|
Post by gamefreak740 on Mar 30, 2010 21:46:48 GMT -5
Listen, Gesh. I have a wonderful series of videos for you to watch. These should answer your questions about Evolution, Creationism, and the Bible in general. Now, before you watch these, first I want you to realize that if you watch these with a closed mind, you will not gain anything. Just as if you were reading the bible to a deaf person, so too must you watch these videos with your eyes and ears open. Oh, and there's 17 videos (14 and 15 are split into two parts each), and all of them are roughly 10 minutes. Link to the first: www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnJX68ELbAY&feature=related
|
|
|
Post by Joey on Mar 30, 2010 22:15:36 GMT -5
I agree with whoever said it was your own opinion, yes god does intervene in our lives, but every time we sin he won't be there pushing us back on the right track. We have to meet him halfway.
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Mar 30, 2010 23:52:05 GMT -5
Again, an assumption based on a total misinterpretation of chance. That humans would evolve on Earth was highly unlikely. That some form of creature would evolve somewhere in the universe was highly likely. Every sort of combination of creature and habitable planet are highly unlikely, but one or more of them were very likely to happen overall. Therefore that we exist is no surprise at all, and does not require God to explain. My post on page one goes into more detail on this, so I won't rehash the whole thing here. I /really/ don't feel like explaining everything the TV show said, but I can tell you it was made by people way more knowledgeable about science than you, and they probably didn't believe in God because they kept saying, "We're here because we're lucky." They explained the entire history of the earth, and how unlikely it was that all of that would have happened just the way it did to allow for life on the planet. And what I said was that it's true that it's unlikely for life to have formed on Earth, but when you observe the universe as a whole, life existing somewhere within it is very likely, which doesn't conflict at all with that show saying life on Earth was unlikely. Life on Earth was unlikely. Life somewhere in the universe was incredibly likely, and every individual planet on which it could have happened was unlikely. Ergo, no matter where it happened, it was unlikely for it to have happened in that place. Ergo, the unlikeliness of it happening in a place where it happened is not unusual, and is not a valid proof of God.
|
|
Gesh
Planet
Mishap Molly Cordell
Posts: 453
|
Post by Gesh on Mar 31, 2010 4:36:46 GMT -5
I'm not talking about the dates though. With all our modern technology, I'm sure people would have proven that the Old Testament texts weren't, in fact, as old as they appeared if that was the case.
I never said that though. I said that Jesus alone started the most popular and widely accepted religion in human history, and it doesn't seem likely that that would happen if all he used were his words. Heck, even with the miracles, plenty of people still doubted.
Okay, before I got any further, allow me to explain what I mean by a "plan." God has a way he will use you in order to spread his love or his word or bring other people to him. This could be in any way, shape, or form. And yes, God does know what will happen. But, he still tries to show people the way and give them their choice. Why this is, I don't know for sure, probably because of the whole plan thing, but we are still trying to solve some mysteries of God, just as scientists are still trying to solve mysteries of science. As for the punishment, you don't get sent "down there" just because you didn't follow a certain plan. It's most likely based on whether you accept Christ into your heart or not (though no one can know for sure because God is the ultimate judge). As I said before, God has an open invitation to eternal life for everyone, and if some refuse it, that is their choice. You are essentially choosing not to enter Heaven.
I already explained that. Science is limited to the comprehension of the human mind, because it is a system man created. Therefore, finite and limited science cannot possibly explain God, an infinite being who existed before the start of time. Therefore, science couldn't prove God's existence even if he was real. But it can't disprove it either. So if science can't disprove or prove God's existence... how can you possibly go off of science alone to determine if there is a God?
|
|
|
Post by fanofeverythingz on Mar 31, 2010 5:07:44 GMT -5
FanofEverythingz' view! =D
Okay... Now, since you asked opinions this is my own personal beliefs. I know LOTS of people will not believe a word I say, but I don't really care. I felt like answering the questions with replies I'd bet my entire life on.
I am one of those old time KJV Bible believing Fundamental Baptist Christians (yeah the ones that get scorned a lot by talkshows). The original version of the Bible (KJV) says that Adam was created out of the dust of the Earth (which God created). I do not believe in evolution, in fact I believe the world is getting worse and corrupted. People contradict saying but look at technology, look at the skyscrapers, look at the medicines, etc etc. But, in history there was a time when we didn't have that many viruses, we didn't have that many crimes, and obviously we had many many more natural resources. Adam and Eve, the two first humans God created and the ones that caused the fall of man by the fallen angel, Lucifer (aka Satan or the devil) influenced them. They fell into sin and God's plan for eternal companions etc. I'm sure many of you know a Christian's belief (if not and you'd like to know, PM me). I believe they were created as perfect and intelligent beings, not cavemen. How else could they know English, how else could Adam have provided food and named the animals? As for the whole figurative thing. God uses many examples in the Bible, but why would he be using a figurative way of writing for History? He uses parables often in his Earthly ministry, and signs and obvious representations during the prophets and Revelation.
The chicken came first. The Bible says, God created the animals of land. He didn't say that He created a life form that would eventually evolve into a chicken...
Science vs. Creation. True, they say they have tons of evidence desperately trying to prove evolution and deny God's existence. Where is it? If you know please show me ABSOLUTE PROOF, not the usual theories. Evolution goes against some of the very basic laws of Science! It contradicts itself ALL the time from what I've studied.
Of course, Creationism and belief in God is not all blind. There are many things that point toward the history recorded in the Bible. God would never leave any actual total proof of His existence though, because one of the most basic things he wants us to have is faith, not seeing yet still believing.
The Bible does indeed prove itself lots of times. It really all comes down to the person whether to believe or not. I repeat, the necessary thing God wants is FAITH.
"For we walk by faith, not by sight." II Corinthians 5:7 (KJV)
|
|
Gesh
Planet
Mishap Molly Cordell
Posts: 453
|
Post by Gesh on Mar 31, 2010 5:36:47 GMT -5
FanofEverythingz' view! =DOkay... Now, since you asked opinions this is my own personal beliefs. I know LOTS of people will not believe a word I say, but I don't really care. I felt like answering the questions with replies I'd bet my entire life on. I am one of those old time KJV Bible believing Fundamental Baptist Christians (yeah the ones that get scorned a lot by talkshows). The original version of the Bible (KJV) says that Adam was created out of the dust of the Earth (which God created). I do not believe in evolution, in fact I believe the world is getting worse and corrupted. People contradict saying but look at technology, look at the skyscrapers, look at the medicines, etc etc. But, in history there was a time when we didn't have that many viruses, we didn't have that many crimes, and obviously we had many many more natural resources. Adam and Eve, the two first humans God created and the ones that caused the fall of man by the fallen angel, Lucifer (aka Satan or the devil) influenced them. They fell into sin and God's plan for eternal companions etc. I'm sure many of you know a Christian's belief (if not and you'd like to know, PM me). I believe they were created as perfect and intelligent beings, not cavemen. How else could they know English, how else could Adam have provided food and named the animals? As for the whole figurative thing. God uses many examples in the Bible, but why would he be using a figurative way of writing for History? He uses parables often in his Earthly ministry, and signs and obvious representations during the prophets and Revelation. The chicken came first. The Bible says, God created the animals of land. He didn't say that He created a life form that would eventually evolve into a chicken... Science vs. Creation. True, they say they have tons of evidence desperately trying to prove evolution and deny God's existence. Where is it? If you know please show me ABSOLUTE PROOF, not the usual theories. Evolution goes against some of the very basic laws of Science! It contradicts itself ALL the time from what I've studied. Of course, Creationism and belief in God is not all blind. There are many things that point toward the history recorded in the Bible. God would never leave any actual total proof of His existence though, because one of the most basic things he wants us to have is faith, not seeing yet still believing. The Bible does indeed prove itself lots of times. It really all comes down to the person whether to believe or not. I repeat, the necessary thing God wants is FAITH. "For we walk by faith, not by sight."II Corinthians 5:7 (KJV) That was very insightful, and while I disagree with some of the things you say (for example, Adam and Eve didn't speak English, they spoke an ancient language that was later translated), I also agree with you on many aspects.
|
|
|
Post by Ricky on Mar 31, 2010 6:17:22 GMT -5
I'm not talking about the dates though. With all our modern technology, I'm sure people would have proven that the Old Testament texts weren't, in fact, as old as they appeared if that was the case. Actually with all our modern technology we did prove that the old testament text were not, in fact, as old as they appeared... The oldest text is 300-350 years after Christ died... So all the prophesies of christ coming could have been made up... Well if Hitler was able to convince millions that what he was doing was the right thing to do. I think it is very likely that Jesus, with a much nicer message, could have convinced that many people without miracles... and since it was without miracles people doubted... You are not listening... Ok, lets rephrase according to your response, shall we? 1. God creates humans knowing exactly what they will do. 2. God is going to want to use you to spread his love or his word or bring other people to him 3. God knows you will fail at this task before you are even created. 4. You are born, live your life, and don't accept christ into your heart. (or don't follow whatever rules he sets [ doesn't matter if you know what rules they are or not]) Just like God knew you wouldn't before you were born. 5. God punish you with eternal fire for not following the set of rules... Wait, I just realized something. If you can't understand God either, then how could you possibly know that science can't understand it... I mean for all YOU know, science can, and just like quantum physics you can't...
|
|
|
Post by mateo199109 on Mar 31, 2010 7:16:00 GMT -5
Alright, I too have been watching Mr. Brown's videos recently and feel bad when I watch him talk about his concept of Christ, along with his belief in evolution over Creationism. Here is the thing. Most people do believe in evolution, yet there are still many people in the World today that believe in the more logical Creationism. I mean, the people who say that evolution is "the way we came to be," is saying this based on the premise that Creationism is a religion, rather than a science. When it comes down to it though, isn't evolution a mere religion also? I mean, where is the solid evidence of evolution? Why is the evidence all around the Earth, which would lead us to believe that the Earth is actually a young earth that ages to about 10,000 years old, rather than being 15.2 billion years of age? I mean, there have been a couple of things that some evolutionists have come up with that makes evolution seem probable, but once you look at what they are saying and break it up, it is based on false pretenses. On another thought, the Bible is a piece of literature. I myself will always believe that it is a divinely inspired piece of literature. Like all literature, there is some figurative language written in the Bible (they are called parables), and these spots are very evident. The rest though I believe is a hundred percent accurate. I believe that Adam was the first man, made from dust along with Eve the first woman, made from Adam's rib. I believe that Jesus literally died on the cross and rose on the third day. I mean, some of this stuff people take as figurative language are the fundamental beliefs of christianity today. If you don't believe a part of the Bible, who are we to pick and choose what parts are liable and worthy of being believed? Back to my main point, anyone have true solid evidence of Evolution? How about evidence of Creationism or a young earth? Thanks for taking time to at least read this sentence.
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Mar 31, 2010 11:32:33 GMT -5
The chicken came first. The Bible says, God created the animals of land. He didn't say that He created a life form that would eventually evolve into a chicken... Science vs. Creation. True, they say they have tons of evidence desperately trying to prove evolution and deny God's existence. Where is it? If you know please show me ABSOLUTE PROOF, not the usual theories. Evolution goes against some of the very basic laws of Science! It contradicts itself ALL the time from what I've studied. Of course, Creationism and belief in God is not all blind. There are many things that point toward the history recorded in the Bible. God would never leave any actual total proof of His existence though, because one of the most basic things he wants us to have is faith, not seeing yet still believing. The Bible does indeed prove itself lots of times. It really all comes down to the person whether to believe or not. I repeat, the necessary thing God wants is FAITH. "For we walk by faith, not by sight."II Corinthians 5:7 (KJV) Alright, I too have been watching Mr. Brown's videos recently and feel bad when I watch him talk about his concept of Christ, along with his belief in evolution over Creationism. Here is the thing. Most people do believe in evolution, yet there are still many people in the World today that believe in the more logical Creationism. I mean, the people who say that evolution is "the way we came to be," is saying this based on the premise that Creationism is a religion, rather than a science. When it comes down to it though, isn't evolution a mere religion also? I mean, where is the solid evidence of evolution? Why is the evidence all around the Earth, which would lead us to believe that the Earth is actually a young earth that ages to about 10,000 years old, rather than being 15.2 billion years of age? I mean, there have been a couple of things that some evolutionists have come up with that makes evolution seem probable, but once you look at what they are saying and break it up, it is based on false pretenses. On another thought, the Bible is a piece of literature. I myself will always believe that it is a divinely inspired piece of literature. Like all literature, there is some figurative language written in the Bible (they are called parables), and these spots are very evident. The rest though I believe is a hundred percent accurate. I believe that Adam was the first man, made from dust along with Eve the first woman, made from Adam's rib. I believe that Jesus literally died on the cross and rose on the third day. I mean, some of this stuff people take as figurative language are the fundamental beliefs of christianity today. If you don't believe a part of the Bible, who are we to pick and choose what parts are liable and worthy of being believed? Back to my main point, anyone have true solid evidence of Evolution? How about evidence of Creationism or a young earth? Thanks for taking time to at least read this sentence. Are you two serious or just trolling? Creationism -- the concept that everything came into existence exactly 6000 years ago -- is not logical or scientific by any means. It's ridiculous to claim it's so, and no, there's no evidence in favour of it that I've ever seen. After all, we have absolute boat-loads of evidence showing things that happened more than 6000 years ago, and things that are clearly greater than 6000 years (or 10000 years) old. Ergo, things were still around more than 6000 years ago. This is common sense. As for evolution being a religion, or evolution breaking laws of science, that's utter garbage. A religion is a set or collection of beliefs, at least some of which deal in the supernatural. Science is a method by which we learn truths about the natural world. Evolution has been conclusively proven over and over again -- in fact, it's been proven under several totally separate fields of study. It's not just a 'belief,' it's the result of real research with an amount of evidence that is beyond conclusive. And what laws of science are you claiming it contradicts? Where'd you read something like that? Okay, proof. There's so much proof of evolution that I could never fit it in one post -- it's not any small theory that's played around with, there's millions upon millions of data points involved -- but here's a good starting point that should be understandable to someone not in the field. This is a long video, but it covers some of the proof of evolution: Hell, we observe evolution happening in the world around us even today. Claiming it didn't happen at this point is pure absurdity. You are welcome to believe in god or not as you choose. However, if your faith specifically contradicts what is obvious fact, then clearly that faith is wrong, and it would be much more sensible to at least correct it to the point where it fits with the facts we know to be true.
|
|
Gesh
Planet
Mishap Molly Cordell
Posts: 453
|
Post by Gesh on Mar 31, 2010 14:09:48 GMT -5
Citation please? I'm sorry to break it to you, but the main writers of the old testament were alive well before Jesus came to be...
Okay, so maybe it is possible (though still not likely, I believe, because even Hitler didn't get as many followers as Jesus did, and some of Hitler's "followers" didn't truly believe in what he claimed). We all have our own opinions. You still can't prove the miracles /didn't/ happen. I still believe that they did.
I think you're confusing the whole "plan" concept and the "get into Heaven" concept. Or maybe you're not, and I'm just once again misinterpreting your phrasing, and again if this is the case, I'm very sorry. But anyhow. I believe it is definitely still possible to get into Heaven just because you don't follow God's plan the way he wants you to. Getting into Heaven most likely has to do with your acceptance of Christ as your savior, and that concept is completely separate from the "plan" thing. Yes, God probably knows how everything is going to end up before you're even born, but does that stop him from creating you and letting you live your life and make your own choices? No. If he did, all the people in this world would be Christian, and there would be nothing on the planet to test those Christians' faith. Even the people who don't believe in God have an important role in his master plan. So he can't just omit some people just because he knows they will make bad decisions. But I would like to reiterate what I said before - that just as scientists are still trying to solve mysteries of science, so are Christians still trying to solve mysteries of God.
I've said this twice already. Human minds are limited and finite. So yes, even with science (again, a system created by man), it would be impossible for us to explain God. We cannot wrap our minds around or explain an infinite being; our minds will not allow it. Here is just one of many examples - God has existed forever, since before the beginning of time. He had no start. Nor will he have an end. We can imagine something having no end, but having no beginning? That is difficult for us to wrap our minds around. And I'm willing to bet that science can't explain it. Still, that is just one example.
And, just a little side note here. You say that if science can prove something, then it is absolutely certain. And that is one of the main reasons people claim God cannot exist. But, didn't Isaac Newton state the three laws of matter? Didn't he test them and prove them? Didn't everyone accept it as being completely true without a doubt? And yet, sometime later this remarkable discovery comes along, and we realize that these laws do not hold true with the really small particles. Hmm... so even science is not definite and certain... For all you know, a thousand years from now we may make an amazing discovery that somehow disproves nearly everything we thought we knew about science. Just saying. No one can know for sure.
|
|
|
Post by Ricky on Mar 31, 2010 14:40:36 GMT -5
Citation please? I'm sorry to break it to you, but the main writers of the old testament were alive well before Jesus came to be... So glad you asked: Elliott, J. K. - "OLDEST BIBLE" from the journal: "History Today" He clearly states that the oldest thing that references Jesus is dated 150 years after he was dead... So i'm sorry to break this to you, but there is no proof the main writers of the old testament even existed... [Where is your citation?] by the way don't think I haven't noticed you have tried to get away from the question of God being a metaphor for doing the right thing... So is it possible that just like the Adam and Eve story, God is a symbol of something with different a meaning? Ok, so you have admitted that it is possible that a person without superpowers can still be influential to the outcome of society. Even if he is not the son of God. That's good to hear. Stop trying to argue about the plan or the things one has to do to get to heaven. That's not what i'm trying to explain to you. Even if all one person had to do is write hello on a piece of paper. The fact is still the same: God knows the person is going to "choose" not to write the word. He creates him (knowing full well that the person is going to have an eternity in hell) God then apparently tries to help the individual (which is not true because trying would mean that he means for it to change). Don't you think he would know what would work for a person to change their mind???! and finally the person is sent to an eternity of pain and suffering... That's the difference about science and religion though. Science is always evolving and changing towards what we find and study. Religion tries to stay with the same backwards thinking... If we do disprove god it wont matter because you wont believe. Its like if Jesus came back to the world today. You wouldn't believe that either... because it would mean change, and religion is always the same.
|
|
|
Post by hey light on Mar 31, 2010 14:58:37 GMT -5
I've said this twice already. Human minds are limited and finite. So yes, even with science (again, a system created by man), it would be impossible for us to explain God. We cannot wrap our minds around or explain an infinite being; our minds will not allow it. Here is just one of many examples - God has existed forever, since before the beginning of time. He had no start. Nor will he have an end. We can imagine something having no end, but having no beginning? That is difficult for us to wrap our minds around. And I'm willing to bet that science can't explain it. Still, that is just one example. And, just a little side note here. You say that if science can prove something, then it is absolutely certain. And that is one of the main reasons people claim God cannot exist. But, didn't Isaac Newton state the three laws of matter? Didn't he test them and prove them? Didn't everyone accept it as being completely true without a doubt? And yet, sometime later this remarkable discovery comes along, and we realize that these laws do not hold true with the really small particles. Hmm... so even science is not definite and certain... For all you know, a thousand years from now we may make an amazing discovery that somehow disproves nearly everything we thought we knew about science. Just saying. No one can know for sure. Actually, there are loads of infinite things in science. Like, in Chaos Theory, the way Strange Attractors have an infinite amount of surfaces, or the way fractals have infinite complexity.
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Mar 31, 2010 15:29:17 GMT -5
It's another one of those things that seems ironic (like it being incredibly likely for incredibly unlikely things to happen -- aka why statistics give people headaches) but isn't actually contradictory. While humans will never really be able to imagine or truly grasp infinite, science can. This is observed most clearly in pure mathematics, but also in other sciences like Chaos pointed out.
|
|
Gesh
Planet
Mishap Molly Cordell
Posts: 453
|
Post by Gesh on Mar 31, 2010 17:16:27 GMT -5
The oldest thing referencing Jesus, eh? Funny, I thought we were talking about the Old Testament, in which Jesus hadn't been born yet... Actually, one example of a citation would be in the video that someone linked to in this very discussion, trying to argue against me. www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnJX68ELbAY&feature=relatedThat's part of a series, and in one of the episodes (I forget which) it states that the oldest texts were from before Jesus was born. Literally, it said B.C., but by definition, that means before Jesus was born. I didn't even realize I was avoiding that question. I thought I'd answered it by saying the Bible was God's own word (not literally, as humans did write it, but generally yes, it is God's word). Looks like I have to repeat myself again. Even if that particular person does not accept Christ, and God knows that they won't, they still fit into his master plan that includes everybody. They could influence other people, for example. And as I said before, if there were not people who didn't believe in God, then Christians would not have people testing their faith. And without people testing their faith, how do you weed out the people who are really true to God and those who are not? Just one of the ways non-believers (who will never go to Jesus) could easily fit in to the master plan... Good luck disproving God. What the heck?? If Jesus came back to the world today, why would I not believe? If it was really him, then Revelation would come true, and therefore we would know. Of course I would believe, and "lift up my head." ~ And now, here is just one example of something stated in the Bible that held true / happened in modern day... In Genesis, Ham (youngest son of Noah) is supposedly cursed when it is discovered he did not cover up his father after seeing him naked. "Cursed be Canaan [son of Ham]! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers." "Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem." Is it not interesting how, even millenniums later, the descendants of Ham and Canaan (mainly blacks) became slaves to descendants of Shem (mainly whites)? Again, that is just one example. If you really care about reading more, try reading through at least some of the Bible, because I am done with this thread. It's clear that I won't be able to change any of your views, and that none of you will be able to change mine, and we've all made a majority of the points we wanted to make, so I'm done. I won't be returning to this thread, just a heads-up. But it was a good fight (so to speak). Ricky, you're awesome, thanks for the challenge. And thanks everyone else too, it's been a very interesting experience.
|
|
|
Post by Ricky on Mar 31, 2010 17:33:50 GMT -5
Alright i suppose I don't have to answer to the points, but I will to the last one just for other people. first of all, wow is that racist... second, slavery was practiced back then too. Third what kind of God decides something as horrible as massive race targeting all because some guy didn't cover his dad...
I also believe no one is "inferior" to anyone else specially because of race... Seriously people should be ashamed of themselves if they suggest something like that...
|
|
Nakor
Star
Non-Prophet
Posts: 991
|
Post by Nakor on Mar 31, 2010 17:37:05 GMT -5
Yeah, it's about time for this one to end lol. I think most of the myths were debunked at least. I assume the old/new testament thing was a goof on Ricky's part, as we Judaism (and the old testament) existed prior to Christianity. God is a concept designed to be undisprovable (not necessarily unprovable, but rather unlikely to ever be proven true except by God himself deciding to come out and prove it to us). Personally my stance has always been to live and let live... or to disbelieve and let believe as it were... only debunking those things we know to be false (regardless of whether the argument being debunked is a religious one or an atheist one... the truth is more important than 'winning'). As for that slaves bit, without bothering to actually research it, we could chalk it up as one of those cases where something unlikely to happen (any particular prophecy coming true) is objectively likely to happen (at least one or two will even if they were just thought up randomly), and thereby give everyone another headache.
|
|
Cortney
Star
[AWD:0c15]The Objectioner
The Bown
Posts: 885
|
Post by Cortney on Mar 31, 2010 17:44:46 GMT -5
.... 1) That is horribly ignorant. 2) That is horribly racist. 3) That is horribly NOT okay.
|
|
Cortney
Star
[AWD:0c15]The Objectioner
The Bown
Posts: 885
|
Post by Cortney on Mar 31, 2010 17:45:58 GMT -5
In Genesis, Ham (youngest son of Noah) is supposedly cursed when it is discovered he did not cover up his father after seeing him naked. "Cursed be Canaan [son of Ham]! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers." "Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem." Is it not interesting how, even millenniums later, the descendants of Ham and Canaan (mainly blacks) became slaves and inferior to descendants of Shem (mainly whites)? .... 1) That is horribly ignorant. 2) That is horribly racist. 3) That is horribly NOT okay.
|
|
Gesh
Planet
Mishap Molly Cordell
Posts: 453
|
Post by Gesh on Mar 31, 2010 18:12:44 GMT -5
Ahh! Yes, I came back, just to see how people would respond, with absolutely no intention of replying. But since I see that people took my last post the wrong way, I definitely want to get my reputation cleared.
I DO NOT THINK THAT BLACKS ARE INFERIOR. I agree that this is totally racist! I'm saying that was the opinion of many whites in the 1600's or whenever it was. THAT IS NOT MY OPINION, THAT WAS THE OPINION OF OTHER PEOPLE. ... Sheesh.
|
|
Philosoraptor
Moon
dangling prepositions is something up with which I shall not put
Posts: 145
|
Post by Philosoraptor on Mar 31, 2010 19:02:12 GMT -5
(note that this is only a direct reply to the first post, I haven't read on yet) First thing - creationism vs. evolution. I understand that it is very, very probable that evolution occurred. In fact, I myself believe that it did happen. It only makes sense. But yet, I believe completely in God and Jesus and everything the Bible says. How is this, when it clearly states in Genesis that God made Adam out of dust, and that he was the first man? Well, here's what I think. There are many, many examples of figurative statements in the Bible (parables, metaphors, etc.), so who's to say that the "making Adam out of dust" thing isn't figurative? When living things die, they eventually decompose and become part of the dirt. So, is it not possible that in saying God made Adam out of dust, it was really speaking of an evolutionary process? There would be absolutely no reason for the authors (supernatural or otherwise) of a holy book to skip the inclusion a detailed answer to one of the biggest questions of humankind in favor of just sticking in a rather confusing and badly phrased "metaphor" about it. It would be illogical and misleading. That is very clearly not what the Genesis story is trying to get across. The bible presents the story rather concisely, and makes it pretty clear that Adam was created, specially, by God, as the first human being. Additionally, it says that all the rest of the animals were created shortly beforehand, also specially. There's no room for an interpretation like this. Eh... why? Why are proven, logical, rational conclusions not enough? Why should you ever want to "put all scientific reasoning aside"? Science fuels reason, it doesn't hinder it. I'm not a biblical scholar, so I don't exactly know what texts you're referring to, and I don't think I can address these few questions fairly. If you want to point those texts out, I'll gladly read over them and respond. Well, to put it frankly, he had some damn good words. For the most part, Jesus' teachings were just basic human morality. You don't need to be a magical man with superhuman powers to inspire masses. I'm not quite sure what you're talking about, here. The bible is real, it's just not nonfiction literature. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by "disproved". There is a very vast amount of evidence that completely nullifies the claims of the bible. What else do you want? Extremely likely. But you're not looking at it the right way. Life adapts to suit its environment. If the earth was ten degrees warmer, life would've evolved to live in conditions that were ten degrees warmer. We are perfect for the Earth, not the other way around. I'm not entirely sure what you're trying to get across here. For one, the Earth didn't go through any evolutionary process at all. The life on it happened to. And life is everything but precise and exact. We have technology. Ever tried fist-fighting a wolf? That is a psychological thing. You want to believe in God, and you "see" the effects that you want to see, which in turn strengthens you belief in God. That doesn't mean God is real. The same way I explain all the "tragic accidents" and the disasters and diseases and sorrow in the world. Things happen. Do you blame those things on God as well? Well... I suppose the probability would be 1-to-1. It's not only likely, it has already happened.
|
|