from acheiveing his goals in life, that was my view on it at that time, I hated anything doctrinal at all.

I spent months on the computer google searching for things to disprove what he beleived, really thinking I was doing the right thing but what did I find, the more I studied the more I found it to be true, I hated the fact that it was so accurate, then I done research on bible prophecy. thinking ive got to find something here with numbers, im good with math, Ive got to find some inaccuracies, this shocked me, there is mathematical genius behind the scripture, and it is the same all the way through, this is what got me hooked on learning more.

The more I learned the more I realised how much of an misconception I had on this whole thing, thinking it was about the sceaming, hollering, sweaty preachers prancing about on stage, getting people pumped up with music and all emotional and taking their money, then I learned the bible teaches of this and gives warnings to stay away from such teachings as it will blind you from the truth, I thought ok, what is the truth, expecting to find a simple answer, what I got was something so deep it blew me away, I know now that is going to take me years to have a good understanding of this, but I am always gonna learn and study more, not because I feel I have to, and not out of fear or pressure, but because I want to.

Im not gonna try and justify what I beleive, nor am I gonna try and convert anyone into believing what I believe, cus I know it was impossible to convice me at that time when I was against it, I would just ask that the people that attack it in certain areas do some research on that which you attack and really dig deep, and you too may find a bit of gold, but most people will just do a bit of digging and find only fools gold.

[pj_goober]

The non beleiver attacks the beleiver cus they think they are stupid for beleiving.

And the beleiver attacks the non beleiver because they cant see from the same viewpoint.



No-one is attacking Endeavor because of his beliefs (well some people might be but if they are they're ignorant bigots who deserve our scorn) what people are attacking Endeavor for is his use of psuedo science to refute the scientific beliefs of others. This and his refuseal to listen to cogent debate instead prefering retoric and strawman arguements to make his points.

He claims to be able to "resolve our biblical misunderstandings" but has completely failed to explain my fairly simple problems with the Noahs arc story, and on the raising of mistranslation issues accused me incorrectly of talking about something i know nothing about, rather than answering the question at hand.

This has nothing to do with faith vs science, but common-sense and rational argument against illogical garbage.

[Moony]

Martial,

There are 3 (4 including you) people on this thread that i can identify as 'believers', Endevour, Scarlet Mist and Capt Ann. If you read through the thread you'll see that alther there has been some disagreements on things that generally people are having polite(ish) and civil discussions with SM and CA. The difference between them and Endevour is that they are posting in a logical fashion and being reasonable. This enables us to have a discourse with them and both sides can pose questions/comments and get a reasoned responce. As such although i won't always agree with some of the things they say I can respect the both of them for their belifs and the discussion that can take place.

However Endevour has shown repeatedly that he seems to have significant problems comprehending what people say and seems to greatly lack the ability to write in a coherent and understanable way. He wants us to listen to him telling us that we're wrong dispite the fact that some of us have spent years studying what we're talking about and know that he is unfortunatly mistaken. Because of that and his attitude of 'i know the truth not you' i find it very hard to respect him and/or his beliefs.

I'm agnostic and i don't think there's enough evidence really either way to say if god is real or not. Taking the view that god is real he'd need to exists outside of what we know to some extent to explain the supernatural issues, which takes him/her outside of the realms of science. As long as i'm not trying to be converted or preached to i'm more than willing to talk about such things and i'll admit that my knowledge of what's in bible is a bit ropey and due to it's impact on society i'd like to learn some more about it someday. However as i'm skeptical about some aspects of it and i don't discount that it's been open to abuse by people wanting to use it to control others and/or support their positions i don't think i'll ever take it all literally.

Moony

[Strafio]

Neither can the bible ScarletMist. In fact, looking at Endeavours answers so far it doesn't seem to give any substantial answers whatsoever.
I'd say it gives good answers.
I know lots of people who've found themselves a lot happier and a lot clearer in what they want from life as a result of become Christian. I think something should be made clear though:

1) These answers are some answers to the questions but not the answers to the questions. I personally have found different ones in different "faiths".

2) These religions do best by searching areas that science cannot reach. Science is so good at accurately describing what it can reach that I wouldn't trust any religious belief to be more accurate. So when a religion challenges proper science, I'm generally going to have more faith in the scientific version.

HOWEVER: Scientism, (the belief that science can answer all of our questions) isn't properly scientific. It's a religious belief based around science but isn't science itself. So telling people that only scientific facts are valid would be religious preaching.

Not that I'm accusing anyone of doing this, it's just something we should all be aware of. You'll notice that Aegis and Moony specifically pointed out that they weren't disallowing the use of non-scientific facts, they were just making sure that someone only claimed a fact was scientific if it actually was scientific. Science has been seriously abused as a PR word lately! :confused:

[thepunisher]

I'd say it gives good answers.
I know lots of people who've found themselves a lot happier and a lot clearer in what they want from life as a result of become Christian. I think something should be made clear though...

What do you consider "good answers" Strafio ? The ten commandments aren't answers, neither is the story of the Arce Noah. Most of what is in the bible can be used as guidelines in morality, perhaps, but not as true fact or answer to anything.

And Strafio, I also know alot of ppl who never embraced Christianity and are still happy and content with their lives. It doesn't need the word of god to know what you want from life..I also have goals, just as an example, and have nothing to do with Christianity whatsoever. I want to find my dream job, I want to find a woman to love and start a family with and I have small goals like becoming a black belt in karate. Doesn't need god for me to know what I want from life at all.

Christian

[Strafio]

What do you consider "good answers" Strafio ? The ten commandments aren't answers, neither is the story of the Arce Noah. Most of what is in the bible can be used as guidelines in morality, perhaps, but not as true fact or answer to anything.
Not explicit spelt-out answers, no. There's no particular passage that answers particular questions. But the questions that we're talking about don't have those kinds of answers. I'm not sure wherabouts in the Bible these people find their answers but they do. It works out for them so who are we to say they're bad?

Yes, some of them assume that every one else is to find their answers in the same place, but don't we all? When I listen to a song and think that it's best thing that I've ever heard I naturally think that other people are going to as well. But I also know from experience that people have different tastes so it might not.

And Strafio, I also know alot of ppl who never embraced Christianity and are still happy and content with their lives.
Yes. I am one of them you muppet! :p
Seriously, re-read the bit where I stressed that they aren't the answers but some answers. This means that it answered the questions for some people, but not necessarily everyone.

It doesn't need the word of god to know what you want from life..I also have goals, just as an example, and have nothing to do with Christianity whatsoever. I want to find my dream job, I want to find a woman to love and start a family with and I have small goals like becoming a black belt in karate. Doesn't need god for me to know what I want from life at all.
Ofcourse. Nobody said that you didn't.
We were talking about questions that science can't answer and "meaning of life" would be one of them. Maybe there's a God behind this meaning (that you recognise as something else) or something else (that believers recognise as God) or whatever...

I don't find the specifics important.
Point is everyone finds their answers some place or other, and I don't fancy snubbing someone else's enlightenment. It kind of takes away from my own, see? :)

[aplonis]

To judge Christianity do not waste time proving Biblical stories true or not. Accept that christians believe they are true and judge those christians for their beliefs. Tally up the body count in the Old Testiment...the suckling infants dashed to pieces in the streets before their mother's eyes...the unborn ripped out of their pregnant mother's bellies...the forty and some little children torn apart by bears as God's answer to a prayer by one of his prophets.

All those acts of carnage and brute savagery are hailed as good and noble acts in the Old Testament and were done at the direct behest of God. These acts are still celebrated today. Not a single born-again christian I have ever met disparages those bloody attrocities for the horrors that they were. No....those were good deeds...done by belivers following orders from their God.

This how to judge a religion, any religion. Count the dead, how they were killed, for what reason. And then ask any modern believer whether those acts were good or evil. If in their view the butchery was good, then those believers are evil.

Gan Uesli Starling
Kalamazoo MI USA

http://monotheism.us

[thepunisher]

Yes. I am one of them you muppet! :p


I know that Strafio. ;) I wasn't trying to go at you for saying what you did just giving my own view. Didn't expect you to agree with it.

We were talking about questions that science can't answer and "meaning of life" would be one of them. Maybe there's a God behind this meaning (that you recognise as something else) or something else (that believers recognise as God) or whatever...


You know does there necessarily have to be a "meaning to our life" ?...I mean, I often see ppl having problems with being put down on the level of animals but in some ways thats what we are, but maybe on a higher level. But all animals go through the same procedure: being born, finding a mate to produce off-spring, care for that off-spring and teach it to cope with life and then die. So why couldn't that be the meaning of our life ? Why do we have to aspire to go to hell or heaven or to please a god ? Just offering food for thought, not disputing or disagreeing with what you are saying Strafio.

Christian

[Strafio]

Ahem... I've got a bit of a debating reflex sometimes. My bad. :o

Yeah, like you say, anyone can find their meaning in life in any sort of thing, I guess...
I reckon we all have in common that it involves some sort of happiness/satisfaction to it.

[Endeavor]

The things I wanted to establish were the admittions that science did not have the absolute knowledge of the origin of life, nor the time of the beginning of the universe. These parts of time are a religion, the worship of time among real aspects of science. Saying you dont know an exact answer then saying people are wrong for questioning your explainations proves a point to everyone.
x
ONe of you asked how did kangaroos get to Australia, ok how did people get to Australia, The continents were all joined then they split? And some monkey had a mutation which produced a human and another monkey just happened to have the same kind of mutation that made another human of the opposite sex and they populated the earth and then the continents split and some humans were in China and some were in Australia and some in North America, ? Nope didnt happen, you cant produce a new species out of an old one, you can however have a sligtly different result, like breeding one type of dog with another, but you dont get a monkey from a dog and you can breed the result of two different breeds of dogs back to the original breed in the process of time.
x
You'll see mr Martial Mark that people that worship time have resorted to name calling and wnnt answer the questions I ask except for saying "we dont know" which is rarly said, and highly respected for honesty. :)
x
ok aplones you are so righteous tell us this? When the Germans killed millions of Jews was it good? And when America and England and others joined together to fight to save the Jews from concentration camps was it good to save them by killing those that oppressed them? So which is it mr judge, let the Jews die or save them? There is bloodshed either way and no time for joking. You just thought you were good enough to judge people, Im sure if someone was choking your mother to death you wouldnt kill them now would you? BS, dont even try to fool yourself, time to get real.
x
Mr punisher the only reason I bring it up so much about your ex is because you blame me for what happened with you , I told you brother I never cheated on anyone and that means Im not like the slime priest that did that to you so you blame him and her and leave me out of it, and then we'll drop it, and I never told you to defend everyone, I told you to defend and blame individuals, and youre still counting us as a group. Thats the problem with racism, and sexism and other judgemental forms of hatrid. I agree you got done wrong and you make fun of me and get mad at me because I know how you feel about it?
x
Moony, youve only spent what 4 years, or 10 years or 20 years and you compare that to about 5,000 years of study? Evolutionary science isnt over 300 years old and the dating methods 100 years old? Please. I can see that you get mad but everyone suffers humilliation in their life, only some of us admit things and it makes us stronger, or we perpetuate things making them worse. Youre just mad at me because you cant answer my questions until you admit you do not know, that is all I wanted you to admit and most of you are doing so. The reason I want you to admit you dont know is for those people that come to view these posts and are not certain about the afterlife and why things are the way they are. They can see how you make fun and call names and avoid the questions they have asked themselves.
x
Most, if not all of you have never used carbon dating to date the earth, nor have you measured radio waves to measure the time of the origin of the universe nor have you measured time by a glacier or a tree or any other method, you heard how others know the answeres yet you have never gotten these answers by yourself nor duplicated these answers, you can take other peoples data and their explainations of the data and use their formulas to change that data to answers that embrace your religion of time.
x
God made all people, God loves us all, we have seen obvious examples of why God doesnt show all people what the believers get in life. You want proof, but you really dont want proof, you want proof to fail. All of us will face God in the end and what will you say, that you deserved proof? Or what did you deserve in this life? Youll find that all that you have you never deserved to have but were given gifts every day of your lives and chances to remember your lives are just a lightening flash and those around you.
x
Mr Strafio, you have an understanding that will be tempted by many kinds of people. Take what is good in science and what is good in religion and search them out. Always remember the results you find. NOt just facts about times, but facts about people, you can obvoiusly see here how the science "teachers" are really not teaching much science but angry that they dont have the answers and that I dont accept it that they dont have the answers, because Ive known all along they didnt have absolute proof, so why do they boast things so much, and not back up their information?
x
Why do people ask me about the animals on Noahs ark? We've already talked it to death. God creates everyday, new plants, new people, new fish.. Why did God tell NOah to build an ark? I dont know, why not make Noah fly? It wasnt my choice. Why not make a good world with out sin? We dont have these options we deal with what we have. It wasnt my choice to have Noah build an ark or for animals to be in it. Why not just have animals on the earth and no humans.. because its not our choice. I dont have to explain higher thougts than mine, I cant in every case. Especially when people dont believe.
And some people believe man evolved from an ape and is an ape thrust out from an explosion that began the universe, and they cant even explain why the universe would do such a thing because they really dont have a clue about the origion of the universe. People in the last few hundred years have better knowledge of it than people since the beginning of time all the way up to now? We know there is data and alot of science is accurate, but not the religous worship of pretend explainations that were made to attack religion by anti-religious scientists. Bad apples amond many good ideas.

[Moony]

Why am i doing this when i need a shower and to get ready for my lectures??? I don't know, it's kinda amusing really....anyway. Public service number3!

Deflection due to lack of understanding of science and the things people have said.
x
More deflection, and more evidence of the writters illiteracy in science. Blatantly needs to go back to school.
x
Attempt to call on a person with reasoning skills and the ability to form a coherent argument in an attempt to back up positition.
x
*yawn* Religious non sequitor padded with waffle due to not understanding what the other person was on about.
x
Really needing to shut up on this issue now as the writter has it *COMPLETELY* wrong and is in fact overbrimming in wrongability.
x
Highly amusing and inept assumption over abridgers mood, the abridger would like to know that she finds it ammusing and far to easy to do this with someone of poor debating skills. She might not be able to answer every question the writter poses but like all good scientists knows where to go for the answer. She also suggests the the writer tunes his radio into Sanity FM.
x
And our survey says....*ick-err*....carbon dating us used on organic materials that once lived and has a maximum age to it's useabulity that the abridger can't look up right now. Again the writter shows their lack of understanding and appreciation of scientific method in an open and blatant way.
x
God made man and man made religion. This point is essentially pseudo religious chaff and filler because at the end of the day whuman mind could really comprehend what god wants.
x
Again not getting the point, the incorrect fusion of science and religion forms both bad science and bad religion. The writter again fails to show an understanding of science and what it's about and makes assumptions about what others think. The abridger would like to note that if you take the word assume and split it up you make ass-u-me....
x
Now attempts to say that they can't hope to understand the mind/workings of god, attempting to have their cake and eat it. Lack of science understanding prohibits lack of understanding of the scientific explanation therefor confusing the writer which it seems the writer does not appreciate. The abridger thinks the writer sh9ould just go back to school and catch up on what they missed as opposed to assuming that all scienitists are against religion when in fact many are religious persons without the hangups of the writer. Again doesn't really get the point......

Moony

BSc (Hons) Geology, FGS

[Aegis]

The things I wanted to establish were the admittions that science did not have the absolute knowledge of the origin of life, nor the time of the beginning of the universe. These parts of time are a religion, the worship of time among real aspects of science. Saying you dont know an exact answer then saying people are wrong for questioning your explainations proves a point to everyone.

No-one here claimed that science has absolute knowledge. However, there are some things which are proved beyond reasonable doubt which directly contradict the funamentalist interpretation of the bible.

And no-one has said that questioning science is wrong. However, questioning it with zero knowledge on the subject is just a waste of time, as you won't even understand what your question means or what answer you would expect. I notice that after all this time you still haven't addressed my point about the first order differential equations of various dating methods overlapping and showing that either both methods are correctly calibrated or that the laws of physics changed the decay constants for each method. I suspect this comes from a lack of study of the science behind radiometric dating and the mathematics of differential equations, essentially redusing any argument you come up with to an argument from ignorance. After all, how can you possibly refute something if you don't even understand it?


ONe of you asked how did kangaroos get to Australia, ok how did people get to Australia, The continents were all joined then they split? And some monkey had a mutation which produced a human and another monkey just happened to have the same kind of mutation that made another human of the opposite sex and they populated the earth and then the continents split and some humans were in China and some were in Australia and some in North America, ?

Actually continental splitting doesn't have to occur. After all, humans are quite good at creativity, including boats, while kangaroos and koalas are noticably lacking in that department. In addition (Moony, correct me if I'm wrong) 40000 years ago when humans arrived in australia, the ice sheets down towards the South Pole would actually have meant that the distance to be crossed by boat was much shorter, still impossible for most mammals due to their having to swim, but not so for humans and boats.

2 minutes of looking on google found this:

The genetic evidence suggests that we evolved in Africa. We know that people reached Australia by forty thousand years ago, maybe earlier, which required travelling across sixty miles of open ocean, and it would have required a species with considerable intelligence to put together some kind of canoe or dugout that could have traversed that distance.

So humans arrived in australia by intelligent means (and also requiring an opposable thumb!)

[/QUOTE]
Nope didnt happen, you cant produce a new species out of an old one, you can however have a sligtly different result, like breeding one type of dog with another, but you dont get a monkey from a dog and you can breed the result of two different breeds of dogs back to the original breed in the process of time.

Do you even know the definition of a species? If so, then you'll probably also know that we have directly observed speciation (i.e. the formation of new species by the biological definition of species) through evolution.

In fact, your stance is now even harder to justify, because you've accepted small changes but not big ones. Why? What genetic barrier is there to stop small changes from accumulating? We have evidence that it happened, in DNA and in the fossil record (as well as other supporting evidences), and all you have to counter it is the claim that evolution can only go so far? Why, what stops it from going further? Answer this well and you'll be the only creationist in history ever to do so. And by "well", I mean with a scientific answer, not with "God stops it going further", which is as far from scientific as you can get.

You'll see mr Martial Mark that people that worship time have resorted to name calling and wnnt answer the questions I ask except for saying "we dont know" which is rarly said, and highly respected for honesty. :)

People have insinuated things about your position and suggested about your quallifications, neither of which are entirely unjustified given the ignorance you seem to show about science. No-one has "resorted to" name calling. You've had questions answered to the best of poeples' abilities here, and you ignore the answers and still try to assume the high ground while refusing to answer difficult questions yourself. Try not to adopt a martyr complex, it's about trhe last thing you want to do if you want your arguments listened to seriously.

ok aplones you are so righteous tell us this? When the Germans killed millions of Jews was it good? And when America and England and others joined together to fight to save the Jews from concentration camps was it good to save them by killing those that oppressed them? So which is it mr judge, let the Jews die or save them? There is bloodshed either way and no time for joking. You just thought you were good enough to judge people, Im sure if someone was choking your mother to death you wouldnt kill them now would you? BS, dont even try to fool yourself, time to get real.

Killing to save a nation is justified. Killing for an insult or to show power is murder. Beyond that, I don't care to answer because this is a question which assumes that the events in the bible happened, something I don't accept.


Moony, youve only spent what 4 years, or 10 years or 20 years and you compare that to about 5,000 years of study?

You what?? 5000 years of study? You're claiming to have studied for 5000 years then?

Moony did a degree at university which looked into the studies of the last few hundred years, and there's no way you studied for 5000 years on your own, so why are you even comparing these two numbers? It's like comparing the power output of a generator to the length of a piece of string: the comparison is utterly inappropriate and totally useless.

Evolutionary science isnt over 300 years old and the dating methods 100 years old? Please. I can see that you get mad but everyone suffers humilliation in their life, only some of us admit things and it makes us stronger, or we perpetuate things making them worse. Youre just mad at me because you cant answer my questions until you admit you do not know, that is all I wanted you to admit and most of you are doing so. The reason I want you to admit you dont know is for those people that come to view these posts and are not certain about the afterlife and why things are the way they are. They can see how you make fun and call names and avoid the questions they have asked themselves.

We're "mad at you" because you're arguing with science from what appears to be a position of almost total ignorance.


Most, if not all of you have never used carbon dating to date the earth, nor have you measured radio waves to measure the time of the origin of the universe nor have you measured time by a glacier or a tree or any other method, you heard how others know the answeres yet you have never gotten these answers by yourself nor duplicated these answers, you can take other peoples data and their explainations of the data and use their formulas to change that data to answers that embrace your religion of time.

Find any study of the origin of the universe or the age of the earth and critique it. Seriously, no bluff here. If you understand this subject well enough to argue it, find a study and debunk it. If you were really passionate about what you "know" then that's what you'd do, not hang around on some internet forum pretending to win a debate that you clearly aren't.

As if to emphasis my earlier points, you've come up with the wrong dating method! Carbon dating isn't used to measure the age of the universe or the earth, as it has an upper limit of 50000 years or so and can only be used on once-living material from creatures which exchanged carbon with the atmosphere. Good knowledge from you there...

Why do people ask me about the animals on Noahs ark? We've already talked it to death. God creates everyday, new plants, new people, new fish.. Why did God tell NOah to build an ark? I dont know, why not make Noah fly? It wasnt my choice. Why not make a good world with out sin? We dont have these options we deal with what we have. It wasnt my choice to have Noah build an ark or for animals to be in it. Why not just have animals on the earth and no humans.. because its not our choice. I dont have to explain higher thougts than mine, I cant in every case. Especially when people dont believe.

Ah, so you've finally given up on the "god is logical really" argument and moved on to the "go moves in mysterious ways" argument. Does this mean that you're not going to add to god's words by insisting on a second creation, or an assisted repopulation now, or are you going to continue adding things to the bible despite explicitly being told not to by the bible itself?

And some people believe man evolved from an ape and is an ape thrust out from an explosion that began the universe, and they cant even explain why the universe would do such a thing because they really dont have a clue about the origion of the universe. People in the last few hundred years have better knowledge of it than people since the beginning of time all the way up to now? We know there is data and alot of science is accurate, but not the religous worship of pretend explainations that were made to attack religion by anti-religious scientists. Bad apples amond many good ideas.

Do you feel that chamistry is a ridiculous belief held by people who can't explain where matter came from? No?

Then why apply such ridiculous requirements to another science? After all, evolutionary theory says nothing about the origin of the universe, the origin of matter, the formation of stars and planets or even the origin of life. The theory of evolution explains the diversity of life from an initial population of imperfect reproducers.

Unlike religion, science doesn't claim to have all the answers, so not knowing the exact reason for the big bang doesn't cripple science. In fact, one of the key strengths of science lies with being able to identify clearly what we don't know so that we can more easily establish what research needs to be done.

Fundamentalism, on the other hand, pretends to already have all the answers, and therefore only wants to either suppress or "explain" evidence to the contrary.

[Moony]

Actually continental splitting doesn't have to occur. After all, humans are quite good at creativity, including boats, while kangaroos and koalas are noticably lacking in that department. In addition (Moony, correct me if I'm wrong) 40000 years ago when humans arrived in australia, the ice sheets down towards the South Pole would actually have meant that the distance to be crossed by boat was much shorter, still impossible for most mammals due to their having to swim, but not so for humans and boats.

Continental rifting is a process that would seperate a species and cause allopatic (SP) speciation to take plce but in the context at hand the land masses were already seperate. This would account for the Marsupial population on Austrailia whilst elsewhere mammals would have done their thing and out competed the marsupials. Without having the time right now (i should REALLY be getting dressed now) 40000 looks about right for glaciation, as from about 100000 years befor present the planet had been experiencing cyclicaly glaciation. So it's highly likely that the lower sea level would have made it easy for early man to migrate across shallow waters.

Page me again Aeggy when you need me services....note the usual 'fee' applies ;)

Moony

[thepunisher]

Mr punisher the only reason I bring it up so much about your ex is because you blame me for what happened with you , I told you brother I never cheated on anyone and that means Im not like the slime priest that did that to you so you blame him and her and leave me out of it, and then we'll drop it, and I never told you to defend everyone, I told you to defend and blame individuals, and youre still counting us as a group. Thats the problem with racism, and sexism and other judgemental forms of hatrid. I agree you got done wrong and you make fun of me and get mad at me because I know how you feel about it?


Endeavour, is your brain not working today or can't you take hints ? I kindly asked you to shut up about this. And no, you idiot, I'm not blaming you personally so quit assuming I'm but I'm not going to also excuse the whole religion for what happened with my ex-gf and me just because you asked me too. Reasons quoted in previous post. It was you who told me to agree its the individual not the whole religion to blame, well, I don't agree with it for the simple reason that if this preacher wouldn't have been so damn religious he wouldn't have picked on me in the first place. Someone who ,after 48 hrs. of knowing you calls you a "loser" and not "worth it" based on you not being religious is being more prejudiced and judgemental than I'm with you. And thats what I also see in you. You judge everyone on here based on them not seeing your point-of-view, in fact you're being downright rude with them.

Once again I'm telling you to shut up about this. You stepped over the line with this posts ago. Its enough. You have no idea what happened and I'm not going to excuse your religion or the way some of you preachers are just because you assume you're different. So leave it. :bang:

You aren't going to get the desired answer from me even if you keep on pushing.

Christian