Darwinism vs creationism

[Times Roman]

Yes. This is what I meant. I didnt mean we havent become "smarter" in the sense of knowing more, just that we didnt have this sudden breakthrough and somehow because of something unexplainable we are some how wiser. I should have put it this way. Of course we have became smarter in what we know, not that we were lacking in knowledge then, just information.

absolutely 100% agree. Just because we know how to clone ourselves, should we? what ethical implications does that mean for the clone? should we harvest organs from our clones (a leading argument amongst some)?

We have advanced technologically in leaps and bounds, but unfortunately, our understanding, our morals and values, our ability to determine what is right from wrong, seems to be lagging? Just because we can do a thing, does that mean we should do a thing?

We create a technology, and before anyone has a chance to discuss the implications, it is already out there for public consumption.

for example, we have genetically modified wheat to maximize yields, be drought/fungus/rodent resisitant.

We did all this, and before any one could ask a simple question.....

....is this GM wheat in our best interests?

From a health standpoint, it is fairly clear the answer is NO! GM wheat is a leading cause of obesity here in the USA.

Once you let the genie out of the bottle, pretty damn hard to put her back in.

[Times Roman]

But with God, "All things are possible".

Fail!

You cannot explain a thing by referring back to the very same thing you are trying to explain.

This is called a circular reference, and anyone familar with debugging a MS Excel spreadsheet knows this is a HUGE problem

[warmouth]

and this is why some muslims are willing to strap dynamite to their chests and blow themselves up in crowded places. Because they cannot consider the possibilty of:

1) that they are wrong, and...
2) Infidels might be right

and because compromise is outside the realms of possibility, they strap on the dynamite and go marching off to meet the virgins.

This is a MAJOR flaw of the idea of religion! Of the seven (7) billlion people on the face of this earth, how is it that only one (1) billion Christians got it right and get to go to heaven, and six (6) billion other non christians got it wrong and will be tortured in hell for all eternity?

When people of religion are unwilling or unable to compromise, and ideals clash, war will inevitably ensue and thousands, if not millions murdered in the name of religion.

When people are unable/unwilling to compromise, that means they have already made up their minds, and therefore have closed their minds to new ideas. Everything they know and want to know is in a document created by some ancient emporer named Constantine (even though they refuse to admit this). When this happens, truth gets thrown to the wind, and dogma prevails.

Dogma is a very scary thing, as it is the driving force of the spanish inquisition, and no one is allowed to question the religious zealots in power. This is the very definition of the dark ages.

Here is a brief discussion about "Dogma"

Dogma is the official system of belief or doctrine held by a religion, or a particular group or organization.[1] It serves as part of the primary basis of an ideology or belief system, and it can not be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or the ideology itself. Although it generally refers to religious beliefs that are accepted regardless of evidence, they can refer to acceptable opinions of philosophers or philosophical schools, public decrees, or issued decisions of political authorities.[2]

The term derives from Greek δόγμα "that which seems to one, opinion or belief"[3] and that from δοκέω (dokeo), "to think, to suppose, to imagine".[4] Dogma came to signify laws or ordinances adjudged and imposed upon others by the First Century. The plural is either dogmas or dogmata, from Greek δόγματα. The term "dogmatics" is used as a synonym for systematic theology, as in Karl Barth's defining textbook of neo-orthodoxy, the 14-volume Church Dogmatics.

Here will be my take on this. I cant abandon my belief TR because I know what I have is undoubtedly real. First off, I cant expect a non-christian to understand this because honestly, it is a supernatural type of thing. But this thread wasntstarted about religion,but 2 theories. It has long movedpast the original purpose and has went into something much more deep. Much more interesting. Christianity, that is, TRUE christianity, is seriously not a religion. Hear me out. There are fanatics in every "religion" and to many people shock, I hate organized religion. The terrorist muslims were fanaticals. I am not saying they were going against what their doctrine teaches, but this is the esence of why I hate "religion". The same goes for those "God Hates F*gs" morons. This is fanatical, and is no way to view true christianity. Those people from Westboro Baptist only have the name "baptist" and are the farthest thing away from what real christianity is. Inevery religion that I have ever studied,and believe me, I have studied them for many years, there is a pattern that follows and this is what religion is. Religion as I have found true with every belief system, the people are trying to work to find the grace and mercy and to please their "god". Every single religion centers around this. They work to find favoritism from thier "god". This is not the case with true, scriptural christianity. We as true christians dont do anything to seek the favor of God, as we hate God, like everyone else in the world(before faith). We dont seek to please God, He seeks us. I have found with christianity, in the true form, that we do nothing and God does it all. We dont seek a relationship with Him, He seeks one with us. Christianity is the only religion that this is the absolute basis of the faith. This is what first drew me to christianity. I was secular, agnostic, wanting to know truth. I wondered "what makes religions different?" I thought they were all the same. People who would go to extremes to find favoritism in the eyes of the god of thier choice. This is true of all but real christianity. God does it all. God seeks us out and we WILL follow, as his will is undeniable and irresistable. Once again, something I cannot explain unless it has happened to you. There is literally nothing you do for God to chose you. It is all Him. When He gets you, you change. Not in a way that teaches hate, or extremes. You long to do the will of God, and we know what this is from the Bible. Dont listen to these people that say "God told me to do this, or God came to me and revealed this". We know God from what the Bible says, and through the creation He created. That is all, nothing else. Please do not catagorize true believers with the fanatic you see in the media, as real christians are few and far between. A remnant. Real christians live thier lives to be imitators of Jesus. And if you read and follow the life of Jesus you will see he showed favoritism to no one. He hung out with unbelievers, theives, whores, adulterers, etc. He came to save people from themselves. True christians dont work to earn this salvation, He does it all. And this is how you know true christianity. They are grateful and want to show love to everyone. Prostitutes, unbelievers, and yes, even gays, lol. There is no christian that can hate anyone, as this isno longer their nature. It kills me to see and hear how we are all lumped together with those hate groups becasue those people are not christians. I just wanted to add this, as true christanity is not a religion, it is God finding favor and showing mercy and coming to us for a relationship. We dont seek His favoritism, and that is why True christians are humble, loving, forgiving, and compassionate. We are not in it for the money, as it is well documented that many are, and this is why I would say that 25% of 100% are actually christians. Who knows though, those are my personal statistics, but I believe it to be true. Even in my church. Much smaller than 405s, but I would even say that those numbers are accurate in any sized church. I just hate being labeled as another religion and lumped in with hate groups because real christians are nothing like those freaks.

[warmouth]

Another note as far as young earth and old earth beliefs. It is a matter of belief. Either one is fine in my book. I have a fossil collection and I love it! I think that God can literally make the earth in 1/2 of a second if He is as powerful as Scripture says he is. I am neither young nor old earth because I dont know. I am a science freak however, adn both sides have great points. The Flood from Noah could explain alot if you believe it. It could cause the grand canyon, Everest, extinction, and so forth. AS far as the Ark itself, I believe that God chose the animals to save and the others were left to extinction. I dont think carbon dating is accurate at all as far as aging stones and bones, and I dont think anyone would disagree with me on that subject. It can be useful and helpfu, but it is nowhere near accurate. Once again, these are what I personally think could explain alot, but as always, you yourselves have to decide your beliefs. All I can do is shed light onwhat I believe to be true to me, and I wont push anything I believe on anyone. I will do everything in my power to help anyone who has questions though.

[warmouth]

Fail!

You cannot explain a thing by referring back to the very same thing you are trying to explain.

This is called a circular reference, and anyone familar with debugging a MS Excel spreadsheet knows this is a HUGE problem

Ha ha! I was messing around with you. Nothing there to be taken serious.

[Bryan2]

What if you live your whole life the way as a true christian and do good works that are pleasing to god. What if god choses you but then you change your beliefs to the exact opposite of that 50 years later?


Is that then Gods will to change you? Then there is that whole predestination thing...

Again I know there is no answer that you will be able to convey to me personally. The thing is from my viewpoint, I have been at that same place where I KNEW in my heart the true god. I had heard and felt him during prayer. To this day I still cant describe what I felt that night. But the more I researched answers the more I saw discrepancies which made me challenge my own personal faith. A faith which earlier seemed completely unchangeable.

Is this my choice or gods?

The breakdown for the whole debate is do we take the bible literal or metaphorical. The literal believers choose to believe in a young earth and that there are absolutely no discrepancies in the bible whatsoever. A literal translation of the bible leaves many many things that science can actually physically disprove today. Why did god even allow the bible to be written in such a way where we have a debate such as this in the first place? God himself said there is nothing that humans cannot do if they put there minds to it.... ie the tower of babel. So why would we think that these questions are so unanswerable to even try to search?

[DeniZen]

Creationism probably goes all the way back to the cave man. Even then I'm sure primitive humans questioned themselves and the world around them, which is probably the roots of all religion.

Why am I here?
How did I get here?
What are those things in the sky?
Why must I die?
Why do bad things happen to me?
Why do good things happen to me?
How can I live a happy life?

Religion has the answers to all those questions.

[--->>405<<---]

bryan the bible is to be taken literally in some places and metaphorically in others. it was written by men under the divine inspiration of God. of course its gonna be hard, even impossible for some, to understand. there are bible scholars (my pastor included) who has a very good understanding of the bible. the KEY for u is to find one of these pastors and start attending his church, ask questions and pray asking the Lord to teach u and give u understanding.

the bible is not a book u can just pick up and read thru like u would "old yeller" and get the entire thing. its just not..

these discrepancies u found can be explained and were not discrepancies at all, u just did not possess the big picture biblical knowledge to understand what u were reading. u need explanations from people who do. this is one reason why we have pastors. a good pastor will not simply tell u "this is what this means" without explanation. a good pastor will refer u to difft parts of the bible and will show u thru other scripture why it means something u may not understand in a way that will make it clear to u. its very interesting! u just have to find a good teacher..

[--->>405<<---]

and this is why some muslims are willing to strap dynamite to their chests and blow themselves up in crowded places. Because they cannot consider the possibilty of:

1) that they are wrong, and...
2) Infidels might be right

and because compromise is outside the realms of possibility, they strap on the dynamite and go marching off to meet the virgins.

This is a MAJOR flaw of the idea of religion! Of the seven (7) billlion people on the face of this earth, how is it that only one (1) billion Christians got it right and get to go to heaven, and six (6) billion other non christians got it wrong and will be tortured in hell for all eternity?

When people of religion are unwilling or unable to compromise, and ideals clash, war will inevitably ensue and thousands, if not millions murdered in the name of religion.

When people are unable/unwilling to compromise, that means they have already made up their minds, and therefore have closed their minds to new ideas. Everything they know and want to know is in a document created by some ancient emporer named Constantine (even though they refuse to admit this). When this happens, truth gets thrown to the wind, and dogma prevails.

1. ur comparing apples and oranges. i am christian NOT muslim and i havent killed anyone nor would i condone it for the sake of religious belief.

2. matthew 7:13,14 - 13 “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. 14 But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

this is what God says, not me. 6 billion wrong and 1 billion right? dont know about the numbers but the percentages fit. take it up with Him..

3. we have already discussed constantine and i said i dont know cuz i havent studied his role but know God can use evil people to do his will. i think u said there were 74 books from constantine, my bible has 66. maybe he did contribute to the bible we have today. just because he was a bad man does NOT mean God didnt use him for his purpose. nor does it void the validity of the bible IMO.

4. i suppose until/IF u ever get saved u will never understand what it means to have uncompromising faith. when u become a christian the Holy Spirit comes to dwell inside and enlighten/guide you into all truth.

john 16:13 - "13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come."

ephesians 1: 13,14 - "13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory."

it is very dangerous in a society when there are some that profess to know the truth, know all the answers, and then are willing to persecute those that do not believe as they believe.

I understand faith. I've studied it. I studied with Jesuits in a Jesuit university for a number of years. Jesuits are very enlightened, and some will concede that they could be wrong about their faith, but that doesn't diminish their faith in the least. They know about Constantine (Who do you think I learned about Constantine from?), and openly admit that the bible is what it is. The jesuits are very learned. But their faith transcends science, and explains why many scientists look to metaphysics to answer some of their most profound questions.

it is possible to merge both science and metaphysics, but in order to do that, one must take the blinders off and become a "seeker" and be willing to go down what ever path that may lead you to.

It is commendable that you fouund faith to resolve some personal issues that were plaguing you, but now I challange you to come out of that shell, and take a step into elightenment. It is possible to stay true to your faith AND be willing to accept the universe around you as it really is, a wonderous place that is so much more than Constantine could ever possibly imagine!

Cheers!

1. as christians we are not called to persecute anyone. as a christian i KNOW i cant convince u to believe, this can only be done by God himself. all i can do is plant seeds.

2. an intellectual understanding of faith is NOT IMO a saving understanding of faith. just because u know about faith on an intellectual level does NOT qualify u IMO to be able to discuss faith on the same level as someone who has embraced faith in Christ in the true sense of the word "faith"

3. i do accept the universe as it is. i also feel no need to explain it scientifically. personally i dont care how old it is. i know God created it in 6 days and rested on the 7th. period. thats good enuff for me..

maybe the analogy of the 19 year old is inappropriate because it refers to a level of immaturity that i did not intend.

So i need to come up with a better analogy

i appreciate the clarification. definitely apples and oranges comparison..

[AD]

405, you're the most patient person i've ever met. Everyone needs to be more like you.

[Lunk1]

405, you're the most patient person i've ever met. Everyone needs to be more like you.

Him and Tr both X2 (the 2 of them would have a great day sitting on the porch witha pitcher of sweet tea).

[--->>405<<---]

405, you're the most patient person i've ever met. Everyone needs to be more like you.

Asiandude i appreciate it buddy! Of course it is a bit easier to appear patient on a computer

On a side note if i thought simply beating TR over the head with my bible would bring him round to my way of thinking i may consider it! LOL

[Times Roman]

Here's my problem with Religion

The Hindu's insist they are right, and willing to fight to the death over it
The Muslims insist they are right, and willing to fight to the death over it
The Christians insist they are right, and willing to fight to the death over it
The Jews insist they are right, and willing to fight to the death over it

Does anyone see a pattern here?

An inability/refusal to compromise
An inability/refusal to consider/empathize from the viewpoint of the other
A steadfast determination to convert others into their way of thinking
A steadfast "obligation" to judge others based on their belief system
A steadfast determination to condemn others for not sharing their belief system

Here's the thing. If one didn't know we were talking about religion, they'd be thinking we were talking about war.

With everyone willing to die for their religion, it also means they are willing to kill for it. Before you say that is not the case, step back and think. People are killing in the name of religion every day.

And with all this killing, how is it possible that religion can be about love?

Only until people of religion are willing to accept the possibility that the other guy may not be wrong, will we be able to live in peace.

[--->>405<<---]

and this is why some muslims are willing to strap dynamite to their chests and blow themselves up in crowded places. Because they cannot consider the possibilty of:

1) that they are wrong, and...
2) Infidels might be right

and because compromise is outside the realms of possibility, they strap on the dynamite and go marching off to meet the virgins.

This is a MAJOR flaw of the idea of religion! Of the seven (7) billlion people on the face of this earth, how is it that only one (1) billion Christians got it right and get to go to heaven, and six (6) billion other non christians got it wrong and will be tortured in hell for all eternity?

When people of religion are unwilling or unable to compromise, and ideals clash, war will inevitably ensue and thousands, if not millions murdered in the name of religion.

When people are unable/unwilling to compromise, that means they have already made up their minds, and therefore have closed their minds to new ideas. Everything they know and want to know is in a document created by some ancient emporer named Constantine (even though they refuse to admit this). When this happens, truth gets thrown to the wind, and dogma prevails.

Dogma is a very scary thing, as it is the driving force of the spanish inquisition, and no one is allowed to question the religious zealots in power. This is the very definition of the dark ages.

Here is a brief discussion about "Dogma"

Dogma is the official system of belief or doctrine held by a religion, or a particular group or organization.[1] It serves as part of the primary basis of an ideology or belief system, and it can not be changed or discarded without affecting the very system's paradigm, or the ideology itself. Although it generally refers to religious beliefs that are accepted regardless of evidence, they can refer to acceptable opinions of philosophers or philosophical schools, public decrees, or issued decisions of political authorities.[2]

The term derives from Greek δόγμα "that which seems to one, opinion or belief"[3] and that from δοκέω (dokeo), "to think, to suppose, to imagine".[4] Dogma came to signify laws or ordinances adjudged and imposed upon others by the First Century. The plural is either dogmas or dogmata, from Greek δόγματα. The term "dogmatics" is used as a synonym for systematic theology, as in Karl Barth's defining textbook of neo-orthodoxy, the 14-volume Church Dogmatics.

it is very dangerous in a society when there are some that profess to know the truth, know all the answers, and then are willing to persecute those that do not believe as they believe.

I understand faith. I've studied it. I studied with Jesuits in a Jesuit university for a number of years. Jesuits are very enlightened, and some will concede that they could be wrong about their faith, but that doesn't diminish their faith in the least. They know about Constantine (Who do you think I learned about Constantine from?), and openly admit that the bible is what it is. The jesuits are very learned. But their faith transcends science, and explains why many scientists look to metaphysics to answer some of their most profound questions.

it is possible to merge both science and metaphysics, but in order to do that, one must take the blinders off and become a "seeker" and be willing to go down what ever path that may lead you to.

It is commendable that you fouund faith to resolve some personal issues that were plaguing you, but now I challange you to come out of that shell, and take a step into elightenment. It is possible to stay true to your faith AND be willing to accept the universe around you as it really is, a wonderous place that is so much more than Constantine could ever possibly imagine!

Cheers!

Here's my problem with Religion

The Hindu's insist they are right, and willing to fight to the death over it
The Muslims insist they are right, and willing to fight to the death over it
The Christians insist they are right, and willing to fight to the death over it
The Jews insist they are right, and willing to fight to the death over it

Does anyone see a pattern here?

An inability/refusal to compromise
An inability/refusal to consider/empathize from the viewpoint of the other
A steadfast determination to convert others into their way of thinking
A steadfast "obligation" to judge others based on their belief system
A steadfast determination to condemn others for not sharing their belief system

Here's the thing. If one didn't know we were talking about religion, they'd be thinking we were talking about war.

With everyone willing to die for their religion, it also means they are willing to kill for it. Before you say that is not the case, step back and think. People are killing in the name of religion every day.

And with all this killing, how is it possible that religion can be about love?

Only until people of religion are willing to accept the possibility that the other guy may not be wrong, will we be able to live in peace.

ur going off the deep end now TR IMO. im trying to think of a circumstance that would require me to kill for my faith. i cant think of one. exodus 20:13 - "13 “You shall not murder."

since when did i say i was willing to fight til the death over my faith? since when does the average christian say such a thing? i cant think of one circumstance. im sure u can pull something off the internet to back up ur claim but these episodes are few and far between and the concept goes against christian theology, the teachings of Jesus and the bible.

one difference between u and i is u are willing to consider science or whatever it is u believe in could be wrong. if it is it means nothing. what difference does it make if a scientific theory is incorrect? what i believe in means everything. i have given u scripture to back up my beliefs. i wonder if u even read them?

my belief is not arbitrary, nor is it a guess, nor is it meaningless, nor has it come about without proof to me personally. u have not been present to observe the evidence as i have. maybe one day evidence will be given to u which will compel u to change ur viewpoint. for ur sake i hope this is the case. in the mean time DO NOT lump my faith and belief system in with radical religious groups who resort to violence to try and get their point across. it is inaccurate. as a science buff i would expect u to hold accuracy in higher regard.

[Times Roman]

ur going off the deep end now TR IMO. im trying to think of a circumstance that would require me to kill for my faith. i cant think of one. exodus 20:13 - "13 “You shall not murder."

since when did i say i was willing to fight til the death over my faith? since when does the average christian say such a thing? i cant think of one circumstance. im sure u can pull something off the internet to back up ur claim but these episodes are few and far between and the concept goes against christian theology, the teachings of Jesus and the bible.

one difference between u and i is u are willing to consider science or whatever it is u believe in could be wrong. if it is it means nothing. what difference does it make if a scientific theory is incorrect? what i believe in means everything. i have given u scripture to back up my beliefs. i wonder if u even read them?

my belief is not arbitrary, nor is it a guess, nor is it meaningless, nor has it come about without proof to me personally. u have not been present to observe the evidence as i have. maybe one day evidence will be given to u which will compel u to change ur viewpoint. for ur sake i hope this is the case. in the mean time DO NOT lump my faith and belief system in with radical religious groups who resort to violence to try and get their point across. it is inaccurate. as a science buff i would expect u to hold accuracy in higher regard.

you are debating from a very narrow perspective. I am debating from a broad general perspective. There is no "deep end", it is a fact. Those statements are very much a reality for a huge percentage of religious individuals. Religion is a very dangerous thing when you get groups of people together.

I am not saying your belief is arbitrary. But it is fanatical in that you are willing to die for it. You may not be willing to kill for it, but the next guy might. Let's look at the middle east and what is going on between the isralies and the palastinians. Here we have two whole countries willing to wipe the other off the face of the planet in the name of their religion.

Regarding your quoted passages. You attempts at justifiying a book based on the contents of that book is called a circular reference. Only in religious circles can this illogical approach not get called out.

So my basic position stands. There are a half dozen or so major religions on this planet, and each insists that they possess true insight into the mind of god, and more or less belittle all others that do not believe as they do.

Until people of religion become tolerant with the belief system of others, and refrain from insisting that others belief systems are "wrong", then and only then will we get some peace on this planet.

But like you said, you would die for your religion. No room for compromise with a statement like that.

Why is it people of religion feel compelled to insist that the other guy always has to be wrong?

Hmmmmm?

[Times Roman]

ur going off the deep end now TR IMO. im trying to think of a circumstance that would require me to kill for my faith. i cant think of one. exodus 20:13 - "13 “You shall not murder."

since when did i say i was willing to fight til the death over my faith? since when does the average christian say such a thing? i cant think of one circumstance. im sure u can pull something off the internet to back up ur claim but these episodes are few and far between and the concept goes against christian theology, the teachings of Jesus and the bible.

one difference between u and i is u are willing to consider science or whatever it is u believe in could be wrong. if it is it means nothing. what difference does it make if a scientific theory is incorrect? what i believe in means everything. i have given u scripture to back up my beliefs. i wonder if u even read them?

my belief is not arbitrary, nor is it a guess, nor is it meaningless, nor has it come about without proof to me personally. u have not been present to observe the evidence as i have. maybe one day evidence will be given to u which will compel u to change ur viewpoint. for ur sake i hope this is the case. in the mean time DO NOT lump my faith and belief system in with radical religious groups who resort to violence to try and get their point across. it is inaccurate. as a science buff i would expect u to hold accuracy in higher regard.

I consider many possibilities. I try to keep my mind open. I never said that my belief system means nothing. But I have also seen many many things, and exposed to many belief systems. I can also appreciate that with all the differing belief systems, they CANNOT ALL BE RIGHT. This means that at a minimum, most are wrong, or they could all be wrong. The only way I would be able to say I am not wrong is for me to close my eyes/ears/mind, already make up my mind, and be unwilling/unable to listen to knew ideas/information.

To entertain the idea of a possibility requires one to keep their mind open. Only when you already know all the answers is there no longer a need to keep your mind open.

Here is a theoritical thought experiment.

I sit you down with a jew, side by side. I know nothing other than what you two tell me. I am trying to determine which of you is right.

How might I go about this process and determine the "true" religion?

[--->>405<<---]

18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:

“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”[c]
20 Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.

26 Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28 God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, 29 so that no one may boast before him. 30 It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. 31 Therefore, as it is written: “Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.”

TR consider, if u will, for a moment the possibility that i am correct and the bible is the word of God, christianity is the faith and means to salvation, in light of the passages highlighted and the obvious infinite capability of God to create a universe from His breath.

considering what the bible says about man and pride do u think it could be possible God knew man as a whole would rely on their ability to scientifically prove or disprove his creation in the manner the bible claims it was created and , relying on this science out of pride in their own intellect and ability to rationalize dismiss God altogether?

do u not think God could create a universe in 6 days that appears billions of years old when relying on scientific method to accomplish exactly what He states He will accomplish in verses 19 & 20 above??

[tboney]

well T.R. the i cant honestly compare the bible to the koran or book of morman because i havent read those books. i can tell u the bible is full of fulfilled prophecy. not to mention all the historical accuracy. there is even science in the bible.

most importantly (and this is something that cant be proven to the rational minded) God has used the scriptures in the bible to speak to me personally regarding certain circumstances i may have been in at the time. this is why i made the statement spiritual truths will not make sense to a non-believer. God made things this way.

ill give u an example:
1 corinthians 1:21
"For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe."

i wish i had better knowledge to be able to impart more to answer ur question. i suppose i need to read the bible more it is important as a christian to try to spread the good news of the bible which is salvation thru faith in christ, however i am not naive enuff to think i can "prove" the bible is true to anyone who does not believe it.. as jesus said:

(john 6:44) Jesus answered. 44 “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day."

(john 6:65): 65 He went on to say, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”

God has to make the first move (not me) ..

BTW TR i used to make the same arguments about how can we know christianity is the "true religion".. LOL i got my answer after many years of pain, suffering and addiction that led me to see my need for God who was the only one who could deliver me from my pain..
hopefully the same will happen for all u guys

That sums it up for me bro! Heroin addict for 15 years, been jailed, institutionalised, etc, etc, It was devine intervention for me! Thats all there is to it! Been clean 9 years now.

[Lunk1]

TR..I guess my definition of belief is just that. If I was questioning or considering that others could be right, then it's not much of a true belief. This would hold true in politics, morals, family values etc:

I believe in corporal punishment. If I didn't "believe" in it I would say " I wonder about or I question corporal punishment"

The same theory applies to your "belief" in science. I wonder do you accept that there could be a God and creator and that your "belief" in science might be incorrect (perhaps typing this you may have already answered this previously)

[RaginCajun]

That sums it up for me bro! Heroin addict for 15 years, been jailed, institutionalised, etc, etc, It was devine intervention for me! Thats all there is to it! Been clean 9 years now.

congrats tboney!!!

[Times Roman]

TR consider, if u will, for a moment the possibility that i am correct and the bible is the word of God, christianity is the faith and means to salvation, in light of the passages highlighted and the obvious infinite capability of God to create a universe from His breath.

considering what the bible says about man and pride do u think it could be possible God knew man as a whole would rely on their ability to scientifically prove or disprove his creation in the manner the bible claims it was created and , relying on this science out of pride in their own intellect and ability to rationalize dismiss God altogether?

do u not think God could create a universe in 6 days that appears billions of years old when relying on scientific method to accomplish exactly what He states He will accomplish in verses 19 & 20 above??

not for a moment will i consider your belief system to be wrong. I'm just not sure it's right, either. I'll answer your question, but please enlighten me with my thought experiment from above.

Yes, if King James' version of the bible is right, then genesis is right, and God created the universe. I won't use the term "days" since a day is a meaningless measure of time prior to the creation of the earth.

So back to my point. It's pretty clear that I have no problem admitting I am wrong. But what bothers me is your insistance you are right! Because if you are right, then that also means you are saying that everyone else on the planet is wrong?

The only way you can insist you are right, really, is to shut down and put the blinders on. By insisting you are right, in essense, you are saying you already have all the answers, and there are no further truths out there for you to find. Case closed, right?

I have known (yes, i'm now repeating) certain jesuits that will concede the possibility that the other guy may not be wrong. He wasn't a rank and file type either, he was a priest. I was extremely impressed by his level of enlightenment. He very soberly confided in me that many in religion do not want to know anything other than what their book tells them. It is a type of blind devotion that causes alot of problems, when dogma supercedes curiosity, when church doctrine supercedes science.

There are those that believe that all religion holds an element of truth. And that god has spoken to his children repeatedly, and in different areasof the world. That there are natural variations between the religions, and that is OK. Because god gave the people of that region what they needed at that point in time, which is different from what other people in a different region needed at a different time. It seems to me that gods actions are a very fluid thing, but many in religion act as if it were an immutable force that cannot/doesn't change to fit the needs of the people over a period of time.

[--->>405<<---]

That sums it up for me bro! Heroin addict for 15 years, been jailed, institutionalised, etc, etc, It was devine intervention for me! Thats all there is to it! Been clean 9 years now.

t-boney congrats dude! amazing how much different and better life can be when u have the Lord is it not my man!

romans 8:31 - "31 What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?"

indeed.. who can be against us?

[tboney]

congrats tboney!!!

Thanks man!

[Times Roman]

TR..I guess my definition of belief is just that. If I was questioning or considering that others could be right, then it's not much of a true belief. This would hold true in politics, morals, family values etc:

I believe in corporal punishment. If I didn't "believe" in it I would say " I wonder about or I question corporal punishment"

The same theory applies to your "belief" in science. I wonder do you accept that there could be a God and creator and that your "belief" in science might be incorrect (perhaps typing this you may have already answered this previously)

So let me get this straight....

Because you believe it, that makes it true?

As in "true belief"?

My belief in science to be accurate, is the belief in the scientific method. NOT the conclusions that are drawn from this process. For example, I have serious issues with the big bang, as stated previously

[tboney]

t-boney congrats dude! amazing how much different and better life can be when u have the Lord is it not my man!

romans 8:31 - "31 What, then, shall we say in response to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?"

indeed.. who can be against us?

Thanks bro! Anyone who has been to "that place" in addiction and come out alive knows what we are talking about!

[Lunk1]

So let me get this straight....

Because you believe it, that makes it true?

As in "true belief"?

My belief in science to be accurate, is the belief in the scientific method. NOT the conclusions that are drawn from this process. For example, I have serious issues with the big bang, as stated previously

NO NO..I'm saying that the me believing something MAKES it true, but "true believe" is a completely different monster. Maybe I shouldnt have called it a monster lol

[--->>405<<---]

not for a moment will i consider your belief system to be wrong. I'm just not sure it's right, either. I'll answer your question, but please enlighten me with my thought experiment from above.

Yes, if King James' version of the bible is right, then genesis is right, and God created the universe. I won't use the term "days" since a day is a meaningless measure of time prior to the creation of the earth.

So back to my point. It's pretty clear that I have no problem admitting I am wrong. But what bothers me is your insistance you are right! Because if you are right, then that also means you are saying that everyone else on the planet is wrong?
i am not saying I am right or the planet is wrong. i am saying the Bible is the word of God. what the bible says is truth.

The only way you can insist you are right, really, is to shut down and put the blinders on. By insisting you are right, in essense, you are saying you already have all the answers, and there are no further truths out there for you to find. Case closed, right?
i do not claim science's determination of the earth and its origin is not correct based on the resources science currently has available. i believe scientifically the earth may indeed appear as old as science says it is. i havent studied it and really dont care. i dont know if there are further truths to be discovered. i DO know there is no truth to be discovered to discredit the Word of God. do i know this absolutely from a scientific standpoint? NO. i dont rely on science to tell me what is or is not. what is true or false. i rely on God to tell me that. this is done by His word.

I have known (yes, i'm now repeating) certain jesuits that will concede the possibility that the other guy may not be wrong. He wasn't a rank and file type either, he was a priest. I was extremely impressed by his level of enlightenment. He very soberly confided in me that many in religion do not want to know anything other than what their book tells them. It is a type of blind devotion that causes alot of problems, when dogma supercedes curiosity, when church doctrine supercedes science.
it appears ur idea of "level of enlightenment" is synonymous with my idea of lack of faith.

There are those that believe that all religion holds an element of truth. And that god has spoken to his children repeatedly, and in different areasof the world. That there are natural variations between the religions, and that is OK. Because god gave the people of that region what they needed at that point in time, which is different from what other people in a different region needed at a different time. It seems to me that gods actions are a very fluid thing, but many in religion act as if it were an immutable force that cannot/doesn't change to fit the needs of the people over a period of time.

to an extent i agree with u. god has given certain info to certain people in a manner relevant to their time period. but i think we will disagree with the particular type of info ur talking about.

Immutability is an attribute of God: Hebrews 13:8- " 8 Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever."

one thing we ALL need has not nor will it ever change. this is Christ. John 14:5,6 - " 5 Thomas said to him, “Lord, we don’t know where you are going, so how can we know the way?”

6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. "

this fact will NEVER Change. it is the essence of christianity and a stumbling block for most. all u have to do is believe in Christ and u can be saved. the question is - Will You???

[--->>405<<---]

So let me get this straight....

Because you believe it, that makes it true?

As in "true belief"?

My belief in science to be accurate, is the belief in the scientific method. NOT the conclusions that are drawn from this process. For example, I have serious issues with the big bang, as stated previously

this scientific method u put so much faith in is proven wrong over and over and over again.. so why do u hold it in such high regard???? yes science is correct quite often, but not always. and science can only be proven to be correct with more science. so basically the thing that is being shown to be incorrect is being shown that by the very method that produced the error in the first place.

[Times Roman]

this scientific method u put so much faith in is proven wrong over and over and over again.. so why do u hold it in such high regard???? yes science is correct quite often, but not always. and science can only be proven to be correct with more science. so basically the thing that is being shown to be incorrect is being shown that by the very method that produced the error in the first place.

prove it. Prove that the scientific "method" is proven wrong. I'm pretty sure you don't quite understand the scientific method, because if you did, you would not have made that comment. A scientific method is just that, it is, and i quote:

The scientific method (or simply scientific method) is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.[1] To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning.[2] The Oxford English Dictionary says that the scientific method is: "a method or procedure that has characterized natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic observation, measurement, and experiment, and the formulation, testing, and modification of hypotheses."[3]

The chief characteristic which distinguishes the scientific method from other methods of acquiring knowledge is that scientists seek to let reality speak for itself, supporting a theory when a theory's predictions are confirmed and challenging a theory when its predictions prove false. Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, identifiable features distinguish scientific inquiry from other methods of obtaining knowledge. Scientific researchers propose hypotheses as explanations of phenomena, and design experimental studies to test these hypotheses via predictions which can be derived from them. These steps must be repeatable, to guard against mistake or confusion in any particular experimenter. Theories that encompass wider domains of inquiry may bind many independently derived hypotheses together in a coherent, supportive structure. Theories, in turn, may help form new hypotheses or place groups of hypotheses into context.

Scientific inquiry is generally intended to be as objective as possible in order to reduce biased interpretations of results. Another basic expectation is to document, archive and share all data and methodology so they are available for careful scrutiny by other scientists, giving them the opportunity to verify results by attempting to reproduce them. This practice, called full disclosure, also allows statistical measures of the reliability of these data to be established (when data is sampled or compared to chance).

[Flagg]

Why is this debate taking place?

I've seen this debate happen a thousand times on the internet and everyone is better of moving their forefinger around in a circular motion for hours on end.

It just decends into, who can write the most, without a remote chance of convincing the other side they are right. Both are as indoctrinated as the other.

Pointless.

[--->>405<<---]

i dont claim to know a lot about science or the scientific method. society benefits from it to a certain extent. i also think society suffers because of it. this whole thread IMO is a perfect example of that.

i dont have to prove there is error in methods used for science because i think the fact that science and theories and conclusions are being changed and modified proves it by itself. if the scientific method were so inerrant it seems to me there would be no reason for correction. if a correction is required then IMO science was not able to anticipate the error which IMO is a flaw.

take pluto for example. science determined it was a planet right for how many years? now all of a sudden science says its not a planet anymore? well which one is it? apparently the methodology involved in the initial determination of pluto's status was flawed..

[--->>405<<---]

Why is this debate taking place?

I've seen this debate happen a thousand times on the internet and everyone is better of moving their forefinger around in a circular motion for hours on end.

It just decends into, who can write the most, without a remote chance of convincing the other side they are right. Both are as indoctrinated as the other.

Pointless.

i agree and am willing to let it go. im simply responding to questions and statements being directed at me the best i know how. if this thread is a cause for irritation to u or anyone else on this forum i would say scrapping it is prob the best idea. certainly not my intent.

[Lunk1]

It has certainly managed to go off track...SHOCKER lol! Probably best we get it locked while everyone is still friends and be happy that there was a nice, friendly open debate.

[Times Roman]

[QUOTE=--->>405<<---;6250680]i dont claim to know a lot about science or the scientific method. society benefits from it to a certain extent. i also think society suffers because of it. this whole thread IMO is a perfect example of that.

i dont have to prove there is error in methods used for science because i think the fact that science and theories and conclusions are being changed and modified proves it by itself. if the scientific method were so inerrant it seems to me there would be no reason for correction. if a correction is required then IMO science was not able to anticipate the error which IMO is a flaw.

take pluto for example. science determined it was a planet right for how many years? now all of a sudden science says its not a planet anymore? well which one is it? apparently the methodology involved in the initial determination of pluto's status was flawed..[/QUOTE]

is that your best example of a flawed scienttific method? does it really matter what we call pluto? If I called it applie pie, and then later on called it pumpkin pie, does it really change what it is? Science did NOT determine it was a planet. It was labeled a planet by people. And as our understanding of planetary science improved, we decided to reclassify Pluto as something other than a planet, since it was discovered that Pluto, along with many other larger objects were in a rocky orbital belt we call the Kupier Belt. It was decided by the scientific community that in order for an object to be considered a planet, it must clear all orbital debris within it's orbital path, something Pluto has failed to do. Therefore, it was reclassified as a "Dwarf Planet".

If you are going to make sweeping statements, such as "the scientific method being wrong many many times", I would hope you fully understand what you are saying so that when i call you on it, you can make a valid point in defense of the statement.

The scientific method is a rational way of acquiring knowledge and information. From there, hypothesis/theories can be made. These theories, like the big bang, may or may not be correct. not disputing that. But the procedure how we go about finding this information IS the right way to go about it. The scientific method is the backbone of our society, and helped us rise up out of the dark ages, and allowing us to discuss this very issue over the internet (which is a product of the scientific method).

OK. I get we won't be able to discuss the scientific method, as clearly this is something you are not too familar with. No problem. But just because you do not understand a thing doesn't mean you should attack it by saying it is wrong. Fair enough?

[AD]

A lot of previous posts have used a handful of apparent discrepency in the Bible to "prove" that the whole Bible is false. What do you think of that reasoning, tr?

[Times Roman]

A lot of previous posts have used a handful of apparent discrepency in the Bible to "prove" that the whole Bible is false. What do you think of that reasoning, tr?

My position was to never try to prove the whole bible was wrong. Not at all. In fact, I'll be the first one to admit there is alot to learn from the bible.

But when some take the position that the bible is the whole truth and nothing but the truth, then I get real curioius about these "discrepencies". And when I ask a simple question, like "what is up with this discrepency", and I either do not get an answer, or the answer is veiled in some long complex answer that is really hard to follow and understand, then I get suspicious.

Wouldnt you?

[JohnnyVegas]

I will say this: the scientific method is not about right and wrong. It is about always learning more. It is cumulative and new information either reinforces existing data, or weakens it. Through billions of man hours we have learned a great deal about a lot of subjects. We learn more all the time and our learning is accelerating because of technology.

We know far from everything, but we know a lot more than we did even 100 years ago.

[Times Roman]

i agree and am willing to let it go. im simply responding to questions and statements being directed at me the best i know how. if this thread is a cause for irritation to u or anyone else on this forum i would say scrapping it is prob the best idea. certainly not my intent.

wasn't my intent to aim anything at you mate! not personally anyways.

It's more like a free for all, and I was asking some questions, you were kind enough to attempt an answer, and I continued to debate. And back and forth it goes. We are all free to step out at anytime, and as long as we are all respectful, then i say let the debate continue! Although I do admit we have followed this pretty far down the path. Not sure how much more "path" there is. =)

[Times Roman]

I will say this: the scientific method is not about right and wrong. It is about always learning more. It is cumulative and new information either reinforces existing data, or weakens it. Through billions of man hours we have learned a great deal about a lot of subjects. We learn more all the time and our learning is accelerating because of technology.

We know far from everything, but we know a lot more than we did even 100 years ago.

Bingo!

The scientific method is process by which we learn! This process is very solid and stable. It is repeatable and verifiable by anyone.

Thank you

[JohnnyVegas]

It has certainly managed to go off track...SHOCKER lol! Probably best we get it locked while everyone is still friends and be happy that there was a nice, friendly open debate.

I thought it went pretty damn well.

I liked the evolution talk. I love me some science. My second favorite website is www.sciencedaily.com