Science or Religion

[Growth In Motion]

Please give an example why also

[War5475]

Because the bible is the single most accurate historicle record ever written.

Because day old oysters are reported to be millions of years old by carbon dateing.

because there are suposidly billion year old fosils of human hand and foot prints.

because they "know" what colour was on certain dinasours heads.

Because they "know" what dinasour mateing calls sounded like.

Because the "know" that hobits existed because they found one skeleton on an island in the middle of the pacific. And from that they "knew" what kind of society and family life it had. and how it got to the islands because this "new Species" was the first sea farring species in existance! but yet they were unable to find anymore specimens.

Do i really need to go on? Its laughable that they never really just sit down and go . Well this is our best guess. No its allways fact. These poor kids are shown all these things as if they were imperical fact. Instead of sciences best guess.

any way rant off....

God BLess.....






War.

[CrazyScott]

The world and all living things are waaaaaayyyy to complex to be an accident. Give me a break.

An intelligent being (God) created it all, there is NO other explaination....period. People try but they only look foolish in the process....

Don't get me started....

[kokokolo]

im confused I said based on the bible and science... because, well, science backs the bible.

I didnt really believe until I went thru the bible studies link, and the spent countless hours at answersingenesis. I was like hey, what ever happened to evolution facts and aliens and dinosaurs etc :/

hey seek and ye shall find right?

[sucramdw]

It seems as though your separating the bible from science. This made me want to choose the third choice, however I base my beliefs on the bible. Even though I base my beliefs on the bible, I love science and agree with what it proves completely.

[CrazyScott]

Science is needed and does play a roll in our lives but it's not what I base my beliefs on, especially how it relates to creation.

You can't make something out of nothing but science has tried to disprove that all along and it just doesn't work. Something HAD to create everything and it didn't happen by "chance". LOL

Something funny my Dad use to always say to people when he was debating creation vs evolution... He'd say, "I don't like people telling me my great, great, great,....uncle Louie was a tadpole who slithered from a creekbed".

Hahaha.... true story. He was a trip.

[Wzs99]

I dont like Religion and I cant understand how people can follow it. . But science can be considered somewhat accurate because of how It questions things and how it connected to spirituality,but science is evolving and its finding Truth.

Has anyone seen the Movie "What the Bleep do We Know" You guys need to watch it or atleast give it a chance before you judge it or anything. I find that movie speaks the Truth. But these are just my opinions and dont mean to shove it down anyones throat or anything

[kokokolo]

just checked out that movies website, looks awesome !

[Mavrick]

Wzs9....WTF!!! you need to learn MORE about relgion! and youll find that science DOES back religon! most everyhing in the bible can be backed one way or another by science. yous say we need to learn more, but how about you learn more. just check out a few of the bible studies on this site and youll see what im talking about. and there is no "truth" in science, and if there is, science's purpoe isnt to find it! LOL its just making stuff we already know more complex, which is needed ofcorse, it just lets us advance our knowldenge, it isnt going to give you truth!, and how in the hell is science connected to spiruttuially? ...if you call Mrs. Cleo a scientist than i see where your coming from..other than that...i have no idea. and the satement"I dont like Religion and I cant understand how people can follow it" is slight blasphemy, in my eyes atleast.

[Wzs99]

Look man it was just my opinion I just think Religion itself its just a scam.And if you look at my post you can see I wasnt trying to shove it down ur throat

[sucramdw]

Alright guys, lets calm things down. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and we should respect each others veiws.

[Wzs99]

Sorry If I upset anyone .It wasnt my intent. I just thought it be ok to discuss it since we were on the subject /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Growth In Motion]

[ QUOTE ]
Because day old oysters are reported to be millions of years old by carbon dateing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whoa. I didnt know that.

[William Ustav]

First of all - Mavrick: take it easy /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Wzs99:

[ QUOTE ]
Look man it was just my opinion I just think Religion itself its just a scam.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am just curious as to why you think that. When you make a strong statement like that, it is always wise to expand on it and explain what you mean. When I read that, I automatically (because of the lack of explaination) think: "Oh no, not another guy who's been brainwashed and can't think for himself". But there's a big probability that you have thought this through extensively, and have researched religion and have enough meat on your bones to base your decision on. Then it's a completely different story /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif Then it's possible to have a good, healthy discussion.

Now, as for the question, I chose the 3rd option. However, the question itself is utterly flawed. Empirical science (option 1) has really nothing to do with religion, like Bible-believing. I don't base my view on that X-box 360 is a more powerful machine than X-box on the Bible, nor do I base the fact that the light bulb will start to emit light when I press the button on my lamp, on the Bible.

Origins science however, which could fit in this poll, is of another matter. It needs a set of axioms from which the empirical evidence is interpreted through, like both evolutionists and creationists have.

I chose the 3rd option, because I started believing firmly in the Bible only after having studied the science that backed it up, which made me understand that the Bible can't be other than correct.

My 2 cents /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Bahir]

The thing is that religion, for example christianity, is based on ancient scriptures, for example the bible, and therefor, the religion can't evolve, there are no breakthroughs. In science, things are allowed to change, and evolve. Using the argument "It does not say so in the bible, and therefor it cannot be true" is an invalid argument. Sure, science might not always be right, but thats just a part of the plan, you can't learn without commiting mistakes. If everyone always take everything for granted, we would be living in caves right now.

I think this thread has some great reflections on religion, from all sides: http://www.sorcerers.net/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?/topic/20/1394.html
(no intent of advertising for another board)

[William Ustav]

[ QUOTE ]
The thing is that religion, for example christianity, is based on ancient scriptures, for example the bible, and therefor, the religion can't evolve, there are no breakthroughs. In science, things are allowed to change, and evolve. Using the argument "It does not say so in the bible, and therefor it cannot be true" is an invalid argument. Sure, science might not always be right, but thats just a part of the plan, you can't learn without commiting mistakes. If everyone always take everything for granted, we would be living in caves right now.


[/ QUOTE ]

It does not say so in the Bible, and therefore it cannot be true is not a scientific argument, yes. But it is a frame of mind one can work from. Just as evolutionism has its own axioms, so does creationism.

And why should religion evolve? I don't get what you mean there... if we already have one truth, why/how should that truth change?

In _science_ (note: not evolution) we come up with new and better things all the time, yeah. But _science_ and religion never contradict each other. Origins is something else. Not _science_.

And remember, if it weren't for creation-believing scientists, we sure as heck would be living in caves now /forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Wzs99]

[ QUOTE ]
When I read that, I automatically (because of the lack of explaination) think: "Oh no, not another guy who's been brainwashed and can't think for himself".

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats interesting. What do you mean by brainwashed?

As far as Explaning why I say that..I just didnt want to start some big (!@#$%^&*) thread were I say this and you say that and we just go back and forth.

[William Ustav]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When I read that, I automatically (because of the lack of explaination) think: "Oh no, not another guy who's been brainwashed and can't think for himself".

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats interesting. What do you mean by brainwashed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, first of all, read the first post here: http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/forum/sho...part=1&vc=1 (http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=1052758&page=0&fpart=1&v c=1)

Second, most people who say stuff like "religion is stupid" are those kind of people who don't really know much about religion, and just go with what someone else thinks and don't bother to study the subject. I don't know if that is the fact with you, which is why I advised you to not throw something out like that without proper explaination.

[ QUOTE ]

As far as Explaning why I say that..I just didnt want to start some big (!@#$%^&*) thread were I say this and you say that and we just go back and forth.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then you shouldn't have said anything in the first place /forum/images/graemlins/smirk.gif That's the point I was trying to make /forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Adam Knowlden]

All of us will base our interpretation of the world on our axioms, or pre-assumptions.

If I believe the bible is true, I will view the world in this light. If I evolution is true, I will view the world in that light.

What we both have is tangible evidence; how we interpret that evidence is based on our pre-assumed beliefs.

For example, both sides see millions of dead things, buried in rock layers, all over the earth.

I would say "That is evidence of a world-wide flood!"

The evolutionist will say, "No, no, no that is proof of the evolution of life and billions of years"

I chose to believe the Word of God, which is perfect and based on an omniscient being, over man's opinions which change daily and are based on our extremely limited intellect.

Also it is somewhat inaccurate to say do you believe the bible over science. The bible is not a science book, but its truths reach to all aspects of life. For example, the bible states there was a worldwide flood. The mechanics and aftermath of the flood are vague in the bible. Creation scientists debate the mechanics of the flood, but believe the foundation of the flood because the believe the bible.

The science here is the mechanics of the flood, the pre-assumption is that the Flood happened.

Evolution does the exact same thing! For example, the origin of life. They believe it spontaneously formed; however the mechanics of this belief are completely anti-science, yet they believe it in spite of any evidence.

Both sides have faith and are religious in nature, it just depends which book you have faith in. The Words of God, or the words of men.

You can read an insane amount on these concepts in our bible studies. We've torn every arguement of evolution to shredds numerous amounts of times.

[War5475]

And why should religion evolve? I don't get what you mean there... if we already have one truth, why/how should that truth change?


On this i also want to share some scripture. To reinterate what william said.






God's Word is eternal

"The grass withers, the flower fades, but the word of our God stands forever." Isaiah 40:8

"...having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever...." 1 Peter 1:23

"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle [a tiny part of the original spelling of a word] will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled." Matthew 5:18

"And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fail." Luke 16:17

Do not alter (add or delete) God's Word

"
You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you." Deuteronomy 4:1-2

"...if anyone preaches any
other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if I still pleased men, I would not be a bondservant of Christ." Galatians 1:9-10


"For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted—you may well put up with it!"
2 Corinthians 11:4

"Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it." Deuteronomy 12:32

"Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. Do not add to His words, lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar." Proverbs 30:5-6

"If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." Revelation 22:18-19


This is the reason why "religion dosnt evolve."


Thanks and GOD BLESS.

[Mavrick]

Relgion will never evolve. its not suppossed to! becuase god isnt evolving. he is already the best it can possibly be.

but, to the athiest of the world, yall may know everything you possibly can about god and the bible, but if you havent already, id advise reading all of the bible studies on this site, and acctualy think about it.

[kokokolo]

^
superb

[TForce]

I think there is a distinction which must be made when comparing science to religion. There is a difference between content and history. Content is infinitely more important than any petty discrepancies in history. I don't believe that either science or the Bible can be entirely historically accurate. However, this is a moot point, because it is largely irrelevant. Belief systems are composed of values, philosophy, and psychology, which are sciences in themselves. Anything can be a science, but it is the substance that defines its value.

[Adam Knowlden]

Excellent advice Mavrick!

[President Wilson]

[ QUOTE ]
It seems as though your separating the bible from science. This made me want to choose the third choice, however I base my beliefs on the bible. Even though I base my beliefs on the bible, I love science and agree with what it proves completely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed,

the other day an individual asked me.

" Is it difficult being a scientist and a Christian at the same time? Isn't it hard to have two parts of your life that are in complete conflict?"

I then proceeded to tell her, that in actuallity rather than conflict, that my study of science and the Bible go hand in hand, as opposed to being on conflict. Science has only strengthened my faith. This verse sums it up

[ QUOTE ]
Ro 1:20 - For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

[/ QUOTE ]

[Growth In Motion]

[ QUOTE ]
And why should religion evolve?

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly! Why should we? That has no benefits

[jeffrobodean]

I don't have a very scientific or mathematical mind, but I do like the discipline. I do not like it when overzealous "scientists" try to refute the Living Word of God and what the Bible has to say. Just because we haven't "found" Noah's Ark does not mean it does not exist. There are many a plane wrecks over the Bermuda Triangle we have not found - does that mean they never really existed either? I watched on the Discovery Channel the other night a program called "Bible Tech". It was cool. The actual specs that are in the Bible for Noah's Ark are exactly correct for a sea faring vessle that would be needed to carry that many. In this regard, I like science. To try and disprove the Bible or try to explain things - I look to my favorite Old Testament Book - the Book of Job:

Job 38
The LORD Speaks
1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:
2 "Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?
3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.
4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone-
7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels [a] shouted for joy?
8 "Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,
9 when I made the clouds its garment
and wrapped it in thick darkness,
10 when I fixed limits for it
and set its doors and bars in place,
11 when I said, 'This far you may come and no farther;
here is where your proud waves halt'?
12 "Have you ever given orders to the morning,
or shown the dawn its place,
13 that it might take the earth by the edges
and shake the wicked out of it?
14 The earth takes shape like clay under a seal;
its features stand out like those of a garment.
15 The wicked are denied their light,
and their upraised arm is broken.
16 "Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea
or walked in the recesses of the deep?
17 Have the gates of death been shown to you?
Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death [b] ?
18 Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth?
Tell me, if you know all this.
19 "What is the way to the abode of light?
And where does darkness reside?
20 Can you take them to their places?
Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
21 Surely you know, for you were already born!
You have lived so many years!
22 "Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
or seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?
24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?
25 Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a path for the thunderstorm,
26 to water a land where no man lives,
a desert with no one in it,
27 to satisfy a desolate wasteland
and make it sprout with grass?
28 Does the rain have a father?
Who fathers the drops of dew?
29 From whose womb comes the ice?
Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens
30 when the waters become hard as stone,
when the surface of the deep is frozen?
31 "Can you bind the beautiful [c] Pleiades?
Can you loose the cords of Orion?
32 Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons [d]
or lead out the Bear [e] with its cubs?
33 Do you know the laws of the heavens?
Can you set up God's [f] dominion over the earth?
34 "Can you raise your voice to the clouds
and cover yourself with a flood of water?
35 Do you send the lightning bolts on their way?
Do they report to you, 'Here we are'?
36 Who endowed the heart [g] with wisdom
or gave understanding to the mind [h] ?
37 Who has the wisdom to count the clouds?
Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens
38 when the dust becomes hard
and the clods of earth stick together?
39 "Do you hunt the prey for the lioness
and satisfy the hunger of the lions
40 when they crouch in their dens
or lie in wait in a thicket?
41 Who provides food for the raven
when its young cry out to God
and wander about for lack of food?

[Leafy Green Vegetables]

I voted 3. I am a man of science (social science - psychology) and love investigating questions about the world. From my view, science is more complementary to God than contradictory, though I do think it is limited in what it can explain (akin to the watch and watch maker analogy).

[**DONOTDELETE**]

hey all,

what does it matter? i personally believe that evolution happened because god willed it so, but i dont need to be taught the why(gods will) just the method(evolution)
i keep my religion personal, and my science secular.

Lee

If you believe God exists, then why not believe what He says? Guess what He says? Genesis 1:1 - "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." It simply doesn't make sense to say that God allowed evolution to happen /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

By the way, how could you make a post if you are "unregistered" and "anonymous?" That's pretty slick /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[**DONOTDELETE**]

i have the utmost faith in god, but i am not a fundamentalist, and dont think that the bible( which has been tampered with by man ) is accurate in all things.

i respect everyones point of view, please respect my right not to believe like you

[sucramdw]

[ QUOTE ]
i have the utmost faith in god, but i am not a fundamentalist, and dont think that the bible( which has been tampered with by man ) is accurate in all things.

i respect everyones point of view, please respect my right not to believe like you

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey bro! Your opinions and different views are definitely welcome here. Basically what we're saying is that there is no science within evolution. The mechanisms by which evolutionists use to back evolution are purely religious, not scientific at all. Please read our bible studies here on this subject if your interested /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif - http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/forum/sho...amp;PHPSESSID== (http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=bodybuilder&Number=357143& page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=&vc=1&PHPSESSI D==)

[William Ustav]

Well, if you don't believe in the Bible - because it has been tampered with by man - why do you believe in evolution, which not only was made up by man, and also tampered with by man several times?

And as far as evolution goes, to continue on what sucramdw superbly said, it doesn't have scientific backup. You said you believe that God made us with evolution - why do you believe that? Because of science?

[Wzs99]

Science and Religion..These are things made by man. If you look at Religion you can see It's just another form of business. Theres nothing spiritual about Religion itself. What most of us have forgotten is that God is NOT a religion but a Spiritual Bound.

The Reason I think this is because it seems too comforting to think that If I follow a religion that God will accept me as his Child by following a poorly mapped way of living,Right or wrong. And that I need to worship,humor,prays him to attain a reward at the end of my life..That is not what God is..That is a blasphemy.And that I need to go to church and pay to justify that I am of that faith.What the Bible doesnt say is that We are ONE with our creator.

I have no proof to any of this.I dont have a "Book" that can backup any statements that I may have stated.I use to be a Christian. I think its true that some beleive that the Bible is right and that everyone elses native culture is wrong.

Honestly I dont like starting these types of thread because of the type of feedback I know im gonna get.But I see you guys back up your religion very strongly. and I just think man..Dont they see what this religion is doing to us?

[Mavrick]

[ QUOTE ]
Dont they see what this religion is doing to us?

[/ QUOTE ] apperntly you dont because you brought back a 5 day old thread. when will you learn to let go or accept?...and yes...i had to bump it to /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif bc u did

appernlty you didnt understand the bible that great.

[ QUOTE ]
The Reason I think this is because it seems too comforting to think that If I follow a religion that God will accept me as his Child by following a poorly mapped way of living,Right or wrong. And that I need to worship,humor,prays him to attain a reward at the end of my life..That is not what God is..That is a blasphemy

[/ QUOTE ]......thats like saying you dont need to go to work to get paid. god made you, and in return does wish you to show faith for him to accept you into heaven. he cant give 100% if you arent giving any! its a 50/50 relationship. not 100/0! ohhh and god created right and wrong! withought him you wouldnt have a basis to know what was good or bad! youd walk around like a savage

[ QUOTE ]
What most of us have forgotten is that God is NOT a religion but a Spiritual Bound.

[/ QUOTE ] NO WAY YOU GOTTA BE ****TIN ME!!! relgion is the worship of a god! i see why you dont like starting these threads now, you dont know what your saying!

[Wzs99]

Im glad to see how you feel about the subject. But I did what I wanted to do. I said it and now its out there for all to see.

but like you said [ QUOTE ]
acctualy think about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

[William Ustav]

Well, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But as always, I strongly suggest people to try to back up their views by a little more than opinion. If you have studied all paths in-depth, and come up with the conclusion that the Bible is wrong, well - please tell me how you did that /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

And as for what religion is doing to us - most often it is not the religion itself, but the people who are doing bad things in religion's name. If I kill someone, and say that YOU told me to do it, would it be fair to blame you?

[Scottyman]

Yes, just because someone says they're something, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are. Their actions reveal their true beliefs/faith.
If one's actions don't logically follow what the main tenets of that faith are(or what Jesus taught) then clearly the individual(s) are full of poopy. hehe
Also, it is not "Religion" that has caused the most harm to people, but in fact Communist/atheistic philosophies.
Example: Over 110 million people killed
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/COM.ART.HTM
Human rights violations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticisms_of_communism
The real murderers: Atheism or Christianity?
http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5527

Wzs99-- Why do you believe what you do if you say, basically, there is no evidence to support your statements?
I don't think you'd want to take a test where your answers are based on how you feel and not objective evidence--do you?
To put a little spin on Socrates' popular quote--An unexamined belief/Faith is not worth believing.

Thanks

Scott

[Bahir]

Yes, the scenario with god just creating the building blocks and letting the world evolve is possible, and it would seem more realistic to me than god creating earth just a few thousand years ago (which to me is impossible, and pretty much proved beyond reasonable doubt to be true). Who knows if god told the truth or lied in the bible, or simply withheld information (as it would seem that creating the universe would create more information than what could fit in a book or two). God might have had his own reasons to do that, but who knows? Neither me nor you. Perhaps the earth is just one of many projects in the universe. It would seem odd for a celestial being to devote himself to just earth and its inhabitants.

[psaturn]

Scottyman,

That was a great reference on the Real Murderers: Atheism or Christianity ?

That was WOW !

Thanks !

[Scottyman]

Old earth and young earth Creation/Intelligent Design is a current in-house debate among Bible-believing Christians. Don't broadbrush Creation as strictly a young earth theory. There are very good arguments for Progressive Creationism as well as Young Earth.
Let's stick to the evidence rather than guessing or asserting that God lied (which contradicts His nature) or left out important facts...
By claiming no one knows if God did this--you must know something based on evidence in order to come to that conclusion. What do you know for you to say,"...but who knows? Neither me or you." ??
Ultimately--Can truth be known?

psaturn---You're welcome. /forum/images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Wzs99]

Has anyone ever heard of the Gospel Of St. Thomas?

It goes like this " Jesus said the Kingdom of God Is inside of you and all around you not inbuildings made of wood and stone. Cut a piece of wood and I am there. These are the living sayings that the Living Jesus said when He was Alive. Who ever discovers the meaning of these sayings will not taste death"

This Scroll was discovered in 1945 in Nag Hamadi Which is described as " THe Secrete sayings of the Living Christ"

http://www.unexplainable.net/artman/publish/article_899.shtml

This Scroll has been claimed by most scholars to the the closest record we have of the words of the Historical Jesus

Now what makes this funny is that the Vatican refuses to recognize this gospel and has describe it as Heresy. I Mean why not? It goes against alot about Religion.

[Scottyman]

114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."
http://www.carm.org/lost/thomas.htm

Does that sound like a book that God inspired?

The Gospel of Thomas though, certainly an interesting find, is not worthy of Canonization due to it contradicting many Biblical precepts and it's Gnostic philosophy.
The author is unknown.
It's is only supported as "Gospel" by liberal "scholars" and those that seek to diminish Jesus' divine nature.

Summary--It is not supported by the majority of scholars--Mostly liberals that adhere to an anti-supernatural bias.

http://www.carm.org/questions/lost_books.htm

[William Ustav]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, the scenario with god just creating the building blocks and letting the world evolve is possible, and it would seem more realistic to me than god creating earth just a few thousand years ago (which to me is impossible, and pretty much proved beyond reasonable doubt to be true).

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Could you please explain a bit more about this proof? /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[William Ustav]

[ QUOTE ]
Old earth and young earth Creation/Intelligent Design is a current in-house debate among Bible-believing Christians. Don't broadbrush Creation as strictly a young earth theory. There are very good arguments for Progressive Creationism as well as Young Earth.


[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, I haven't heard a single _very good_ argument from progressive creationists /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Mavrick]

im no expert like the mods of this site...but...

[ QUOTE ]
It goes like this " Jesus said the Kingdom of God Is inside of you and all around you not inbuildings made of wood and stone. Cut a piece of wood and I am there.

[/ QUOTE ]

i think your trying to read more into this that there is..i belive its stating, god is everywhere and is everything, which dosent go aginst christianity...

and [ QUOTE ]
These are the living sayings that the Living Jesus said when He was Alive. Who ever discovers the meaning of these sayings will not taste death"

[/ QUOTE ]
simply saying, if you discover faith, you will not taste death, as you will descend directly to heaven!

thats what I think it means...

[kwood34]

[ QUOTE ]
114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."
http://www.carm.org/lost/thomas.htm

Does that sound like a book that God inspired?


[/ QUOTE ]

Are you kidding? Ever read the Old Testament? Slavery is ok, people with vision problems aren't worthy of the altar of God, women humbly submitting themselves to men and countless other moral attrocities and you say the Gospel of Thomas couldn't be inspired by God? Sounds just like the Old Testament to me.

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, the scenario with god just creating the building blocks and letting the world evolve is possible, and it would seem more realistic to me than god creating earth just a few thousand years ago (which to me is impossible, and pretty much proved beyond reasonable doubt to be true).

[/ QUOTE ]

A god who had to use billions of years of death, diesease, bloodshed, and blind random chance to create anything, is not a god I would serve.

This notion definietly defies the bible as well.

To believe in theistic evolution is to believe that millions of years of death, disease, and bloodshed created man. This would mean there was death before sin. The bible teaches that man's sin brought death into the world, not that deat brought man into the world. Evolution flies in the face of the clear Words of the bible.

Venom explained it all here:

Are you Evolutionized? (http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=756351&page=0&view=collap sed&sb=5&o=&fpart=)

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
Are you kidding? Ever read the Old Testament? Slavery is ok, people with vision problems aren't worthy of the altar of God, women humbly submitting themselves to men and countless other moral attrocities and you say the Gospel of Thomas couldn't be inspired by God? Sounds just like the Old Testament to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are committing severe false analogies bro. I would love to debate why the gospel of Thomas is not inspired, but argueing from fallacious statements will not lead to a conclusion.

No where is slavery condoned in the bible, nor are any of the other scenarios you presented correct renditions of the truth. If you don't understand that is ok, but try to not to present false facts.

Also to everyone, please remain calm. This is just a discussion, no need to attack anyone. Lets act like adults! /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Remember two things:

1. This is the sanctuary, a place of refuge for everyone, even if they do not believe like you do. Not a place to pounce on folks.

2. If you do not like these types of discussions, or religion at all, there are a dozen other forums on this site. If offended I recommend staying out of this forum, as all types of hot touchy potentially offensive topics will be addressed in this forum. /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Mavrick]

[ QUOTE ]
No where is slavery condoned in the bible, nor are any of the other scenarios you presented correct renditions of the truth. If you don't understand that is ok, but try to not to present false facts.

[/ QUOTE ]
this isnt showing were its condoned...but didnt moses lead his people away to escape the slavery? which led to him parting the seas right?

[William Ustav]

[ QUOTE ]

this isnt showing were its condoned...but didnt moses lead his people away to escape the slavery? which led to him parting the seas right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's correct...

[l0stsheep]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
114. Simon Peter said to them, "Make Mary leave us, for females don't deserve life." Jesus said, "Look, I will guide her to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every female who makes herself male will enter the kingdom of Heaven."
http://www.carm.org/lost/thomas.htm

Does that sound like a book that God inspired?


[/ QUOTE ]

Are you kidding? Ever read the Old Testament? Slavery is ok, people with vision problems aren't worthy of the altar of God, women humbly submitting themselves to men and countless other moral attrocities and you say the Gospel of Thomas couldn't be inspired by God? Sounds just like the Old Testament to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Like said above, the Gospel of thomas(along with those of Philip, Peter, and Mary[probably not of those we know of in the Bible]) were gnostic texts. Christian gnosticism was a rival of proto-orthodox Christianity in the early stage of the Church (along with the Jewish-Christian Adoptionists and Marcionite Christians) Many scholars agree that Christian Gnosticism was the dominant form of Christianity in Asia Minor, Syria and Egypt in the second century. Gnosticism is a term that designates a variety of religious movements that stressed salvation through gnosis or knowledge of one’s heavenly origins. An essential element of Gnosticism is cosmological dualism—opposition between the spiritual world and the evil, material world. Other elements which many Gnostic movements shared in common included their total estrangement from the rest of humanity, an affinity to an ideal (heavenly) order, the superiority of the spiritual realm over the physical, their belief in present salvation (realized eschatology) vs. future salvation (apocalyptic eschatology). Like I said, gnostics believed only the “enlightened” elect would/could be saved. And that salvation would not come from a relationship with Christ. You had to be a special "enlightened" person. Which means, that, if you were to put a random group of people in a room, only a few would have "gnosis" (knowledge), and be saved, even if all of them heard and believed the Gospel of Jesus. Jesus, though, they believed was NOT born the son of God, but was Inhabited by the "Christ" at the resurrection. They believed this man, Jesus, was a revealer figure like buddha. They also discredited the God of the Hebrew Bible, citing Him as being "evil."

This group became large in Asia Minor and adopted their own belief system which they used these heretical gospels to enforce. These gospels were not adopted into the canon because of how unbiblical they are. Also, gnosticism was not adopted into Christianity(parts are SEEN in the Gospel of John) because of their heretical beliefs. (Gnostics believed that once a soul escaped from the prisons of their bodies at death, it had to traverse the planetary spheres of hostile demons(STARS) before it could be reunited with God.)

Paul spoke against "gnosis" and gnosticism a few times. 1Tim 6:20-21:“O Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to you. Avoid the godless chatter and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge (gnosis), for by professing it some have missed the mark as regards the faith.”

Also see:
1Cor 8:1-2
1Cor 2:14-3:3

So, if you want to believe that God inspired these books/passages, go right ahead. Like said, I guess we all have our opinions. But there is a reason gnostic texts were not accepted and gnosticism was not accepted into Christianity. It's because it's beliefs and teachers were not biblical.

[Adam Knowlden]

Also I think the title of this thread is a bit misleading, it should state, "upon which religion do you base your science?, theism or atheism?"

Evolutionism is inheretly religious.

It believes that life can come from non-life and information can increase naturally, neither of which has ever, one time been observed or demonstrated in a lab.

Here is an example, whale evolution:

Here is a quote from an evolutionist:

[ QUOTE ]
Dear J.D.

Yes, whale evolution is fascinating! It is amazing to imagine that 50
million years ago whales were once land animals.

[/ QUOTE ]


"Imagine"... evolution only ever takes place in the imagination. You have to picture it in your mind.

Let me break it down for you, evolution basically teaches that a dog became a whale. There is no proof for this outside of wild fantasy based on imagination so one can deny God's clear truth laid out in Genesis.

<font color="red"> 20And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

21And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
</font>

God created whales in one day, not millions of years of a dog trying to swim to catch bugs in the water, and evenutally fins popped out. /forum/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

Interpurt whale evoltion from that passage, you can't unless you superimpose man's fallible theories. No where will you arrive at whale evolution, unless you take man's fallible theories and try to "Read them" into the bible.

WHere is it happening today? We billions of new births in all kinds animals in millions of different ecosystems, yet no genetic information increases, yet we're to believe its happened multi-millions of times in the past?

Evolution is nothing more than a pagan religion. It is pagan because it deifies nature into this force that can create everything from nothing and add genetic information as it needs.

This is scary because people set up these false pagan religions and try to cram them into the bible. This is the same junk that many of the New Testament churches were doing that Paul layed into them for. Trying to mix the pagan culture in with their new faith.

Mingling false religions into the bible lets people believe all types of immoral behavior is ok, and they can rearragne and ommit anything in the Word of God that they like to suit themselves, breaking the second commandment.

To anyone, what good has the evolution theory done for mankind?

Its not why we have rockets, its not why we have computers, its not why we have fiber optics. What good has it done?

Its a useless theory. Moreover, its a godless theory.

[Leafy Green Vegetables]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, the scenario with god just creating the building blocks and letting the world evolve is possible, and it would seem more realistic to me than god creating earth just a few thousand years ago (which to me is impossible, and pretty much proved beyond reasonable doubt to be true).

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Could you please explain a bit more about this proof? /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


Help me out with something here. I keep reading on here that we [humans] cannot fully understand Gods rules (physical), time, and thoughts primarily because we are the created ones. Kind of like how the watch is bound to the rules of the watchmaker.

Anyways, with that said, since no human has ability to fully understand God, how we can be certain the what is written in the Bible is what we think it means since humans are flawed. Could it be that the the earth was not created a few 1000 years ago but much longer and we [humans] are unable to accurately understand how God classifies time?

[psaturn]

Great points Old School !

Great job Lost Sheep in explaining the Gnosticism ! Are you sure you did not take a Theology Class ?

I took when I was in college and I forgot already what you mentioned !

The Theology Professor had us write a paper why shouldn't the Gospel of Thomas be another Canonical book in the Bible. My paper's position was against it and he still gave me an A (whew!) and that is in one of the most liberal denominational school in America, the United Church Affiliated Elmhurst College in Illinois.

[l0stsheep]

[ QUOTE ]

Great job Lost Sheep in explaining the Gnosticism ! Are you sure you did not take a Theology Class ?


[/ QUOTE ]

haha...yeah I did. But it's some interesting stuff I try to keep fresh on! /forum/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Good job with the paper, but wait...aren't ALL universities liberal nowadays?? Seriously /forum/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[kwood34]

You may be right. I might not understand the passages I am looking at. Here they are.

Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations.

Selling your daughter into slavery is sanctioned in Exodus 21:7.

Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight.

Then there is a passage about not touching women when they are menstruating, but I can’t find that one right now.

My point was I don’t see how you can automatically dismiss the Gospel of Thomas based upon the fact that it wants to turn females into males, when a lot of the same tone is used in the Old Testament. I’m sure there are good reasons why the Gospel of Thomas wasn’t included, but I don’t think that is one of them.

[William Ustav]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, the scenario with god just creating the building blocks and letting the world evolve is possible, and it would seem more realistic to me than god creating earth just a few thousand years ago (which to me is impossible, and pretty much proved beyond reasonable doubt to be true).

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Could you please explain a bit more about this proof? /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


Help me out with something here. I keep reading on here that we [humans] cannot fully understand Gods rules (physical), time, and thoughts primarily because we are the created ones. Kind of like how the watch is bound to the rules of the watchmaker.

Anyways, with that said, since no human has ability to fully understand God, how we can be certain the what is written in the Bible is what we think it means since humans are flawed. Could it be that the the earth was not created a few 1000 years ago but much longer and we [humans] are unable to accurately understand how God classifies time?

[/ QUOTE ]

We cannot fully understand the nature of God, but we can understand the messages conveyed to us in His Word, which was written for us to understand. There are no doubt lots of mystical parts of the Bible, but some things are plain and simply clear, and were never meant to be interpreted in any other way than literally. For example, the creation week, the lineage of historical people from Adam to Jesus, etc.

We are, as you say, unable to accurately understand how God classifies time per se, but not unable to understand how time is working in our lives, and the Bible is directed to us. So when it talks about 7 24-hour periods, it doesn't talk about anything else than 7 24-hour periods.

I hope I cleared it up a little /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Leafy Green Vegetables]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, the scenario with god just creating the building blocks and letting the world evolve is possible, and it would seem more realistic to me than god creating earth just a few thousand years ago (which to me is impossible, and pretty much proved beyond reasonable doubt to be true).

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Could you please explain a bit more about this proof? /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


Help me out with something here. I keep reading on here that we [humans] cannot fully understand Gods rules (physical), time, and thoughts primarily because we are the created ones. Kind of like how the watch is bound to the rules of the watchmaker.

Anyways, with that said, since no human has ability to fully understand God, how we can be certain the what is written in the Bible is what we think it means since humans are flawed. Could it be that the the earth was not created a few 1000 years ago but much longer and we [humans] are unable to accurately understand how God classifies time?

[/ QUOTE ]

We cannot fully understand the nature of God, but we can understand the messages conveyed to us in His Word, which was written for us to understand. There are no doubt lots of mystical parts of the Bible, but some things are plain and simply clear, and were never meant to be interpreted in any other way than literally. For example, the creation week, the lineage of historical people from Adam to Jesus, etc.

We are, as you say, unable to accurately understand how God classifies time per se, but not unable to understand how time is working in our lives, and the Bible is directed to us. So when it talks about 7 24-hour periods, it doesn't talk about anything else than 7 24-hour periods.

I hope I cleared it up a little /forum/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


Thanks for the reply Will, I appreciate it!

[Scottyman]

[ QUOTE ]
You may be right. I might not understand the passages I am looking at. Here they are.

Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations.

Selling your daughter into slavery is sanctioned in Exodus 21:7.

Lev.21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight.

Then there is a passage about not touching women when they are menstruating, but I can’t find that one right now.

My point was I don’t see how you can automatically dismiss the Gospel of Thomas based upon the fact that it wants to turn females into males, when a lot of the same tone is used in the Old Testament. I’m sure there are good reasons why the Gospel of Thomas wasn’t included, but I don’t think that is one of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point was to display the absurdity of some of the passages in the Gospel of Thomas. Do you think a woman can turn into a man? If not, then you do understand the differences between the verses you mentioned and the one I quoted. Right? /forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif
The "tone" is in an entirely different category.
Levititus 25:44-
In the fallen world that mankind had created, slavery was a reality. God permitted its existence and worked within its system. Slaves were more domestic servants than oppressed field workers. Slaves could be the captives of war (Num. 31:25-47), subjects of debt to be worked off (2 Kings 4:1), born into slavery (Gen. 17:12-13), or entered into voluntarily (Exodus 21:5-6). In the Ancient Near East, some slaves were able to own other slaves and even conduct business and in Exodus 25:2 a slave was required to be set free after six years of service. Though slavery carries a very negative connotation here in America, it was not nearly as bad it was here in the first 100 years of our nation's existence.
As I said above, God works within the fallen system to bring about His will. Slavery was permitted by God and rules of treatment of slaves were given so that they would not be mistreated.
Exodus 21:7--
This paragraph is troubling to modern readers, but given the way that marriages were contracted and the way people lived in the ancient world, it was a good provision for people who might want to find a better life for their daughter. On the subject in general for this chapter, see W. M. Swartley, Slavery, Sabbath, War, and Women, 31-64.

16tn The word (’amah) refers to a female servant who would eventually become a concubine or wife; the sale price included the amount for the service as well as the bride price (see B. Jacob, Exodus, 621). The arrangement recognized her honor as an Israelite woman, one who could be a wife, even though she entered the household in service. The marriage was not automatic, as the conditions show, but her treatment was safeguarded come what may. The law was a way, then, for a poor man to provide a better life for a daughter.
Leviticus 21:20--Laws concerning the priests.
As these priests were types of Christ, so all ministers must be followers of him, that their example may teach others to imitate the Saviour. Without blemish, and separate from sinners, He executed his priestly office on earth. What manner of persons then should his ministers be! But all are, if Christians, spiritual priests; the minister especially is called to set a good example, that the people may follow it. Our bodily infirmities, blessed be God, cannot now shut us out from his service, from these privileges, or from his heavenly glory. Many a healthful, beautiful soul is lodged in a feeble, deformed body. And those who may not be suited for the work of the ministry, may serve God with comfort in other duties in his church.
16-24. Whosoever he be . . . hath any blemish, let him not approach to offer the bread of his God--As visible things exert a strong influence on the minds of men, any physical infirmity or malformation of body in the ministers of religion, which disturbs the associations or excites ridicule, tends to detract from the weight and authority of the sacred office. Priests laboring under any personal defect were not allowed to officiate in the public service; they might be employed in some inferior duties about the sanctuary but could not perform any sacred office. In all these regulations for preserving the unsullied purity of the sacred character and office, there was a typical reference to the priesthood of Christ (Hebrews 7:26).
Yes--these are copies. I'm feeling lazy. /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Again, I'm not dismissing the Gospel of Thomas based on an apparent degrading of women, but on the absurdity of many of the passages and it's contradictory to the nature and work of Christ as revealed in the whole of Scripture.
Since you seem to be studying the Bible, get some good study aids and commentaries to learn more of the background, culture and customs of that time.
The Bible is an incredible piece of literature---and of course more. /forum/images/graemlins/cool.gif

Take care--
Scott

[psaturn]

Slavery in the past also came as a result of one being indebted to others. If you could not pay your debts, then you would be a slave to the one you owed the debt.

[Mavrick]

i dont know alot about evolutonism(sp?) but...how do the belivers of it explain what created the first 1 cell organism to exist?? and if the big bang theory..what created the sun????

[kwood34]

[ QUOTE ]

The point was to display the absurdity of some of the passages in the Gospel of Thomas. Do you think a woman can turn into a man? If not, then you do understand the differences between the verses you mentioned and the one I quoted. Right? /forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that does seem absurd, but talking snakes (Genesis) seem absurd too but I am not going to discredit that all together. /forum/images/graemlins/wink.gif

Concerning your commments on slavery. You almost make it sound cozy. Slavery was not a comfortable lifestyle no matter how you try to rationalize it. Afterall, watching a slave getting treated badly caused Moses to murder an Egyptian. /forum/images/graemlins/frown.gif

They didn't allow people with deformities to be priests before Christ? Didn't know that. Thanks for the information. /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[kokokolo]

I think the there belief is that the first cell despite is incredible complexity, is still just a mass of atoms put in the exact order to make a certain machine, that is the cell. So somewhere along the lines of millions of years with the big bang and all, and the heat everywhere moving atoms around, a cell just appeared randomly by chance assortment of elements...Im pretty sure thats the basics then step 2
2.this cell become a tiny organism with multiple cells
3. these organisms change over time ... and morph into tons or organisms some that fly some that live underwater...
4. eventually this random assortment of cells turns into a human...

One aspect of evolution that I havent seen Questioned is the fact that we are male and female, Now think about this if you will, How in the heck could we have slowly evolved as a species some into male some into female... Impossible I tell you, I geuss you can go back and say, the arrangment of atoms just rearanged a persons by chance at a moment in time to make us that way...... But thats creation isnt it...

[Mavrick]

oo i mean like what created the FIRST cell/atom

[kokokolo]

an atom is always there i think... The cell just formed by chance assortment of billions of atoms...

In other words nothing did it in evolution

ok you may have heard this one but, say the world is a car junkyard filled with litle spare parts these would be the protons nuetrons and electrons, ( the pieces of an atom ), then over time the wind and storms blow these things around over millions of years until by chance there is found somewhere a perfectly built Hummer or something.

If you read this and think " yeah but how did it happen still ?... " then you see the fundamental problem of evolution /forum/images/graemlins/frown.gif

[Mavrick]

yeah, evolution really dosent make sence to me, but was curious about it...so there atom is there god? sence it created everythng and it was always there? i know they dont "have a god" or belive it in...but thats the equvilent right?

[TForce]

The key word here is trial combinations. If you had all of these basic chemicals swirling around in the primordial soup, surely it must have been a planetwide phenomena going on. It's kind of like the opposite of Murphy's Law. If it can happen, it will happen. The world is so big that with all of this water and so many building blocks of life, sooner or later, it was bound to happen. Think about what goes into the make-up of one single celled organism - mitochondria, ribosomes, a nucleus, a cell wall, lots of cytoplasm, and above all, DNA. The evolution of single-celled organisms was probably a long, gradual process in itself, beginning with a single-celled organism unlike any that we know, including combinations of chemical reactions that could not even be classified yet as living cells. Did it happen by chance? It happened because all of the right materials were here in the right environment. I doubt that it could happen in any other environment, since water is supposedly the unique key. Too cold and all of the water is ice, too hot and all of the water is vapor. It is feasible that there could be completely alien systems, but that is beyond the scope of our knowledge. What is the one thing that all living organisms have in common, whether or not it is a bacteria, a plant, or a brontosaur? DNA. The evolution leading up to DNA was probably a long process, in itself.

3 billion years is a long time. I can tell you for certain that I have evolved a small amount from my parents. It's kind of a requirement if you want to stay on top of things.

Does a baby grow hair because he wills it to? It just happens, because he had the right genetic make-up to actually grow hair.

[Adam Knowlden]

Hey bro, thanks for sharing your opinion, but I have to disagree with a few of your points:

[ QUOTE ]
The key word here is trial combinations. If you had all of these basic chemicals swirling around in the primordial soup, surely it must have been a planetwide phenomena going on.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is this still greatly oversimplifies the entire problem.

Here is a great layman's article:

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-crs/abiogenesis.html

[ QUOTE ]
It's kind of like the opposite of Murphy's Law. If it can happen, it will happen. The world is so big that with all of this water and so many building blocks of life, sooner or later, it was bound to happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually statistics show it can never happen.

Moreover, we're not just discussing a mere chance, but the defiance of a scientific law, the law of biogenesis.

Rudolf Virchow formulated what is known as the biogenetic law: Life comes only from life.

This law dictates that life begats life. To somehow believe that non-life can begat life, is completely anti-science.

Here is a quote from President Wilson from the bible studies:

[ QUOTE ]
Here are a few of the problems with life orgionating from dead matter

Cohen, Jon, Getting All Turned Around Over the Origins of Life on Earth Science, vol. 267 (March 3, 1995), pp. 1265-1266.


right handedness -

" p. 1265
"Why do the sugar molecules in DNA and RNA twist to the right in all known organisms? Similarly, all of the amino acids from which proteins are formed twist to the left. The reason these molecules have such uniform handedness, or &amp;#8216;chirality is not known, but there is no shortage of theories on the subject. And, as was clear at a recent meeting on the topic in Los Angeles, there is also no shortage of passion, which is understandable, because the question of homochirality speaks to the mother of all scientific mysteries: the origin of life."



The state of the origin of life

Dose, Professor Dr. Klaus, "The Origin of Life; More Questions than Answers," Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 348-356. Dose is Director, Institute for Biochemistry, Johannes Gutenberg University, West Germany.

p. 348
" More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on Earth rather than to its solution. At present all discussions on principal theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance."


p. 348
"Considerable disagreements between scientists have arisen about detailed evolutionary steps. The problem is that the principal evolutionary processes from prebiotic molecules to progenotes have not been proven by experimentation and that the environmental conditions under which these processes occurred are not known. Moreover, we do not actually know where the genetic information of all living cells originates, how the first replicable polynucleotides (nucleic acids) evolved, or how the extremely complex structure-function relationships in modern cells came into existence."


p. 349
"It appears that the field has now reached a stage of stalemate, a stage in which hypothetical arguments often dominate over facts based on experimentation or observation."


and finally

p. 352
"In spite of many attempts, there have been no breakthroughs during the past 30 years to help to explain the origin of chirality in living cells."


What do scientists know about the origin of life?

Dyson, Freeman, Honoring Dirac," Science, vol. 185 pp. 1160-1161. Dyson was at the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey.

p. 1161

"The problems of reconstructing possible pathways of prebiotic evolution in the absence of any kind of fossil evidence are indeed formidable. Successful attack on these problems will require, on the one hand, the boldness to imagine and create new concepts describing the organization of not-yet-living populations of molecules and, on the other hand, the humility to learn the hard way, by laborious experiment, which molecular pathways are consistent with the stubborn facts of chemistry. We are still at the very beginning of the quest for understanding of the origin of life. We do not yet have even a rough picture of the nature of the obstacles that prebiotic evolution has had to overcome. We do not have a well-defined set of criteria by which to judge whether any given theory of the origin of life is adequate."


Thats straight forward.

Which came first?

Eigen, Manfred, William Gardiner, Peter Schuster, and Ruthild Winkler-Oswa****ch, "The Origin of Genetic Information," Scientific American, vol. 244


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

p. 91
"The primitive RNA strands that happened to have the right backbone and the right nucleotides had a second and crucial advantage. They alone were capable of stable self-replication. Which came first, function or information? As we shall show, neither one could precede the other; they had to evolve together."



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



That is an impossibility

What about simple cells?

Green, David E., and Robert F. Goldberger, Molecular Insights into the Living Process (New York: Academic Press, , 420 pp.

p. 403
"The popular conception of primitive cells as the starting point for the origin of the species is really erroneous. There was nothing functionally primitive about such cells. They contained basically the same biochemical equipment as do their modern counterparts.

How, then, did the precursor cell arise? The only unequivocal rejoinder to this question is that we do not know."


and the fantasy of it all

pp. 406-7
However, the macromolecule-to-cell transition is a jump of fantastic dimensions, which lies beyond the range of testable hypothesis. In this area all is conjecture. The available facts do not provide a basis for postulating that cells arose on this planet.


It is still a mystery to the evolutionist

Haskins, Caryl P., "Advances and Challenges in Science in 1970," American Scientist, vol. 59

p. 305
"But the most sweeping evolutionary questions at the level of biochemical genetics are still unanswered. How the genetic code first appeared and then evolved and, earlier than that, how life itself originated on earth remain for the future to resolve, though dim and narrow pencils of illumination already play over them. The fact that in all organisms living today the processes both of replication of the DNA and of the effective translation of its code require highly precise enzymes and that, at the same time the molecular structures of those same enzymes are precisely specified by the DNA itself, poses a remarkable evolutionary mystery. Did the code and the means of translating it appear simultaneously in evolution? It seems almost incredible that any such coincidence could have occurred, given the extraordinary complexities of both sides and the requirement that they be coordinated accurately for survival. By a pre-Darwinian (or a skeptic of evolution after Darwin) this puzzle would surely have been interpreted as the most powerful sort of evidence for special creation."


What about Scientific America, one of the top evolutionary journals out there. What do they have to say?

Horgan, John, "In the Beginning," Scientific American, vol. 264 (February 1991), pp. 117-125.

1. p. 118
"None of these approaches has gained enough support to qualify as a new paradigm. On the other hand, none has been ruled out. That bothers Miller who is known as both a rigorous experimentalist and a bit of a curmudgeon. Some theories, he asserts, do not merit serious attention. He calls the organic-matter-from-space concept &amp;#8216;a loser,&amp;#8217; the vent hypothesis &amp;#8216;garbage&amp;#8217; and the pyrite theory &amp;#8216;paper chemistry.&amp;#8217; Such work, he grumbles, perpetuates the reputation of the origin-of-life field as being on the fringe of science and not worthy of serious pursuit."


2. p. 119
"DNA cannot do its work, including forming more DNA, without the help of catalytic proteins, or enzymes. In short, proteins cannot form without DNA, but neither can DNA form without proteins."

3. p. 119
"But as researchers continue to examine the RNA-world concept closely, more problems emerge. How did RNA arise initially? RNA and its components are difficult to synthesize in a laboratory under the best of conditions, much less under plausible prebiotic ones."

4. p. 125
"About a decade ago Orgel and Crick managed to provoke the public and their colleagues by speculating that the seeds of life were sent to the earth in a spaceship by intelligent beings living on another planet. Orgel says the proposal, which is known as directed panspermia, was sort of a joke.

5. And the faith one must have in the process!


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

p. 125
"Does he ever entertain the possibility that genesis was a miracle not reproducible by mere humans? Not at all, Miller replies. I think we just haven&amp;#8217;t learned the right tricks yet, he says."



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



After all the evidence points against it, the above statement is made. Which is similar to others, I.E.

Wald, George, The Origin of Life," in The Physics and Chemistry of Life , 270 pp.
p. 9

" One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible. Yet here we are as a result, I believe, of spontaneous generation."


That is pure religion

What are the ingrediants for life?

Scott, Andrew, New Scientist, vol. 106 , pp. 30-33.


" 1. p. 30 Take some matter, heat while stirring and wait. That is the modern version of Genesis. The fundamental forces of gravity, electromagnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces are presumed to have done the rest. But how much of this neat tale is firmly established, and how much remains hopeful speculation? In truth, the mechanism of almost every major step, from chemical precursors up to the first recognizable cells, is the subject of either controversy or complete bewilderment."

2. p. 32
"The emergence of the gene-protein link, an absolutely vital stage on the way up from lifeless atoms to ourselves, is still shrouded in almost complete mystery."

3. And the religion of it all

p. 33
"In their more public pronouncements, researchers interested in the origin of life sometimes behave a bit like the creationist opponents they so despise glossing over the great mysteries that remain unsolved and pretending they have firm answers that they have not really got. We still know very little about how our genesis came about, and to provide a more satisfactory account than we have at present remains one of science's great challenges."


That is the state found in the origin of life question. In other words, the Biogenetic Law only continues. Life cannot have arrisen from dead matter.


[/ QUOTE ]


This process requires multimillions of links, all which either are missing or controversial. Scientists even lack plausible just-so stories for most of evolution. Furthermore the parts required to provide life clearly have specifications that rule out most substitutions

[ QUOTE ]
The evolution leading up to DNA was probably a long process, in itself.


[/ QUOTE ]

The key to DNA is information and the translation of that information. The process is so complex it is not even funny. In fact is simply absurd the way its oversimplified by abiogenesis. I would like to see any evidence for a naturalstic mechanism that can increase information.

You need a mechanism to "increase" genetic information or macro evolution( i.e. a new organ system or the development of the complex eye).

Let me show my point with another reference

Dr. Lee Spetnor, one of the most respected scientists in his field states:

"in all the reading I've done in the life-sciences literature, I've never found a mutation that added information ."

and he further states

"All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not to increase it "

Let's look at evolution:

1. Evolution predicts that there are mutations which increase information. So far, not one has been found!

Here is from Scientific America Richard Prum and Alan Brush, March 2003, pp. 84–93:

[ QUOTE ]
<font color="green"> ‘How did these incredibly strong, wonderfully lightweight, amazingly intricate appendages evolve? … Although evolutionary theory provides a robust explanation for the appearance of minor variations in the size and shape of creatures and their component parts, it does not yet give as much guidance for understanding the emergence of entirely new structures, including digits, limbs, eyes and feathers.’
</font>

[/ QUOTE ]

2. The history of most fossil species include two features particularly inconsistent with gradualism:

1) Stasis - most species exhibit no directional change during their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking much the same as when they disappear; morphological change is usually limited and directionless;

2) Sudden appearance - in any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and 'fully formed

Gould, S. J. Paleobiology, 6(1), p. 120


Evolution predicts that there are countless intermediate forms as Darwin stated. However, Animals appear fully formed!

3. Evolution predicts a mechanism to turn dead matter into life.

There is none!

[ QUOTE ]
3 billion years is a long time

[/ QUOTE ]

Time is always the hero of evolution. Time is like a magic wand, wave it and anything can happen.

The human mind can not really wrap around the idea of billions of years. SO when we here "Billions of years...yeah it could have happened!", we are essentially overloaded and more likely to believe these miracles.

If I told you a frog turned into a prince you'd say that was a fairy tale, but if I said well it happened over billions of years then you'd believe it? That is exactly what we are told, the frog turned into a prince, just give it a lot of time.

I don't buy that, and scientifically there's no reason for me too. Time can not add genetic information. Time does not eliminate the fact there is no naturalistic mechanism that can increase genetic information.

"Well you can't see evolution it takes a lot of time",

so a lack of evidence proved it happened?

If a man got up and walked through the air, that would be a miracle. If a man got up and walked through the air slowly would it be less of a miracle?

Evolution takes time, which is why we have no evidence for it. That is faith, and not science. In other words, you must believe that an increase in information can occur. Though this has never been demonstatred. That is completely against science!

This idea of space spores is even more scientifically unsound, and grasping at the air. Crick advocted this theory called panspermia which states that life drifted to earth on an asteroid or comet. The problem is all that does is tranfer the problem somewhere else because the evidence that the conditions for this primoridal soup being able to exist on earth is 100% nonexistant. So instead of admiting the obvious, they'll instead believe life floated in from a galaxy far far away. /forum/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

That is much more far fetched and takes a million times more faith to believe in than the bible, or a earth only thousands or years old.

[ QUOTE ]
Think about what goes into the make-up of one single celled organism - mitochondria, ribosomes, a nucleus, a cell wall, lots of cytoplasm, and above all, DNA. The evolution of single-celled organisms was probably a long, gradual process in itself, beginning with a single-celled organism unlike any that we know, including combinations of chemical reactions that could not even be classified yet as living cells.

[/ QUOTE ]

To believe that over 100, 000 trillion synapses in our central nervous system could have happened by chance, seems much more improbable, then that wiring being implemented by a designer.

[ QUOTE ]
Did it happen by chance?

[/ QUOTE ]

The sciene demonstrates it didnot happen at all! In fact the evidence is so overwhelming that now we're saying life floated in from outer space.

[ QUOTE ]
It happened because all of the right materials were here in the right environment.

[/ QUOTE ]

A rock can not come to life, no matter what materials you combine.

[ QUOTE ]
I doubt that it could happen in any other environment, since water is supposedly the unique key. Too cold and all of the water is ice, too hot and all of the water is vapor.

[/ QUOTE ]

The real problem is the atmosphere.

[ QUOTE ]
I can tell you for certain that I have evolved a small amount from my parents.

[/ QUOTE ]

Evolutionists always talk as though somehow a change in the environment can cause the magic wand of evolution to pull any type of preferred trait out of its magic hat. If the adaptation requires flight, a lizard simply flaps his arms and feathers are evolved. If I need to see, then over time my bacterial-like ancestors form a light sensitive spot and over millions of years that dot becomes an eyeball.

Or if I need to surmise where a universe came from I can take nothing plus nothing and before you know it I've pulled a hundred billion galaxies out of my quantum hat.

And there you have it...evolution is a religion based on the belief of nothing. With enough faith nothing can become everything as we have seen so eloquently displayed time and time again with notions like abiogenesis and panspermia.

The truth is animals can adapt to change IF and only IF, the genetic information for the adaptation is already in their genetic code, or within the genetics of a animal that can reproduce with them. This is natural selection. Natural selection cannot create new genetic information.

Rapid change in an environment or ecosystem causes extinction, it does not cause a creation of new genetic information. Some animals may adapt if the essential adaptation is already in their genetic code; in which case a change of environment would naturally bring out this preferred trait. However, the most likely scenario is extinction and certainly not the creation of new genetic information, like feathers, eyes, or scales.

If I did not have a coat and shoes I would die in sub zero temperatures, I would not simply reproduce and spawn children who are "adapted" to their environment.

An even neater trick would be trying to explain how the first organism reproduced and what exact change in the environment caused the formation of sexual reproduction.

[ QUOTE ]
What is the one thing that all living organisms have in common, whether or not it is a bacteria, a plant, or a brontosaur? DNA.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed, this demonstrates a common designer.

[TForce]

Thanks for your input, as I have to give you credit for the idea that the evolution wasn't actually willed, even though that is right up the alley of agnosticism, IF you accept the idea of evolution. If you don't believe in evolution, what can you possibly believe in? That's the way I look at it. Sure, there are too many missing links and unanswerable questions to state the whole phenomena of it in its entirety, but the big picture is right there, and it, in no way, takes anything away from the Bible, only the way that you intrepret the Bible. Panspermia, abiogenesis, alien seeds, however way, it all started somewhere, as you all here have already mentioned. I agree, macromolecular jumps into cell structure is a truly mind-boggling idea, but it had to happen some way, somewhere, at some time. Just because we have not been able to figure it out doesn't really mean anything. Of course, there's no way I can explain it either, but somehow, it happened, and it probably happens on 10% of the planets in the universe containing water, at least! Once again, thank you for your time.

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
If you don't believe in evolution, what can you possibly believe in?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a good point, there are only two options, God created, or nature created itself.

I chose to believe the Word of God! God created ex nihilo.

[ QUOTE ]
Sure, there are too many missing links and unanswerable questions to state the whole phenomena of it in its entirety, but the big picture is right there,

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is any evidence to substantiate "the big picture" is not there, as I laid out above.

All we ever hear is imaginary stories that contadict the evidence.

1. There is no mechanism to increase genetic information.

ie, "Ameoba to man" scenario is bankrupt.

2. The fossil record does not show transition.

ie, Gould states the only real "changes" in the fossil record are "abrupt". This coincides perfectly with the bible, and created kinds, but does nothing for evolution.

3. There is no mechanism to cause non-living material to come to life.

So I don't see how we have the big picture when there is zero evidence for the this evolutionary overview, just imagination and a blind belif in these notions.

[ QUOTE ]
no way, takes anything away from the Bible, only the way that you intrepret the Bible.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree, evolution completely contradicts the bible in literally hundreds of ways. If evolution is true, the bible is full of lies.

Moreover, the entire gospel is based on the fact that Adam brought death into the world because of his sin.

If man brought death into the world, that flys in the face of evolution being used by God to create the earth.

To state "God used evolution" is to believe God used millions of years of death, bloodshed, and disease to "create" man. This means death brought man into the world, and death is the hero of evolution. This is the 100% complte opposite of the bible.

Here is how the bible describes death:

<font color="red">Romans 5:12
Wherefore, as by one man (Adam) sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: </font>

<font color="blue"> Romans 5:17
For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) </font>

<font color="brown"> 20But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. 22For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive. 23But each in his own turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him. 24Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power. 25For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. 26The last enemy to be destroyed is death. </font>

Where is the hero role evolution ascribes to death?

It isn't anywhere in the bible, death is the enemy that Christ came to crush! He proved it by His Resurrection!

Moreover, read the bible independent of any evolutionary bias and you will not read anything about millions of years, big bang, etc in the bible.

The only way you can arrive at that is to apply man's impcomplete fallible theories and try to cram them in.

[ QUOTE ]
agree, macromolecular jumps into cell structure is a truly mind-boggling idea, but it had to happen some way, somewhere, at some time.

[/ QUOTE ]

It only had to happen if you believe it had to happen. It should be noted this belief lacks any science but is completely faith based.

[ QUOTE ]
Just because we have not been able to figure it out doesn't really mean anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

The fact that there is not one shred of scientific evidence or plausible theory actually means everything. It means its a flawed theory and is in no way science. Its a faith based religion founded on superstition.

[ QUOTE ]
Of course, there's no way I can explain it either, but somehow, it happened, and it probably happens on 10% of the planets in the universe containing water, at least! Once again, thank you for your time.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is just begging the question because to state that this notion can happen even once is scientifically impossible. A natural law of science is universal, which means no matter where we go in the universe the law applies. For example, the law of gravity. Whether I go to pluto or another galaxy, the law of graivty applies. Its the same with the law of biogenesis. Unless you can demonstrate the law can be defied (has been attemped hundreds of times and has failed miserabley, its an estabilshed law) it is universal, so therefore scientifically we can conclude abiogenesis has not happened anywhere at anytime.

The only other conclusion is that God created life ex nihilo, not progressivley, just as the bible claims.

This actually conicides with the law of biogenesis perfectly.

It is often asked "What came first the chicken or the egg", the answer is neither!

The first life form had to be eternal. It is the only way the law can apply logically. This is scientific and biblical.

God is eternal, therefore God creating conicides perfectly with the law of biogenesis. /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

There is no scientific reason to doubt the Word of God, as is. No need to "fit" man's opinions into the bible.

God's Word stands strong as is.

<font color="red"> Job 38
The LORD Speaks
1 Then the LORD answered Job out of the storm. He said:
2 "Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?

3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.

4 "Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.

5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?

21 Surely you know, for you were already born!
You have lived so many years!
</font>
Thanks for your time as well!

[TForce]

OK, here is my answer. What do we know so far about the idea of mind over matter? We know that if we are looking into an electron microscope and a single electron is fired into the field of view with a 50% probability of it being attracted to a left target or a right target, it will always go into the direction that we will it to. If the microscope is unattended, it returns to its 50% ratio. I cannot document this at the moment, but it is there in this book and I can find it, if absolutely necessary, having heard this from a different source several years before this book was even published.

Now, the way I look at it, this earth of ours is like a big body. Maybe it has a brain, maybe it doesn't, but this sun of ours most likely has a brain 1,000 billion times more powerful than anything we can even imagine. We have been taught that we have free will, but let's get serious here. When God wants to get something done, sometimes he needs someone to actually do the work, so he simply makes them want to do it. That shouldn't be so hard. Raising my pinkie is pretty easy. Raising the hair on the back of my neck, that might be kind of hard, because I don't know how to do it intentionally, but if it needs to happen, it'll happen. Of course, getting my T cells to ward off viruses is like clockwork, I don't even have to think about that, just keep my diet up and do my cardio.

Now, back to the point. If we have this big body being controlled by this big sun, with all of these infinitely huge biochemical resources and electromagnetic forces to involuntarily or voluntarily bring everything together, something WILL happen, somehow, someway, because God willed it. Converting dead matter into life is truly beyond my scope of expertise, but when you have a quadrillion trial combinations going on every second of every day for the first billion years of the planet's life, sooner or later, something should happen, especially if God is willing it do so, or if it is just supposed to happen involuntarily. Maybe lightning did have something to do with it. What the bleep do we know? /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Adam Knowlden]

Wow you read fast! /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[ QUOTE ]
dead matter into life is truly beyond my scope of expertise,

[/ QUOTE ]

Its also beyond science, so do not feel bad. /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
but when you have a quadrillion trial combinations going on every second of every day for the first billion years of the planet's life, sooner or later, something should happen, especially if God is willing it do so, or

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you're following me bro.

The law of biogenesis can not be defied, this notion is impossible. There is no such thing as any "Combination". Adding millions of years does not change that. Give it trillions of years, doesn't matter, can't happen!

We can imagine and fantasize about chemical soup all day, but that's where it stops...fantasy. Dreaming does not change the scientific laws of nature.

If there is any evidence, please demonstrate it.

Also as I showed God did not create life progressively. If you believe God did that that is your right, but to demonstrate that is credible please give me the verse or explain what God you believe in. There is no mention or even applicable interpretation to substantiate that belief in the bible.

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe lightning did have something to do with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah Frankenstein is about as scientific as it gets. /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
What the bleep to we know?

[/ QUOTE ]

We know what God stated, and since He was there we can believe it. Moreover, there's no scientifica or logical reason not to believe it happened just as He said:

<font color="red"> 20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
</font>

God said, it was done. No problem here!

It would take a Paul Hamm of mental gymnastics to cram evolution in that account.

<font color="brown"> Psalm 33:6
By the word of the LORD were the heavens made, their starry host by the breath of his mouth.

Let all the earth fear the LORD;
let all the people of the world revere him.

9 For he spoke, and it came to be;
he commanded, and it stood firm.

10 The LORD foils the plans of the nations;
he thwarts the purposes of the peoples.

11 But the plans of the LORD stand firm forever,
the purposes of his heart through all generations.
</font>

The bible states God spake life into existance and man was fully man, from the time God spoke Him into existance. That is all we have ever seen in the fossil record, that is all we see today. Man produces man.

[Grunt11B]

I have a novel idea, how bout we all respect differing opinions, and not try to out gospel each other. Im pretty sure that as long as we believe in Jesus and try to be good human beings, the rest will work itself out...but just my opinion

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a novel idea, how bout we all respect differing opinions,

[/ QUOTE ]

No one has been disrespectful at all, no need for sarcasm. We're just discussing, as I stated earlier, if you do not like these types of topics do not enter the thread. THere's a dozen other forums.

[ QUOTE ]
and not try to out gospel each other. Im pretty sure that as long as we believe in Jesus and try to be good human beings, the rest will work itself out...but just my opinion

[/ QUOTE ]

Moreover, your analogy is fallacious. If you do not have anything worthwhile to add, please stay out of this thread. /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Mavrick]

[ QUOTE ]
I have a novel idea, how bout we all respect differing opinions, and not try to out gospel each other. Im pretty sure that as long as we believe in Jesus and try to be good human beings, the rest will work itself out...but just my opinion


[/ QUOTE ]

you "sort of" make no sence...why would you blindly worship somthing instead of knowing ALL of the background info you can about somthing?..blind worship is kinda...stupid...and you make it seem like you belive in god aswell by saying "we" so why wouldnt you like your religion to be defended instead of just pelted with false claims etc?

[kokokolo]

[ QUOTE ]
We have been taught that we have free will, but let's get serious here. When God wants to get something done, sometimes he needs someone to actually do the work, so he simply makes them want to do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

interesting argument. I have always had a hard time believing some of the christain doctrine because while adam sinned creating death, it was obviously gods intention for that to happen. Furthermore it was gods intention that every sin happens. Because god controls everything. So when god made the earth, he did it with the intention of making millions of people burn in hell for eternity for thier sins, when he could have just made them differently, with more will to not sin...

I think it is interesting that almost everyone I ask believes in god, but most dont live like it, I think it is because some basic things about god according to religioins doesnt seem logical. I am actually surprised to see the evolution debate raging so much when that issue is( to me at least ) much smaller and easier. For instance If god is all knowing and good, wouldnt he forgive everybody for the sins they make that he placed them in the situations to do, full knowing what they would do?


[ QUOTE ]
I have a novel idea, how bout we all respect differing opinions, and not try to out gospel each other. Im pretty sure that as long as we believe in Jesus and try to be good human beings, the rest will work itself out...but just my opinion


[/ QUOTE ] Actually I think we are respecting different opinions, I always debate with the hope of learning or swaying the other side, but mostly learning, if hypothetically Tforce put down some good evidence for evolution OS might listen... well maybe not about evolution, but in an argument that hasnt allready been decided.

Also Old school ( or anyone who knows ) what are the evolutionist reasoning as to how the male and female sex possibly formed? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ????? ?
ok so the species was repprocing itself while mutating, some into male some into female, when by chance eventually 2 organisms of same species happen to complete this proces and meet, and succesfully reproduce ??!

[Mavrick]

[ QUOTE ]
Also Old school ( or anyone who knows ) what are the evolutionist reasoning as to how the male and female sex possible formed? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ????? ?
ok so the species was repprocing itself while mutating, some into male some into female, when by chance eventually 2 organisms of same species happen to complete this proces and meet, and succesfully reproduce ??!

[/ QUOTE ] hahah who knows....but! there was the big turtles on the diffrent islands that are shaped diffrently....mabey its somthing like that

[Adam Knowlden]

Hey Kokolo,

I think your arguement is invalid from a biblical standpoint. Essentially you are asking me to defend a strawman arguement.

[ QUOTE ]
I have always had a hard time believing some of the christain doctrine because while adam sinned creating death, it was obviously gods intention for that to happen.

[/ QUOTE ]

As I've stated, because God knows the outcome does not mean he forces anyone's choice.

You are trying to lump free will and foreknowlege into one logical statement. However, the problem is it does not flow correctly. You are asking me to counter argue a false biblical truth.

[ QUOTE ]
For instance If god is all knowing and good, wouldnt he forgive everybody for the sins they make that he placed them in the situations to do, full knowing what they would do?


[/ QUOTE ]

He has forgiven everyone, but they have to chose to accept His forgiveness.

If someone is presented with the gospel and willingly rejects it, how is that God's fault? What more can He do unless He violates their free will?

Nothing! He's done everything possible, but people have to accept His forgiveness. He can not force the acceptance, its a free will choice.

[ QUOTE ]
I think it is interesting that almost everyone I ask believes in god, but most dont live like it, I think it is because some basic things about god according to religioins doesnt seem logical.

[/ QUOTE ]

Believing in God and submitting to God are two entirely different things. Even satan belives in God.

I would recommend reading and studying the book of James. He covers all your questions:

<font color="red"> 18Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

19Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

21Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?

22Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?

23And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

24Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

25Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way?

26For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.

</font>

James said faith without works is dead, so biblically these people may believe in God, but they do not have faith in God. James compares this to the demons. They believe in God, but do not have faith in God. Huge difference.

I would state from a biblical standpoint that is why people live godless lives, not becaue there are no answers.

The bible says "Seek and you will find". You have to seek truth, and pursue it.

Most do not want to seek truth because that might reveal their own sin. People do not like to be told what they are doing is wrong. They like to live in their pride and their sin.

[ QUOTE ]
Also Old school ( or anyone who knows ) what are the evolutionist reasoning as to how the male and female sex possibly formed? ?? ? ? ? ? ? ????? ?


[/ QUOTE ]

Just some imaginery scenario, they don't have any answer for this or really anything else. All they give is examples of small variation, no true examples of macro evolution.

We've debated evolutionists for years and have asked for emperical evidence.

All we ever have been given is imagination, faith, and fantasy, never any science.

[ QUOTE ]
hahah who knows....but! there was the big turtles on the diffrent islands that are shaped diffrently....mabey its somthing like that

[/ QUOTE ]

The issue is its still a turtle.

That's what Darwin did, he sailed around and saw finches with different shaped beaks...then he concluded they all had a common ancestor...you know what I agree! The common ancestor was a finch! Different shaped beaks don't prove we all came from a rock 4 billion years ago.

[kokokolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Essentially you are asking me to defend a strawman arguement.

[/ QUOTE ]
first off, what is a strawman argument?


[ QUOTE ]
You are trying to lump free will and foreknowlege into one logical statement. However, the problem is it does not flow correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]
I honestly dont understand what you are saying here.

ok here goes, see if there is a problem with the logic, or with a premise

premises
1. god created everything
2. when god created everything he knew exactly everything that would happen afterwords

conclusions
1. god put the tree in the garden
2. god created satan
3. god put satan in the garden
4. god put all these things together to get adam to sin.
5. god knows all who will make it to heaven and all who wont
6. god created many people with a final purpose of them burning in hell for eternity ( ??? )

so did god decide who would go to heaven at the beginning, and everything we see is just to proove to us?

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
first off, what is a strawman argument?


[/ QUOTE ]

Sure basically its creating a false rendition of a subject, statement, or topic, then attacking that false rendition.

Its faulty logic.

[ QUOTE ]
premises
1. god created everything
2. when god created everything he knew exactly everything that would happen afterwords

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, you have said:

"God has foreknowledge, that proves I don't have free will?"

God having forknowlege does not mean He violates free will.

You are trying to combine foreknowledge with free will, it is not logical bro.

[ QUOTE ]
conclusions
4. god put all these things together to get adam to sin.

[/ QUOTE ]

The first three are not entirely true, but let's focus on number 4 first.

Here again, you are combining foreknowlege with forced will.

Its not the same thing at all.

In fact what we read in the bible is that Adam and Eve <font color="red">chose</font>to eat the fruit.

God warned them what would happen if they did. They however, chose, to eat the fruit and chose to disobey God.

<font color="red"> 2 The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, 3 but God did say, 'You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die.' " </font>

As you can see, Eve knew exactly what God said, "Do not eat", but she chose of her own free will to eat anyway.

<font color="red"> 6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it. She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, </font>

Because God knew they would eat did not mean God chose for them to eat.

They ate because they wanted too. God told them not too. Whether he knew they would or wouldn't did not interfere with their decision.

To have no choice is to be devoid of free will. They had a choice, they made it.

[ QUOTE ]
5. god knows all who will make it to heaven and all who wont

[/ QUOTE ]

People chose to either go or not. God has done everything he can to bring people in. He gave His own Son! What else can He do! He gave His most precious Son!

Because God knows does not mean He choses for them. That is what you are not understanding.

[ QUOTE ]
6. god created many people with a final purpose of them burning in hell for eternity ( ??? )


[/ QUOTE ]

They chose to go to hell. God did everything He could to bring them to salvation.

The bible is clear God does not want anyone to go to hell, people chose hell.

<font color="red"> 2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. </font>

God always gives everyone a choice. Every person is a blood bought soul. They chose, to reject God. God has not rejected or sentenced anyone outside of their own will.

God's set life and death before us all, and tells us to chose:

<font color="blue"> 15 See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction. 16 For I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in his ways, and to keep his commands, decrees and laws; then you will live and increase, and the LORD your God will bless you in the land you are entering to possess.

17 But if your heart turns away and you are not obedient, and if you are drawn away to bow down to other gods and worship them, 18 I declare to you this day that you will certainly be destroyed. You will not live long in the land you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess.

19 This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live 20 and that you may love the LORD your God, listen to his voice, and hold fast to him. For the LORD is your life, and he will give you many years in the land he swore to give to your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
</font>

I hope that helps clear things up for you bro.

I know you have tough questions, but if you continue seeking the truth you'll find it.

I can recommend sites for you to read if you're interested, just PM me. /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[William Ustav]

Just to build up on what OldSchool said, it's like I had a time-machine and could travel forward in time and see who wins the Mister Olympia this year, and then I travel back. I would have the foreknowledge of who is going to win, but that wouldn't change the outcome of the event because of the free will of the judges (unless I hold them at gunpoint and make them decide in a different way, etc. etc. etc. - but I hope you get the point, lol /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif )

[kwood34]

I think I understand all of your answers to his questions Old School (or maybe I don't, because I still have one more).

God put the tree of knowledge in the Garden of Eden. By eating from it Adam and Eve knew good from evil. So evil was already there. So God created evil. So God can't be all good?

Do you see what I saying? Evil was already there, but by eating on the tree Adam and Even were then able to recognize it.

[Grunt11B]

i believe what i believe, i dont need it defended..someone elses thinking does not deminish mine. /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[William Ustav]

[ QUOTE ]
I think I understand all of your answers to his questions Old School (or maybe I don't, because I still have one more).

God put the tree of knowledge in the Garden of Eden. By eating from it Adam and Eve knew good from evil. So evil was already there. So God created evil. So God can't be all good?

Do you see what I saying? Evil was already there, but by eating on the tree Adam and Even were then able to recognize it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Rebellion against God is evil. Both Adam and Eve knew that it was wrong to eat of the tree.

You have to understand that God is not a simple nature. Yes, He is good, but He also has lots of other features that he needs to balance with goodness, like being a righteous judge for example. Adam and Eve rebelled against God, and thus deserved death (as was established when God told them - if ye eat of the fruit of the tree ye shall surely die).

Also, you have to define what is "evil" or _wrong_ according to you. According to the Bible, everything that is not in accordance with God is wrong. Thus, rebellion itself is wrong. "Wrong" is not a thing that is created.

Thankfully, aside from being good and a just judge, God is also loving. That's why He forgave us, and lets us all come to Heaven if we accept His forgiveness.

[William Ustav]

[ QUOTE ]
i believe what i believe, i dont need it defended..someone elses thinking does not deminish mine. /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif But if you believe something that you know you cannot defend in any way, then I don't know how you can sleep at night /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif If I were in that situation (and often I am) I would sit and read and think for hours, to come up with answers.

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
God put the tree of knowledge in the Garden of Eden. By eating from it Adam and Eve knew good from evil. So evil was already there. So God created evil. So God can't be all good?


[/ QUOTE ]

Hey bro, good question and this may be hard to wrap your mind around.

What you have to realize first is what evil is.

Evil is the opposite of the nature of God.

For example, God is love, the opposite of that is hate.

Part of the love aspect of His nature entails free Will. Which means to stay true to His own nature, one of those aspects being genuine love, God has to allow people to chose not to be a reflection of His nature.

If God did not have a nature which could be opposed there would be no such thing as genuine love.

God created us in His image, or His nature, which was perfect.

But we chose to defy that image and walk in the opposite of God's nature.

Christ was created in God's image and instead walked in the nature of God perfectly.

<font color="red">Hebrews 1:2-4
2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high:

4Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.

</font>

Now God did not "create" evil, because that would mean He "created" His nature. He did not "create" His nature. His nature is eternal.

This is hard to grasp because we can't fully grasp eternity.

But God has always been the same for eternity past.

[kwood34]

Thanks Old School. I'm not sure I fully understand what you are saying but basically it comes down to, there has to be evil otherwise there wouldn't be free will?

[Grunt11B]

but the whole point is that I dont HAVE to defend it.
my views are the cumulation of my lifes experiences and ponderings. If someone wants to "attack" my views more power to em, it doesnt bother me a bit. /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[XenoWang]

Isn't that a bit intellectually dishonest though?

[kokokolo]

I dont think Im trying to say we dont have free will ...
I honestly didnt think my argument had anything to do with free will /forum/images/graemlins/frown.gif
try this one on
1. didnt god put that snake in the garden?
2. god was the one who decided to say , that if they ate the fruit they would die, he chose to say that.

SO Basically, I tend to think that saying the reason there is death and suffering is because a**** ate the fruit, is kinda a copout, the reason we live in a world full of death and suffering is because this is all part of gods plan, that we witness this.

it was not the divine plan for adam to live a perfect life ...


A lot of specifics about god are debateable, as there a number of ways to interpest things in the bible, I find the evidence of this to be the fact that there are so many churches within christianity, catholics, babtists, lutherans etc, but note there is still only one truth. And I tend to think people from all these denominations could get to heaven, despite that only one or zero, has all the specifics about how god works correctly.

[TForce]

This is what I am coming up with. Evil is everything that has been defined which is harmful to society, in varying degrees of severity. Free will is just what it is. I don't think God can control each and every detail that happens in each and every person's life, all day, every day. I daresay that some things are just a bit too much to expect, especially when the population reaches a certain point. Otherwise, we would already live in utopia. Accountability and control are two completely different functions. That's why He has all of these rules set up and society to help enforce them. Inevitably, the general outcome is always the same, but you have the option of deciding if you want to go with the flow or against the grain. If you are simply adhering to the rules, God rewards you. If you are going against the grain, it's an uphill battle. It's just kind of built into the programming, so to speak. If you choose the path of the dark side, you are inevitably bombarded with the difficulties that await you. If you choose the path of the good side, you can look forward to having a rewarding and virtually stress-free life, which is essentially a cure for cancer, in some ways. The only thing that remains is controlling the population. Sooner or later, we start reaching a critical mass and people start to wake up and stop having so many babies (which seems to be already starting to happen in the more educated countries), or Thomas Maltheus has his way and everybody fights to the death for their cup of gruel (like in some places). I think that mankind is a bit more mature than that. Again, I am veering off topic, but so is everybody else. /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Now, the question that I see is how does this apply to Lucifer, the Beginning, Adam's fall, etc.? To me, it's irrelevant, because everything that has been built upon, from that point on, defines what I have explained.

[Mavrick]

ok ok, ive been thinking about this...sence i read the last few pages of the thread and thought about it all day almost...prolly wrong, but my conclusion about god knowing what was gonna happen is that..he created us(obviously) but didnt set a path for us, gave us a oppertunity to belive him and be saved, or go to hell, he let us choose, but he knows whats going to happen, becuase he can see into the future weither it be a good or bad one...whatever we chose to make it with our choices...is this right?

[kokokolo]

so he made us
knows all of what we will do

but didnt decide for us what we would do

?

[Mavrick]

yeah, like he made us, then set us free to do what we want and only reason he knows what we are going to do is because he looked into our future

[Adam Knowlden]

Hey koko,

[ QUOTE ]
I dont think Im trying to say we dont have free will ...

[/ QUOTE ]

Your trying to combine free will and foreknowledge as though they are the same things, they're not.

I'm not sure if you are just not following what I'm saying?

Really you haven't brought up any legitimate arguement yet.

[ QUOTE ]
1. didnt god put that snake in the garden?

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not stated either way in the bible.

[ QUOTE ]
2. god was the one who decided to say , that if they ate the fruit they would die, he chose to say that.


[/ QUOTE ]

And they chose to ate it.

[ QUOTE ]
SO Basically, I tend to think that saying the reason there is death and suffering is because a**** ate the fruit, is kinda a copout,

[/ QUOTE ]

That's your opinion.

[ QUOTE ]
the reason we live in a world full of death and suffering is because this is all part of gods plan, that we witness this.

[/ QUOTE ]

We chose to stay in a world of death and suffering by rejecting God.

[ QUOTE ]
lot of specifics about god are debateable, as there a number of ways to interpest things in the bible

[/ QUOTE ]

On essential doctrines, not really. Those that deviate from the essential doctrins of Christianity are labeled cults of Christianity.

[ QUOTE ]
And I tend to think people from all these denominations could get to heaven, despite that only one or zero, has all the specifics about how god works correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think anyone has said otherwise. Denomination is an entirely different topic.

[Mavrick]

hey oldschool was what i said in my last post anywhere near right, becuase i im just now trying to figure this part of it out, as ive never really thought about it...untill now

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
yeah, like he made us, then set us free to do what we want and only reason he knows what we are going to do is because he looked into our future

[/ QUOTE ]

Not a bad analogy bro, however God doesn't look into our future.

He exists in all times, past, present, and future, simulantesly.

Many people have understandable anguish over the suffering in the world. This is probably the most effective argument of anti-Christians. But it is still invalid.

To an atheist, we could ask: 'What is your criterion for judging whether something is good or bad? Since you reject God's transcendent moral standard, all you have are your own feelings. Why should we accept the feelings of an admittedly fallible human being?'

God created a perfect world; the free choice of Adam to turn his back on Him is the ultimate cause of all the suffering. The efficient cause of specific suffering is the free evil choice of moral agents. However, Scriptures are clear that those who suffer the most are not necessarily the most sinful (e.g. John 9:1-3).

No logical contradiction has been demonstrated between the propositions 'an all-good and all-powerful God exists' and 'evil exists'.

For God to rid the world of evil would require ridding the world of all of us! However, in the future, God will indeed rid the world of evil, since He is too pure to tolerate evil for eternity. People have two options:

The first is they must separate from their sins, by accepting that Christ bore them on the Cross (Is 53:10), and receive Christ's righteousness credited to their accounts. The means of this is belief in the Gospel- Corinthians 15:1-4:

1. Moreover, Brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;

2. By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

3. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

4. And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

The second is to cling to their sins, in which case God will grant them their wish, and separate them from Himself, the source of goodness, for eternity. There will be only two types of people: those who say to God 'Thy will be done' who will be happy in heaven for eternity; and those to whom God says: 'thy will be done', who will be separated from goodness for all eternity.

[Mavrick]

Ohhh, so once god gets fed up with people going aginst him...he will revolt and tell them to pick a path?, or will it slowly happen??

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
so he made us
knows all of what we will do

but didnt decide for us what we would do


[/ QUOTE ]

Koko, you seem to take issue with God's way of doing things.

I will give you a very straight forward answer, hope this helps:

Psalms 115:1-3
1 Not unto us, O LORD, not unto us, but unto thy name give glory, for thy mercy, and for thy truth's sake. 2 Wherefore should the heathen say, Where is now their God? 3 But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.

Because he wanted to.

Isaiah 29:15-16
15 Woe unto them that seek deep to hide their counsel from the LORD, and their works are in the dark, and they say, Who seeth us? and who knoweth us? 16 Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding?

Isaiah 45:5-10
5 I am the LORD, and there is none else, there is no God beside me: I girded thee, though thou hast not known me: 6 That they may know from the rising of the sun, and from the west, that there is none beside me. I am the LORD, and there is none else. 7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. 8 Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness: let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation, and let righteousness spring up together; I the LORD have created it. 9 Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! Let the potsherd strive with the potsherds of the earth. Shall the clay say to him that fashioneth it, What makest thou? or thy work, He hath no hands? 10 Woe unto him that saith unto his father, What begettest thou? or to the woman, What hast thou brought forth?

It's his creation, his rules, his work, and his clay. He does as he pleases with it.

I know if I were the Most High, the ideas set forth, that God is not fair, would be dismissed immediately. I see no reason why I would even consider that.

God does know everything. And we have the benefit of that knowledge as Adam and Eve did. He has already allowed us to know exactly what will occur based on our decisions. It isn't guess work, its truth, and we have the benefit of that truth.

God not only give us a choice. But he sets it before us.

Deuteronomy 30. 19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing:

He not only gives us the choice. But he councels us on it as well. With an extremely easy decision

The real question is, why choose hell? Especially when he lays this before you

But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

Its all laid out

You can lead a donkey to water, but you can't make him drink. The Lord is showing the direction to go, he is not going to make you choose that direction. Whatever philosophical lie, or vain thought people want to make up. There will be no excuse when they stand before him.

Colossians 2:8
8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Say I know you better than anyone else knows you (God knows His children, after all, He made them!). I know everything about you, your thoughts, your fears, your hopes, your dreams - everything. You have a choice to make (lets say a choice between an apple and an orange). I know you will pick the orange. How do I know? Because I know everything about you. Suprise suprise, you pick the orange.

Now imagine that, with God, who is not bound by time - remember. He knows what choice you will make - I say choice because it is just that - your choice. This does not mean you have no choice, it simply means He knows what you will choose. It's a simple concept really

Some have suggested that God knows the future in two ways. First, He knows that some things will happen, by Himself intending to do those things, and because His intentions can't be thwarted, He knows absolutely those things He intends. Second, He is a perfect diagnostician of present tendancies and dispositions, knowing all the probabilities of anything we might freely do.

God knows that you are going to do "A" just because you are freely going to choose "A". Foreknowledge (which God possesses) still leaves room for free will.

God knows our choice before we make it. Again, this does not negate the fact that we are still free to choose in the first place. God has already seen the beginning and the end. Here you can see God is clearly not bound by time:

8I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.


We are given a choice:

19I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: 20That thou mayest love the LORD thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he is thy life, and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them

15And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD. 16And the people answered and said, God forbid that we should forsake the LORD, to serve other gods; 17For the LORD our God, he it is that brought us up and our fathers out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage, and which did those great signs in our sight, and preserved us in all the way wherein we went, and among all the people through whom we passed: 18And the LORD drave out from before us all the people, even the Amorites which dwelt in the land: therefore will we also serve the LORD; for he is our God

21And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word.

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
Ohhh, so once god gets fed up with people going aginst him...he will revolt and tell them to pick a path?, or will it slowly happen??

[/ QUOTE ]

Each of us has one life time to chose God.

What I am discussing is Christ's coming earthly kingdom. He will Return, in power, and the kingdoms of this world will become the kingdom of our God. He will rule with a rod of iron, evil will cease, and Christ will reign.

<font color="red"> Psalm 2
1Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?

2The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,

3Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.

4He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the LORD shall have them in derision.

5Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.

6Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.

7I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.

8Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

9Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.

10Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.

11Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.

12Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

</font>

[kokokolo]

I think the reason I am not getting this is because, I have been operating out of this pre-supposition that our choices, specifically the choice for someone to accept god or not, is decided by how or brain is working and our past experiences since birth, so basically a bunch of chemical and electrical reactions.

And so seeing as god created the body and the brain, he could have just took a person that is self centered, and make thier brain work better, to understand things right, or given them more external influences in thier life to show and explain them the gospel.

Have any of you ever heard the argument, that seeing as our bodies are just made up of smaller things, that all of what we think, is just a product of what is going on in our brain, which is a product of all the things we experience and all the things our body went through. Knowing all the working of the brain and body could then hypothetically allow someone to know what your thinking and how you will respond to things by looking at information in your brain, that is electrical signals, and chemical reactions. So following this reasoning I would come up with the argument, If god created all, couldnt he have just tweaked our brain chemicals, or made more external influences on everyone/anyone to allow them to go to heaven if he loves them? Its not their fault their brain isnt grasping it...

However After studying the brain just a little, I am starting to think, that the brain itself may not be all there is to our thoughts and how we feel, I mean how in this skull of brain stuff, do we get our conciousness ?

I geuss now im just speculating, But maybe the brain is a sort of gateway for our body to communicate with our soul.
thoughts on that?


and now im thinking this whole view on all our choices being because of chemical reactions and electrical impulses, does violate free will.

[Adam Knowlden]

The bible says He reveals Himself to everyone, no matter their past, ethnicity, or intelligence...the bible is clear that there is no excuse for rejecting God. /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Mavrick]

i dont think god changes people, no matter how they think, like if some one was predetermined to be selfcenterd and cruel, god wouldnt go to change this just because the person isnt going to belive in him becuase that is forcing someone to belive in him , and taking away free will, god dosent tweak how someone works to get them to belive in him, god lets them be who they will be, only hoping they will belive in him&amp; be saved.(i think!)

[Wzs99]

Like I said I dont like Religion. and I would explain myself but I think this site will better explain everything I've been trying to say.

Check this Audio bit out first.Listen to all of it before you jdo or say anything about it.

http://www.angelfire.com/ca5/utplayers/index.html

[kokokolo]

would you say you hate the idea that god exists?
Or would you say that you hate the fact that there are so many different religions, that disagree on certain things?
Put it this way, If there was only one united church in existance on the planet, it could not go to war against itslelf, then religion wouldnt be bad and also people wouldnt have to tihnk so much about issues of god, but just whether they believe god exists or not.

also that guy on the radio has mostly christian belief's, I thought it was interesting, he says " first I was a catholic, then a methodist " etc For the most part he has christian protestant belief's about how you should live to be happy, but without god.

[Wzs99]

koko I'm sorry but you totaly missed the whole point. He was trying to point out that Religion is crap and that God is Love and Light and that there shouldnt be a religion that divides everyones. The guy himself doesnt consider himself christian. He talks about Jesus because he believes Jesus is the Light and Love of this world based on his actions.But he doesnt go to the point were he claims a religion faith like christianity and says thats the way into Heaven . I believe what hes talking about 100%.Werent you listening?

To answer your question no I dont hate the fact that God Exist.I love that He/She exist.I hate religion because its trying to tell everyone that If "Their" way isnt followed there no way to get into Heaven.Which as a matter of fact religion doesnt know where heaven is. They dont have there address.Theres nothing spiritual about Religion

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
I hate religion because its trying to tell everyone that If "Their" way isnt followed there no way to get into Heaven.Which as a matter of fact religion doesnt know where heaven is. They dont have there address.Theres nothing spiritual about Religion

[/ QUOTE ]

Then what you hate is Jesus Christ.

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth and the life; no one comes to the Father but through me."

He said He is the only way.

<font color="red">John 1:12
12Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—
</font>

<font color="blue">John 3:16-18
16"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.
</font>

<font color="green"> John 3:36
36Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him
</font>

<font color="brown">John 10:9-14
9I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved. He will come in and go out, and find pasture. 10The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full. 11"I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. 12The hired hand is not the shepherd who owns the sheep. So when he sees the wolf coming, he abandons the sheep and runs away. Then the wolf attacks the flock and scatters it. 13The man runs away because he is a hired hand and cares nothing for the sheep. 14"I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me— </font>

<font color="purple"> 23For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in[a] Christ Jesus our Lord.</font>

<font color="blue"> Romans 10:9-10
9That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.
</font>

<font color="green"> 1 John 2:23
23No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
</font>

<font color="blue"> 1 John 5:10-13
10Anyone who believes in the Son of God has this testimony in his heart. Anyone who does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because he has not believed the testimony God has given about his Son. 11And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.13I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life. </font>

[Venom]

[ QUOTE ]
I hate religion because its trying to tell everyone that If "Their" way isnt followed there no way to get into Heaven.Which as a matter of fact religion doesnt know where heaven is. They dont have there address

[/ QUOTE ]

What I don’t understand about this logic, is that is not how we act in any other area of our lives.

Think about it for a minute.

If I tell you the only way you can log into your account is using a the password “12345”, you would not say I was close minded for telling you “123” will not work. Or if I tell you that you have to use this key to get into your car:

http://www.varis.com/Product/Keys.jpg

You would not call me close minded for telling you this this key will not work:

http://www.bytefusion.com/products/ens/secexgate/keys_swinging_hr.png

It is like trying to fit a round peg into a square whole. It just will not fit.

Same thing can be considered with Christianity.

Jesus said he is the only door into heavy.

The bible says the path to heaven is straight and narrow, and that all other deviations from this will lead to destruction.

The gospel is simple and straight forward: believe that Christ came, lived a perfect life, died, rose again, and is your Lord and saviour, and you will be saved. You cannot deviate from this belief in any way.

It also seems that you are proposing a self defeating argument (if this is in fact what you are suggesting).

In other words, you believe people should accept others beliefs, yet you do not accept our belief, that you should not just accept everyones beliefs. /forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif

John 3:18
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.





Here is a great except on this from the book, ‘evidence that demands a verdict’ by Mr. Josh Mcdowell:

The Christian faith is faith in Christ. Its value or worth is not in the one believing, but in the One believed—not in the one trusting, but in the One trusted.

Immediately following that debate, a Moslem fellow approached me and, during a :
most edifying conversation, said very sincerely, "I know many Moslems who have
more faith in Mohammed than some Christians have in Christ." I said, "That may well be true, but the Christian is 'saved; You see,it doesn't matter how much faith you have, but rather who is the object of your faith; that is important from the Christian perspective of faith."

I often hear students say, "Some Buddhists are more dedicated and have more
faith in Buddha [this showing a misunderstanding of Buddhism] than Christians have in Christ." I can only reply, "Maybe so, but the Christian is saved."

Paul said, "I know whom I have believed. This explains why the Christian gospel centers on the person of Jesus Christ.

John Warwick Montgomery writes: "If our 'Christ of faith' deviates at all from the biblical 'Jesus of history; then to the extent of that deviation, we also lose the genuine Christ of faith. As one of the greatest Christian historians of our time, Herbert Butter field, has put it: 'It would be a dangerous error to imagine that the characteristics of an historical religion would be maintained if the Christ of the theologians were divorced from the Jesus of history;" (Montgomery, SP, 145)

In other words, one must avoid the attiitude, "Don't confuse me with the facts, my is mind is made up!" For the Christian, the historical facts reported in the Scriptures are essential. That is why the apostle Paul said,"If Christ is not risen, then our preaching is empty and your faith is also empty.... and if
n Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins'."
1 Cor. 15:14,17).

And one more:

5B. Misconception #5: "Loving Christians Should Accept Other Religious Views",

"You Christians seem to think that your way is the only way and that all other views are] wrong. How intolerant can you be? Why can't you accept other people and what they believe as also true?"


These criticisms reflect the views of a new a definition of the word "tolerance." Webster's New World Dictionary of English (third edition) defines "tolerate" as "to recognize and respect [other's beliefs, practices, and soc forth] without sharing them," and "to bearn or put up with [someone or something notp especially liked]." The apostle Paul expressed this concept when he said, "[Love] endures all things" (1 Cor. 13:7).

But today a new definition of tolerance is systematically being foisted upon the minds of all people. As an example, Thomas A. Helmbock, executive vice-president of Lambda Chi Alpha fraternity, states, "The definition of new ... tolerance is that every individual's beliefs, lifestyle, and perception of truth claims are equal.... Your beliefs and my beliefs are equal, and all truth is relative."
Helmbock, IT, 2)

This misconception assumes that truth is inclusive, that it gathers under its wings claims that oppose each other. The fact, 1 however, is that all truth is exclusive_at least to some degree— for it must exclude as 1 false that which is not true.

For instance, it is true that washington r D.C. is the capital city of the United States of America. This means that no other city in the United States is that country's capital. In fact, no other city on planet Earth or anywhere in the universe can lay legitimate claim to being the capital city of the United
States. One city and one only fits the bill, and that's washington D.C.

Simply because just one city is the United States capital does not mean that the people who affirm this truth are therefore intolerant. They may like scores of other cities and even live in different cities themselves. They may even live in different countries and pre- fer their country to America. Accepting the exclusive truth claim about washington D.C. does not make a person tolerant or intolerant it simply makes him or her correctabout what the capital city of the United States is.


The same is true about Christianity. If the claims of the Christian faith are true—and many people accept them as true—these people are no more intolerant for their belief than those people who accept washington

D.C. as the United States capital. They are either correct or mistaken about how God has revealed Himself in the world. If they are right, then there really is no other way to God but through Christ. If they are wrong, then Christianity is false. The question of tolerance isn't the issue. The question of truth is.

The misconception of intolerance assumes that a person should always keep his
options open, even when the evidence narrows the options to one. Why should we do this? It seems clearly unreasonable, as apologists Norman Geisler and Ron Brooks state:

Surely, it is good to admit the possibility that one might be wrong and never good to maintain a position no matter what the evidence is against it. Also, one should never make a firm decision without examining all the evidence without prejudice. . . . [But] are we still to remain open-minded when all reason says
that there can be only one conclusion? That is the same as the error of the closed mind. ... What if the absolute view is true? Isn't openness taken to be absolute? In the long run, openness cannot really be true unless it is open to some real absolutes that cannot be denied. Open-mindedness should not be
confused with empty-mindedness. One should never remain open to a second alternative when only one can be true. (Geisler, WSA, 259)

It is the person who disbelieves in the face of strong evidence supporting Christianity who is really intolerant and closed-minded.



Read this article, http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v24/i2/koran.asp

This is a good read on all religions being right:

All religions can’t be right
by Tas Walker, AiG–Australia

17 March 2003

We were heartened to hear that the new Dean of Sydney’s Anglican Cathedral, Phillip Jensen, took a brave stand for the claims of Christ recently.

Speaking in his inaugural sermon, Phillip Jensen attacked the excessive ‘relativism’ in the way the media treats Hinduism, Judaism, Islam and Christianity. In his sermon, he said that these religions can’t all be right.

It looks as if such claims about ‘truth’ are not what the media expect these days. We applaud Jensen’s stand. It seems like the new Dean is not playing the game the way the secular liberals expect. His sermon has been hot news.

Phillip Jensen doesn’t dispute that there are many wonderful Hindus, Muslims, Jews and atheists in Sydney. But his message was simple—they can’t all be right.

Jensen explained: ‘Jesus Christ either lived or he didn’t live. The communists in the 1940s said that Jesus didn’t live.’ The Bible says that Jesus Christ did live. Both can’t be right.

He went on to say that Jesus Christ either died or he didn’t die. ‘The Koran—in 4:157—said that Jesus did not die, and that the Jews and Christians were deceived, or confused in saying that he did.’ But the Bible says he did die. Both can’t be right.

It was exciting to see such a prominent cleric taking the same stand as AiG—that the Christian faith makes truth claims and that these claims are tied to real events in history as recorded in the Bible. Take away the history and you destroy the truth claim.

That is why AiG upholds the authority of the Bible from the very first verse. Secular humanism, the real religion of the West, says the world evolved over millions of years. The Bible says the world was created in six Earth-rotation days. Both can’t be right. Jesus Christ said that humans were present from the beginning of creation (Mark 10:6) whereas long-age belief has them appearing towards the end of creation. Again, both can’t be right.

We were excited to see Phillip Jensen raise the truth claims of Christ to national prominence, albeit briefly. You would think that truth would be an issue worth debating. Did the media pick up the issue and promote discussion on Jensen’s claim—that all religions can’t be right? Yes, they promoted discussion. But no, not on the issue.

Discussion focused on how Jensen’s statements were provocative, how they would be interpreted by other religions, how other religions would be offended, how he did not have a right to make such a statement in a pluralistic society, how he shouldn’t be wielding a big stick, how it will impact on the Muslim community, how he can’t claim to be tolerant of other religions, etc. But the discussion avoided the truth claims of Jesus Christ.

Deep down, secular liberals would agree with Jensen that all religions can’t be right. They would go one further—none is right. But it’s strategic for them not to say this about the non-Christian religions. Perhaps the secular liberal is petrified of the only other logical possibility: that one religion is right. That is too terrifying a truth to face.

[kokokolo]

ok

[ QUOTE ]
The guy himself doesnt consider himself christian. He talks about Jesus because he believes Jesus is the Light and Love of this world based on his actions.But he doesnt go to the point were he claims a religion faith like christianity

[/ QUOTE ]
now in the broadest sense, isnt christianity, believing in christ, and trying to live like jesus?

here some qutoes from the radio guy
"when I hear you say freedom, i think that as long as your going by another mans rules, we can never be free"

"if someone told me i had to wear a jamaca or if I couldnt go out after dark, and it turns out most of that was lies, then im not beleiving that, religion is the devils work"
"god doesnt care about cirumsision and all that, that mind control thats mans words used for mind control, or his defense for what he wants to do to people"

"I dont think its gods work EVER to enslave people"

~~ I agree, that god does not love rituals, forced rules
~~ from men etc


"lets say i was your father and I created you as long as I told you the importance of love, compassion, beinh honest, giving forgiveness, then why would I want to control you?, I would be a crappy father. I would say go and live, marry whoever you want, dance with whoever you want"

~~ yes, god believes in free will also !

"


OK se he hates the religions that have too much rules and rituals ... and that cause wars...


"jesus was the light of the world because of his actions,"
in response to a caller saying the bible is true and that what we should do with our lives is not by our own feelings
"I disagree When you finally drop all that crap and get your own conections going , youll know what truth, youll know whats lies, I used to believe all that, till I got rid of mans crap and meditated, first I became a loving human being for all. I believe in Jesus, but i dont believe a lot about what people wrote about the spiritial being"
" I dont believe that you must be circumsized, you must bend down to pray, you have to pray on the beads,gotta confess, gotta go to church on this day etc"

so basically I think he doesnt like all the ritualisticness he sees but has some very christlike feelings, about what he thinks is right and wrong.

Galatians 5
2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. 3 For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. 5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. 6 For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.

"god is love for everyone"
"jesus lived the life we are supposed to live and they killed him for it"

Inuitively we know what is right and wrong, and we know that all of these rituals that some do, are not necessary because god looks at the heart.Notice his natural knowledge of right and wrong is not that everything is ok as evolution would tell you. But is what jesus showed. I tend to take this natural knowledge of right and wrong we have as proof of the bible.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience F11 also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

As far as most of his hating religion because of specific rituals and customs, well he could go to a regular bible church, or check out a nazarene church, pretty normal...

you say religion is crap, god doesnt want you to have religion in your life. He wants a personal relationship with you.

[kokokolo]

wow looks like hes got reading to do... did anyone see my post I updated?

[ QUOTE ]
I think the reason I am not getting this is because, I have been operating out of this pre-supposition that our choices, specifically the choice for someone to accept god or not, is decided by how or brain is working and our past experiences since birth, so basically a bunch of chemical and electrical reactions.

And so seeing as god created the body and the brain, he could have just took a person that is self centered, and make thier brain work better, to understand things right, or given them more external influences in thier life to show and explain them the gospel.

Have any of you ever heard the argument, that seeing as our bodies are just made up of smaller things, that all of what we think, is just a product of what is going on in our brain, which is a product of all the things we experience and all the things our body went through. Knowing all the working of the brain and body could then hypothetically allow someone to know what your thinking and how you will respond to things by looking at information in your brain, that is electrical signals, and chemical reactions. So following this reasoning I would come up with the argument, If god created all, couldnt he have just tweaked our brain chemicals, or made more external influences on everyone/anyone to allow them to go to heaven if he loves them? Its not their fault their brain isnt grasping it...

However After studying the brain just a little, I am starting to think, that the brain itself may not be all there is to our thoughts and how we feel, I mean how in this skull of brain stuff, do we get our conciousness ?

I geuss now im just speculating, But maybe the brain is a sort of gateway for our body to communicate with our soul.
thoughts on that?


and now im thinking this whole view on all our choices being because of chemical reactions and electrical impulses, does violate free will.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Mavrick]

haha mine dissapeard!

[l0stsheep]

[ QUOTE ]
What I don’t understand about this logic, is that is not how we act in any other area of our lives.

Think about it for a minute.

If I tell you the only way you can log into your account is using a the password “12345”, you would not say I was close minded for telling you “123” will not work.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great, Venom! I've never heard it put that way before but YES, I completely agree. /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[William Ustav]

Fantastic post, Venom!

It's a common mistake made in arguments regarding many different topics. Just like some people say "There are no absolutes!" which is an absolute itself, or as in this case. That's why I always try to encourage people to take some time off from whatever they are doing at the moment, and just sit and read about what different viewpoints say (regarding choice of religion) and through different paths, like morality, origins, etc. And THEN, only then, can one start to sit and ponder about which religion is the correct one. Because as long as religions contradict each other, only one of them (or none!) is correct. And you have to find out for yourself which one is more correct.

A well read christian and a well read muslim could sit and debate for years with neither of them winning the argument. The other side always has arguments. That should prove just how much one needs to study before one can honestly say they know the path.

And one must also take into account internal evidence for a religion as well, but that is hard to do unless one has already started following one.

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
haha mine dissapeard!


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, these posts need to say respectful. Cussing people out is not allowed.

[ QUOTE ]

and now im thinking this whole view on all our choices being because of chemical reactions and electrical impulses, does violate free will.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not following that at all.

You're getting really weird on us. lol /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

The bible declares we all have a choice and that God can transend all of life circumstances and reveal truth to us.

Look at the bible, there are hundreds of examples.

Now what choice does God honor? One built on faith!

Study Hebrews 11.

koko, I think you are getting to out there, with these "We're not really here scenarios"

[kokokolo]

well my point was just that ummmm /forum/images/graemlins/confused.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
and now im thinking this whole view on all our choices being because of chemical reactions and electrical impulses, does violate free will.
I'm not following that at all.

[/ QUOTE ]
heh like, im picturing a person rejecting god, but they might not have if they had taken thier vitamins and got a good nights sleep because they would be thinking more clearly...heh



[ QUOTE ]
The bible declares we all have a choice and that God can transend all of life circumstances and reveal truth to us.

[/ QUOTE ]

just so we are on the same page, I agree with you. believe it or not, I make choices all the time !
/forum/images/graemlins/shocked.gif , Im just trying to understand etc. Although maybe it is simply beyond my scope of understanding how exactly god could create something with free will, ie humans no matter how good our technology and AI is, can NEVER actually create a machine with free will.

[ QUOTE ]
and now im thinking this whole view on all our choices being because of chemical reactions and electrical impulses, then that would violate free will.

[/ QUOTE ] Im thinking that we are not just a cumulation of chemical, and electrical reactions. we also have a soul/spirit (same thing?). that affects us.

one last thing, are you frustrated with me yet ?

/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]

one last thing, are you frustrated with me yet ?


[/ QUOTE ]

lol no.

[ QUOTE ]
heh like, im picturing a person rejecting god, but they might not have if they had taken thier vitamins and got a good nights sleep because they would be thinking more clearly...heh

[/ QUOTE ]

I just think that challenging God's fairness is not a right any of us have if we believe the bible. He's a perfect judge, so there is no way our feeble brains can even question His methods or judgements.

<font color="red"> 8 ‘For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,’ declares the Lord.

9 ‘As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.’

</font>

Here is what Christ said:

<font color="red"> 7"Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. 8For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened. </font>

What is the condition for all of these events, finding, opening, receiving...the bible tells...

<font color="green"> "God opposes the proud
but gives grace to the humble."

7Submit yourselves, then, to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. 8Come near to God and he will come near to you. Wash your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded. 9Grieve, mourn and wail. Change your laughter to mourning and your joy to gloom. 10Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up.

</font>

Humility.

If we humble oursevlves the right choices will be clear.

<font color="blue"> 18 ‘Come now, let us reason together,’ says the Lord. ‘Though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red as crimson, they shall be like wool.’
</font>

God does not push us,he allows us to reason along with Him. He created us with that capacity. But the condition is we must have a humble heart, or He can reveal nothing.

<font color="brown">16 ‘For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?’ But we have the mind of Christ.
</font>

[ QUOTE ]
just so we are on the same page, I agree with you. believe it or not, I make choices all the time !

[/ QUOTE ]


I know bro, please don't think I'm attacking your, we're just discussing. /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Although maybe it is simply beyond my scope of understanding how exactly god could create something with free will, ie humans no matter how good our technology and AI is, can NEVER actually create a machine with free will.


[/ QUOTE ]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/images/create_life1.jpg

The real question is 'what is life'. Life is more than matter, it is complex information.

Scientists have not "created life", and they can not "create intelligence".

Here is why.

First there is no comparison between a human brain and a computer.


The objective is not to create systems that would artifically improve the intelligence of someone with insufficent intellect, like a artifical heart in the case of a poor heart.


The word intelligence not only refers to the intellect, but also includes gathering, transmission and evaluation of messages. An office specialising in intelligence does not deal with intellecutal matters, but is concerned with information.

There is no fixed defenition of AI, but the general objective is as follows: The development of programming systems for dealing with the following issues--

1. Expert systems

This involves information systems where questions and answers in some area of specialization can be stored in the form of if-then-else rules;new cases are incorporated as they occur.

2. Robotics

It should be noted that robots can do nothing more than what they are programmed for.

3. Image processing

This involves the construction or deconstruction of images from data.

4. Speech processing

--the conversation of spoken words into symbols independent of the person who speaks
--translation from one language to another
--the ability to converse in natural language

In this area the limitations of AI are obvious, because it is in principle impossible to prepare software that can really understand and process meaning, as would be necessary for exercises requiring lingual discernment. Speech recognition and comprehension as well as the creative use of language is one of the essential cognitive faculties of man, and is the prerogative of human intelligence!

The problem of enabling a computer to deal with natural language is still unsolved and will never be resolved.It is not possible to model a comprehension of semanitc categories unmention intentions and convictions of the speaker, or emotions and motivations, for a computer. Human ability like common sense, intelligence, and creativity can not be simulated mechanically, because the intelligent use of language includes observation, thought and actions.

Even the best programs for speech processing do not know what they are talking about, in the truest sense of this expression.

Any program would fail in these areas:

1. Comprehension of meaning: A program can not understand semanitc relationships;neither can it link them wiht one another.

2. Grammatial analysis: WHen translating text, a grammatical analysis is required initially. A program which analyses some text without considering its meaning will not be ale to analyse numerous sentences correctly.

3. Language usuage depends on context: The meaning of a sentence cannot be found by adding the meanings of single words(I can't wait to get into information theory with you guys, this is where evolution falls flat on its face!). Moreover, the meaning of single words depends on the context in which they appear.

4. Language employs background knowldege: Each and every sentence is rooted in a specific frame of reference and it can oftern only be understood in terms of a understanding of its background.

5. The richness of language resides in poetic turns of speech and its metaphors. These occur in countless sentences that cannot be derived from the meaning of the component words.

6. Languages are multivocal: In all languages some words have more than one meaning. But this relates to more than just the words themselves. there are unique personal components wich cannot be accessed mechanically.

We should distinguish between data and knowldege, between algorithimcally conditioned branching of a program and a deliberate decision, between sorting by comparison and associations, between an averaging of values and comprehension of meaning, between a formal decision tree and an individual choice, between a sequence of computer opearations and creative thought process. A computer can only do the former; herein lies its strengts, its areas of applications, but also its limitations!


AI could be regarded as a higher level of data processing, but defenitetly not the beginning of independent thought on the part of computers. It would be a great misconception to believe that it would be possible to develop a system which will purportedly be something other than just a computing system. A chess-playing computer can not think independently; it is no better or worse than the strategy programmed into it by human intelligence.


A machine can not think independently. It can only algorithmically process information formulated and entered beforehand by one or more people.

Systems developed by AI programmers will become more meaninful in many areas. But we should always keep in mind that no machine will ever be able to generate creative infomation.

The distinctive characteristic of creative information is its novelty, ie. "to think what nobody else has thought". This aspect can be described with concepts like inventiveness, creativity, originallity, unconventionality, innovativeness, advancement, and abundance of ideas.

Every piece of creative information represents an intellectual effort and is directly linked to an originator who is a person endowed with a free will and with cognitive abilities.

These protocols could never be made into a program.

[ QUOTE ]
Im thinking that we are not just a cumulation of chemical, and electrical reactions. we also have a soul/spirit (same thing?). that affects us.

[/ QUOTE ]

Logically I believe this is correct, however science can not demonstrate a "spirit" at this time.

Here is a quote from an evolutionist biologist, J.B.S. Haldane:

‘If my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain, I have no reason to suppose my beliefs are true … and hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms.’

/forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif



Regarding allowing the world to go to hell and not witnessing as another poster had stated. "I don't need to defend my faith". This is a violation of the golden rule.

If I had a truth that could save your life, for me not to reveal that to you, would mean me not doing to you as I would want you to do to me (tell the truth). Logically, we must defend the faith, or tell the truth to stay consistent with God's commands.

<font color="red"> ‘… earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.’ </font>

<font color="blue"> 15 But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect.
</font>

<font color="brown"> 4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.

5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

</font>

[kokokolo]

wow dude, I got more than I bargained for on that one ! I honestly cant think of another question ! Thanks a lot for taking the time to answer so many of my questions.

[rickck48]

I think that God us what we have and all we need to work with to perform what he needs us to do. He will not tweak what we have it is up to us to seek and ask for what we need to have revealed to us through him. He doesn't force, if you ever notice the door that is always in fornt of a picture of the door for his entering, It never has a doorknob on his side of the door. We must do our on tweaking and seeking of his knowledge. /forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ <font color="red"> </font> <font color="blue"> </font>

[Wzs99]

Let me make it clear first of all that Im not attacking anyone personally. I have nothing but love for you guys. I have nothing againts you guys but when it comes to Religion..Im sorry I just have to say whats on my mind.Whether you like it or not.

If you want to be a christian or a catholic Im cool with that. You have your own free will and point of view. I respect your beliefs and dont consider them wrong. My only beef is with religion itself. I believe In christ and everything he said, but I also believe in Buddha mohammad and all of these spiritual beings that came into this plane of existence to spread their message. I respect your beliefs try to understand that Im not attacking you as a person. I have a heart and I do try to love and have compassion for every human being.

Bottom Line is we all have a personal connection with GOD.Ok theres no religion that can give us this because We all have this connection. Its called meditation or Silence. Jesus christ taught this but was extracted from the Bible by the Kings and Religion.And to think that One Religion can be right is straight Ignorance.


The Truth of the matter its not that I dont accept your beliefs. I believe in God and Christ. Its just a bad decision to follow any religion. Cant you understand how its dividing everyone? Your telling me that If I dont follow your Rules I wont be accepted as a Child Of God? That the exact same thing as Racism or KKK. keep in mind this is just an example: That If We are not white then we are not the choosen ones.Same thing about the Jews saying they are the choosen ones.Why would God do that and Alienate the rest of the human race If he has Love and Compassion? Keep in mind I do believe in Jesus but as far as that one quote that explains how he is the way into heaven.That is bogus that is crap.Jesus did not write that down. The majority, which is more than half, of the bible is written by man and its only interpertations. And the Little bit of love and light (most of it Jesus Quotes) that is in the bible still remains but its not enough to outweight the man written gospels

[Venom]

What it comes down to, is you don't believe the bible. So it is very hard to argue with that being the case. You say you believe everything Christ said, but you don't believe the bible. That just does not make any sense. How do you decide what is true and what is not? If you believed what Christ said, there is no way you could believe what you believe in, plain and simple.

Concerning this being like the KKK, that is a red herring. There is absolutely no comparison. People like this just hate, and are trying to harm you. We in no way are alienating you in any way, or anyone else. Nor did we claim we are special. We are just telling what we believe is the only way to get to heaven. This is a free gift and anyone can accept it. I don’t see how that is discriminating.

And again, that is a self defeating argument. YOU are discriminating us, by saying our belief that there is only one way to heaven is false, and that we should accept every religion. Yet, you don't accept ours.

And I don’t understand why you are saying we are ignorant for claiming this either, I really don’t know how to even comment on that.

Concerning the Jews believing only they could be saved, that is not true.

Isaiah 56:3-8
3 Neither let the son of the stranger, that hath joined himself to the LORD, speak, saying, The LORD hath utterly separated me from his people: neither let the eunuch say, Behold, I am a dry tree. 4 For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant; 5 Even unto them will I give in mine house and within my walls a place and a name better than of sons and of daughters: I will give them an everlasting name, that shall not be cut off. 6 Also the sons of the stranger, that join themselves to the LORD, to serve him, and to love the name of the LORD, to be his servants, every one that keepeth the sabbath from polluting it, and taketh hold of my covenant; 7 Even them will I bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer: their burnt offerings and their sacrifices shall be accepted upon mine altar; for mine house shall be called an house of prayer for all people. 8 The Lord GOD which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, beside those that are gathered unto him.

There are hundreds of examples of people who were not Jews and were accepted by God into the Kingdom of heaven.

Concerning the accuracy of the bible, I would investigate that, bro. We wrote a Giant bible study on this. Check it out here, Part I- Accuracy of Scripture and Salvation (http://www.abcbodybuilding.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&amp;Board=bodybuilder&amp;Number=590954&amp; Forum=bodybuilder&amp;Words=How%20to%20use%20the%20Wor d%20of%20God%20Part%201&amp;Match=Entire%20Phrase&amp;Sear chpage=0&amp;Limit=25&amp;Old=1week&amp;Main=590954&amp;Search=tru e#Post590954)

[Mavrick]

[ QUOTE ]
Your telling me that If I dont follow your Rules I wont be accepted as a Child Of God? That the exact same thing as Racism or KKK.

[/ QUOTE ]Mabey your thinking of genocide(sp?) and the Nazi's, the people who killed blacks etc in the KKK were extremist, as the KKK wasnt intended to be a rasist organization when it was started by the 3 collage proffecers(sp?), just people took it to extremes that they didnt need to.

[ QUOTE ]
Im sorry I just have to say whats on my mind.Whether you like it or not.

[/ QUOTE ]
hehehe i tried that...

[ QUOTE ]
And to think that One Religion can be right is straight Ignorance.
-----------------------------------------------
If you want to be a christian or a catholic Im cool with that.


[/ QUOTE ]
so your all cool with it, but then you slap it in our face that we belive untrue things? thats like telling a child that its ok for them to be treated like trash, because your cool with it!


[ QUOTE ]
Keep in mind I do believe in Jesus but as far as that one quote that explains how he is the way into heaven.That is bogus that is crap.

[/ QUOTE ]
if its a quote...it means HE said it. so if you dont belive somthing he said, how can you belive in him?


[ QUOTE ]
Jesus did not write that down. The majority, which is more than half, of the bible is written by man and its only interpertations. And the Little bit of love and light (most of it Jesus Quotes) that is in the bible still remains but its not enough to outweight the man written gospels

[/ QUOTE ]
...im pretty sure humans wrote the ENTIRE bible, not just a majority, not muhhamad or jesus, sat down writing for hours and hours.everything you know about god, and the fact that you even know he exist is because of man and the writtings left that they wrote. everything moses wrote, he wrote because god told him to. BUT! rember that moses wrote it!, therefore..as i see it, it makes your entire claims unbased sence you belive in somthing, yet dont belive those who told you about it aka The Bible


But, i do respect your views, and choice of relgion, weither you be the only one belivng in it, or its one of the main ones. just you present your veiws, in a intresting way
--------------------------------

hey you sorta got me confused in with
[ QUOTE ]
4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.

5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Adam Knowlden]

[ QUOTE ]
I believe In christ and everything he said,

[/ QUOTE ]

You simply do not believe anything He said.

There's no way around it. I can prove to you the bible is accurate and we have the correct translation and interpertation.

We have 11000 original manuscripts, there is no dodging the fact we have the original bible, the words of Christ, and the apostles.

You don't have to believe it, but stating we do not have the literal words of Christ is simply incorrect and makes your entire case look less than scholarly.

Luke is revered as one of the greatest most accurate historians in all antiquity, we have hundreds or archeological evidences his historical accounts are dead on. He recorded the words of the apostle Peter:

<font color="red"> 8Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: "Rulers and elders of the people! 9If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a cripple and are asked how he was healed, 10then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. 11He is
" 'the stone you builders rejected,
which has become the capstone.' 12Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."
</font>

No way around it, the Lord stated it, the apostles preached it.

Christ is truth, all else is false.

Whether you like the truth or not, does not change it.

None of your statements have any correct analogies attached them. Your historical facts are 100% fallacious. All you've given is your opinion, which stands alone and is void of any validity.

None of the religions you mentioned have foundational doctrines even remotely similar. To say that complete contradictory doctrines are reflections of the same truth is illogical.

[Wzs99]

[ QUOTE ]
What it comes down to, is you don't believe the bible. So it is very hard to argue with that being the case. You say you believe everything Christ said, but you don't believe the bible. That just does not make any sense. How do you decide what is true and what is not? If you believed what Christ said, there is no way you could believe what you believe in, plain and simple.

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe in Christ I just dont believe everything these people have wrote about this SPIRITUAL Being

I did not say I didnt believe in the Bible.Check my post. The bible does have little bit of truth in it The Bible has been translated so many times..but do you know why? because the Kings and Religous leaders were losing control of the people so they put more and more restrictions on it..Have you ever heard of the Koran? Jesus is the most quoted person in it. So the Bible isnt the only place where Jesus is quoted. Its not true that you are telling that a "religion" is the only way to get into heaven because thats what you have been told by there religious leaders who are just as corrupt as Religion itself. THink about the Vatican church holds I think historical artifacts worth tons of money. Why the hell dont they use that to feed and help people in need? Because they greedy and the bottom line is that its just a Business to make money from the masses. Its mind control. I know you guys are smart enough to understand that Religion is not what connects you to GOd..its what blocks you from him/her. You yourselfs the connection to Him..Not some set of rules..not some book..not some set of beliefs and definately not yours or any other religion. If you go back and listen to all of these spiritual beings that including jesus and buddha warned us about organized religion.

ANd maybe your right its not like the KKK but you cant say it doesn't alienate anyone..What about the Gays? Trust me I've been to church and they alineate gays,muslims,other beliefs and everyone who doesn follow their religion. And please dont tell me that " Oh the bible says that gays...." Please.. We are created in Gods Image. Both and men and women from his Image. So that means that God is a man and woman. Theres nothing wrong with gays yet they are the most alineated people especially by religions.

[ QUOTE ]
And again, that is a self defeating argument. YOU are discriminating us, by saying our belief that there is only one way to heaven is false, and that we should accept every religion. Yet, you don't accept ours.

[/ QUOTE ]

How in the world is my argument self defeating. Also Im not discriminating you its ALL RELIGIONS IN GENERAL.Not just YOURS. I didnt not say that you should accept every religion. I didnt say I didnt accept yours either..The first things I have said about Religion was that I dont like it.


I respect you Venom and everyone else on this board.But what Im trying to say is that you CAN have a connection to God and everything without having a Religion Tag on you. We dont need religion we just need to know what love truly means and love everything out there without any religion restrictions because all it does it constrict us. its just riducules
/forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Adam Knowlden]

I respect you as well bro, we're just discussing, but I do have to question your responses:

[ QUOTE ]
believe in Christ I just dont believe everything these people have wrote about this SPIRITUAL Being


[/ QUOTE ]

Christ is the Son of God, not just "another spirit guide", you can believe He's "just another guide"if you want, but then you DO NOT believe in the bible. If so demonstrate where this verse is.

[ QUOTE ]
did not say I didnt believe in the Bible.Check my post. The

[/ QUOTE ]

Your logic however, demands it. You do not believe the bible is the only truth, although it claims it is. So therefore, you believe it is flawed, therefore you do not believe it to be the inerrant Word of God, therefore you do not believe in the Bible.

It's simple really.

[ QUOTE ]
Have you ever heard of the Koran? Jesus is the most quoted person in it. So the Bible isnt the only place where Jesus is quoted.

[/ QUOTE ]

/forum/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

So much wrong with this...where to even begin. First Muhammad's companions, who wrote down his chants, were not apostles (Muhammad could not write).

He received his "visions" as a recitier from a spirit, which Galatians chapter 1 teaches us was clearly a deceiving spirit.

<font color="red"> 6I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!
10Am I now trying to win the approval of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ.

</font>

In other words a false spirit took over his body and controlled his mouth. Muhammad did not live during the time of Christ as the apostles did. Comparing the written testimony of eyewitnesses to a man living in a cave reciting from a trance is a hardly historical documented evidence. False analogy. /forum/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

Nor even comparable to the 11000 original documents we have of the New Testament.

The apostles lived with Christ and knew Christ during His earthly ministry, we have their eyewitness accounts, and Christ's true teachings. Muhammaed did not live during Christ's ministry and his beliefs of what Christ said severely contradict what the apostles gave us via the bible, therefore they are not reliable, not inspired, and as Paul clearly stated in Galatians chapter 1, not true.

[ QUOTE ]
You yourselfs the connection to Him..Not some set of rules..not some book..not some set of beliefs and definately not yours or any other religion. If you go back and listen to all of these spiritual beings that including jesus and buddha warned us about organized religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are simply giving us new age occult doctrine.

“Just be a good person, you’ll get to heaven”, that is completely Anti-Christ.

Before you keep giving us sacrilegious blasphemy I recommend you stop to consider the religion you claim does not exist in your life.

[ QUOTE ]
What about the Gays? Trust me I've been to church and they alineate gays,muslims,other beliefs and everyone who doesn follow their religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's again another false analogy. To state, "x church is wrong, therefore the entire Christian doctrine is wrong" is completely illogical. Man fails, God does not.

[ QUOTE ]
Theres nothing wrong with gays

[/ QUOTE ]

Simply making a statement does not mean its true.

[ QUOTE ]
We dont need religion we just need to know what love truly means and love everything out there without any religion restrictions because all it does it constrict us. its just riducules


[/ QUOTE ]

The bible is clear, God forgiving us of our sins, by the giving of His One and Only Son, is the ultimate demonstration of love.

What restricts us is not religions, but our sins, and the desire to reject God and His Words. The only thing that is rediculous is to continue rejecting God's only way of salvation, the cross.

<font color="red"> 1 Corinthians 1:18
18For the story and message of the cross is sheer absurdity and folly to those who are perishing and on their way to perdition, but to us who are being saved it is the manifestation of the power of God.
</font>

[Mavrick]

[ QUOTE ]
I respect you Venom and everyone else on this board.But what Im trying to say is that you CAN have a connection to God and everything without having a Religion Tag on you. We dont need religion we just need to know what love truly means and love everything out there without any religion restrictions because all it does it constrict us. its just riducules

[/ QUOTE ]

with...
[ QUOTE ]

Main Entry: re·li·gion
Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&amp;nFunction: nounEtymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at RELY 1 a : the state of a religious &lt;a nun in her 20th year of religion&gt; b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
- re·li·gion·less adjective

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]

ANd maybe your right its not like the KKK but you cant say it doesn't alienate anyone..What about the Gays? Trust me I've been to church and they alineate gays,muslims,other beliefs and everyone who doesn follow their religion. And please dont tell me that <u>" Oh the bible says that gays...."</u> Please.. We are created in Gods Image. Both and men and women from his Image. So that means that God is a man and woman. Theres nothing wrong with gays yet they are the most alineated people especially by religions.

[/ QUOTE ]

im pretty sure EVERY religon alinates gays. so it isnt just churchs, its cathedrals, temples, even the things the muslims worship in. and they dont "alinate" other relgions, if they do, they dont follow the doctrine in the holy books, even the muslims, state they want peace with the monotheistc relgions in the koran.uhhh and god isnt a boy or a girl! if he was both hed be a hermaphdite(sp?) which he isnt, he is a spirt! with no sexual reproductive organs, just referd to as the fater, because he holds the power. sorta like guys call there boats girls etc...the saying that he creatged us in his image, dosent mean he has a cookie cutter mold that he stamps us out of, i see it as more of a guide to create us by.