Results 101 to 110 of 115
-
01-20-2010, 11:10 PM #101
Spare the sarcasm because I was absolutely right. You just rattled off a list of non-illuminating non-answers, exactly as I said you would. Although I'd like to hear what Biblical principles apply to the life of present-day people rather than Bronze Age goat herders and their slaves.
Care to lead me to where anyone has said such a thing on this forum? Because from what I've read, they've provided great answers, you've just chosen not to listen or even hear their words.
You just did, Sunny Jim. Same thing I always hear from Christians regardless of the setting. If your answers couldn't hold up in a court of law or in a scientific peer review process, then they're not really answers.
Sounds to me like the circulation of the atmosphere.
Oh please, spare me the scientific foreknowledge lies. If there were any truth to any of these outrageous claims you people love to make, we wouldn't have had to wait hundreds or even thousands of years for science to make these discoveries in order for them to become recognized parts of human knowledge. Furthermore, you'd be able to point to some passages in the Bible and tell the scientific community, "Hey, we've known this for hundreds of years, why don't you guys check it out?" and they'd investigate and say, "Holy moly, a phenomenon we were completely ignorant of!" But no, you can't do that. All you ever do is take credit ex post facto, like the self-important kid who tells the teacher, "Yeah, I knew that!" after everything the teacher says.
I think this one is self-explanatory. The Bible says that blood is necessary for life.
Yeah, the first caveman who ever bashed another caveman in the guts with a rock and watched him bleed to death could have figured that out. Not to mention that not all living things have blood.
Hydrologic cycle.
Pancakes.
Evaporation, translation, condensation, precipitation.
Turkey sandwich.
Here's a quick question for you. Where did moral laws come from?
That's also a non-sequitur question, but I'll humor you. Humans invented moral laws. And now I'll use my Nobel prize-winning mind-reading powers to predict what you'll say next: "Moral laws have to be absolute, and that means there must be an absolute moral law giver, because otherwise you can't say that murder and rape are bad!"
-
-
01-20-2010, 11:41 PM #102
GBM- the bible never claims to answer scientific questions. There are things science answers that religion cannot and vice versa.
since you claim that believing in God automatically means you have closed your mind, how to you explain the large number of christian scientists? Do their contributions to science not matter because they believe in god as well?
-
01-20-2010, 11:47 PM #103
Im not going to touch most of it as i have wasted enough of my time responding to your post but there are many parables throughout the bible that you can relate to today. If you really want me to get you examples i will... make sure you have a bible handy as i am not typing it all out for you.
-
-
01-21-2010, 12:11 AM #104
I believe in God, though I've struggled with faith through the years and continue to do so.
My concern isn't so much when we originated, or the process by which we originated; I don't fret over whether it was 6,000 years or millions, whether we have ancestors in common with other species or not. Our current existence in and of itself is enough of a mystery for a lifetime of thought, as are the consequences thereof (both ephemeral and eternal, if the latter goes on as some think it might).
Right now, as it stands, we are a bunch of people on an Internet sports card forum. You probably have more Facebook friends than me, I probably have more gender issues than you; your relationship with the opposite sex is almost certainly worse than mine, my imagination is almost certainly kookier and more aberrant than yours. So?
No one can know for certain why we are here, so we do what we can with what we have. Sometimes it's hard for me to fathom why the gene pool allowed me to form since I seem so poorly adapted to what the gene pool currently favors, but somehow I've managed.
If one thing is certain, the world gives room for lots of diversity. Most of us may want everyone to be an impersonal white male with a 160 IQ and 300 Aryan concubines, but the fact remains that females exist, people of other ethnicities exist, people of moderate to low IQs exist, people with brown hair and brown eyes exist, people with so-called egregious "spiritual" tendencies exist, people with happy relationships exist in spite of differences that "shouldn't allow them to" per the masses' "wisdom," people who aren't outgoing exist, and lots of other "quirks" exist in spite of our efforts to quell them.
We will just have to deal with it somehow without blowing the planet to smithereens.
-
01-21-2010, 12:12 AM #105
Tell that to Darth Braun, Smiley. He seems to think there are vast troves of scientific knowledge contained in the Bible. I'm glad to see you don't follow suit. But as for the idea that religion can answer questions science cannot answer, here's your problem. Whenever someone like me asks "How do you know religion's answers are correct?" the response always boils down to "I just have faith," which really means, "I don't know, but I believe it anyway, and I'll never change my mind no matter what." That's what is truly close minded. I never said it was just belief in a god that makes you close minded. It's unwillingness to examine your beliefs or change your mind. And before you accuse me of that, as I know you're going to, let me state that I would be willing to change my position on the existence of god...IF there was sufficient reason to. I've never been presented with a good reason so far. The lion's share of things people have tried on me to get me to believe in their particular god, such as "Well I have a spooky story you can't explain," "Then where did the universe come from?" and "You should believe anyway just in case it's true so you won't go to hell" are NOT good reasons. As the saying goes, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Here's how I explain the large number of Christian scientists: upbringing. Christianity is the dominant religion in most of the western world, and it dominates the cultures of different countries to different degrees. Here's something I think you fail to understand, however: just because a lot of scientists believe in God, that doesn't make God a scientific concept. If the majority of the scientific community was of the opinion that chocolate chip cookies are tastier than oatmeal cookies, that wouldn't be a scientific fact either. Scientists are flawed human beings, every bit as subject to prejudice and irrational thinking as you and I. The difference is they're supposed to recognize that fact and take steps to minimize its impact on their work. Actually, in the US, 30% of the scientific community are self-identified atheists or agnostics, which is double the percentage of the overall population, and of the remaining 70%, not that many believe in a theistic god. And the further up the ladder you go, into the most prestigious ranks of science, the less religious they are. To answer your question, no, belief in gods does not automatically invalidate the work of a particular scientist; conversely, the work of a particular scientist does not automatically validate their belief in gods. The fact is that they leave god at the door. They don't invoke god in their work. They keep religion and science separate in their lives as it should be in the schools.
-
-
01-21-2010, 01:52 AM #106
i definately don't think the bible tries to answer scientific problems, mostly because it wasn't intended to.
I also agree that the answers you usually receive are not good ones.
despite the fact that I am a minister, I often examine my beliefs and re-evaluate what I believe and why. Does that qualify me as open minded or must I denounce God in order to be truly open minded? What I mean is, in your view, as long as I am a Christian, am I automatically close minded?
as for point 2: I definately wasn't trying to say that if a scientist is a christian then christianity is a scientific concept. I don't believe it is so if that is how I came across then I retract. I was merely trying to get clarification on your statement that I thought was you saying belief in God equated to close-mindedness.
As a christian, I think one of the worse things we have done is to pit science and religion in opposition to each other. I find answers in both and do not feel that science (even evolution) contradicts nor hinders my faith in God.
-
01-21-2010, 03:38 AM #107
Depends on what you call re-evaluating your beliefs. My brother, who is a Christian, bought me a Lee Strobel book for Christmas. I told him Lee Strobel was more the kind of guy you'd read if you were already Christian, but your faith was starting to slip and you needed reassurance that what you already believed was right--a faith refill. He's not the kind of guy you read if you're a non-believer looking to investigate the legitimacy of Christianity. Same issue applies here. So the question is...what are you doing? Are you just reassuring yourself that you're right and trying to smother the doubt? Because that would be close-minded. But no, I wouldn't say being Christian automatically makes you that.
as for point 2: I definately wasn't trying to say that if a scientist is a christian then christianity is a scientific concept. I don't believe it is so if that is how I came across then I retract. I was merely trying to get clarification on your statement that I thought was you saying belief in God equated to close-mindedness.
As a christian, I think one of the worse things we have done is to pit science and religion in opposition to each other. I find answers in both and do not feel that science (even evolution) contradicts nor hinders my faith in God.
Well then you should be even angrier at the likes of Kent Hovind, Ken Ham, Ray Comfort, Ben Stein, Michael Behe, Casey Luskin, Duane Gish, Stephen Meyer, Phillip Johnson, William Dembski, the Discovery Institute, the Institute for Creation Research, Answers in Genesis, and all the assorted creation museums than I am. Those are the people who are at war with real science in the name of Christianity. Those are the people who have wasted countless amounts of our nation's money and legal resources trying to turn public schools into little churches. And if you truly are against that, I would hope you say so in your sermons.
-
-
01-21-2010, 07:54 AM #108
There are so many I could give you, but I'll name 6 for time's sake. Let me know if you would like more later:
-Thou shalt not kill (it's wrong to kill, right?)
-Thou shalt not steal (people go to jail for this too)
-Thou shalt not commit adultery (not punishable by law, but still wrong)
-Thou shalt not lie (depending on the context, punishable by law)
-Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (is this not what happens in marriage?)
-For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows. (people want more and more, rob a bank, get caught, and go to jail. just one example)
Did you know that way back when, they used to base science on the Bible? Scientists have sadly departed from it since, but they would perform their experiments from a Biblical worldview.
Death could not have happened until sin entered the world when Adam and Eve disobeyed God.
I certainly hope they're the pumpkin kind.
Wrong sir. My next question: could you please define for me the word "evil?"
-
01-21-2010, 11:15 AM #109
braun,
do you honestly think the earth was created exactly as you stated in 6 days and in that proper order? I'm not certain on this but doesn't the bible state that the earth is only around 6,000 years old? Do you believe that as well?
Did you know that way back when, they used to base science on the Bible? Scientists have sadly departed from it since, but they would perform their experiments from a Biblical worldview.
Back then pretty much everything revolved around religion as that was the norm and in certain areas was forced upon it's citizens. They would also bleed people in hopes of healing them. They also burnt women in fears that they were witches. Just because they used to do something doesn't really have any bearing.
Death could not have happened until sin entered the world when Adam and Eve disobeyed God.
So all death is sin? What about death by natural causes (who would be the sinner in that cause) or one animal killing another animal to feed itself?
To me the bible is a story book. Yes there are some very meaningful lessons that one can take from it, but it certainly isn't an end all be all book of the earth's history. I get why people are serious about their faith, but don't understand why faith would outweigh scientific facts. Quite honestly I don't think they even belong in the same converation. To me the two are completely different. I see faith as conceptual lessons that one can use in their everyday life. In that sense I find faith as a very valuable tool for society.
-
01-21-2010, 05:06 PM #110
Uh-huh, well, most of those things pre-dated the Old Testament. Look up the Code of Hammurabi if you don't believe me. So those are not explicitly Christian values. You seem to think it was Christianity that invented the very idea that murder and theft are bad. This is not so. Christianity merely agreed with what cilivized societies were already doing. As for money being the root of all evil, that's a subjective judgment.
Did you know that way back when, they used to base science on the Bible? Scientists have sadly departed from it since, but they would perform their experiments from a Biblical worldview.
Yeah, and do you know when that was? Back in the Dark Ages.
Death could not have happened until sin entered the world when Adam and Eve disobeyed God.
First of all, Adam and Eve are mythical. Second, if something cannot die then it's not alive in the first place. Third, I seem to recall that before they were supposedly expelled from paradise, Adam and Eve ate fruits and vegetables from the garden. Guess what, that's plant matter dying right there.
I certainly hope they're the pumpkin kind.
I thought you would, seeing as how you're still waiting for the Great Pumpkin to return.
Wrong sir. My next question: could you please define for me the word "evil?"
Sure, but I can only give you my personal, subjective definition. I define it as indifference, willingness or eagerness to cause other living things unnecessary harm or loss for its own sake or in the pursuit of one's own ends. I know what you're going to say it is: not doing what Jebus wants. I reject that definition.
-
Originally Posted by Darth Braun 
