is this is ur way of thinking?.......i hope not!
Posted by assadof1
Using this logic i can argue anything in the name of god. Doesnt make it true does it?
yeah, you can. and many people have done terrible things in the past in the name of God (ww2, iraq...)
____
Tony
yeah, you can. and many people have done terrible things in the past in the name of God (ww2, iraq...)
____
Tony
As i said earlier about sin - murder is something that is explicitly forbidden in the ten commandments...
i'll repeat myself:
Did i say killing or other evils are right for Christians? No - i'm simply stating that no matter what past you've lived - there is an opportunity to turn from it and be blameless before God.
Can i explain the water into wine/parting of the Red Sea - no i can't because science is based on repeatable events - miracles (of this nature) are not repeatable because they have no more purpose... as Tony said - if i went and did a miracle for you - would you believe in Jesus? no - because its not about these abnormalities in science - its all about faith in Jesus.
Is God totally explainable - no, because if we were to totally comprehend God - why would we need God - we'd be God ourselves. The fact is He has intervened and expects something of us - if we don't do it well tough luck for you.
On dinosaurs can you explain what happened to the dodo? it died out - whats different about dinosaurs? Did they exist with humans? yes they did.
Carbon dating is fine for periods up to about 6000 years ago - before that the Flood altered the whole world, including carbon decay rates, rendering carbon dating inaccurate past about that time.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2006 03:38PM by fongu.
i'll repeat myself:
Did i say killing or other evils are right for Christians? No - i'm simply stating that no matter what past you've lived - there is an opportunity to turn from it and be blameless before God.
Can i explain the water into wine/parting of the Red Sea - no i can't because science is based on repeatable events - miracles (of this nature) are not repeatable because they have no more purpose... as Tony said - if i went and did a miracle for you - would you believe in Jesus? no - because its not about these abnormalities in science - its all about faith in Jesus.
Is God totally explainable - no, because if we were to totally comprehend God - why would we need God - we'd be God ourselves. The fact is He has intervened and expects something of us - if we don't do it well tough luck for you.
On dinosaurs can you explain what happened to the dodo? it died out - whats different about dinosaurs? Did they exist with humans? yes they did.
Carbon dating is fine for periods up to about 6000 years ago - before that the Flood altered the whole world, including carbon decay rates, rendering carbon dating inaccurate past about that time.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2006 03:38PM by fongu.
DaveEllis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> b-tone Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Using this logic i can argue anything in the
> name
> > of god. Doesnt make it true does it?
> >
> > yeah, you can. and many people have done
> terrible
> > things in the past in the name of God (ww2,
> > iraq...)
>
> But going by christianity these are not terrible
> as these people will be forgiven and let into
> heaven, but a good eprson who is not a chrisitian,
> will not. Explain that please.
>
well i don't know the full rules on who determines belief. canhitler stand up and say 'in gods name lets kill evryone'. who knows if he's welcomed as a beleiver, or sent to hell as an unbelieving blasphemer?
____
Tony
-------------------------------------------------------
> b-tone Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Using this logic i can argue anything in the
> name
> > of god. Doesnt make it true does it?
> >
> > yeah, you can. and many people have done
> terrible
> > things in the past in the name of God (ww2,
> > iraq...)
>
> But going by christianity these are not terrible
> as these people will be forgiven and let into
> heaven, but a good eprson who is not a chrisitian,
> will not. Explain that please.
>
well i don't know the full rules on who determines belief. canhitler stand up and say 'in gods name lets kill evryone'. who knows if he's welcomed as a beleiver, or sent to hell as an unbelieving blasphemer?
____
Tony
I didnt say you said it was ok. I said that murder is forgiven, but if you dont belive in christianity, your going to hell, yes?
aye thats the issue.
Or maybe they didnt actually happen, which actually, logically makes more sense to the human mind, and to science.
Sure there is a faith element - but theres lots of proven historical fact that affirms at least some of it to be true, and if it claims that all of it is true too, then that comes to faith again. The evidence for it today is the Bible believing Christians who have their lives changed from immorality into something increasingly Biblical - whether you believe in its power is up to you.
Dinosaurs were around millions of years before humans and never exsisted at the same time. But there is no mention of them in the bible. According to science, Dinos came first, according to the bible, humans came first (and all scientific knowledge says this is not true). So theres another contradicition of relgion and science which you claim doesnt exsist.
I'm no expert when it comes to these things i can point you to a website that deals exclusively with them - but humans were created last - dinosaurs being an animal, were created 1 or 2 days before. The Bible doesnt claim to be a book that talks about animals - it does mention some specifics - but who cares if a dodo or a t-rex died out in the grand scheme of things? As i said - carbon dating has been proven recently to have fluctations - its not entirely consistent - and again - it was altered about 5000/6000 years ago. There is no sufficient evidence to prove that dinosaurs were around millions of years ago - because science today has taken many assumptions as fact - and based lots of thinking on that. Can i scientifically prove that dinosaurs were around later? no - i believe what the Bible says and that there is a scientific explanation for this. There is one reference to a behemoth like creature in Job - which is taken to mean a dinosaur (a term given only a few 100 years ago).
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2006 04:19PM by fongu.
aye thats the issue.
Or maybe they didnt actually happen, which actually, logically makes more sense to the human mind, and to science.
Sure there is a faith element - but theres lots of proven historical fact that affirms at least some of it to be true, and if it claims that all of it is true too, then that comes to faith again. The evidence for it today is the Bible believing Christians who have their lives changed from immorality into something increasingly Biblical - whether you believe in its power is up to you.
Dinosaurs were around millions of years before humans and never exsisted at the same time. But there is no mention of them in the bible. According to science, Dinos came first, according to the bible, humans came first (and all scientific knowledge says this is not true). So theres another contradicition of relgion and science which you claim doesnt exsist.
I'm no expert when it comes to these things i can point you to a website that deals exclusively with them - but humans were created last - dinosaurs being an animal, were created 1 or 2 days before. The Bible doesnt claim to be a book that talks about animals - it does mention some specifics - but who cares if a dodo or a t-rex died out in the grand scheme of things? As i said - carbon dating has been proven recently to have fluctations - its not entirely consistent - and again - it was altered about 5000/6000 years ago. There is no sufficient evidence to prove that dinosaurs were around millions of years ago - because science today has taken many assumptions as fact - and based lots of thinking on that. Can i scientifically prove that dinosaurs were around later? no - i believe what the Bible says and that there is a scientific explanation for this. There is one reference to a behemoth like creature in Job - which is taken to mean a dinosaur (a term given only a few 100 years ago).
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2006 04:19PM by fongu.
They have dug up full skeltons, eggs, even 2 full sketons together, mixed as they died whilst fighting.
hmm to me that proves that these were killed during a big catastrophe namely the flood :/. But anyways, just because you can dig up dinosaurs does not mean they are necessarily millions of years old. Actually the earliest modern human found (based on cro-madnon cave paintings) is (by Carbon 14 dating) is only about 10,000 years old - there is no concrete evidence of any other type of human - neanderthal man a possible an exception (and there is no evidence that he is any less human than us - unique as they are) - however there are serious doubts whether he was a man at all. and as i said before - timing pre 5000/6000 years has gone to pot anyway.
If you understand anything about science as fact, you'll understand that evolution is more a faith than it is to believe the Bible. If you're calling me gullable for believing the Bible - then actual science says you're more gullable for believing evolution.
Did i say that jesus on toast has anything to do with miracles? no because there is no purpose for it after the completion of the Bible.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2006 05:01PM by fongu.
hmm to me that proves that these were killed during a big catastrophe namely the flood :/. But anyways, just because you can dig up dinosaurs does not mean they are necessarily millions of years old. Actually the earliest modern human found (based on cro-madnon cave paintings) is (by Carbon 14 dating) is only about 10,000 years old - there is no concrete evidence of any other type of human - neanderthal man a possible an exception (and there is no evidence that he is any less human than us - unique as they are) - however there are serious doubts whether he was a man at all. and as i said before - timing pre 5000/6000 years has gone to pot anyway.
If you understand anything about science as fact, you'll understand that evolution is more a faith than it is to believe the Bible. If you're calling me gullable for believing the Bible - then actual science says you're more gullable for believing evolution.
Did i say that jesus on toast has anything to do with miracles? no because there is no purpose for it after the completion of the Bible.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2006 05:01PM by fongu.
Now we are back to the old discussion "how hard actually is hard science?". We've done this before; we just need to dig up the old threads.
Fact is that serious scientists never claim that stuff like "evolution"; "big bang" or "atom theory" are absolute facts. They all agree that these are theories - constructs made up by the human mind to explain things in a way that is preferably not a contradiction in terms. If the world is really made out of atoms, if there really was a big bang and if we really somehow evolved cannot be said (and every scientist who claimed he could, would be laughed at by his fellow colleagues). These theories explain things in a coherent way, that's why we can generally accept them as being right - this is however more due to consensus then to the fact that they are absolute right. Come another theory that explains things better and easier, the old ones are history (hence they are called theories, not truth)
On the other hand I know enough about theology to know that no serious theologian would claim that the bible has to be taken word by word. In both Catholic and Protestant theology this would be regarded as being pretty absurd. The Bible is a book written by humans and it didn't fall off the sky. It has to be written carefully and interpreted (this is called exegesis). Reading it all by yourself and then believing every thing word for word is anything BUT Christian belief. I have no idea which Christian movement you belong to fongu, but I dare say you are no proper theologian.
If you keep these things in mind you will see that science and religion don't confront or contradict each other - only when looked at as a dogma, which is wrong in both cases.
REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
Fact is that serious scientists never claim that stuff like "evolution"; "big bang" or "atom theory" are absolute facts. They all agree that these are theories - constructs made up by the human mind to explain things in a way that is preferably not a contradiction in terms. If the world is really made out of atoms, if there really was a big bang and if we really somehow evolved cannot be said (and every scientist who claimed he could, would be laughed at by his fellow colleagues). These theories explain things in a coherent way, that's why we can generally accept them as being right - this is however more due to consensus then to the fact that they are absolute right. Come another theory that explains things better and easier, the old ones are history (hence they are called theories, not truth)
On the other hand I know enough about theology to know that no serious theologian would claim that the bible has to be taken word by word. In both Catholic and Protestant theology this would be regarded as being pretty absurd. The Bible is a book written by humans and it didn't fall off the sky. It has to be written carefully and interpreted (this is called exegesis). Reading it all by yourself and then believing every thing word for word is anything BUT Christian belief. I have no idea which Christian movement you belong to fongu, but I dare say you are no proper theologian.
If you keep these things in mind you will see that science and religion don't confront or contradict each other - only when looked at as a dogma, which is wrong in both cases.
REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
wow, 2 whole new pages since i last read it yesterday!
i love this line:
"humans were created last - dinosaurs being an animal, were created 1 or 2 days before."
the world of paleontology generally talks about 65 million years of history, but the Bible says "nah, just a couple of days between dino's and humans".
Dave wrote: "Well for the last 2000 years all god has done is put jesus image on peices of toast in the hick states of America which to me isnt too impressive."
you're forgetting the most recent amazing miracle, Jesus on the Red Bull can
Fongu, you say we're gullible for believing the theory of evolution, but throw away everything that we've said about believing or not believing, whatever side of the argument we're on, and think of it like this:
which seems more plausible of these two theories: a single-celled organism evolving over millions of years into every creature that's ever walked the earth; being able to trace humans back through the timeline of evolution to chimps; human DNA being 98% identical to chimps today
or
one day there was nothing, but the next fully formed humans appear on earth from nowhere.
if an alien came down to earth and we explained to them the 2 theories, which do you think it would find more believable?
yes, evolution is just a theory, but it's makes a whole lot more sense and logic than creationism.
RIP Jules, never to be forgotten. #KeepFightingMichael
i love this line:
"humans were created last - dinosaurs being an animal, were created 1 or 2 days before."
the world of paleontology generally talks about 65 million years of history, but the Bible says "nah, just a couple of days between dino's and humans".
Dave wrote: "Well for the last 2000 years all god has done is put jesus image on peices of toast in the hick states of America which to me isnt too impressive."
you're forgetting the most recent amazing miracle, Jesus on the Red Bull can
Fongu, you say we're gullible for believing the theory of evolution, but throw away everything that we've said about believing or not believing, whatever side of the argument we're on, and think of it like this:
which seems more plausible of these two theories: a single-celled organism evolving over millions of years into every creature that's ever walked the earth; being able to trace humans back through the timeline of evolution to chimps; human DNA being 98% identical to chimps today
or
one day there was nothing, but the next fully formed humans appear on earth from nowhere.
if an alien came down to earth and we explained to them the 2 theories, which do you think it would find more believable?
yes, evolution is just a theory, but it's makes a whole lot more sense and logic than creationism.
RIP Jules, never to be forgotten. #KeepFightingMichael
Muks_C Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> wow, 2 whole new pages since i last read it
> yesterday!
>
> i love this line:
>
> "humans were created last - dinosaurs being an
> animal, were created 1 or 2 days before."
>
> the world of paleontology generally talks about 65
> million years of history, but the Bible says "nah,
> just a couple of days between dino's and humans".
>
That's because it nowhere in the bible says how long these first days were. God made the sun and the moon on the forth day - think logical, how long would the first three days have been without change of day? After all it's just a metaphor anyway and cannot really be used as a serious argument agaisnt religion - at least not without making a fool out of yourself.
As I said before, proper science and proper theology don't exclude each other. Mumbo jumbo does.
REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
-------------------------------------------------------
> wow, 2 whole new pages since i last read it
> yesterday!
>
> i love this line:
>
> "humans were created last - dinosaurs being an
> animal, were created 1 or 2 days before."
>
> the world of paleontology generally talks about 65
> million years of history, but the Bible says "nah,
> just a couple of days between dino's and humans".
>
That's because it nowhere in the bible says how long these first days were. God made the sun and the moon on the forth day - think logical, how long would the first three days have been without change of day? After all it's just a metaphor anyway and cannot really be used as a serious argument agaisnt religion - at least not without making a fool out of yourself.
As I said before, proper science and proper theology don't exclude each other. Mumbo jumbo does.
REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
sure i'm no theologian - although i do spend alot of my time dabbing into theology. Catholics clearly dont take Bible seriously - otherwise why would they have a pope telling them what to do? If protestants took their Bibles seriously - they too would believe that every word of scripture is taken as truth - to not do so denies God's truthfulness (veracity in theological terms)
is this getting to you dave
Did i say any of us are worthy of heaven - what is good? its all relative to what we know and see today - the Bible says none of it is good enough.
how am i contradicting myself? Miracles are miracles otherwise science continues as it is.
I know what i'd choose Muks - an intelligent designer creating intelligent beings that are far superior to monkeys and a world that has order and purpose - over a series of unproven - unrepeatable - contradictory to the third law of thermodynamics - events that lead us up to our existence with no purpose than a paper clip.
is this getting to you dave
Did i say any of us are worthy of heaven - what is good? its all relative to what we know and see today - the Bible says none of it is good enough.how am i contradicting myself? Miracles are miracles otherwise science continues as it is.
I know what i'd choose Muks - an intelligent designer creating intelligent beings that are far superior to monkeys and a world that has order and purpose - over a series of unproven - unrepeatable - contradictory to the third law of thermodynamics - events that lead us up to our existence with no purpose than a paper clip.
@vader - the word used for day can mean both a period of time and also a literal 24 day - the context must have been clear to the readers at the time of its writing. To me all the evidence points to a 24hour day...
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2006 05:39PM by fongu.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/13/2006 05:39PM by fongu.
This reminds of Ricky Gervais speaking about religion and the bible
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
And then God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Ricky Gervais goes on to say " so he made the heaven and the earth in the dark!!!
i mean c'mon!! how cool is that?"
made me laugh anyway
LS's Tip of the week
ESSENTIAL OILS aren't essential unless you're an engine, a gearbox or a twat
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
And then God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
Ricky Gervais goes on to say " so he made the heaven and the earth in the dark!!!
i mean c'mon!! how cool is that?"
made me laugh anyway
LS's Tip of the week
ESSENTIAL OILS aren't essential unless you're an engine, a gearbox or a twat
if the "days" were in fact much longer than the "days" we know of today, then why aren't they quoted as "months", "weeks" or "years", so it makes it clear what sort of time period we are talking about?
a "day" in the 7 days of creation may have been as long as 1000 years, so it should be conveyed in such language when discussing it today.
I know what i'd choose Muks - an intelligent designer creating intelligent beings that are far superior to monkeys and a world that has order and purpose - over a series of unproven - unrepeatable - contradictory to the third law of thermodynamics - events that lead us up to our existence with no purpose than a paper clip.
but the things in the Bible (and other holy books) are unproven, unrepeatable and contradictory in many ways too, as Dave has been discussing (parting of the sea, water into wine etc.).
if anything, science and religion are both a load of nonsense, but i find the scientific explanations and theories more plausible.
RIP Jules, never to be forgotten. #KeepFightingMichael
a "day" in the 7 days of creation may have been as long as 1000 years, so it should be conveyed in such language when discussing it today.
I know what i'd choose Muks - an intelligent designer creating intelligent beings that are far superior to monkeys and a world that has order and purpose - over a series of unproven - unrepeatable - contradictory to the third law of thermodynamics - events that lead us up to our existence with no purpose than a paper clip.
but the things in the Bible (and other holy books) are unproven, unrepeatable and contradictory in many ways too, as Dave has been discussing (parting of the sea, water into wine etc.).
if anything, science and religion are both a load of nonsense, but i find the scientific explanations and theories more plausible.
RIP Jules, never to be forgotten. #KeepFightingMichael
What Christian movement you belong to? Adventists? Any kind of non-denominational church? Are you sure it's not an obscure sect?
I doubt that there is any "evidence" pointing towards a 24h day.
REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
I doubt that there is any "evidence" pointing towards a 24h day.
REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.