User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 3:52:55 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The first name on your list was an atheist. "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly." - Albert Einstein, 24 March 1954: Should I keep going? Don't know which website you copied those names from, but some of them predate the scientific method and even the Enlightenment. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Well, these guys would disagree with you, but I bet your scientific achievements far out pace theirs, no? Albert Einstein (1879-1955)Arthur Compton (1892 – 1962)Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)Ernst Haeckel (1834 –1919)Erwin Schrödinger (1887 –1961)Francis Bacon (1561-1627)Francis Collins (Born 1950)Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)Gottfried Leibniz (1646 –1716)Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)Guglielmo Marconi (1874 –1937)Isaac Newton (1642-1727)James Clerk Maxwell (1831 –1879)Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)John Eccles (1903 – 1997)Louis Pasteur (1822-1895)Max Planck (1858-1947)Michael Faraday (1791-1867)Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)Rene Descartes (1596-1650)Robert Boyle (1791-1867)Robert A. Millikan (1868 – 1953)Werner Heisenberg (1901 – 1976)William Harvey (1578 –1657)William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)The first name on your list was an atheist. "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly." - Albert Einstein, 24 March 1954: Should I keep going? Don't know which website you copied those names from, but some of them predate the scientific method and even the Enlightenment. However accurate the list is, it's a fact that most of the great scientists in the last thousand or so years were devout believers. And yet they paved the way to our current understanding of the physical world. You have a penchant for missing the point. I'll nip this in the bud, because I can just see someone saying it. The point is not that you need to be a believer to be a great scientist. The point is that being a believer in no way gets in the way of learning and studying the physical world. You can have faith and fact. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 3:58:37 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Based on your reply, I'm not sure those you quoted above made any error, as your reply validates this as well. To some, it seems incredibly limiting, perhaps even close minded, when asking questions about some of the most complex issues known to mankind, to defer to a single, ancient book, written by ancient people, to the exclusion of all other information. Particularly in light of the myriad of staggering knowledge we have come to learn since the Bible was written. Additionally, when the discussion forum you refer to is populated by only those who are already "sold" on the general Biblical premise, you're not exactly dealing with a think-tank of objectivity. By your own admission, "we are satisfied in the answers we find in the Bible" & "We ask hundreds of questions, and search the Scriptures for the answers." One source of information and a group who've already decided that all other sources, discoveries and information mankind has learned aren't worth considering.....could certainly be viewed as close minded. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One of the biggest hangups for non-believers is that there is exactly zero evidence for any of the supernatural claims made by any religion ever. That is pretty much what it boils down to. We are at the pinnacle of discovery right now, and will continue to be as long as technology keeps advancing. We've learned more about the universe in the last 50-100 years than we have since man has been around. Constantly testing and proving new theories. The things claimed by religion can not be tested, or proven, and to lots of people that isn't acceptable. Myself included. I understand why people take comfort in faith, but I can't understand why they are not questioning the things they are told, and looking for answers. It is the nature of our species to discover and learn. And you make a common error. You assume that Christians have not "question(ed) the things they are told, and look(ed) for answers". We have. And we are satisfied in the answers we find in the Bible. I always am amazed at how non-believers say that Christians need to "not be closed minded and open your minds", as if we have never done that. I teach a Sunday School class of mature men (45-70 years old) every Sunday. We ask hundreds of questions, and search the Scriptures for the answers. And in all honesty, some of the questions are not fully answered. Yet. But as the Bible says, unless the Holy Spirit opens up the Bible for us, it will be impossible to understand. But as we study, we find His Word is revealed to us. Based on your reply, I'm not sure those you quoted above made any error, as your reply validates this as well. To some, it seems incredibly limiting, perhaps even close minded, when asking questions about some of the most complex issues known to mankind, to defer to a single, ancient book, written by ancient people, to the exclusion of all other information. Particularly in light of the myriad of staggering knowledge we have come to learn since the Bible was written. Additionally, when the discussion forum you refer to is populated by only those who are already "sold" on the general Biblical premise, you're not exactly dealing with a think-tank of objectivity. By your own admission, "we are satisfied in the answers we find in the Bible" & "We ask hundreds of questions, and search the Scriptures for the answers." One source of information and a group who've already decided that all other sources, discoveries and information mankind has learned aren't worth considering.....could certainly be viewed as close minded. As I have already explained, we use the Bible to study Christianity and its doctrines. Where else would we look? If the class had a question about reloading, we would look in a reloading manual. But a Sunday School class in a Baptist church is, by definition, a study of the Bible. That doesn't mean that those guys are not well educated in other disciplines besides Christian Theology. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:02:24 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As I have already explained, we use the Bible to study Christianity and its doctrines. Where else would we look? If the class had a question about reloading, we would look in a reloading manual. But a Sunday School class in a Baptist church is, be definition, a study of the Bible. That doesn't mean that those guys are not well educated in other disciplines besides Christian Theology. Reason, meet brick wall. EDIT: Reason being Old Painless' post |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:04:23 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The first name on your list was an atheist. "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly." - Albert Einstein, 24 March 1954: Should I keep going? Don't know which website you copied those names from, but some of them predate the scientific method and even the Enlightenment. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Well, these guys would disagree with you, but I bet your scientific achievements far out pace theirs, no? Albert Einstein (1879-1955)Arthur Compton (1892 – 1962)Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)Ernst Haeckel (1834 –1919)Erwin Schrödinger (1887 –1961)Francis Bacon (1561-1627)Francis Collins (Born 1950)Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)Gottfried Leibniz (1646 –1716)Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)Guglielmo Marconi (1874 –1937)Isaac Newton (1642-1727)James Clerk Maxwell (1831 –1879)Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)John Eccles (1903 – 1997)Louis Pasteur (1822-1895)Max Planck (1858-1947)Michael Faraday (1791-1867)Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)Rene Descartes (1596-1650)Robert Boyle (1791-1867)Robert A. Millikan (1868 – 1953)Werner Heisenberg (1901 – 1976)William Harvey (1578 –1657)William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)The first name on your list was an atheist. "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly." - Albert Einstein, 24 March 1954: Should I keep going? Don't know which website you copied those names from, but some of them predate the scientific method and even the Enlightenment. Truth. Although never coming to belief in a personal God, he recognized the impossibility of a non-created universe. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "Firmly denying atheism, Einstein expressed a belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." This actually motivated his interest in science, as he once remarked to a young physicist: "I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details." Einstein's famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was "God does not play dice" - and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. A famous saying of his was "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:04:26 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the Bible is misinterpreted a lot, and I do NOT believe that non-believers go to hell. I cannot see a loving God doing that - though many "believers" say that God sending you to hell proves his love.  I think that idea is totally wrong, and it also turns a lot of people away from Christianity.
You are welcome to believe that, or anything else you please, but such a belief makes you an "outlier" from mainline Christians. The Bible says that there is a Hell and that those that do not accept Jesus as Savior are headed there. It doesn't matter what you "cannot see". God is very clear about it. And the solution is not to water it down because "it also turns a lot of people away from Christianity". The solution is to preach the gospel of Jesus. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:07:09 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You are welcome to believe that, or anything else you please, but such a belief makes you an "outlier" from mainline Christians. The Bible says that there is a Hell and that those that do not accept Jesus as Savior are headed there. It doesn't matter what you "cannot see". God is very clear about it. And the solution is not to water it down because "it also turns a lot of people away from Christianity". The solution is to preach the gospel of Jesus. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I think the Bible is misinterpreted a lot, and I do NOT believe that non-believers go to hell. I cannot see a loving God doing that - though many "believers" say that God sending you to hell proves his love. I think that idea is totally wrong, and it also turns a lot of people away from Christianity.
You are welcome to believe that, or anything else you please, but such a belief makes you an "outlier" from mainline Christians. The Bible says that there is a Hell and that those that do not accept Jesus as Savior are headed there. It doesn't matter what you "cannot see". God is very clear about it. And the solution is not to water it down because "it also turns a lot of people away from Christianity". The solution is to preach the gospel of Jesus. There are some points I could argue, but I am not enough of a scholar to make an effective enough argument. But I do have one general problem with it. What does it mean to accept Jesus as your savior? It does not mean to be perfect, because we cannot be. It does not mean to say the words, because words are only words. It does not mean to follow certain rules, because the law was done away with. I can say I believe in Jesus. But do I really? I do not have a close, personal relationship with Him. I don't know how to. I can't have a conversation with Him like I can a friend. I believe in Him, but how much? I can't honestly say I do with all my heart and mind and soul and strength. I don't even know what that means. I only love Him as much as I am able. Does that mean I'm going to Hell? I don't think so. But what exactly does one have to do, in real terms, to not go to hell? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:10:53 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Does a 'lack of evidence' equal 'no evidence exists'? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Faith is not something you can decide to have - it is offered, you must accept it, and it is freely given. It does not conflict with rationality in the least. Faith is, by definition, irrational. It requires that you forgo evidence to hold it and that you disavow evidence that your assertions are unprovable. The words that people would be using to describe it, if it wasn't so popular, would be delusion and hallucination. The terms are a textbook fit. Does a 'lack of evidence' equal 'no evidence exists'? Strictly speaking, no. But as sure as the evidence indicates the sun will rise tomorrow, evidence indicates a few thousand more supernatural claims will go unproven tomorrow. Given those odds, to wager against it would be... irrational. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:14:06 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There are some points I could argue, but I am not enough of a scholar to make an effective enough argument. But I do have one general problem with it. What does it mean to accept Jesus as your savior? It does not mean to be perfect, because we cannot be. It does not mean to say the words, because words are only words. It does not mean to follow certain rules, because the law was done away with. I can say I believe in Jesus. But do I really? I do not have a close, personal relationship with Him. I don't know how to. I can't have a conversation with him like I can a friend. I believe in Him, but how much? I can't honestly say I do with all my heart and mind and soul and strength. I only do as much as I am able. Does that mean I'm going to Hell? I don't think so. But what exactly does one have to do, in real terms, to not go to hell? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I think the Bible is misinterpreted a lot, and I do NOT believe that non-believers go to hell. I cannot see a loving God doing that - though many "believers" say that God sending you to hell proves his love. I think that idea is totally wrong, and it also turns a lot of people away from Christianity.You are welcome to believe that, or anything else you please, but such a belief makes you an "outlier" from mainline Christians. The Bible says that there is a Hell and that those that do not accept Jesus as Savior are headed there. It doesn't matter what you "cannot see". God is very clear about it. And the solution is not to water it down because "it also turns a lot of people away from Christianity". The solution is to preach the gospel of Jesus. There are some points I could argue, but I am not enough of a scholar to make an effective enough argument. But I do have one general problem with it. What does it mean to accept Jesus as your savior? It does not mean to be perfect, because we cannot be. It does not mean to say the words, because words are only words. It does not mean to follow certain rules, because the law was done away with. I can say I believe in Jesus. But do I really? I do not have a close, personal relationship with Him. I don't know how to. I can't have a conversation with him like I can a friend. I believe in Him, but how much? I can't honestly say I do with all my heart and mind and soul and strength. I only do as much as I am able. Does that mean I'm going to Hell? I don't think so. But what exactly does one have to do, in real terms, to not go to hell? This is all the works required today, unlike before Jesus came. John 6:28-29 28 Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?” 29 Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.” |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:15:54 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is all the works required today, unlike before Jesus came. John 6:28-29 28 Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?” 29 Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.” Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think the Bible is misinterpreted a lot, and I do NOT believe that non-believers go to hell. I cannot see a loving God doing that - though many "believers" say that God sending you to hell proves his love. I think that idea is totally wrong, and it also turns a lot of people away from Christianity.
You are welcome to believe that, or anything else you please, but such a belief makes you an "outlier" from mainline Christians. The Bible says that there is a Hell and that those that do not accept Jesus as Savior are headed there. It doesn't matter what you "cannot see". God is very clear about it. And the solution is not to water it down because "it also turns a lot of people away from Christianity". The solution is to preach the gospel of Jesus. There are some points I could argue, but I am not enough of a scholar to make an effective enough argument. But I do have one general problem with it. What does it mean to accept Jesus as your savior? It does not mean to be perfect, because we cannot be. It does not mean to say the words, because words are only words. It does not mean to follow certain rules, because the law was done away with. I can say I believe in Jesus. But do I really? I do not have a close, personal relationship with Him. I don't know how to. I can't have a conversation with him like I can a friend. I believe in Him, but how much? I can't honestly say I do with all my heart and mind and soul and strength. I only do as much as I am able. Does that mean I'm going to Hell? I don't think so. But what exactly does one have to do, in real terms, to not go to hell? This is all the works required today, unlike before Jesus came. John 6:28-29 28 Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?” 29 Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.” But what does it mean to believe? Me saying I believe does not mean I truly do. What if I'm not believing the right way, or enough? I guess I'll go to hell. That's the main issue I have with it. It requires that we're perfect, because if we're not perfect we can't perfectly believe. No human can believe perfectly. Is there a certain percentage of belief that will get you to heaven? I don't mean to sound snide or rude, but it's probably coming off that way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:19:35 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: However accurate the list is, it's a fact that most of the great scientists in the last thousand or so years were devout believers. And yet they paved the way to our current understanding of the physical world. You have a penchant for missing the point. I'll nip this in the bud, because I can just see someone saying it. The point is not that you need to be a believer to be a great scientist. The point is that being a believer in no way gets in the way of learning and studying the physical world. You can have faith and fact. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Well, these guys would disagree with you, but I bet your scientific achievements far out pace theirs, no? Albert Einstein (1879-1955)Arthur Compton (1892 – 1962)Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)Ernst Haeckel (1834 –1919)Erwin Schrödinger (1887 –1961)Francis Bacon (1561-1627)Francis Collins (Born 1950)Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)Gottfried Leibniz (1646 –1716)Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)Guglielmo Marconi (1874 –1937)Isaac Newton (1642-1727)James Clerk Maxwell (1831 –1879)Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)John Eccles (1903 – 1997)Louis Pasteur (1822-1895)Max Planck (1858-1947)Michael Faraday (1791-1867)Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)Rene Descartes (1596-1650)Robert Boyle (1791-1867)Robert A. Millikan (1868 – 1953)Werner Heisenberg (1901 – 1976)William Harvey (1578 –1657)William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)The first name on your list was an atheist. "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly." - Albert Einstein, 24 March 1954: Should I keep going? Don't know which website you copied those names from, but some of them predate the scientific method and even the Enlightenment. However accurate the list is, it's a fact that most of the great scientists in the last thousand or so years were devout believers. And yet they paved the way to our current understanding of the physical world. You have a penchant for missing the point. I'll nip this in the bud, because I can just see someone saying it. The point is not that you need to be a believer to be a great scientist. The point is that being a believer in no way gets in the way of learning and studying the physical world. You can have faith and fact. Of course, years later we figured out how it could happen, but who knows what would have happened if he had hadn't accepted "magic" as his "explanation" for it. We see it now today, when faced with what we don't know about the physical world (how the first life began, what, if anything caused the universe), many otherwise smart people are content to say "god did it" and leave it at that. It definitely hurts their ability or desire to seek answers beyond that. ETA::And then you have people like Ken ham, or the "True Christians (aka, the original neck beards)" in this thread who explicitly state that NOTHING can ever change their mind to believe a scientific explanation for the universe or life over their theological one. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:20:52 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are some points I could argue, but I am not enough of a scholar to make an effective enough argument. But I do have one general problem with it. What does it mean to accept Jesus as your savior? It does not mean to be perfect, because we cannot be. It does not mean to say the words, because words are only words. It does not mean to follow certain rules, because the law was done away with. Quote HistoryQuoted:
There are some points I could argue, but I am not enough of a scholar to make an effective enough argument. But I do have one general problem with it. What does it mean to accept Jesus as your savior? It does not mean to be perfect, because we cannot be. It does not mean to say the words, because words are only words. It does not mean to follow certain rules, because the law was done away with. That is an excellent summation. And correct on every point. I can say I believe in Jesus. But do I really? I do not have a close, personal relationship with Him. I don't know how to. I can't have a conversation with Him like I can a friend. I believe in Him, but how much? I can't honestly say I do with all my heart and mind and soul and strength. I don't even know what that means. I only love Him as much as I am able. Does that mean I'm going to Hell? I don't think so. But what exactly does one have to do, in real terms, to not go to hell? That is a very good question and one that a man named Nicodemus asked Jesus one day. John 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: 2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. 3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. There is the true answer. You MUST be born again. As Jesus explains, we are born of water (physical birth) and that makes us physically alive. But we must be born "of the spirit" if we want to be alive spiritually. Read the rest of the story on John 3. We cannot "save ourselves". Only Jesus can save us. And we cannot "keep ourselves saved". Only Jesus can do that. Pray and ask God for the faith to believe unto salvation. You must be born again. I am praying for you. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:21:34 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not entirely true. Issac newton is considered by most as the smartest person ever. When he got to the point where he didn't understand how the planets could make it in to stable orbits he said "god did it". Of course, years later we figured out how it could happen, but who knows what would have happened if he had hadn't accepted "magic" as his "explanation" for it. We see it now today, when faced with what we don't know about the physical world (how the first life began, what, if anything caused the universe), many otherwise smart people are content to say "god did it" and leave it at that. It definitely hurts their ability or desire to seek answers beyond that. He reached his limit. He couldn't figure out anymore. But do you deny that his scientific discoveries were groundbreaking? I don't see the problem with realizing you have reached your limit, and letting it go and saying, "Well, I guess that's God's realm." |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:22:40 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I believe, based on knowledge and study, that there is no reason you can't believe in both science and creation, as an example for my following point. I understand that some see the two as incompatible. It seems you guys believe, and perhaps it is sometimes true, that some people put up a mental block between their own personal beliefs (whether they are religious or not) and what they know about physical laws, history, etc. so that they can believe in both and not have them conflict with one another.. Quote HistoryQuoted:
I believe, based on knowledge and study, that there is no reason you can't believe in both science and creation, as an example for my following point. I understand that some see the two as incompatible. It seems you guys believe, and perhaps it is sometimes true, that some people put up a mental block between their own personal beliefs (whether they are religious or not) and what they know about physical laws, history, etc. so that they can believe in both and not have them conflict with one another.. "The essence of science is that it is always willing to abandon a given idea, however fundamental it may seem to be, for a better one; the essence of theology is that it holds its truths to be eternal and immutable." - H.L. Mencken Quoted:
...But if that's true, how is it hurting or offending you? If we're wrong, let us be wrong. It ruins the scientific education of countless thousands of young minds, not to mention that children indoctrinated into supernatural dogma too often grow up to burn heretics or fly airplanes into buildings. If mankind is to survive for long in the age of nuclear weapons, we will have to move towards reason and away from superstition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:23:49 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, people who believe are not rational? Are you trying to bait someone into stepping over the line? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:24:19 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: He reached his limit. He couldn't figure out anymore. But do you deny that his scientific discoveries were groundbreaking? I don't see the problem with realizing you have reached your limit, and letting it go and saying, "Well, I guess that's God's realm." Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Not entirely true. Issac newton is considered by most as the smartest person ever. When he got to the point where he didn't understand how the planets could make it in to stable orbits he said "god did it". Of course, years later we figured out how it could happen, but who knows what would have happened if he had hadn't accepted "magic" as his "explanation" for it. We see it now today, when faced with what we don't know about the physical world (how the first life began, what, if anything caused the universe), many otherwise smart people are content to say "god did it" and leave it at that. It definitely hurts their ability or desire to seek answers beyond that. He reached his limit. He couldn't figure out anymore. But do you deny that his scientific discoveries were groundbreaking? I don't see the problem with realizing you have reached your limit, and letting it go and saying, "Well, I guess that's God's realm." Any good scientist will say "hey, here is a list of things I/we couldn't figure out, future researchers should definitely find the cause of this" saying "god did it" puts a premature and silly period on the statement of what actually is still an open question. Saying "i couldn't figure it out, so its magic" makes you look silly, regardless of how good your previous findings are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:25:11 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I've done a lot of reading on the subject. I see no compelling evidence for evolution, and plenty against the concept. And the fossil record? Full of gaps that are unexplainable. People that have read a lot on evolution don't make statements like that. Is it possible you were doing most of your reading at AIG or similar site? There are devout Christians who work in the fields of evolutionary biology and they don't have issues with evolution. To them, and me, evolution is God's method. Like any scientific theory, it doesn't require God, but is perfectly compatible with the concept of God. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:26:52 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It ruins the scientific education of countless thousands of young minds, not to mention that children indoctrinated into supernatural dogma too often grow up to burn heretics or fly airplanes into buildings. If mankind is to survive for long in the age of nuclear weapons, we will have to move towards reason and away from superstition. Come on, Rodent. You can do better than that. When is the last time some guys from First Baptist Church "burned heretics or flew airplanes into buildings"? There are some evil religions on this planet, but that doesn't mean that all of them are "bad". |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:28:04 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That is an excellent summation. And correct on every point. That is a very good question and one that a man named Nicodemus asked Jesus one day. John 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: 2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. 3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. There is the true answer. You MUST be born again. As Jesus explains, we are born of water (physical birth) and that makes us physically alive. But we must be born "of the spirit" if we want to be alive spiritually. Read the rest of the story on John 3. We cannot "save ourselves". Only Jesus can save us. And we cannot "keep ourselves saved". Only Jesus can do that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
There are some points I could argue, but I am not enough of a scholar to make an effective enough argument. But I do have one general problem with it. What does it mean to accept Jesus as your savior? It does not mean to be perfect, because we cannot be. It does not mean to say the words, because words are only words. It does not mean to follow certain rules, because the law was done away with. That is an excellent summation. And correct on every point. I can say I believe in Jesus. But do I really? I do not have a close, personal relationship with Him. I don't know how to. I can't have a conversation with Him like I can a friend. I believe in Him, but how much? I can't honestly say I do with all my heart and mind and soul and strength. I don't even know what that means. I only love Him as much as I am able. Does that mean I'm going to Hell? I don't think so. But what exactly does one have to do, in real terms, to not go to hell? That is a very good question and one that a man named Nicodemus asked Jesus one day. John 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: 2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. 3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. There is the true answer. You MUST be born again. As Jesus explains, we are born of water (physical birth) and that makes us physically alive. But we must be born "of the spirit" if we want to be alive spiritually. Read the rest of the story on John 3. We cannot "save ourselves". Only Jesus can save us. And we cannot "keep ourselves saved". Only Jesus can do that. But that is assuming that "not seeing the Kingdom of God" means going to hell. I think that having a deep relationship with God and knowing that there is nothing to fear even though you are "walking through the valley of the shadow of death," or however close you can get to that, is "living in God's Kingdom." Pray and ask God for the faith to believe unto salvation. You must be born again. I am praying for you. Of course I believe, but my faith is not perfect, which leaves room for doubt. I do think that, as I mentioned before, being "born again" allows you to have a true relationship with God and Jesus. I do not believe that if you aren't "born again" you go to hell. I do wish I could have a true relationship, and hopefully someday I will. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:29:28 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"The essence of science is that it is always willing to abandon a given idea, however fundamental it may seem to be, for a better one; the essence of theology is that it holds its truths to be eternal and immutable." - H.L. Mencken It ruins the scientific education of countless thousands of young minds, not to mention that children indoctrinated into supernatural dogma too often grow up to burn heretics or fly airplanes into buildings. If mankind is to survive for long in the age of nuclear weapons, we will have to move towards reason and away from superstition. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I believe, based on knowledge and study, that there is no reason you can't believe in both science and creation, as an example for my following point. I understand that some see the two as incompatible. It seems you guys believe, and perhaps it is sometimes true, that some people put up a mental block between their own personal beliefs (whether they are religious or not) and what they know about physical laws, history, etc. so that they can believe in both and not have them conflict with one another.. "The essence of science is that it is always willing to abandon a given idea, however fundamental it may seem to be, for a better one; the essence of theology is that it holds its truths to be eternal and immutable." - H.L. Mencken Quoted:
I believe, based on knowledge and study, that there is no reason you can't believe in both science and creation, as an example for my following point. I understand that some see the two as incompatible. It seems you guys believe, and perhaps it is sometimes true, that some people put up a mental block between their own personal beliefs (whether they are religious or not) and what they know about physical laws, history, etc. so that they can believe in both and not have them conflict with one another. But if that's true, how is it hurting or offending you? If we're wrong, let us be wrong. Quoted:
...But if that's true, how is it hurting or offending you? If we're wrong, let us be wrong. It ruins the scientific education of countless thousands of young minds, not to mention that children indoctrinated into supernatural dogma too often grow up to burn heretics or fly airplanes into buildings. If mankind is to survive for long in the age of nuclear weapons, we will have to move towards reason and away from superstition. So Christians are ruining science? Since that isn't happening and never has happened - in fact quite the opposite - I wouldn't worry too much. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:30:22 PM EDT
[#20]
Also, newton, the guy who invented calculus to settle a bet, spent allot of time looking for secret codes and patterns within the bible. He wasted allot of mental time and effort on something that even most christians today would think is batshit crazy.
Who knows what he would have worked on in that time if he hadn't had this weird, non-biblical, non-main stream christian belief. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:31:24 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Also, newton, the guy who invented calculus to settle a bet, spent allot of time looking for secret codes and patterns within the bible. He wasted allot of mental time and effort on something that even most christians today would think is batshit crazy. Who knows what he would have worked on in that time if he hadn't had this weird, non-biblical, non-main stream christian belief. That's just nitpicking and missing the point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:32:17 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
People that have read a lot on evolution don't make statements like that. Is it possible you were doing most of your reading at AIG or similar site? There are devout Christians who work in the fields of evolutionary biology and they don't have issues with evolution. To them, and me, evolution is God's method. Like any scientific theory, it doesn't require God, but is perfectly compatible with the concept of God. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I've done a lot of reading on the subject. I see no compelling evidence for evolution, and plenty against the concept. And the fossil record? Full of gaps that are unexplainable. People that have read a lot on evolution don't make statements like that. Is it possible you were doing most of your reading at AIG or similar site? There are devout Christians who work in the fields of evolutionary biology and they don't have issues with evolution. To them, and me, evolution is God's method. Like any scientific theory, it doesn't require God, but is perfectly compatible with the concept of God. Apparently, some do. 
And there are many, many top scientists who do not believe in evolution. And most of my reading was college textbooks, research on any website with good information, and just putting things together and using logic and critical thinking. And no, I'm not associated with AIG. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:34:24 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's just nitpicking and missing the point. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Also, newton, the guy who invented calculus to settle a bet, spent allot of time looking for secret codes and patterns within the bible. He wasted allot of mental time and effort on something that even most christians today would think is batshit crazy. Who knows what he would have worked on in that time if he hadn't had this weird, non-biblical, non-main stream christian belief. That's just nitpicking and missing the point. The ability to believe in fantasy can and does get in the way of an otherwise brilliant investigation of the world. Regardless of how good someone's work is, its hard to argue that believing in magic didn't at least hinder it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:35:15 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If you can't grasp this simple, very human concept and are even hostile towards it, why don't you just stay away from these threads? It would be a favor to all of us. How many times do I need to explain: The definition of faith is NOT to believe in things that are contrary to reality, reason and experience. This is very simple, Rodent. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It is not irrational to feel and see things that are unexplainable and develop strong personal beliefs based on those things... When those feelings and visions lead to beliefs that are contrary to reason and experience, that's exactly what it is. If you can't grasp this simple, very human concept and are even hostile towards it, why don't you just stay away from these threads? It would be a favor to all of us. How many times do I need to explain: The definition of faith is NOT to believe in things that are contrary to reality, reason and experience. This is very simple, Rodent. It might be an interesting exercise to try explaining that to Galileo Galilei. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:35:31 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, I think that IS the point. The ability to believe in fantasy can and does get in the way of an otherwise brilliant investigation of the world. Regardless of how good someone's work is, its hard to argue that believing in magic didn't at least hinder it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also, newton, the guy who invented calculus to settle a bet, spent allot of time looking for secret codes and patterns within the bible. He wasted allot of mental time and effort on something that even most christians today would think is batshit crazy. Who knows what he would have worked on in that time if he hadn't had this weird, non-biblical, non-main stream christian belief. That's just nitpicking and missing the point. The ability to believe in fantasy can and does get in the way of an otherwise brilliant investigation of the world. Regardless of how good someone's work is, its hard to argue that believing in magic didn't at least hinder it. We don't know if it got in the way, but it certainly didn't keep him from advancing science in a huge way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:35:35 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Faith is, by definition, irrational. It requires that you forgo evidence to hold it and that you disavow evidence that your assertions are unprovable. The words that people would be using to describe it, if it wasn't so popular, would be delusion and hallucination. The terms are a textbook fit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Faith is not something you can decide to have - it is offered, you must accept it, and it is freely given. It does not conflict with rationality in the least. Faith is, by definition, irrational. It requires that you forgo evidence to hold it and that you disavow evidence that your assertions are unprovable. The words that people would be using to describe it, if it wasn't so popular, would be delusion and hallucination. The terms are a textbook fit. My faith in no way conflicts with empirical evidence. I never asserted that my beliefs are provable. They aren't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:36:42 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It might be an interesting exercise to try explaining that to Galileo Galilei. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It is not irrational to feel and see things that are unexplainable and develop strong personal beliefs based on those things... When those feelings and visions lead to beliefs that are contrary to reason and experience, that's exactly what it is. If you can't grasp this simple, very human concept and are even hostile towards it, why don't you just stay away from these threads? It would be a favor to all of us. How many times do I need to explain: The definition of faith is NOT to believe in things that are contrary to reality, reason and experience. This is very simple, Rodent. It might be an interesting exercise to try explaining that to Galileo Galilei. The catholic church? That was a dictatorship and politics disguised as faith. Besides, sure someone could have faith that is contrary to reality, reason and experience. But that is not the DEFINITION of faith. That's my only point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:37:50 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The religious experience can be induced. Faith in God is almost never the issue in these discussions though, y'all are going to be talking right past each other unless you make the distinction. Religion is about faith in claims made about God, by men. Rational assessment of those claims is essential and dogma prevents it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What you describe sounds very much like my own experience. Faith is not something you can decide to have - it is offered, you must accept it, and it is freely given. It does not conflict with rationality in the least. The religious experience can be induced. Faith in God is almost never the issue in these discussions though, y'all are going to be talking right past each other unless you make the distinction. Religion is about faith in claims made about God, by men. Rational assessment of those claims is essential and dogma prevents it. Sure, it can be induced. Trans-cranial magnetic stimulation. That doesn't mean what I know to be true isn't. It just means that there exists a biochemical means for experiencing it, which can be manipulated through science. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:38:09 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So Christians are ruining science? Since that isn't happening and never has happened - in fact quite the opposite - I wouldn't worry too much. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District "The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy." "Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources." "After the trial, there were calls for the defendants accused of not presenting their case honestly to be put on trial for committing perjury. "Witnesses either testified inconsistently, or lied outright under oath on several occasions," Jones wrote. "The inescapable truth is that both [Alan] Bonsell and [William] Buckingham lied at their January 3, 2005 depositions. ... Bonsell repeatedly failed to testify in a truthful manner. ... Defendants have unceasingly attempted in vain to distance themselves from their own actions and statements, which culminated in repetitious, untruthful testimony." An editorial in the York Daily Record described their behaviour as both ironic and sinful, saying that the "unintelligent designers of this fiasco should not walk away unscathed"." |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:39:42 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: My faith in no way conflicts with empirical evidence. I never asserted that my beliefs are provable. They aren't. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Faith is not something you can decide to have - it is offered, you must accept it, and it is freely given. It does not conflict with rationality in the least. Faith is, by definition, irrational. It requires that you forgo evidence to hold it and that you disavow evidence that your assertions are unprovable. The words that people would be using to describe it, if it wasn't so popular, would be delusion and hallucination. The terms are a textbook fit. My faith in no way conflicts with empirical evidence. I never asserted that my beliefs are provable. They aren't. Then I salute you. Perhaps you could spread the good word. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:40:20 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District "The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy." "Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources." "After the trial, there were calls for the defendants accused of not presenting their case honestly to be put on trial for committing perjury. "Witnesses either testified inconsistently, or lied outright under oath on several occasions," Jones wrote. "The inescapable truth is that both [Alan] Bonsell and [William] Buckingham lied at their January 3, 2005 depositions. ... Bonsell repeatedly failed to testify in a truthful manner. ... Defendants have unceasingly attempted in vain to distance themselves from their own actions and statements, which culminated in repetitious, untruthful testimony." An editorial in the York Daily Record described their behaviour as both ironic and sinful, saying that the "unintelligent designers of this fiasco should not walk away unscathed"." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So Christians are ruining science? Since that isn't happening and never has happened - in fact quite the opposite - I wouldn't worry too much. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District "The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy." "Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources." "After the trial, there were calls for the defendants accused of not presenting their case honestly to be put on trial for committing perjury. "Witnesses either testified inconsistently, or lied outright under oath on several occasions," Jones wrote. "The inescapable truth is that both [Alan] Bonsell and [William] Buckingham lied at their January 3, 2005 depositions. ... Bonsell repeatedly failed to testify in a truthful manner. ... Defendants have unceasingly attempted in vain to distance themselves from their own actions and statements, which culminated in repetitious, untruthful testimony." An editorial in the York Daily Record described their behaviour as both ironic and sinful, saying that the "unintelligent designers of this fiasco should not walk away unscathed"." There's a difference between true Christians and people who use their beliefs as a front to get their own way politically. For example, Westboro. People who manipulate and lie aren't exactly good Christians, are they? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:40:27 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not entirely true. Issac newton is considered by most as the smartest person ever. When he got to the point where he didn't understand how the planets could make it in to stable orbits he said "god did it". Of course, years later we figured out how it could happen, but who knows what would have happened if he had hadn't accepted "magic" as his "explanation" for it. We see it now today, when faced with what we don't know about the physical world (how the first life began, what, if anything caused the universe), many otherwise smart people are content to say "god did it" and leave it at that. It definitely hurts their ability or desire to seek answers beyond that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, these guys would disagree with you, but I bet your scientific achievements far out pace theirs, no? Albert Einstein (1879-1955)Arthur Compton (1892 – 1962)Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)Ernst Haeckel (1834 –1919)Erwin Schrödinger (1887 –1961)Francis Bacon (1561-1627)Francis Collins (Born 1950)Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)Gottfried Leibniz (1646 –1716)Gregor Mendel (1822-1884)Guglielmo Marconi (1874 –1937)Isaac Newton (1642-1727)James Clerk Maxwell (1831 –1879)Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)John Eccles (1903 – 1997)Louis Pasteur (1822-1895)Max Planck (1858-1947)Michael Faraday (1791-1867)Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543)Rene Descartes (1596-1650)Robert Boyle (1791-1867)Robert A. Millikan (1868 – 1953)Werner Heisenberg (1901 – 1976)William Harvey (1578 –1657)William Thomson Kelvin (1824-1907)The first name on your list was an atheist. "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly." - Albert Einstein, 24 March 1954: Should I keep going? Don't know which website you copied those names from, but some of them predate the scientific method and even the Enlightenment. However accurate the list is, it's a fact that most of the great scientists in the last thousand or so years were devout believers. And yet they paved the way to our current understanding of the physical world. You have a penchant for missing the point. I'll nip this in the bud, because I can just see someone saying it. The point is not that you need to be a believer to be a great scientist. The point is that being a believer in no way gets in the way of learning and studying the physical world. You can have faith and fact. Of course, years later we figured out how it could happen, but who knows what would have happened if he had hadn't accepted "magic" as his "explanation" for it. We see it now today, when faced with what we don't know about the physical world (how the first life began, what, if anything caused the universe), many otherwise smart people are content to say "god did it" and leave it at that. It definitely hurts their ability or desire to seek answers beyond that. Called "God of the Gaps" |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:44:07 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Then I salute you. Perhaps you could spread the good word. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Faith is not something you can decide to have - it is offered, you must accept it, and it is freely given. It does not conflict with rationality in the least. Faith is, by definition, irrational. It requires that you forgo evidence to hold it and that you disavow evidence that your assertions are unprovable. The words that people would be using to describe it, if it wasn't so popular, would be delusion and hallucination. The terms are a textbook fit. My faith in no way conflicts with empirical evidence. I never asserted that my beliefs are provable. They aren't. Then I salute you. Perhaps you could spread the good word. Honestly, I felt the same way you do about it for most of my life. It was only when I realized that what people who had truly felt the presence of God were talking about wasn't the same thing as what those who denied all religion talked about that things began to come together. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:44:30 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
As I have already explained, we use the Bible to study Christianity and its doctrines. Where else would we look? If the class had a question about reloading, we would look in a reloading manual. But a Sunday School class in a Baptist church is, by definition, a study of the Bible. That doesn't mean that those guys are not well educated in other disciplines besides Christian Theology. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One of the biggest hangups for non-believers is that there is exactly zero evidence for any of the supernatural claims made by any religion ever. That is pretty much what it boils down to. We are at the pinnacle of discovery right now, and will continue to be as long as technology keeps advancing. We've learned more about the universe in the last 50-100 years than we have since man has been around. Constantly testing and proving new theories. The things claimed by religion can not be tested, or proven, and to lots of people that isn't acceptable. Myself included. I understand why people take comfort in faith, but I can't understand why they are not questioning the things they are told, and looking for answers. It is the nature of our species to discover and learn. And you make a common error. You assume that Christians have not "question(ed) the things they are told, and look(ed) for answers". We have. And we are satisfied in the answers we find in the Bible. I always am amazed at how non-believers say that Christians need to "not be closed minded and open your minds", as if we have never done that. I teach a Sunday School class of mature men (45-70 years old) every Sunday. We ask hundreds of questions, and search the Scriptures for the answers. And in all honesty, some of the questions are not fully answered. Yet. But as the Bible says, unless the Holy Spirit opens up the Bible for us, it will be impossible to understand. But as we study, we find His Word is revealed to us. Based on your reply, I'm not sure those you quoted above made any error, as your reply validates this as well. To some, it seems incredibly limiting, perhaps even close minded, when asking questions about some of the most complex issues known to mankind, to defer to a single, ancient book, written by ancient people, to the exclusion of all other information. Particularly in light of the myriad of staggering knowledge we have come to learn since the Bible was written. Additionally, when the discussion forum you refer to is populated by only those who are already "sold" on the general Biblical premise, you're not exactly dealing with a think-tank of objectivity. By your own admission, "we are satisfied in the answers we find in the Bible" & "We ask hundreds of questions, and search the Scriptures for the answers." One source of information and a group who've already decided that all other sources, discoveries and information mankind has learned aren't worth considering.....could certainly be viewed as close minded. As I have already explained, we use the Bible to study Christianity and its doctrines. Where else would we look? If the class had a question about reloading, we would look in a reloading manual. But a Sunday School class in a Baptist church is, by definition, a study of the Bible. That doesn't mean that those guys are not well educated in other disciplines besides Christian Theology. But that's the one we're discussing here, their other "education" is irrelevant. Compartmentalization. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:48:54 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There's a difference between true Christians and people who use their beliefs as a front to get their own way politically. For example, Westboro. People who manipulate and lie aren't exactly good Christians, are they? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: So Christians are ruining science? Since that isn't happening and never has happened - in fact quite the opposite - I wouldn't worry too much. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District "The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy." "Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources." "After the trial, there were calls for the defendants accused of not presenting their case honestly to be put on trial for committing perjury. "Witnesses either testified inconsistently, or lied outright under oath on several occasions," Jones wrote. "The inescapable truth is that both [Alan] Bonsell and [William] Buckingham lied at their January 3, 2005 depositions. ... Bonsell repeatedly failed to testify in a truthful manner. ... Defendants have unceasingly attempted in vain to distance themselves from their own actions and statements, which culminated in repetitious, untruthful testimony." An editorial in the York Daily Record described their behaviour as both ironic and sinful, saying that the "unintelligent designers of this fiasco should not walk away unscathed"." There's a difference between true Christians and people who use their beliefs as a front to get their own way politically. For example, Westboro. People who manipulate and lie aren't exactly good Christians, are they? Are you using a fallacy checklist or something? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:51:31 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So Christians are ruining science? Since that isn't happening and never has happened - in fact quite the opposite - I wouldn't worry too much. Galileo believed that the earth revolved around the sun, but he still respected scientists like the Pope and his inquisitors when they challenged him with their own theory that hot irons would burn out his eyes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:53:15 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Come on, Rodent. You can do better than that. When is the last time some guys from First Baptist Church "burned heretics or flew airplanes into buildings"? There are some evil religions on this planet, but that doesn't mean that all of them are "bad". Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It ruins the scientific education of countless thousands of young minds, not to mention that children indoctrinated into supernatural dogma too often grow up to burn heretics or fly airplanes into buildings. If mankind is to survive for long in the age of nuclear weapons, we will have to move towards reason and away from superstition. Come on, Rodent. You can do better than that. When is the last time some guys from First Baptist Church "burned heretics or flew airplanes into buildings"? There are some evil religions on this planet, but that doesn't mean that all of them are "bad". “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:56:30 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's a difference between true Christians and people who use their beliefs as a front to get their own way politically. For example, Westboro. People who manipulate and lie aren't exactly good Christians, are they? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So Christians are ruining science? Since that isn't happening and never has happened - in fact quite the opposite - I wouldn't worry too much. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District "The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy." "Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources." "After the trial, there were calls for the defendants accused of not presenting their case honestly to be put on trial for committing perjury. "Witnesses either testified inconsistently, or lied outright under oath on several occasions," Jones wrote. "The inescapable truth is that both [Alan] Bonsell and [William] Buckingham lied at their January 3, 2005 depositions. ... Bonsell repeatedly failed to testify in a truthful manner. ... Defendants have unceasingly attempted in vain to distance themselves from their own actions and statements, which culminated in repetitious, untruthful testimony." An editorial in the York Daily Record described their behaviour as both ironic and sinful, saying that the "unintelligent designers of this fiasco should not walk away unscathed"." There's a difference between true Christians and people who use their beliefs as a front to get their own way politically. For example, Westboro. People who manipulate and lie aren't exactly good Christians, are they? You're getting dangerously close to saying that anybody who doesn't do, think, and say as you do, isn't a "True Christian" so they fall putside your definition. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 4:57:42 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But that is assuming that "not seeing the Kingdom of God" means going to hell. I think that having a deep relationship with God and knowing that there is nothing to fear even though you are "walking through the valley of the shadow of death," or however close you can get to that, is "living in God's Kingdom." Of course I believe, but my faith is not perfect, which leaves room for doubt. I do think that, as I mentioned before, being "born again" allows you to have a true relationship with God and Jesus. I do not believe that if you aren't "born again" you go to hell. I do wish I could have a true relationship, and hopefully someday I will. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There are some points I could argue, but I am not enough of a scholar to make an effective enough argument. But I do have one general problem with it. What does it mean to accept Jesus as your savior? It does not mean to be perfect, because we cannot be. It does not mean to say the words, because words are only words. It does not mean to follow certain rules, because the law was done away with. That is an excellent summation. And correct on every point. I can say I believe in Jesus. But do I really? I do not have a close, personal relationship with Him. I don't know how to. I can't have a conversation with Him like I can a friend. I believe in Him, but how much? I can't honestly say I do with all my heart and mind and soul and strength. I don't even know what that means. I only love Him as much as I am able. Does that mean I'm going to Hell? I don't think so. But what exactly does one have to do, in real terms, to not go to hell? That is a very good question and one that a man named Nicodemus asked Jesus one day. John 3:1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: 2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. 3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. There is the true answer. You MUST be born again. As Jesus explains, we are born of water (physical birth) and that makes us physically alive. But we must be born "of the spirit" if we want to be alive spiritually. Read the rest of the story on John 3. We cannot "save ourselves". Only Jesus can save us. And we cannot "keep ourselves saved". Only Jesus can do that. But that is assuming that "not seeing the Kingdom of God" means going to hell. I think that having a deep relationship with God and knowing that there is nothing to fear even though you are "walking through the valley of the shadow of death," or however close you can get to that, is "living in God's Kingdom." Pray and ask God for the faith to believe unto salvation. You must be born again. I am praying for you. Of course I believe, but my faith is not perfect, which leaves room for doubt. I do think that, as I mentioned before, being "born again" allows you to have a true relationship with God and Jesus. I do not believe that if you aren't "born again" you go to hell. I do wish I could have a true relationship, and hopefully someday I will. welcome to the club..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:02:50 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are you using a fallacy checklist or something? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So Christians are ruining science? Since that isn't happening and never has happened - in fact quite the opposite - I wouldn't worry too much. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District "The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy. It is ironic that several of these individuals, who so staunchly and proudly touted their religious convictions in public, would time and again lie to cover their tracks and disguise the real purpose behind the ID Policy." "Those who disagree with our holding will likely mark it as the product of an activist judge. If so, they will have erred as this is manifestly not an activist Court. Rather, this case came to us as the result of the activism of an ill-informed faction on a school board, aided by a national public interest law firm eager to find a constitutional test case on ID, who in combination drove the Board to adopt an imprudent and ultimately unconstitutional policy. The breathtaking inanity of the Board's decision is evident when considered against the factual backdrop which has now been fully revealed through this trial. The students, parents, and teachers of the Dover Area School District deserved better than to be dragged into this legal maelstrom, with its resulting utter waste of monetary and personal resources." "After the trial, there were calls for the defendants accused of not presenting their case honestly to be put on trial for committing perjury. "Witnesses either testified inconsistently, or lied outright under oath on several occasions," Jones wrote. "The inescapable truth is that both [Alan] Bonsell and [William] Buckingham lied at their January 3, 2005 depositions. ... Bonsell repeatedly failed to testify in a truthful manner. ... Defendants have unceasingly attempted in vain to distance themselves from their own actions and statements, which culminated in repetitious, untruthful testimony." An editorial in the York Daily Record described their behaviour as both ironic and sinful, saying that the "unintelligent designers of this fiasco should not walk away unscathed"." There's a difference between true Christians and people who use their beliefs as a front to get their own way politically. For example, Westboro. People who manipulate and lie aren't exactly good Christians, are they? Are you using a fallacy checklist or something? Not sure what you mean. I do not agree with manipulation to get one's way, no matter what the outcome is. However, I do believe that the truth about the issues with evolution should be taught as well as the evidence. There are numerous problems with evolution that are never discussed. If you're going to teach it, be honest about it. It seems to me that those in their ivory towers have decided that God does not exist, and therefore if you teach anything about it you are corrupting our kids. Meanwhile they treat Science as if it's god. If something doesn't fit their theory, well, Science made it happen. Evolution shouldn't be taught as fact, and ID shouldn't either. Let's teach facts and let the kids decide for themselves. At some point I could post the main issues I have with evolution, but this isn't the thread for it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:03:58 PM EDT
[#41]
Essentially, I resent the idea that if it has anything to do with God, it's automatically wrong and will corrupt our kids and the scientific method. What gives you the right to make that determination? I would have just as much right to say, "Nope we're teaching all about intelligent design in school, and will never mention evolution."
God and Science do not have to be in conflict. God invented science, after all. That is often a drive for Creationists and Christians to study science - physical laws are created by God, so we might get a glimpse of God by studying them. If we were to make something up and ignore what we see, we would be defeating our purpose - we would be messing up our view of God. I'm not really that concerned with evolution. I don't think it or intelligent design should be taught. If you want to believe it, fine. I don't. If you want to believe that God created the world over billions of years and guided evolution, fine. I've even considered the idea myself. I just can't quite believe it. I could give the reasons I don't believe in evolution, but in another thread. But I do not like it when we are called "anti-science" for not believing it. It is incorrect and not helpful at all to either side. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:13:15 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It ruins the scientific education of countless thousands of young minds, not to mention that children indoctrinated into supernatural dogma too often grow up to burn heretics or fly airplanes into buildings. If mankind is to survive for long in the age of nuclear weapons, we will have to move towards reason and away from superstition. Come on, Rodent. You can do better than that. When is the last time some guys from First Baptist Church "burned heretics or flew airplanes into buildings"? There are some evil religions on this planet, but that doesn't mean that all of them are "bad". “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire A stupid comment that is proven wrong every day. As I noted, the boys from First Baptist Church haven't flown any jets into buildings. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:15:40 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A stupid comment that is proven wrong every day. As I noted, the boys from First Baptist Church haven't flown any jets into buildings. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It ruins the scientific education of countless thousands of young minds, not to mention that children indoctrinated into supernatural dogma too often grow up to burn heretics or fly airplanes into buildings. If mankind is to survive for long in the age of nuclear weapons, we will have to move towards reason and away from superstition. Come on, Rodent. You can do better than that. When is the last time some guys from First Baptist Church "burned heretics or flew airplanes into buildings"? There are some evil religions on this planet, but that doesn't mean that all of them are "bad". “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire A stupid comment that is proven wrong every day. As I noted, the boys from First Baptist Church haven't flown any jets into buildings. eh...he'll reach back 400 years for the inquisition as proof. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:25:07 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Evolution shouldn't be taught as fact, and ID shouldn't either. Let's teach facts and let the kids decide for themselves. At some point I could post the main issues I have with evolution, but this isn't the thread for it. It would be so nice if those who argue against evolution went to a little trouble to learn what it is that they're arguing against. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:27:02 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would be so nice if those who argue against evolution went to a little trouble to learn what it is that they're arguing against. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Evolution shouldn't be taught as fact, and ID shouldn't either. Let's teach facts and let the kids decide for themselves. At some point I could post the main issues I have with evolution, but this isn't the thread for it. It would be so nice if those who argue against evolution went to a little trouble to learn what it is that they're arguing against. It would also be nice if those who argue against God and faith went to a little trouble to learn what it is they're arguing against. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:39:02 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is another faith. There is no proof of this, but there is evidence. There's plenty of evidence to the contrary. Whether or not you believe the creation story is direct history or a metaphor (I'm somewhat mixed on that), to use evidence to prove that the Bible is incorrect is a fallacy. Evidence cannot prove something. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
"Science tells us." Science tells us nothing. It's simply a method of interpretation, and it can be, and is all the time, misinterpreted. I don't think we should swerve this thread into one on evolution, but how, exactly, does science point towards land animals becoming sea creatures? Archeological and genetic evidence along with the concepts and scientific theories of evolutionary biology. Sea mammals evolved from land mammals. Birds evolved from reptiles. This is another faith. There is no proof of this, but there is evidence. There's plenty of evidence to the contrary. Whether or not you believe the creation story is direct history or a metaphor (I'm somewhat mixed on that), to use evidence to prove that the Bible is incorrect is a fallacy. Evidence cannot prove something. Okay, let's see the evidence to the contrary (ie: that whales and birds were created by God at the same time). Meanwhile, here is some info about whale evolution, complete with talk of "transitional species" and vestigial limbs. Here is an example of atavism in an adult whale with hind legs. Here is some genetic evidence for you. Enjoy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:39:56 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
eh...he'll reach back 400 years for the inquisition as proof. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire A stupid comment that is proven wrong every day. As I noted, the boys from First Baptist Church haven't flown any jets into buildings. eh...he'll reach back 400 years for the inquisition as proof. Or I could reach back to yesterday for The Lord's Resistance Army, ISIS, the Christian militias in Palestine, the anti-Hindu movement in India, the Buddhists, Christians and Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, etc. ad nauseum. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:42:58 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or I could reach back to yesterday for The Lord's Resistance Army, ISIS, the Christian militias in Palestine, the anti-Hindu movement in India, the Buddhists, Christians and Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, etc. ad nauseum. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire A stupid comment that is proven wrong every day. As I noted, the boys from First Baptist Church haven't flown any jets into buildings. eh...he'll reach back 400 years for the inquisition as proof. Or I could reach back to yesterday for The Lord's Resistance Army, ISIS, the Christian militias in Palestine, the anti-Hindu movement in India, the Buddhists, Christians and Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, etc. ad nauseum. But you still can't find any Baptist boys flying jets into buildings. Just as I said. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:44:33 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or I could reach back to yesterday for The Lord's Resistance Army, ISIS, the Christian militias in Palestine, the anti-Hindu movement in India, the Buddhists, Christians and Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, etc. ad nauseum. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire A stupid comment that is proven wrong every day. As I noted, the boys from First Baptist Church haven't flown any jets into buildings. eh...he'll reach back 400 years for the inquisition as proof. Or I could reach back to yesterday for The Lord's Resistance Army, ISIS, the Christian militias in Palestine, the anti-Hindu movement in India, the Buddhists, Christians and Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, etc. ad nauseum. Of course, there have never been any violent groups that WEREN'T associated with some religion. It's not just that some people are evil and will use whatever tool is handy to spread it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/19/2014 5:48:27 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But you still can't find any Baptist boys flying jets into buildings. Just as I said. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” - Voltaire A stupid comment that is proven wrong every day. As I noted, the boys from First Baptist Church haven't flown any jets into buildings. eh...he'll reach back 400 years for the inquisition as proof. Or I could reach back to yesterday for The Lord's Resistance Army, ISIS, the Christian militias in Palestine, the anti-Hindu movement in India, the Buddhists, Christians and Tamils in Sri Lanka, the Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, etc. ad nauseum. But you still can't find any Baptist boys flying jets into buildings. Just as I said. ISIS is Christian.....news to me.....keep it up Rodent..you'll eventually step on your dick again...and your fellow traveler will have to ban you again. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
