1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!
    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers.

    You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!

Atheism

Discussion in 'The Atrium' started by Lynch, Jul 1, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. trippster

    trippster Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    1,405
    Ratings:
    +2
    Zombie?

    Can you answer my recent post regarding vision?

    (from earlier post)

    Evolution claim: All living things started as oemebas (sp?)

    Question: Where and how did we attain eyesight/vision?
    Evolution is based on evolving because of need. So how did we know we needed to see? How did we know that if we had eyes we could see? How did we know that air was transparent so we could see if we had eyes? How did we know what type of organ could produce vision?

    Knowledge of the need and knowledge of the possibility of vision had to have come from a third party. (God?)
     
  2. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,579
    Ratings:
    +2,920
    ok my nephew went to MLC and graduated a few years ago
     
  3. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,553
    Ratings:
    +641
    cool. that's in Iowa, right?
     
  4. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,579
    Ratings:
    +2,920
    No its in New Ulm Minnesota
     
  5. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Even Darwin himself couldn't explain that, and he's the one that started the whole evolution theory. He couldn't explain how light sensitive cells came about. So he ignored it and just jumped over that part. Once again, the words "imagine this or that happened" pretty much sum it up. Not real scientific in my opininon.
     
  6. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Thank you for the comments Carol!
    There are bad people in ALL religions. And unfortunatly those are the ones that get the most attention and are "used" by people that hate or don't believe in God. I have heard people say "I'm not gonna go to no church! There are too many hippocrites there!" I just tell them "Thats ok! You can come! There's room for one more!" Fact is, NO ONE on this earth is perfect. Not ONE of us. Not ME, thats for sure! But where your heart is is what will drive you, make you do what you do. If you are selfish and care about no one but yourself, you will puff yourself up and brag about how great you are. That sounds like the place where Lynch lives. I have never been there, so i don't know if his interpretation of Sweden is true or not. I HAVE read that they have a high crime rate, and their sexual pleasure centers are well known. I guess that goes back to self absorbsion. I bet there ARE people in Sweden that believe in God, but like in Russia, they have to keep their faith hidden in order to not be attacked or rideculed.
    Lynch pretty much makes it sound that if you have faith in God there, you might be murdered for it. Hmm......."Lynch" sounds like a fair name for that.
     
  7. Anubis

    Anubis Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2005
    Messages:
    767
    Ratings:
    +0
    You seem to have misunderstood something. I did not claim that those who believe in god(s) were idiots. I have many highly-educated freinds who believe in such things. I have a great deal of respect for them and their beliefs, even if I do not agree with them myself.

    That being said, my comment was directed toward anyone who makes such idiotic claims that humans and dinosaurs co-existed, and that the Earth is only six or so thousand years old. The Ubaid Period in Sumer (the oldest civilization on Earth) rose to prominence in 5300 BC or approximately 7000 years ago, and never once does their history mention dinosaurs roaming about. There is no evidence whatsoever to validate such nonsense. Cheesey has cited "cave paintings" as the only valid evidence for this debate. Last Halloween, my cousin's son drew pictures of pumpkin men. Does this mean that pumpkin men exist? This whole line of reasoning is ridiculous at best. I have seen old silent movies that seemed to indicate the moon was made of green cheese, however I think it goes without saying that nobody here believes that to be true (though looking at some of the silliness in this thread, one cannot be too sure).

    To answer your question about amoebas, you have stated a falsehood. In the evolutionary chain, amoebas are fairly advanced compared to single-cell photoplasm and simple forms of phytoplasm, and as such indicates that amoebas evolved from simpler life forms. However, I understand you were asking in regards to how life evolves based on need. When Darwin visited the Galpagos islands, he discovered that there were vast differences between the same species from one island to another. These variations were due to different environments from island to island. The giant tortoises on one island had a raised hump the shell above its neck, allowing them to reach plant matter from bushes that were not as low to the ground. The tortoises on the other islands had much more accessible food, and as such did not evolve the same way, even though both species were identical in every other aspect. Another example of evolutionary change is the blind cave fish. Fish that swim into streams that flow into underground caves get trapped there, and due to being in complete darkness, they no longer have eyes. Now, if what Cheesey says is true about DNA, these fish would still be born with eyes which would atrophy from lack of use after birth. However, this is not the case. Blind cave fish are not born with eyes at all. Other than this, they are identical to the same species that still live above ground in light. From these two examples, it is easy to see how evolutionary change occurs. IMO, it is far more easier to believe than silly tales of men hunting dinosaurs, men being resurrected from the dead and virgins giving birth.

    And to whoever was questioning my nick and avatar:

    You are correct. Anubis was the ancient Egyptian god of ebalming, and in earlier dynasties he was revered as the Lord of the Underworld. However, I do not use this name because I am religious. I started using it years ago as an alias when I used to trade ISOs over mIRC (not that I ever understood what my avatar had to do with the topic at hand).

    I have a question for those posters who are Christian:

    It has been stated by some in this thread that Adam and Eve were the first two people, and all human offspring are descendents of them. Assuming this to be the truth (regardless of the realities of human inbreeding) how do you explain Genesis 4:16 and 4:17:

    And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

    And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.


    The fact that there was another land called Nod indicates that there were people who dwelt there and gave it that name. If Adam, Eve, Caine and (depending on what text you read) Lilith were the only surviving humans after Abel's murder, where did the Caine's wife come from?
     
  8. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    First, it doesn't say how much TIME went between Abel's murder and Cain's wife. So your question is not valid. Hey, why don't you pretend it's "evolution" talk, where all that is necessary for ANYTHING to happen is " lots of time!"
    You mention turtles and fish as proof of evolution. Uh, both kinds of turtles you mentioned are still, uh TURTLES, right? A BUMP on a shell......yup, thats great proof of evolution. Now, when a pair of wings come out of one of the humps THEN bring it to my attention. Until then, it means nothing.

    Oh.....and the "cave fish"........did it ever occur to you that maybe they have lived in caves the whole time? Has anyone been there to actually SEE a fish "get trapped" in the caves and then lose their eyes and give birth to young with no eyes? Or is it just because the fish are the same otherwise that you ASSUME that they are the same species? Yet another "proof" that means nothing once you look at other possibilities that don't ASSUME everything "evolved." And still in the end, they are still 100% FISH. If evolution was true, why didn't these cave fish evolve some kind of appendage that could drill their way out of the cave they were supposedly "trapped" in? Or maybe a sonar that could lead them back out the way they supposedly went in? (You know.....like the sonar God put into porpoises?) I'm cheating of course, cause i know the answer. THEY DID'NT EVOLVE IN THE FIRST PLACE. They were CREATED that way.
    Hey, a human can go blind, does that mean he evolved into a higher life form?
    Anyway.........you belittle me because i reject your evolution theory as science fiction. Here I believe we as humans came from one original couple, Adam and Eve, and you make fun of that. Yet YOU believe everything, and i mean EVERYTHING on this earth came from a ROCK millions of years ago, and I am the idiot? Hey.....go out your door and bring your great great great great (and so on) Grandpa "Rock" inside, i heard it might rain.
    Like i have said before, i have NO proof that i can show you that God exists. And likewise, there is NO proof (surely nothing you have said thus far) that can prove that birds came from reptiles, or we came from some tree dwelling like monkeys.
    Here's a question.........why haven't earth worms developed eyes, so they can see the birds coming to eat them? Wouldn't that be beneficial? For that matter, why are there still earth worms at all??? Or monkeys for that matter? Why haven't they "evolved" out of existence? Hmmm.....maybe again, cause it never happened in the first place.
    Seeing as you like to use the Bible for reference, check out Job 41, verses 1-34. It talks about "leviathan" in great detail. Now in past history, there have been countless stories of brave men fighting "fire breathing dragons". Thats in writtings other then the Bible. Today we call them "dinosaurs". There is a beetle that can combine 2 things in compartments in it's rear end, and spray out a burning chemical when threatened. I saw on TV where they have looked at the skulls of dinosaurs that they have found, and found areas in the skull that lead to the nasal passages. They now think that these areas were where two chemicals were stored seperately and combined by the reptile to shoot out fire.
    Which makes the Bible look way ahead of these modern day geniuses.
    But you don't beleive in God, so why would you believe a 6000 year old report of something we just found out.
     
  9. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Another question.
    Have you ever heard of the prehistoric fish known as the coelacanth? It was said to have pre-dated the dinosaurs by millions of years, and then went extinct with the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. They had found about 125 fossils of the fish along with dinosaur bones, in the same layers.

    Then in 1938 some fishermen caught one. Yup.......alive and well. Since then many have been caught, and many seen with small submarines. It's EXACTLY the same as the fossils that "scientists" said became extinct 65 million years ago. If you would have said the fish was still alive prior to 1938, you would have been laughed at. Yet here it is, still here. And like i said, it hasn't changed in the supposed 65 million years it sat there in the fossil record. Where did evolution go for this fish? Why is it the same now as it was as a fossil? Please don't try the old "I guess it had evolved as far as it could" line.

    Also, what about sightings of creatures like "Champ", the Lake Champlain monster, or "Ogopogo", or "Nessie" the Loch Ness monster? THOUSANDS of reliable witnesses have seen these shy creatures. And they are all described as a plesiasaur. Isn't it possible these people arn't all hallucinating? That just maybe these dinosaurs are still living?

    In Africa there is a swamp about the size of Illinois. Natives there have made drawings of a creature that lives there that also looks just like a plesiasaur. These natives have never seen drawings of "dinosaurs", but when shown some thats the one they pick out. They have tried to have expiditions into that swamp, but the conditions are so awful there they can't do it.
    The coelacanth was thought to be extinct, why is it not possible these dinosaurs are still here with man NOW?
    Yet i am made fun of and called stupid because i believe man and dinosaurs coexisted.
     
  10. Lynch

    Lynch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    183
    Ratings:
    +0
    [align=left]I didn´t say those who belive in god gets laughed at its the opposite but those who say the world is just 6000 years doesnt exist here, unless if they havent immigrated from the middleeast or something or belonging to a cult.

    We have many people who belive in god, jahve, allah and what so in he is called. We have a big mosque outside my town 3 jewish churches and a handfull of lutheran churches and one chatloic and ortodox churches. IN total do we have many chuches in my country a big buddhist temple in Kiruna, 2 mosques and so on and many relious meeting places for muslims.

    We dont laugh at those who belive in their religion, but we laugh at tem those who say the world is 6000 years that they bride of jesus and they kill eachother, which have happend here in sweden. Cults is also something that is weird. THose who have said that they predicted that world would end during the 80´s , the 90´, now during 2000 all that, those do we also laugh at.
    Crazy people in general is comical. Perhaps not those who kill, but those who come up will al those wacky ideas that make no sense, they are quite funny.

    I think you understod me before, In my country u can belive what ever you want and say what ever u want to and look like what ever u want to. Which is not the case in ur country, if you are muslim who have visited their homecountry recently then they must be terrorsits. Your country arrested and took away some of my countrymen and just two have came back from Guantanamo the rest are still there and in egypt. Your country dont seem to be very open to religion which maybe explains that there are more muslims in my country then in the U.S.
    [/align]
     
  11. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    We are VERY open to religion. The problem with Muslim has been recent, with the followers that believe all "infidels" (non Muslims) should be killed. You, even though you don't believe in God, would be killed also, right along with us weirdos. Even with what happened here, there are MANY Muslims practicing their beliefs here. I don't know where you get your information, but it's wrong. We have some here in the town where i live, and big mosques and the Muslim center in Milwaukee (Wisconsin's biggest city).
    We have accepted ALL beliefs here.
     
  12. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Here is a scientific expierement.
    Take a big jar, fill it 3/4 with water. Throw in some dirt, some gravel, some small stones, some sand, some feathers, and maybe some bones. Now, SHAKE IT UP real much! Now put it down on a table and watch what happens.
    Yup........it seperates into layers. The heavier things go to the bottom first. Then the next lighter, and so on.
    Now..........did it take "millions of years" to make those layers? Nope.
    If there was a flood that covered the whole world, you know, like the Bible says, don't you think things like big dinosaurs would end up on the bottom first? And man, who can REASON, would be trying to stay on the higher ground as long as he could? Animals can't reason of course. Plus there were not NEARLY as many people alive back then as there are here today. Maybe thats why their skeletons are on a different level then the huge and heavy dinosaurs. And the Bible says the water came not just from the sky, but from the depths of the earth also. There must have been earth quakes and ash all over, burying the dead and helping the fossilization process. How else would there be so MANY fossilized creatures, all over the earth, in such good condition? Had they just died, wouldn't scavengers have destroyed them, and even chewed the bones up? When you see an animal dead on the side of the road, how long does it take to be almost gone today? Within a week you can't usually even tell what was there.

    How about the MANY instances where petrified trees go through MANY of these layers that are supposed to be "millions of years" old??? Trees in the UPRIGHT POSITION! Do you really believe all these trees stood there for millions on years while each layer swallowed them up? I don't know how it is where you are from, but here, when a trees dies and rots, it doesn't stay up for even dozens of years.
     
  13. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,579
    Ratings:
    +2,920
    Could the great flood have only been in the area where Noah lived, and not the ENTIRE world
     
  14. PackFanInSC

    PackFanInSC Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    563
    Ratings:
    +0

    I do not believe so LT. Too many civilizations refer back to a flood story in their history.


    From Page One of this thread

     
  15. RainX

    RainX Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    230
    Ratings:
    +13
    Look, I'm not one to really get into an argument on religion, but this has always been an interesting debate to me.

    For starters, I was raised Catholic and became an atheist about 5 or so years ago. To me, I looked at the facts, and it was telling me there is not enough evidence for me to firmly believe in any specific creator or a creator in general.

    That being said, I do not discount the possibility a creator, be it God, Allah, or whoever did create the world. To me, there is just not enough solid scientific evidence to support it.

    To me, the idea that 6 billion humans with all their differences and all the diverse life on this planet came from 8 humans of one race and animals of a "kind" crammed onto one 450ft ark after a worldwide flood wiped out everything 4400 years ago seems a bit far fetched. The only explanation I've heard is that the environment humans moved into made them that way, and I don't think I've heard really any explanation for the animals, such as Australia alone, got back from the Middle East and diversified to their extent today, although I'm sure there's some creation explanation for that as well. Now, I don't discount the possibility it may have happened that way, but I've yet to see any really concrete evidence to support such a claim other than the bible, which is not nearly enough by itself to dissuade me to think that way. To me, sure the idea of we just "chanced" to come into existence might seem like a far-fetched proposition to some, but to me, there is much more scientific evidence, that has been thoroughly tested multiple times, to back up the "chance" theory than there is to prove God or a creator did it.

    To me, also the idea of a 10,000 year old universe and a 6,000 year old Earth also seems a bit far-fetched for mainly one reason. The speed of light. Light speed is pretty constant in the universe, and the stars that burn over 20,000 and 30,000 light years away, to me, pretty much discounts the idea of a very young universe. The main arguments I've heard against this is that God created light 10,000 years ago which many creationists discount, Stetterfield's work about decaying light speed which many creationists now discount, and now the more prevailing creationist theory is gravity affects the speeds of light via a "white hole" (that is no longer visible and is the opposite of a black hole) where the Milky Way is near the center of the universe where there was such a phenomenon and can account for the speed of light discrepancy. (Ever changing and conflicting theory. Isn't that a novel concept?) Now, who knows, maybe there is some validity behind these theories that does make light travel faster or slower than it normally would, but we haven't found much evidence to support such claims, and until otherwise, you're going to have a hard time proving the universe and earth are only 10,000 years old. Most of these "theories" to explain distant objects I read on creationist science websites. I haven't read any of this is any other scientific journal.

    Look, I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from believing any certain thing. Everyone is entitled to believe what they want. I'm no scientist, so I can't claim to factually know everything, but I'm much more inclined to believe the scientific majority out there than I am the creationist minority. Now, that doesn't necessarily mean the scientific majority is absolutely 100% correct when it comes to how things came to be, oh heck no. True, 500 years ago or so, everyone thought the Earth was flat, but we live in a much more scientifically enlightened time than at any other point in our history. Our understanding of things is much greater these days, and that along with the evidence out there that supports evolution by natural selection, my logical mind looks at is and that's what I choose to believe happened. Now, maybe in 200 years, mankind will look back at this time and see that Evolution was a bunch of BS and Intelligent Design will be the way the scientific majority things. That being said, the same could be said for creationist theory. To me, until there is enough scientific evidence that supports creationist theory, that a large majority of scientists fully support it, you'll have a hard time swaying me in the other direction.

    There is no denying the majority isn't always right, but you also can't discredit the times we lived in versus even a few hundred years ago. Most scientists aren't throwing a bunch of BS out there that they know is wrong just to "fool" everyone into thinking God doesn't exist. They do it because they want to understand how everything works, and through their interpretations of the evidence through fundamental testing and experimentation, that the scientific majority backs-up, they theorize that is how we came to be. Until there is enough solid scientific evidence to fully support creationist theory, you're going to have a hard time swaying any atheist with a critically thinking mind into the creationist camp.
     
  16. big3

    big3 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Messages:
    784
    Ratings:
    +0
    here's my thing about evolution. we developed from monkey's right? and there are still monkeys. ok. but then things like giraffes. developed long necks to reach food. so where are the short necked giraffes? there are some undeveloped monkeys, amoebas etc........and then there are developed ones (humans). if we are all developing because of our enviroments wouldn't all things be developing into the same things. the same attributes? for survival? wouldn't we (all species) be getting more similar all the time? That certainly isn't happening. I think it's bullshit. wouldn't families and regions that have spent generations in the coal mines be developing resistance against the harmful things going into their lungs? h thats right. it takes time. but here is the thing..........the world, and it's enviroment are always changing. weather patterns and what not. so if it takes millions of years to develop how can that be true when the things are constantly changing around us? I'll never believe it. and people talk about inconsistancies in the bible lol.
     
  17. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Good points Big3. Thats the way i feel. How all the things happen just by "blind chance" makes alot less sense then someone creating it. I mean, if you want to drink a brandy and coke, you have to mix the 2 together, right? What are the chances that the 2 would combine by themselves? Yet we are to believe that ALL we see around us just magically appeared out of nothing. And like you said, people working in coal mines don't evolve a resistence to coal dust. Instead, it kills them. So if you look at all cases where something supposedly "evolved" in an environment where it would kill them, HOW did it survive the "millions of years" that it took for it to get to where it could finally servive the conditions?
    Or how about symbionic (sp?) relationships, where one creature's survival depends on a different creature? Wouldn't they both have had to "evolve" at the same time? Or one would die, and then of course the other would die too. The answer is: God created them that way, so BOTH would servive.
    Someone here said "Sometimes the easiest answer is the right one."

    Rainx......you think it's far fetched that we came from 8 people cramed on a boat. Have you ever seen where (I THINK it was Australia, but I'm not certain) where a breed of rabbit was introduced by accident? It took over the place in almost no time. Look at how China is, with all the people. We couldn't populate the earth to where it is in 4000 years or so? Me, i think thats possible.
    And as far as "light years", scientists try to measure to stars, but really, what solid proof do they have that they really ARE that far away?
    Truely, it's all guess work, with no way to really prove the distance.
    I think God made it all the way it is. It just makes the most sense to me.
     
  18. cheesey

    cheesey Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    Ratings:
    +3
    Rainx said:"Most scientists aren't throwing a bunch of BS out there that they know is wrong just to "fool" everyone into thinking God doesn't exist. They do it because they want to understand how everything works, and through their interpretations of the evidence through fundamental testing and experimentation, that the scientific majority backs-up, they theorize that is how we came to be. Until there is enough solid scientific evidence to fully support creationist theory, you're going to have a hard time swaying any atheist with a critically thinking mind into the creationist camp."

    I don't doubt that alot of them DO believe what they are saying. But the truth is, they have no more proof that we "evolved" then I have that we were "created". They take a theory, and say it's FACT, when they choose it because they have nothing else. All the carbon dating, and having things at different layers does NOT prove that we came from a rock millions of years ago. Look at Mount St. Helens. It erupted i believe in 1980 or 81. The destruction from just that ONE volcano cut a minature Grand Canyon in a matter of weeks. And when i say minature, it's still pretty big. Now scientists say the Colorado River supposedly took "millions of years" to make the Grand Canyon. (Oh.....which if that WAS true, it's really funny, as the river would have to run UP HILL to do so). Now consider a world wide flood, and the damage it would cause, like say, cutting the Grand Canyon! The flood waters took a year to subside. Which would have made PLENTY of time for all the dead animals, plants, and dirt, sand, and other material to settle. Thus causing the different layers we see, and some believe are from millions of years. Where, like i said before, there are many places where petrified trees are going through what are SUPPSPOSED to be millions of years of layers. Yet these things are ignored because they fly in the face of what these scientists have been saying for years. They don't like admitting that they arn't as brilliant as they think, so many of them cover up or at the least ignore any SCIENTIFIC proof that what they have thought for years just might be wrong.
    What some of it comes down to is..........if an atheist admits there is some merit to the arguments I have put forth, then they have to admit that there just might BE a God, and that thought is so terrifying that they will do anything to not face that possibility.
    It would destroy their entire belief system, and most won't allow themselves to even THINK of that possibility.
     
  19. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    16,579
    Ratings:
    +2,920
    Interesting enough, but Discovery Channel has a program on...Noahs Ark

    There was a guy on there "claiming" each possible way a GLOBAL flood could not have happened..I only heard 2, but I am sure there was more

    Springs, or geysers, and any under ground thing that would fill the world..It would change the airs atmosphere to the point where it would be full of water, and no human could breath it with out drowning.


    A comet full of dirty ice would have had to be about 1000 miles across...that is possible, but once it blew up entering the earths air, it would have made the temp rise more then the surface temp of the sun...

    Now this is why I have said MAYBE Noahs "world" was just his area, to that would very well explain to the sciencetists how it was done..
     
  20. Lynch

    Lynch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    183
    Ratings:
    +0
    How do u(who belive in god and that long haired dude on the cross or that wacky thief who nearly starved himself in cave or just belive in god and not those two) know that ur religion is the most correct one? I mean what says that the buddhists,hunduistst, taoists, zoroastrians, confucianists,spiritsts,universitists, shintoists, baha`ists, sikhs, ethnoreligionsts, jains are wrong? they sure have alot of "proof" that their religion is extremly right jsut like you how have comed up with so stunningly convincing proof that even though radioactive material cant be changed or tempered with at all, can u just say that a 100 000 year old animal must be 6000 years old or less because that was the bible says, even though the animals raioavtive material have a half life of 6000 years.

    Wow a book must certenly be more right then scientific evidence. Then its possible that the world is flat because that was also written in a book and the Star Wars must have been so true! Theres so many book, plus there have been movies about it too! Why have I even bothered going to school when all this books holds all the answeres specially the really really old ones.
     
  21. PackFanInSC

    PackFanInSC Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2006
    Messages:
    563
    Ratings:
    +0

    "This Book holds all the answers" ... No truer words have been spoken in this thread. :D

    BTW Lynch, even if you believe or not, God loves you.


    But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Romans 5:8
     
  22. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,553
    Ratings:
    +641
    I can only speak for myself here Lynch. Not all Christians believe the exact same thing. I hope you don't find this to be evidence of the fallacy of God, because as you know we're all different and our experiences shape our outlooks, and no two people can really believe the exact same thing. I believe the Bible is true, as the inspired work of God, meaning that God inspired the authors to write it. I believe that the Bible holds all the answers, in a sense. To look at the Bible as a book is rather limiting. Christians believe the Bible is the Word of God. If you look at the beginning of John's gospel, it says that Jesus is the Word of God that became flesh.

    when we read the Bible as the word of God, we must also look to Jesus as the Word of God as well. So, while we can use the Bible to 'prove' or 'disprove' new scientific findings, we also must look at Jesus and its pretty clear that proving and disproving scientific findings wasn't part of his agenda. Much of what Jesus preached was the interconnectedness of all humanity. When God became flesh we actually came into relationship with God, so for me it isn't difficult to see the relationships of all being. Wherever I see relationships, I see God, be it with my friends, or with events on earth, or how God is revealing the workings of the world through science.

    You're going to get answers about life and the human experience, lessons on how to act and a sense of the interconnectedness of all humanity. You're not going to get answers on scientific proofs, because when these texts were written, science didn't exist. All the things that science is now concerned with existed, of course, but they had no way of studying any of these things. it's not that they weren't concerned with these questions, or that they were trying to avoid them. Simply put, these questions didn't exist back then.

    Since these questions didn't exist, how can something written in that time be expected to answer these questions? Just as these texts were inspired, I believe God still inspires. Now that we live in the scientific realm, I believe God still inspires people to reflect on God in the world now. So you're looking at this book and demanding of it answers that it can not give. If you want scientific answers to questions about God, look for the answers in the right place. There is a ton of literature on that subject.

    Also, it's not a question of which is the truest text. True is true, concretely. It's not an abstract, although that's the way we tend to think of it. By this, I mean that we try to answer scientific questions from the Bible. The Bible offers concrete answers about a lot of questions, but its ridiculous to extrapolate science from the Bible. Scientific inquiry exists, of course, so look for answers in books that address scientific inquiry.

    Humans today are masters of reason, and can pretty much offer reasonably consistent 'proof' for nearly anything. I, as a Christian, try to face the abyss of existence through my relationship with Jesus Christ, and I feel that this is right, because this is the one way I, with my limited human knowledge, can be in relationship with God. I feel that this is right. Problems arise from a human rationale here, ie. "I feel that I am right, therefore, everyone who holds a different set of values and beliefs must be wrong." This is dangerous and I believe counterproductive to God's mission. God is huge, and I believe it is possible for God to exist in a larger sense than me (crazy, huh?). So God may very well reveal Godself in different ways to different people. So while I feel my relationship with God is right, I can't say whether someone else's is wrong.
     
  23. Lynch

    Lynch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    183
    Ratings:
    +0
    [align=left]There is a TV series that come from the USA or something, I think. That have been shown here in Sweden a while ago that had to to with god and hell and all that, some sort of Sci-Fi serie.
    Anyhow the main charachter sat in a church and I dont know how it came up but he said "god exist but he just dont give a damn" which for me sounds more likely then say he exists and he loves you all and whatever Even tough war is going on, some people die for no reason, some have it very unfair, some people get treated bad, Paris Hilton gets out of jail to soon and so on ,so on, so on. Maybe some say this is a sick way for god to test people (a lil bit sadistic if he now loves us) or that it´s the devil that do such things. Then I must say, who is then the strongest? Porbably the devil if the "allmighty" god cant stop him.

    Another proof is that god doesnt exist becasue if he had said that sex is a sin, then he isnt real, because who should have said such thing?? Wahts next shal he say " dont have fun", "dont eat things that taste good", "dont listen to music" or perhaps "dont watch football"? Who knows.

    But seriously I think it strange to see people nearly starv themself to deatch during the ramadan, people dont having sex unless they are married, and all other weird things that are pure torture. Its specially weird because they dont have too. I mean I have broken most of those things that the priests and that the bible call a sin and nothing have happen me. And dont come with the same all crap your been saying "god loves u and forgive for your mistake" ok so he doesnt do anyhting u can jsut brake all his laws all the time and all hes gonna do is forgive me. It doesnt make any sense.

    So guys whats the proof that god exist then? because everything points in one direction and that is No higher power exists. [/align]
     
  24. Lynch

    Lynch Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Messages:
    183
    Ratings:
    +0
    [align=left]I wasnt talking about muslims killing me, neither me and my country have done anyhting to them. THats why no terrorists have attacked us becasue we have not annyoed them its not worth it. The only is to ignore them tdoesnt god say that?

    Why start to attack something that is hidden taht u cant see its no use only innocent people will die that will only gain the terrorists as a excuse to still keep attacking the western world. If we doesnt do anything to them keep on with ourlives build up those things that they ruin then they will see what a great willpower and what a great people that live in USA and in the western world. Then they never will have a reason to attack others and if they do without no reason or no politcal excuse and instead start to say that its religous more will stand on USA:s side they will also turn there own people against themself.

    Otherwise countires will just be nutral like mine. We dont want to get into the war because no one has attacked our country and both have attacked eachother and no one likes eather of the sides and despise both the sides terrorism.

    Did you remember Vietnam? No one was on the USA:s side even though u guys did the right thing just like the war against terrorism but to response the same why as the terrorists will not bring u more allies.

    I dont really belive that crap about "if someone hits u turn the other cheek" (sorry if I didnt translate correctly to english) becuase that doesnt work, taht soemthing u normaly wouldnt do. but if the one who attack is invisble and building there actions on pure hatred(plus brainwash) then u should ignore them until the have no excuses

    I think my post perhaps will lock this thread but if it becomes that then there are no freedom of speech in your country huh?
    [/align]
     
  25. bozz_2006

    bozz_2006 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Messages:
    4,553
    Ratings:
    +641
    It's not that God doesn't care. He loves humans (all humans) enough to let them make their own mistakes. Think about if you had kids. If you really love them, you wouldn't shelter them. This way they would never learn or experience anything. If you really love your kids you'll let them make mistakes and learn what's right and wrong, what's smart to do and what isn't so smart. And God never said sex was bad. Sex is pretty much the most beautiful thing ever, but too much of it leads people to destructive decisions. just like too much money, or too much power, or how too much food makes you too fat. If you're a father and your kid screws up when that kid does something that the father knows isn't healthy or good for the kid, and the kid apologizes, the loving father forgets about it. But i think this is all lost on you. people keep saying there is no proof that God exists, and you keep demanding it. so if you want to believe that since there is no scientific proof of God's existence that God does NOT exist, that's up to you.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page