tyler.durden
Well-Known Member
Very good. +rep...
Are there ANY Christians on RIU?
- Thread starter GanjaGod420000
- Start date
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
It's an idea he had, which by his very definition, is subject to change.
Hepheastus420
Well-Known Member
Wait.. does he believe his ideas? You can change your beliefs so I wouldn't consider it being close-minded. So if you have ideas and beliefs are you close-minded and open-minded at the same time?
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
^Exactly
Everyone has ideas, not everyone has beliefs. (Everyone thinks, but not everyone feels the psychological need to claim truth or certainty regarding their thoughts)
It is much easier to change an idea that holds onto no truth value, than it is to change a belief that holds onto some form of certainty. Beliefs form certainties, where as ideas eventually form more complex and different ideas always subject to change.
I think (not believe) that this is the most rational explanation (the closest approximation to the truth) of the differences between beleifs, and ideas. This idea is subject to change if contradicting evidence is to be found.
*So if you have ideas and beliefs are you close-minded and open-minded at the same time?* - Open minded about the ideas that are ever changing into new and beautiful (sometimes uglier) ideas, close minded about the beliefs that you do not want to change.
Just try to remember what beliefs are... they are IDEAS, that we claim certainty to. When we attempt to claim certainty to ideas that cannot be subject to the scrutinies of science... we are merely telling ourselves we are certain, when we really are not. Believing in something without evidence is the same thing as lying to ourselves.
carl.burnette
Well-Known Member
BUT what if what you believe is correct? I had faith & believe that 5+5 is 10. I know that 5+5 is 10. Therefore sometimes (& I mean this is the MOST STRICT NARROW FOCUS) you can be closed minded about something that is a fact. Gravity I think is a fact.
Belief becomes fact when its proven.
All my point is that until something is proved, it is just that, a belief. Science can then be called a belief system. A logical, self studying constantly to impart new information, but at its core, its a belief system. Since its a belief system is has as much validity as the Christian belief system & vice versa. I'm not talking about beliefs such as no lipstick or your going to hell. That in my opinion, is the kind of beliefs that myself & I believe most people have the issues with. Belief in a creator is different that belief in what the rules are.
Now that's not to say that the creator didn't make rules for us to follow. THere are rules. Drop a bowling ball off a building & it will fall to earth. Science believes that's I guess you would call it a natural law. I just believe that someone wrote/implemented those laws. Gravity, light, mass etc. All that good stuff. Its there, no doubting it. Just where it started & where it will all end is where we differ.
IMO most people think the CHristian is closed minded, but in actuality I find that they can be far more open minded than some. For example, because I believe God's designed it all & guides it as he sees fit, I'm not held to my thinking inside a box. An example of that could be when God stopped the sun in the sky for Joshua. THinking that GOd can do anything & everything he does is for the good & part of His plan it opens up an entire world of opportunities & possibilities. I think sometimes CHristianity is sold as a box of rules & regulations & in reality Jesus spoke the opposite. N ot letter of the law but the spirit. Can you work on the sabbath? Not supposed to, but if its necessary than yes. Not to be a broken record (thats what we old folk used to listen to music on way back when
) but Love God more than anything else & love your neighbor more than yourself. Can you steal? no. Can you steal to feed a starving group? Of course.
Problem is, in my disgrace, "christians" have been a bunch of dumb-asses. They used to convert people then kill them right away, the logic being they would die & goto heaven before they could screw up & sin. Logically it makes sense I guess, but I'm pretty sure that was not what the Lord intended.
Fark. If we could just keep it simple. Christian=One who follows Christ. One who follows Christ does his will, we get what his will was from what we read in the New Testament. Almost everything I ever hear about why Christian are nuts has to do with things that have been done in His name that have nothing to do with what we read in His word. If their doing something other than that, their not Christians. Hard to say your an evolutionist if you don't believe in evolution. Hard to say your a banker if you don't work in a bank & don't know anything about banks.
Man I ramble.
Anyways. I have absolutely enjoyed this debate even though I still have no idea how to quote I will try to continue this but i do have this silly thing called a job I have to deal with My replies may be delayed more than they have been.
Later Gator O Angelic Carl (laugh.. not even close )
Belief becomes fact when its proven.
All my point is that until something is proved, it is just that, a belief. Science can then be called a belief system. A logical, self studying constantly to impart new information, but at its core, its a belief system. Since its a belief system is has as much validity as the Christian belief system & vice versa. I'm not talking about beliefs such as no lipstick or your going to hell. That in my opinion, is the kind of beliefs that myself & I believe most people have the issues with. Belief in a creator is different that belief in what the rules are.
Now that's not to say that the creator didn't make rules for us to follow. THere are rules. Drop a bowling ball off a building & it will fall to earth. Science believes that's I guess you would call it a natural law. I just believe that someone wrote/implemented those laws. Gravity, light, mass etc. All that good stuff. Its there, no doubting it. Just where it started & where it will all end is where we differ.
IMO most people think the CHristian is closed minded, but in actuality I find that they can be far more open minded than some. For example, because I believe God's designed it all & guides it as he sees fit, I'm not held to my thinking inside a box. An example of that could be when God stopped the sun in the sky for Joshua. THinking that GOd can do anything & everything he does is for the good & part of His plan it opens up an entire world of opportunities & possibilities. I think sometimes CHristianity is sold as a box of rules & regulations & in reality Jesus spoke the opposite. N ot letter of the law but the spirit. Can you work on the sabbath? Not supposed to, but if its necessary than yes. Not to be a broken record (thats what we old folk used to listen to music on way back when
) but Love God more than anything else & love your neighbor more than yourself. Can you steal? no. Can you steal to feed a starving group? Of course. Problem is, in my disgrace, "christians" have been a bunch of dumb-asses. They used to convert people then kill them right away, the logic being they would die & goto heaven before they could screw up & sin. Logically it makes sense I guess, but I'm pretty sure that was not what the Lord intended.
Fark. If we could just keep it simple. Christian=One who follows Christ. One who follows Christ does his will, we get what his will was from what we read in the New Testament. Almost everything I ever hear about why Christian are nuts has to do with things that have been done in His name that have nothing to do with what we read in His word. If their doing something other than that, their not Christians. Hard to say your an evolutionist if you don't believe in evolution. Hard to say your a banker if you don't work in a bank & don't know anything about banks.
Man I ramble.
Anyways. I have absolutely enjoyed this debate even though I still have no idea how to quote
I will try to continue this but i do have this silly thing called a job I have to deal with My replies may be delayed more than they have been. Later Gator O Angelic Carl (laugh.. not even close )
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
Just because you believe something, does not mean you know it. Say you believe 5+5 = 11, it makes no difference, through careful study, and rigorous testing... it is easy to see that the answer is 10.
A lot of people confuse belief with things that can and do have evidence to support their claims, with belief in the metaphysical/theological/spiritual aspects in which no evidence can be found to support their claims.
We don't have to have a belief that 5+5 = 10 in order to know that it is the right answer, because regardless if we have the belief that it is or isn't 10, it makes no difference, the answer is 10.
When you start to claim truth to ideas that cannot stand up to the scrutinies of science and the validation of tangible evidence, you have NOTHING to base your claims on... but faith.
Faith-Believing in something where no tangible evidence can be taken into consideration (Believing in something because you want to, period) -same thing as lying to yourself.
When you make assumptions based on the rigorous testing and scrutinies of the scientific method, we begin to form ideas based on tangible evidence, we scientists know that all of our ideas (not beliefs) will never be out of reach of doubt, and if any evidence shows up that contradicts whatever ideas we may have about how the universe works, we must, and will, take this evidence into consideration and begin the search all over again.
Examples:
I know that the big bang is what created the universe-False
I believe (claim truth to) that the big bang created the universe-False
Taking into consideration everything we know about the universe, how it works, and the chemical/biological processes it goes through, the IDEA that the big bang created the universe (SO FAR) seems as if it is the closest approximation to the truth. -True
We can say the same thing about evolution, accept when dealing with evolution, there is even more evidence to draw a conclusion on.
Scientists who are not restricted by their emotions do not hold onto any beliefs, understanding that everything is subject to change if the right amount of contradictory evidence is found, which is why we only claim closest approximation to the truth when taking into consideration all evidence.
"Science can tell us the closest we can get to what we know, but what we know is little, and if we forget how much we do not know we become insensitive to many things of very great importance in the universe.
Theology/metaphysics/spirituality on the other hand, enduces the dogmatic belief that we have knowledge, when in fact we have ignorance, and by doing so generates a kind of impertinent insolence towards the universe.
Uncertainty in the presence of vivid hopes and fears is painful, but must be endured if we wish to live life without the support of comforting fairytales." -Russell
A lot of people confuse belief with things that can and do have evidence to support their claims, with belief in the metaphysical/theological/spiritual aspects in which no evidence can be found to support their claims.
We don't have to have a belief that 5+5 = 10 in order to know that it is the right answer, because regardless if we have the belief that it is or isn't 10, it makes no difference, the answer is 10.
When you start to claim truth to ideas that cannot stand up to the scrutinies of science and the validation of tangible evidence, you have NOTHING to base your claims on... but faith.
Faith-Believing in something where no tangible evidence can be taken into consideration (Believing in something because you want to, period) -same thing as lying to yourself.
When you make assumptions based on the rigorous testing and scrutinies of the scientific method, we begin to form ideas based on tangible evidence, we scientists know that all of our ideas (not beliefs) will never be out of reach of doubt, and if any evidence shows up that contradicts whatever ideas we may have about how the universe works, we must, and will, take this evidence into consideration and begin the search all over again.
Examples:
I know that the big bang is what created the universe-False
I believe (claim truth to) that the big bang created the universe-False
Taking into consideration everything we know about the universe, how it works, and the chemical/biological processes it goes through, the IDEA that the big bang created the universe (SO FAR) seems as if it is the closest approximation to the truth. -True
We can say the same thing about evolution, accept when dealing with evolution, there is even more evidence to draw a conclusion on.
Scientists who are not restricted by their emotions do not hold onto any beliefs, understanding that everything is subject to change if the right amount of contradictory evidence is found, which is why we only claim closest approximation to the truth when taking into consideration all evidence.
"Science can tell us the closest we can get to what we know, but what we know is little, and if we forget how much we do not know we become insensitive to many things of very great importance in the universe.
Theology/metaphysics/spirituality on the other hand, enduces the dogmatic belief that we have knowledge, when in fact we have ignorance, and by doing so generates a kind of impertinent insolence towards the universe.
Uncertainty in the presence of vivid hopes and fears is painful, but must be endured if we wish to live life without the support of comforting fairytales." -Russell
cannofbliss
Well-Known Member
oh and just to interject into the conversation lol 
5+5=10 only because we say so and because we created the "language" that came through the observation of quantities...
the mind takes what is random and puts order to it... so we really have literally "no choice" otherwise to observe "reality" as our entire bodies and senses have been developed through billions of years of adaptation, selection, mutation, and variation...
could there be an "entity" that is invariably "larger than us" or outside our realm of relativity?
sure its possible, just as im sure the idea had come up before long ago... for all we know we could be the size of bacteria on the arm of another creature
but is that "creature" or the "nature we observe" a deity??? certainly not... just as much as bacteria cannot communicate or pray to us...
we just dont know how "expansive" reality is and for that matter we may really never know... because as it stands... our species is only finite and there may not be enough "time" for successive generations of us to ever come to really know what everything really is...
all id like to say is... perhaps one day, maybe we will find out...
5+5=10 only because we say so and because we created the "language" that came through the observation of quantities...
the mind takes what is random and puts order to it... so we really have literally "no choice" otherwise to observe "reality" as our entire bodies and senses have been developed through billions of years of adaptation, selection, mutation, and variation...
could there be an "entity" that is invariably "larger than us" or outside our realm of relativity?
sure its possible, just as im sure the idea had come up before long ago... for all we know we could be the size of bacteria on the arm of another creature
but is that "creature" or the "nature we observe" a deity??? certainly not... just as much as bacteria cannot communicate or pray to us...
we just dont know how "expansive" reality is and for that matter we may really never know... because as it stands... our species is only finite and there may not be enough "time" for successive generations of us to ever come to really know what everything really is...
all id like to say is... perhaps one day, maybe we will find out...
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
^like, very cool.
Dislexicmidget2021
Well-Known Member
cannofbliss
Well-Known Member
yes... it is an awesome concept and very true that our perceptions greatly vary the "amount" of time perceived changes from one person to the next, even in the essence of neurotransmisson by chemical alteration...
however time does exist, in the form of "space" or the "expansion of dimension" because it is space that creates time... as time would not exist without space between two objects... and on a secondary level time exists as the movement of objects through space...
seeing as if there was no distance between two objects then they obviously (wouldnt be "two" objects) and thus wouldnt take any "time" for one object to travel to the other... nor would there be any movement of points of those objects through any dimension of space either...
DreamTime
Member
This is a very gross generalization, but I would propose that its not that Christians are more open minded, but that they can be more gullible. From a fundamentalist Christian perspective, the primary test of any theory or hypothesis is whether or not it conflicts with their faith. After that I would suggest that emotional resonance is the next test - Does the theory support my self-image, existing world view, etc. Testing a theory or hypothesis using critical thinking or scientific methodology isnt likely to occur. Hence the scope of ideas that a Christian is willing to seriously consider is quite likely to be very different than the ideas considered by an Atheist or someone who understands critical thinking. However, I would not characterize this as being more open minded.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
Math has it's own internal logic system. Getting 10 from adding 5+5 is not a belief so much as a result. It requires no faith to believe this result to be accurate, as it can be completely demonstrated and tested. If you are gonna define faith as the stock we put in prior knowledge or results, then you have changed the context and are no longer talking about religious faith. Placing trust in answers that are indistinguishable from guesses is a very different act, no results to point to, nothing that can be demonstrated.
Spot on. Science is indeed a belief system, as is skepticism.
Are all systems equally effective? If I say a pyramid scheme is an investment system, does it now have equal validity as savings bonds? The two systems you describe conflict with each other, and we need only look at the answers each has given us to decide which is more effective, more valid. If your logic held true, we would have to give equal validity to all belief systems, including tea leaf reading, astrology, homeopathy and rabbits feet. You yourself separate the belief of 'no lipstick' from creation, what is the differentiating feature that causes you to view these as separate? Do they not come from the same authority, the same belief system? If you honestly define that difference in your head you will be much closer to understanding the difference I see between science and creationism.
The question of how were the fundamental forces of the universe authored is an intriguing one, and one that science is trying to answer. Science is just not comfortable going from 'unexplained' to 'explained by god' with no rationale in between. Wouldn't you agree that we must understand what those forces are and how they act, we must describe and define them, before we can hope to understand where they came from? Which belief system has given us the most strides in this area? It might have been helpful if the creator mentioned something about gravity, thermodynamics, or even germ theory in the book he wrote for us, but he seemed more concerned with human sacrifice and controlling women.
carl.burnette
Well-Known Member
Damn I want to break this quote up.
To your part on math isn't so much a fact as a result. You weren't with me at my math exam. Trust me, there was a lot of faith based answers there baby
Lots of prayer too!I am no scholar by any means, but you say it would be helpful if the creator mentioned things like gravity & what not & you even mention germ theory. I can't write it all, but a google search would help. In Leviticus 15:13 it talks about washing under running water (not standing water) after touching a dead person, also, something about all the open containers in the room where they died were to be burned or something like that. (I am so sorry I don't have the time to quote it). We didn't know the details of germs then, but He gave us instructions that certainly go along with the knowledge of germs. What I tell my kids is obedience does not require understanding. Sounds mean & callus, but I was in the army. When they yelled get down, you didn't look around. Know what I mean?
Remember, this was written thousands of years ago long before any understanding of germs, microbiology & the likes.
THere is also, in JOb I think where it says that He hung the earth on nothing, which is where it sits in the universe, like floating. MOst other religions have the earth sitting the back of a turtle or some other place, but the bible says hung on nothing.
The round earth is mentioned in there too. Once again, sorry I don't have the exact quote, God bless google
The word for round earth in the greek refers to a sphere, not a disk.The complete hydrocycle (this may be the wrong word. Im referring to rain falls, collects, evaporates & then it rains again) is covered.
It's interesting how a group of people can look at something & both get 2 totally different EUREKA moments. We study the forces of the universe & see how intricate they are, how balanced, how perfect & an atheist says EUREKA! See, no designer required! A Christian say EUREKA! Look! Proof God's work is perfect!
The more they look into how things work, the more, to me anyways, the more it proves to me that there HAD to be some kind of designer.
I'm sure you've heard the arguments like look at a Ferrari. took a team of engineers & designers, trades people, scientist etc etc to make it come together. Thats NOTHING compared to even the simplest model of any part of the universe or how the smallest little bug works. I hate to regurgitate others arguments, but its kind of pretty good point. A little simplified, but it is logical.
I'm in my 40's & I wish I had 25 years back. I would have studied astro physics till I was dead. Instead Im a business man in the homebuilding industry. The forces of nature & physics & all that stuff. Too late now though, but I can still do it as a hobby
I can totally understand why the job with the highest rate of religious people is astronomy. HOnestly, I can't understand (& this in not an insult of any kind) how anyone can look up at the night sky, with all the knowledge we have & to be honest I don't think we've scratched the surface of it, & not think that there has to be SOMETHING that created the beauty, wonder & mechanics of the universe. I hate water mellon more than life itself. Makes me puke even the smell, but almost everyone else loves it. Viva La Differance!!
Wether you believe in a creator or not, its still all fucking amazing! EVerything made from the same stuff. electrons & such. You add hydrogen & some oxygen & damn it they make water! You add this & that & fuck, its something else, but it all works together. As a Christian I can totally understand where the bible says (actually I think it was Christ himself) that people started worshiping the creation instead of the creator.
From my point of view (No one is required to agree.. this is just a statement. If you yell at me its like yelling at me because I like red cars. Im allowed to like red cars & Im not brainwashed by my fathers belief system because I like red cars
) if what He made is this amazing, hell, He must be worthy & My honest prayer & hope is that I can sit down & have a conversation with him. I bet you would too. (That is IF there is a creator, which I am not saying you do.) someday.. I picture like the Simpsons when Homer goes to meet God. No robes or clouds though Well.. maybe.. Did you know that on the Simpsons the only character drawn with 5 fingers is God? Wow, how did we get here? NOt quite the astro physical deep thoughts of previous posts
Honestly neither will know for sure till their dead & then they can't tell anyone
Bummer... There was a preacher I heard once named Daryl Gillard, this was probably 20-25 years ago, but it was fantastic. It was called God or Gorilla. Best 30 minutes you can spend. EVen if its just to laugh & disagree. He had full facts, figures. Laws of thermal dynamics etc. I don't know how people can remember all those fact & figures. [/COLOR]
Just looked it up. FOund the sermon & Its still great, he has had issues though.. sigh.. high & mighty just means further to fall I guess.
carl.burnette
Well-Known Member
Its interesting that you mention Paul talking about damnation & such. Do you hold the gospels & the words of Christ above the rest of the bible?
In my own walk, I've questioned that myself. Christ's message was so much simpler than the rest of the new testament.
Talking to various pastors the general consensus is all the bible is equal. All of it inspired by God. I believe the jist of it certainly is. The core message, Love God more than yourself & love your neighbor more than yourself. Belief in Christ & the salvation he offered to those that followed him & such. Although I think it was Paul who said something like if your gonna argue about it (he was referring to rules of worship or lifestyle or something like that) than just forget it & focus on the basics (terrible paraphrase).
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
Haha, indeed. I suppose there was a fair amount of faith involved in my math exams as well.Damn I want to break this quote up.
To your part on math isn't so much a fact as a result. You weren't with me at my math exam. Trust me, there was a lot of faith based answers there baby
This might help you learn quoting. Skip to about 1 min 30 seconds into it, the intro is not important.
[video=youtube;nrqLv__bFzk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrqLv__bFzk[/video]
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
The Bible also talks about the pillars of the earth. In Job 9:6 it says, "Who shakes the earth out of its place, and its pillars (ydwmu) tremble." The LXX says, "Who shakes the earth under heaven from its and its pillars (stuloi) totter." In Psalm 75:3 it says, "The earth and all its inhabitants are melting away; I set firm its pillars (ydwmu)." The LXX says, "I have strengthened its pillars (stuloi)." In I Samuel 2:8 it says, "For the pillars of the earth are the Lords and he had set the world upon them."
foundations
There are also numerous passages that mention the four corners of the earth and the ends of the earth.
Really? You can't find the quote but you're so sure? Sorry but Isaiah 40:22 was written in Hebrew, not Greek. They used the Hebrew word for circle (chug), i.e a flat disc, not ball or sphere (dur) The author could have easily used the Hebrew word dur, if they intended to depict the earth as a sphere.The round earth is mentioned in there too. Once again, sorry I don't have the exact quote, God bless google
This appears to be a case of the religionist trying to apply current knowledge to retroactively fit the bible. If the bible was so damn clear that the earth was a sphere, whey did religious people ignore the ancient Greeks for so long (they figured out the earth was a sphere by the scientific process, not by revelation in a book) and insist we lived on a flat plane?
It is interesting how the theist posits the idea of a designer into everything even if there is actually no evidence for one. The Xian saying that this is proof that god's creation is perfect is clearly circular logic.
I would agree that nature often demonstrates the appearance of design. What science has done is demonstrate how this appearance of design can arise from completely natural processes. Anyone that continues to tout design, has not fully understood the implications of the facts that science has uncovered.
This sounds like a made up statistic. It goes against every survey that I have ever seen. Do you have any support for this claim?
axionjaxson
Well-Known Member
I claim Jesus Christ as my savior and Gods Son.
carl.burnette
Well-Known Member
Great, another experienced post breaker upper
I am by far no scholar. I've said that many times. My posts have been labels many times as simply my opinion. I suggested that people look it up for themselves. I didn't say take my word for it.
Kinda harsh to be jumping in accusingly & what not. "Really? You can't find the quote but you're so sure? Sorry but Isaiah 40:22 was written in Hebrew, not Greek. They used the Hebrew word for circle (chug), i.e a flat disc, not ball or sphere (dur) The author could have easily used the Hebrew word dur, if they intended to depict the earth as a sphere. " Review the quote & I said to look it up yourself. Don't take my word for it.
You also in your post mention "This appears to be a case of the religionist trying to apply current knowledge to retroactively fit the bible. If the bible was so damn clear that the earth was a sphere, whey did religious people ignore the ancient Greeks for so long (they figured out the earth was a sphere by the scientific process, not by revelation in a book) and insist we lived on a flat plane? "
Your jumping in to a conversation that is pointing out that religious people are for the most part incorrect as to what they do in regards to God's word (the Bible). But that's ok. Glad to have another person to enjoy a good debate over these things.
Your comment of "This sounds like a made up statistic. It goes against every survey that I have ever seen. Do you have any support for this claim?" I am using knowledge based on conversations I've had with people over the years. I have no page or book I can reference.
I think your missing the point of this conversation/thread. This is not an argument or a harsh conversation. Just a couple guys discussing how they look at the universe differently. Nones trying to convert anyone. Hell, read the previous posts. I've mentioned many times that I disagree with most of what is done in God's name. My father was a pastor & I have been involved with churches, as an insider for years.
I would love to enjoy a continued debate, but please, lose the harsh tones. That's not what its about. We can agree to disagree as much as you want. I can believe that the clouds are angels & they wipe my ass for me daily & that's my right to believe that. I;m not & have not once told anyone I was correct, or "forced" my opinions on anyone. I have beliefs & I enjoy discussing them with others but in a non-insulting manner. My beliefs are not what most Christians would say are theirs,as you can read in my previous posts.
I totally agree that there is no hard & fast proof of a designer. Neither is there hard fast proof that there isn't. BOth arguments hold the same validity. I choose to believe that there was & you choose to believe there wasn't. I'm not calling you a heathen ignorant monkey lover & you're not going to call me a brainwashed, religious zealot.
If you want to join in please, feel free but under those conditions of respect & tolerance. If your going to spout militant ant-God positions please go to another thread, were having fun in the kids sandbox. Hope you stay though. HOpe you actually go back & read some of the posts. BOth myself & Heisenburg have been having some good conversation. He's made some excellent points & I've enjoyed it immensely that it hasn't gone down the path where most of these type of conversation end up. Name calling & immature posts. Its been great so far so please, & if Im wrong please tell me as I may be jumping the gun here, don't take it down that path.
Actually, I just realized that we sort of took over the poor O.P's thread.. Sorry about that. Dear OP. If you want I will certainly move to another thread. PLease let me know.
Hey... that's what Christopher Columbus did to the new world in the name of the Church!
oh shit...
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
Interesting how the level of knowledge imparted on these subjects coincides with what men knew at the time. We knew washing hands helped prevent disease long before we knew why. In fact, religion often supplied demons or curses as the reason. What I am looking for as proof of divinity is something unknowable by man at the time, like e=mc2, or even just the idea of antibiotics. It would seem a creator who writes a book entailing creation could mention at least one thing about the design that was privileged knowledge for the times. If not, then we have nothing to set holy books apart from any other books of the time in terms of truth value.I am no scholar by any means, but you say it would be helpful if the creator mentioned things like gravity & what not & you even mention germ theory. I can't write it all, but a google search would help. In Leviticus 15:13 it talks about washing under running water (not standing water) after touching a dead person, also, something about all the open containers in the room where they died were to be burned or something like that. (I am so sorry I don't have the time to quote it). We didn't know the details of germs then, but He gave us instructions that certainly go along with the knowledge of germs. What I tell my kids is obedience does not require understanding. Sounds mean & callus, but I was in the army. When they yelled get down, you didn't look around. Know what I mean?
Remember, this was written thousands of years ago long before any understanding of germs, microbiology & the likes.
THere is also, in JOb I think where it says that He hung the earth on nothing, which is where it sits in the universe, like floating. MOst other religions have the earth sitting the back of a turtle or some other place, but the bible says hung on nothing.
The round earth is mentioned in there too. Once again, sorry I don't have the exact quote, God bless google
The complete hydrocycle (this may be the wrong word. Im referring to rain falls, collects, evaporates & then it rains again) is covered.
Was he simply putting into terms humans could understand at the time? That would seem strange, since, being omniscient, he must have known we would be looking at the bible today, capable of understanding higher concepts than back then.
Again, the skeptic says the mystery needs no designer, and without some sort of rational arrows pointing in the direction of creation, it is irresponsible and disingenuous to say it's true. The creationist simply says reality is complicated, therefore god. The second is operating on intuition, which science has come to rightfully distrust. Intuition tells us the earth is flat and the sun revolves around it. It is only careful study, systematic doubt, which leads us to the apparent truth.
Please watch this. It's short and to the point.
[video=youtube;4238NN8HMgQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4238NN8HMgQ[/video]
Imagine the car that could be built with millions of years of trial and error coupled with an unrelenting and precise pressure to produce success.
I totally connect with you one the wonder of it all. This is what gives me inspiration in life. True mystery. It's something I try to take in whenever possible. Lately, thanks to the posters here, I have been fascinated with the idea that our past or future is someone else's now, but that is beyond the scope of this post.I'm in my 40's & I wish I had 25 years back. I would have studied astro physics till I was dead. Instead Im a business man in the homebuilding industry. The forces of nature & physics & all that stuff. Too late now though, but I can still do it as a hobby
I think you would enjoy reading pale blue dot by Carl Sagan. It shares the awe you and I find in astrology and IMO, masterfully explains the perspective any person who is honest with themselves should share. Here are a few quotes.
The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena. Think of the endless cruelties visited by the inhabitants of one corner of this pixel on the scarcely distinguishable inhabitants of some other corner, how frequent their misunderstandings, how eager they are to kill one another, how fervent their hatreds. Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot.
Look back again at the pale blue dot of the preceding chapter. Take a good long look at it. Stare at the dot for any length of time and then try to convince yourself that God created the whole Universe for one of the 10 million or so species of life that inhabit that speck of dust. Now take it a step further: Imagine that everything was made just for a single shade of that species, or gender, or ethnic or religious subdivision. If this doesnt strike you as unlikely, pick another dot. Imagine it to be inhabited by a different form of intelligent life. They, too, cherish the notion of a God who has created everything for their benefit. How seriously do you take their claim?
If we allowed personal taste to influence science, we would have found ourselves wrong or ignorant on many subjects we take for granted today. Following evidence without bias to wherever it leads is integral to successful investigation.
Yes, if there is a creator I want to know about it. I have a few things i'd like to ask. I am totally open to evidence or reasoning that would lead me to him. This is one of the reasons why I spend so much time thinking about it, and why I enjoy conversations such as this.Wether you believe in a creator or not, its still all fucking amazing! EVerything made from the same stuff. electrons & such. You add hydrogen & some oxygen & damn it they make water! You add this & that & fuck, its something else, but it all works together. As a Christian I can totally understand where the bible says (actually I think it was Christ himself) that people started worshiping the creation instead of the creator.
From my point of view (No one is required to agree.. this is just a statement. If you yell at me its like yelling at me because I like red cars. Im allowed to like red cars & Im not brainwashed by my fathers belief system because I like red cars
carl.burnette
Well-Known Member
Great, another experienced post breaker upper
I am by far no scholar. I've said that many times. My posts have been labels many times as simply my opinion. I suggested that people look it up for themselves. I didn't say take my word for it.
Kinda harsh to be jumping in accusingly & what not. "Really? You can't find the quote but you're so sure? (Actaully, reread my posts, never said i was "SO SURE")Sorry but Isaiah 40:22 was written in Hebrew, not Greek. They used the Hebrew word for circle (chug), i.e a flat disc, not ball or sphere (dur) The author could have easily used the Hebrew word dur, if they intended to depict the earth as a sphere. " Review the quote & I said to look it up yourself. Don't take my word for it. Also, would it not have been written in Sanskrit? I thought the ancient greek was just the first translations. Usually when I've talked to scholars they talk about the greek.
You also in your post mention "This appears to be a case of the religionist trying to apply current knowledge to retroactively fit the bible. If the bible was so damn clear that the earth was a sphere, whey did religious people ignore the ancient Greeks for so long (they figured out the earth was a sphere by the scientific process, not by revelation in a book) and insist we lived on a flat plane? "
Your jumping in to a conversation that is pointing out that religious people are for the most part incorrect as to what they do in regards to God's word (the Bible). But that's ok. Glad to have another person to enjoy a good debate over these things.
Your comment of "This sounds like a made up statistic. It goes against every survey that I have ever seen. Do you have any support for this claim?" I am using knowledge based on conversations I've had with people over the years. I have no page or book I can reference. Just curious, have you studied it too? Just for this moment when someone like me MAY reference something?
To be honest, I tried to look it up after I read your post & couldn't find shit. I chalk it up to hearing things & assuming them true. Like in the bible. We all have things we know that are in there. Like how many wise men were at the birth of Christ & where was he when they found him.. Cute little baby Jesus in the manger..
Actually, & judging by your post & the details of the scriptures you probably know this, but he was about 2 & he was living in a house (Luke I believe) & its doesn't say how many. In actuality, the wise men were King Makers & would have probably had a huge entourage with them.
So is everyone who thought that He as a baby in the manger when they showed up a lier or they made it up? Come on.
I think your missing the point of this conversation/thread. This is not an argument or a harsh conversation. Just a couple guys discussing how they look at the universe differently. Nones trying to convert anyone. Hell, read the previous posts. I've mentioned many times that I disagree with most of what is done in God's name. My father was a pastor & I have been involved with churches, as an insider for years.
I would love to enjoy a continued debate, but please, lose the harsh tones. That's not what its about. We can agree to disagree as much as you want. I can believe that the clouds are angels & they wipe my ass for me daily & that's my right to believe that. I;m not & have not once told anyone I was correct, or "forced" my opinions on anyone. I have beliefs & I enjoy discussing them with others but in a non-insulting manner. My beliefs are not what most Christians would say are theirs,as you can read in my previous posts.
I totally agree that there is no hard & fast proof of a designer. Neither is there hard fast proof that there isn't. BOth arguments hold the same validity. I choose to believe that there was & you choose to believe there wasn't. I'm not calling you a heathen ignorant monkey lover & you're not going to call me a brainwashed, religious zealot.
If you want to join in please, feel free but under those conditions of respect & tolerance. If your going to spout militant ant-God positions please go to another thread, were having fun in the kids sandbox. Hope you stay though. HOpe you actually go back & read some of the posts. BOth myself & Heisenburg have been having some good conversation. He's made some excellent points & I've enjoyed it immensely that it hasn't gone down the path where most of these type of conversation end up. Name calling & immature posts. Its been great so far so please, & if Im wrong please tell me as I may be jumping the gun here, don't take it down that path.
Actually, I just realized that we sort of took over the poor O.P's thread.. Sorry about that. Dear OP. If you want I will certainly move to another thread. PLease let me know.
Hey... that's what Christopher Columbus did to the new world in the name of the Church!
oh shit...
Ah, but he didn't offer to move over