PDA

View Full Version : God vs. Science



road kill
04-10-2012, 08:47 PM
'Let me explain the problem science has with religion.'The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.




'You're a Christian, aren't you, son?'

'Yes sir, 'the student says.

'So you believe in God?'

'Absolutely.

Is God good?'

'Sure! God's good.'

'Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?'


'Yes'


'Are you good or evil?'


'The Bible says I'm evil.'


The professor grins knowingly. 'Aha! The Bible!

He considers for a moment. Here's one for you.

Let's say there's a sick person over here and you

can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him?

Would you try?’



'Yes sir, I would.'



'So you're good...!'



'I wouldn't say that.'


'But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed

person if you could. Most of us would if we could.

But God doesn't.'



The student does not answer, so the professor continues.

'He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who

died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to

heal him.. How is this Jesus good? Can you answer that one?'



The student remains silent.. 'No, you can't, can you?'

the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a

glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.

'Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?'


'Er..yes,' the student says.


'Is Satan good?'


The student doesn't hesitate on this one. 'No.'


'Then where does Satan come from?'

The student falters. 'From God'



'That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son.

Is there evil in this world?'



'Yes, sir..'



'Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything,

correct?'


'Yes'



'So who created evil?' The professor continued, 'If God

created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists,

and according to the principle that our works define who

we are, then God is evil.'



Again, the student has no answer. 'Is there sickness?

Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things,

do they exist in this world?'



The student squirms on his feet. 'Yes.'



'So who created them?'


The student does not answer again, so the professor

repeats his question. 'Who created them?' There is still

no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace

in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. 'Tell

me,' he continues onto another student. 'Do you believe

in Jesus Christ, son?'

The student's voice betrays him and cracks. 'Yes,

professor, I do.'




The old man stops pacing. 'Science says you have five

senses you use to identify and observe the world around you.

Have you ever seen Jesus?'



'No sir. I've never seen Him.'


'Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?'


'No, sir, I have not..'



'Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or

smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory

perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?'



'No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't.'


'Yet you still believe in him?'


'Yes'

'According to the rules of empirical, testable,

demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't

exist... What do you say to that, son?'



'Nothing,' the student replies.. 'I only have my faith.'



'Yes, faith,' the professor repeats. 'And that is the

problem science has with God. There is no evidence,

only faith.'



The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking

a question of His own. 'Professor, is there such thing

as heat?'



'Yes. ’


'And is there such a thing as cold?'

'Yes, son, there's cold too.'

'No sir, there isn't.'



The professor turns to face the student, obviously

interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet.

The student begins to explain. 'You can have lots of

heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited

heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't

have anything called 'cold'. We can hit down to 458

degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go

any further after that. There is no such thing as cold;

otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest

-458 degrees. Every body or object is susceptible to study

when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes

a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero

(-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir,

cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat.

We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal

units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of

heat, sir, just the absence of it.'



Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the

classroom, sounding like a hammer.


'What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing

as darkness?'


'Yes,' the professor replies without hesitation.. 'What

is night if it isn't darkness?'


'You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something;

it is the absence of something. You can have low light,

normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have

no light constantly you have nothing and it's called

darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define

the word. In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would

be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?'



The professor begins to smile at the student in front

of him. This will be a good semester. 'So what point

are you making, young man?'



'Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise

is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must

also be flawed.'



The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this

time. 'Flawed? Can you explain how?'



'You are working on the premise of duality,' the student

explains... 'You argue that there is life and then there's

death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing

the concept of God as something finite, something we

can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought.'

'It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen,

much less fully understood either one. To view death

as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that

death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not

the opposite of life, just the absence of it.' 'Now tell me,

professor.. Do you teach your students that they

evolved from a monkey?'



'If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process,

young man, yes, of course I do.'



'Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?'



The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as

he realizes where the argument is going. A very good

semester, indeed.



'Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution

at work and cannot even prove that this process is an

on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion,

sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?'



The class is in uproar. The student remains silent

until the commotion has subsided. 'To continue

the point you were making earlier to the other student,

let me give you an example of what I mean..' The student

looks around the room. 'Is there anyone in the class

who has ever seen the professor's brain?' The class breaks

out into laughter. 'Is there anyone here who has ever

heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain,

touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to

have done so. So, according to the established rules of

empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that

you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.' 'So if science

says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?'


Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at

the student, his face unreadable. Finally, after what seems

an eternity, the old man answers. 'I Guess you'll have to

take them on faith.'



'Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith

exists with life,' the student continues. 'Now, sir, is there

such a thing as evil?' Now uncertain, the professor

responds, 'Of course, there is. We see it Everyday. It is in

the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in The

multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world.

These manifestations are nothing else but evil.'



To this the student replied, 'Evil does not exist sir, or at

least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence

of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man

has created to describe the absence of God. God did not

create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man

does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the

cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that

comes when there is no light.'


The professor sat down.


PS: the student was Albert Einstein.



Albert Einstein wrote a book titled God vs. Science in 1921...




Hope Albert is educated enough for the enlightened elitist here on RTF!!!!:cool:



RK

Cody Covey
04-10-2012, 09:06 PM
Not Albert Einstein but good read none the less!

Franco
04-10-2012, 09:12 PM
Yes, a good read but, here is why Uncle Albert didn't wirte this.

"
'Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution

at work and cannot even prove that this process is an

on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion,

sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?'


"

Today, we have overwhelming evidence of Evolution! To ignore what has been discovered in the last 50 years should lay any doubt to rest.

Gerry Clinchy
04-10-2012, 09:23 PM
But darkness is still the absence of light ...

coachmo
04-10-2012, 09:36 PM
Good post RK!

HPL
04-10-2012, 10:15 PM
The whole story is apocryphal. I can see why one might want to attribute such to someone like Einstein, but simply not true.

coachmo
04-10-2012, 10:26 PM
So are you saying that the storyline itself is false or the fact that it is attributed to Einstein that makes it false. Just wondering.

HPL
04-10-2012, 10:37 PM
So are you saying that the storyline itself is false or the fact that it is attributed to Einstein that makes it false. Just wondering.
From what I have read, the entire story is of dubious origin, not just the attribution to Einstein, however I find the attribution to Einstein especially egregious, somewhat akin to the use of Treyvon Martin's photo as a 12yr old as opposed to a photo of the actual Treyvon as shot. If you have a point, make it honestly, don't dress it up in phony fairytales.

coachmo
04-10-2012, 10:53 PM
I would disagree with the comparison. The media continues to use photographs of a young Trayvon Martin to deceive and distort facts and persuade the gullible masses. The above story is written as a fable that attempts to impart a moral lesson. At least that's how I perceive it.

HPL
04-10-2012, 11:07 PM
The above story is written as a fable that attempts to impart a moral lesson. At least that's how I perceive it.

You are, of course, free to disagree with the comparison, and I would be willing to view it as a "fable" were it not for the Einstein attribution which was there to give credibility and thus persuade the gullible masses by deceiving and distorting the facts.

road kill
04-11-2012, 06:17 AM
The enlightened elitist have spoken.

I searched this a little further, the best I can tell it is a paraphrse of some of Steven Carr's writings on his web site.

However, the enlightened elite here have no comments on the content, only that Einstein didn't produce this.


I rather imagine life is missing a key component for fulfillment for some here.
To me very sad.

I am sure this will better suit your needs......

http://www.bowness.demon.co.uk/brain.htm



RK

cripes
04-11-2012, 06:58 AM
Then there are the fanatical atheists whose intolerance is the same as that of the religious fanatics, and it springs from the same source . . . They are creatures who can't hear the music of the spheres. (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2000 p. 214)

Franco
04-11-2012, 07:41 AM
You are, of course, free to disagree with the comparison, and I would be willing to view it as a "fable" were it not for the Einstein attribution which was there to give credibility and thus persuade the gullible masses by deceiving and distorting the facts.

Exactly! In post #3, I pointed out the problem with the entire premise of this story yet we get called enlightened elitest. Too funny:D I guess I should stick my head in the sand and ignore all of what mankind has learned and instead beleive a 2,000 year old mythology.

Better to be enlightened than to live like sheep;-)

Ken Bora
04-11-2012, 08:10 AM
Whom ever penned the original quoted story....
I actually recognize the heat cold, light dark, good evil bullet points.
I first read them in a Jehovah's Witnesses recruiting leaflet.
My Dads second wife was at the time a devout Whiteness
and I, at the time was still a practicing Roman Catholic.
WE used to have great, fun, religious debates and she perked
my interest in old bibles. Anyway, that is where they may have been lifted from.
As for evolution, Ellen (the 2nd wife) had a great, wonderful line she would use
to justify her Creation story. She would say only Man could be naive enough
to believe a "Day" for GOD is what we think of as 24 of our hours. And like a person making a clay
pot. The first plop of mud on the potters wheel does not ever look like the finished vase.;-)
 
 
.

Pete
04-11-2012, 08:26 AM
Today, we have overwhelming evidence of Evolution! To ignore what has been discovered in the last 50 years should lay any doubt to rest

Can you share some of them with us ostriches.

There is also over whelming evidence that there is a God. And he is the father of JC.

Pete

road kill
04-11-2012, 08:36 AM
Can you share some of them with us ostriches.

There is also over whelming evidence that there is a God. And he is the father of JC.

Pete

Pete,
It is a waste of time to approach the enlightened elite about matters of soul and faith.
It is simply a fact that some have neither.

They would rather inform YOU that there is no Santa Claus (but we know there is, he is in our souls), wrestling is fake (but they wouldn't miss thier favorite TV show), and God is not real (though we know he is, he is in OUR souls!!).
They also were at the fore informing we fools that God is dead, even though they contend he never existed.

PEACE my friend and keep the faith!!


RK

coachmo
04-11-2012, 08:44 AM
Ken, I had the same conversation with a college professor many years ago. Although he was the Dean of the Science department he had a strong belief in GOD but viewed Creation much in the way you described in your post.
RK, isn't it funny though how many of the non-believers don't mind taking advantage of those annoying holidays i.e., Christmas and Easter as an excuse to not work. Talk about wanting your cake and eating it too!

HPL
04-11-2012, 10:50 AM
Although an agnostic at most, I don't really see any serious incompatibility between a belief in God and evolution, just between evolution and pretty much any religion's creation myth. I suppose the rubber really hits the road when it comes to what children are taught in school. I want my tax money used to teach the most current scientific knowledge and if parents want to provide religious training at home, that's great, but they should at least understand evolutionary principles before refuting them. It has been my experience that many fundamentalists have no actual understanding of the principles of evolution and still just say "man is NOT descended from an ape" which is in fact true, but a misstating of evolution's position.
As to the rest of the discussion over the existence of God, well, that is simply a matter of faith. Most of the time, I don't see where a belief in a supreme being is a negative thing and in fact it brings many people comfort. It is perhaps nice to believe that there is some loving, beneficent being that will take care of us in times of need, but, in looking around the world, visible evidence would tend to indicate that if God does exist, He is a mean, vindictive, SOB that must take pleasure in the suffering of what many claim is His most important creation.

I will also say that according to what my fundamentalist friends tell me, God demands an absolute belief in Him (even though the bible tells us of Christ's crisis of faith "Father, Father, why hast thou forsaken me?") or one is damned, and that God is not only omnipotent but omniscient, so if you don't have absolute faith, He knows and thus you are damned. That being the case, "faking it 'til you make it" is of little benefit. That omniscient thing would also mean that your destiny is known by God before you are even a twinkle in your mother's eye, so from the beginning of time, one is either destined to salvation or damnation, leaving very little reason to worry about it.

Oh, and as a photographer, I frequently end up working on those holidays of which you speak, and no real complaint about it.

GoldenSail
04-11-2012, 11:24 AM
RK, isn't it funny though how many of the non-believers don't mind taking advantage of those annoying holidays i.e., Christmas and Easter as an excuse to not work. Talk about wanting your cake and eating it too!

You do know that Christmas and Easter have pagan origins, right? And that many of the traditions believers and non-believers both practice today reflect that? :rolleyes:

Socks
04-11-2012, 11:36 AM
Can you share some of them with us ostriches.

There is also over whelming evidence that there is a God. And he is the father of JC.

Pete

:roll:

Please provide the test results, and or peer reviewed papers, or anything other than opinion and a book of fiction written by men to try to bring order to society.

ARay11
04-11-2012, 11:46 AM
[quote=HPL;951592]Although an agnostic at most, I don't really see any serious incompatibility between a belief in God and evolution, just between evolution and pretty much any religion's creation myth. I suppose the rubber really hits the road when it comes to what children are taught in school. I want my tax money used to teach the most current scientific knowledge and if parents want to provide religious training at home, that's great, but they should at least understand evolutionary principles before refuting them. It has been my experience that many fundamentalists have no actual understanding of the principles of evolution and still just say "man is NOT descended from an ape" which is in fact true, but a misstating of evolution's position.
I would not have a problem with our children being taught the scientific side of evolution IF there were a competent teacher involved. And THAT is a mouthful. ;-)
As to the rest of the discussion over the existence of God, well, that is simply a matter of faith. Most of the time, I don't see where a belief in a supreme being is a negative thing and in fact it brings many people comfort. It is perhaps nice to believe that there is some loving, beneficent being that will take care of us in times of need, but, in looking around the world, visible evidence would tend to indicate that if God does exist, He is a mean, vindictive, SOB that must take pleasure in the suffering of what many claim is His most important creation.
The suffering we as humans endure is self inflicted. I do not believe He takes pleasure in it. In fact, I believe it saddens Him greatly. In giving humans free choice, sometimes we choose wrong. But, we can always change our minds ;)

I will also say that according to what my fundamentalist friends tell me,
Just as most fundamentalists never took the time to really understand principles of evolution, Please don't take someone else's word in regards to the true principles of Faith. Not religion. Faith.

coachmo
04-11-2012, 11:50 AM
Goldensail, you base your statement that Christmas and Easter were started by pagans on what exactly? Kinda like asking someone for test results, etc. to prove the existence of GOD. Before you start lecturing me on the origin of particular Christian holidays let me inform you I am aware of the history of pagan's and their worship to goddesses. Additionally, I am aware of the Roman celebration that occurred during December. However, if you think that either of these two holidays celebrated by pagans in ancient times can be equated to Christmas or Easter as viewed by Christians then you are simply foolish. We can get into the agnostics, atheists, deist, pagans, or Pantheist if you would like but that would be another topic for another post.

GoldenSail
04-11-2012, 11:56 AM
I just think it is ridiculous that it is acceptable for believers to change a holiday to suit their needs, but it is unacceptable for non-believers to do the same. Hypocritical!

coachmo
04-11-2012, 12:09 PM
I said nothing of the sort! I was making a point about how you stated what you have read about pagans and the connection to Easter and Christmas. I could care less (well not actually, that would not be christian) what you believe, worship, etc. Vivat Jesus!!!

Ken Bora
04-11-2012, 12:11 PM
I just think it is ridiculous that it is acceptable for believers to change a holiday to suit their needs, but it is unacceptable for non-believers to do the same. Hypocritical!


now thats good ;-)
so, anyone know the birthday of Jesus?
just askin' :D




.

road kill
04-11-2012, 12:14 PM
now thats good ;-)
so, anyone know the birthday of Jesus?
just askin' :D




.
Sorry Ken, I do not.
Nor would that or the date of any holiday impact what's in my soul!!

Perhaps this will be another learning opportunity for me.


RK

Ken Bora
04-11-2012, 12:20 PM
Sorry Ken, I do not.
Nor would that or the date of any holiday impact what's in my soul!!

Perhaps this will be another learning opportunity for me.


RK

I'd say you get it already :cool:


.

coachmo
04-11-2012, 12:48 PM
Socks,
So from you post can we conclude that you have a problem with every non-Christian cultural that exists and their beliefs which includes a supreme being, a god or goddess, etc. or do you just have an issue with Christianity? From your statement I'm not sure although I have my suspicions.

BonMallari
04-11-2012, 12:50 PM
Every time this type of discussion arises, I remind myself its almost like those that want to debate collar training vs non collar training....I have a tendency to admire those that respect someones faith in their God along with those that accept that there are other ways to train a dog besides using an E collar

I also realize that I do not wish to attempt to change anyone's mind in the existence of God and in the same vein do not wish to change their mind to train their dog like I do

I find that I have very little patience for those that almost enjoy trying to discredit those that choose to practice worshiping their God, as much as I do those that only want to tell me that the way we train dogs is archaic

road kill
04-11-2012, 12:51 PM
Every time this type of discussion arises, I remind myself its almost like those that want to debate collar training vs non collar training....I have a tendency to admire those that respect someones faith in their God along with those that accept that there are other ways to train a dog besides using an E collar

I also realize that I do not wish to attempt to change anyone's mind in the existence of God and in the same vein do not wish to change their mind to train their dog like I do

I find that I have very little patience for those that almost enjoy trying to discredit those that choose to practice worshiping their God, as much as I do those that only want to tell me that the way we train dogs is archaic

I would never presume to tell you how to train your dog, Bon, as I struggle with getting my own dog trained!

stan b

HPL
04-11-2012, 01:34 PM
[QUOTE=ARay11;951616][quote=HPL;951592]
[/COLOR]
The suffering we as humans endure is self inflicted. I do not believe He takes pleasure in it. In fact, I believe it saddens Him greatly. In giving humans free choice, sometimes we choose wrong. But, we can always change our minds ;)

I find that statement hard to swallow. What could a child with cancer or some other hideous affliction possibly have done to bring in on itself? There is simply too much suffering among what are clearly innocents to believe that it was all self inflicted, and an omnipotent God could, of course STOP the suffering with a simple thought. As to free choice, if God is omniscient, free choice is only an illusion since God KNOWS what the outcome will be from the beginning of time, thus the outcome (and the choices that lead you there) are pre-ordained.

coachmo
04-11-2012, 01:55 PM
So if you know the potential outcome of an event and ignore it is that not an example of free will? Just like if you choose to act upon that knowledge and possibly change the outcome is that not also free will? Not sure how GOD knowing the outcome has to do with human beings making choices. Isn't that the whole premise of free choice?

ARay11
04-11-2012, 01:56 PM
[quote=ARay11;951616][quote=HPL;951592]
[/color]
The suffering we as humans endure is self inflicted. I do not believe He takes pleasure in it. In fact, I believe it saddens Him greatly. In giving humans free choice, sometimes we choose wrong. But, we can always change our minds ;)

I find that statement hard to swallow. What could a child with cancer or some other hideous affliction possibly have done to bring in on itself? There is simply too much suffering among what are clearly innocents to believe that it was all self inflicted, and an omnipotent God could, of course STOP the suffering with a simple thought. As to free choice, if God is omniscient, free choice is only an illusion since God KNOWS what the outcome will be from the beginning of time, thus the outcome (and the choices that lead you there) are pre-ordained.

The child would not have brought it on themselves, but wouldn't you agree that breeding might have something to do with it? Dogs dont choose to have inherited disorders, but they are genetically passed on. Think about it... "responsible" breeding might be as good for humans as it is our dogs. Nope, I didnt choose my mate that way, and I am not advocating that.. just sayin it's a choice we make.

He could have given us all the knowledge to go to the moon and protection to not die from doing it, and in fact force us to love Him. I think He knows whats on each road we choose, but not necessarily which road we will choose. Will He help me choose a road? Only if I ask Him to. I do not believe every second of every day is pre-ordained and I do not remember reading that anywhere in the Bible. I'm not saying I am any kind of an expert on the Bible, I am far from that.

mudminnow
04-11-2012, 02:15 PM
A few things:

-God never says "woops", if you believe in a god that says woops, you might as well not believe in a God.

-God weeps at pain and suffering "Jesus wept"

- I cannot reconcile free will and God ordaining everything that happens, but if there is a God i am sure he has figured that one out. "who can know the mind of God"

- Things like cancer, pain, etc did not exist until humans tried to be like God, (Eden)

- If you see a child with cancer suffering, why is it always from a God who doesn't care? Would you tell those parents that God does not care about your child (ie. if God really cared about you wou would have no children because there is a possibility they might suffer) and they are not a good gift? Even if they have cancer, in the scope of eternity the time with cancer is minute compared to the time in the new heavens and new earth (where kids don't have cancer and our dogs line 600 yd blinds)


Just some things to think about

BonMallari
04-11-2012, 03:57 PM
I would never presume to tell you how to train your dog, Bon, as I struggle with getting my own dog trained!

stan b


and I would never presume to tell you that your house of worship was built on lies, myths , or pagan rituals, as I struggle to keep my own house in order ;):cool:

Now if you care to talk MLB and Brew Crew vs Dodgers, I can be your huckleberry :p

HPL
04-11-2012, 03:58 PM
So if you know the potential outcome of an event and ignore it is that not an example of free will? Just like if you choose to act upon that knowledge and possibly change the outcome is that not also free will? Not sure how GOD knowing the outcome has to do with human beings making choices. Isn't that the whole premise of free choice?
You are completely missing the point. It's not knowing POTENTIAL outcome that we are talking about here. Certainly if God exists and is omniscient and omnipotent, and if all is according to His plan, HE has free will, it is we who only have the illusion of free will. If everything happens according to God's plan, then all is pre-ordained, even the choices we think we are using our free will to make. I am not a student of formal logic, so I may be making some logical fallacy and if I am I wish someone would tell me what it is and explain it to me, but this is how I see it: If any being knows beforehand absolutely (not potentially) what the outcome of an event is going to be (and that would be part of the definition of omniscience), then the outcome is predetermined, and thus the choices (those would be the choices we make) that lead up to that outcome are also predetermined, so no actual free choice on the part of those whose choices are predetermined leading up to the predetermined outcome.

HPL
04-11-2012, 04:06 PM
[quote=HPL;951664][quote=ARay11;951616]

The child would not have brought it on themselves, but wouldn't you agree that breeding might have something to do with it?

But the child is the one suffering, so that seems to go against the statement that the suffering we experience is due to our own actions, which brings us back to a mean, unmerciful deity.


I think He knows whats on each road we choose, but not necessarily which road we will choose.

Most believers that I know attribute omniscience to the God in which they believe, which would mean that He does know what path you will choose and thus whether a lamb or a goat. Since he knew you in the womb, I would say that your destiny is known to Him always. Surely you don't believe that God can be surprised?

road kill
04-11-2012, 04:07 PM
and I would never presume to tell you that your house of worship was built on lies, myths , or pagan rituals, as I struggle to keep my own house in order ;):cool:

Now if you care to talk MLB and Brew Crew vs Dodgers, I can be your huckleberry :p
I guess that seperates us from the enlightened elite then, doesn't it!!??!!??:shock:


RK

coachmo
04-11-2012, 04:15 PM
HPL, no I believe you are completely off base on this. Explain how GOD having the foreknowledge of what you are going to do interferes with your free will. Just because GOD knows what you are going to do doesn't mean you are not free to make choices. Your free choices are still "free" even if GOD knows what they will be. Furthermore, your logic does not hold true if you consider that He doesn't interfere even when all of the nonbelievers thinks He should in order to prove He exists. You can't have it both ways!! I'm never going to change my point of view and GOD knows you will probably never change yours but you are free to do so if you choose too!!!!!!

HPL
04-11-2012, 04:39 PM
HPL, no I believe you are completely off base on this. Explain how GOD having the foreknowledge of what you are going to do interferes with your free will. Just because GOD knows what you are going to do doesn't mean you are not free to make choices. Your free choices are still "free" even if GOD knows what they will be. Furthermore, your logic does not hold true if you consider that He doesn't interfere even when all of the nonbelievers thinks He should in order to prove He exists. You can't have it both ways!! I'm never going to change my point of view and GOD knows you will probably never change yours but you are free to do so if you choose too!!!!!!
It is not just that He knows but that what happens is according to His plan, thus predetermined and thus even though you may have the illusion of free choice, since the outcome is pre-known and thus predetermined, your free choice is only an illusion (if all happens according to God's plan). Do you believe that God can be surprised or that He is subject to the law of unintended consequences? If not, then EVERYTHING that happens is known in advance by God and thus pre-determined. I suppose the root question here for the believers is "is God all-knowing?"

ARay11
04-11-2012, 04:44 PM
[quote=ARay11;951677][quote=HPL;951664]

But the child is the one suffering, so that seems to go against the statement that the suffering we experience is due to our own actions, which brings us back to a mean, unmerciful deity.
You cannot say that the child was born outside of a CHOICE made. FREE WILL produced that child. A mean, unmercifu deity is far from the truth. His mercy provides perfection in Christ. We will all be made perfect. But I am sure you don't subscribe to that.

Most believers that I know attribute omniscience to the God in which they believe, which would mean that He does know what path you will choose and thus whether a lamb or a goat. Since he knew you in the womb, I would say that your destiny is known to Him always. Surely you don't believe that God can be surprised?
I think Coach explained this part better than I did.

Duck Blind
04-11-2012, 04:51 PM
Hoping we can get back on the evolution vs creation argument...Can someone, much smarter than I, please tell me how something was created from nothing? I mean the monkey evolved from something, right? Where did that something come from? I am dying to know.

Franco
04-11-2012, 05:11 PM
Hoping we can get back on the evolution vs creation argument...Can someone, much smarter than I, please tell me how something was created from nothing? I mean the monkey evolved from something, right? Where did that something come from? I am dying to know.

You may want to start with the fact that Earth is over 4.5 BILLION years old. This site will also explain to you the earliest forms of life that appeared on Earth. Also, take moment and just think about how long 4.5 billion years actually is.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/origins-series-overview.html

or you can just ignore what Science has discovered.

HPL
04-11-2012, 05:53 PM
Try this site.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/how-did-life-begin.html

I don't think that you will find a credible scientist that will say that we know exactly how inorganic became organic. This fellow provides a pretty good discussion of the current state of knowledge.
The biggest failure most people make is not looking at the actual timeline. Evolution is a pretty well proven process, and yet natural selection takes place over thousands, tens of thousands, or even millions of years, so don't expect to see a slug turn into a dog in your lifetime (and of course even though slugs and dogs almost certainly share a common ancestor, that creature would have been neither a slug nor a dog).

roseberry
04-11-2012, 06:15 PM
You may want to start with the fact that Earth is over 4.5 BILLION years old. This site will also explain to you the earliest forms of life that appeared on Earth. Also, take moment and just think about how long 4.5 billion years actually is.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/origins-series-overview.html

or you can just ignore what Science has discovered.

y'all want to know why franco(and i) believes in evolution?

live in louisianna as franco does(or alabama as i do). observe the people living around you as franco does(and as i do). then travel to almost any other state as franco has done(and as i have done). observe the people living there. BOOM, emperical scientific evidence of the evolution of a species slaps him(and me) right in the face!

i knowed weeuz a little backards 'roun these parts.......but 4 'n a haf billion years is a dern site of kechin' up ta do!;)

on the contrary, could the "swamp people" have happened by accident? i think not!

Duck Blind
04-11-2012, 06:36 PM
You may want to start with the fact that Earth is over 4.5 BILLION years old.

Not following how the age of the earth supports your argument for evolution? I mean 4.5 billion or 3000, the monkey had to evolve from something, right? The monkey example was just that, an example. How about the first living cell? Where did the cell come from?


Try this site.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/how-did-life-begin.html

I don't think that you will find a credible scientist that will say that we know exactly how inorganic became organic.
Scientist don't know exactly how inorganic became organic because they can't explain where inorganic matter came from. I am not trying to change anyone's mind, but I have yet to find one person that can explain how something came from nothing. I'll just stick with "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth". I can't imagine my life without faith in God.

HPL
04-11-2012, 06:47 PM
Not following how the age of the earth supports your argument for evolution? How about the first living cell? Where did the cell come from?

Go read the article at the link I referenced in the previous post.



Scientist don't know exactly how inorganic became organic because they can't explain where inorganic matter came from.
Actually, there is quite a bit of thought on that. (See big bang theory, string theory, etc.)


I am not trying to change anyone's mind, but I have yet to find one person that can explain how something came from nothing. I'll just stick with "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth". I can't imagine my life without faith in God..
Of course you are. What kind of Christian would you be if you weren't proselytizing?

Duck Blind
04-11-2012, 06:57 PM
[QUOTE=Duck Blind;951792]Not following how the age of the earth supports your argument for evolution? How about the first living cell? Where did the cell come from? [QUOTE]

Go read the article at the link I referenced in the previous post.


[QUOTE]Scientist don't know exactly how inorganic became organic because they can't explain where inorganic matter came from.[QUOTE]

Actually, there is quite a bit of thought on that. (See big bang theory, string theory, etc.)

Of course you are. What kind of Christian would you be if you weren't proselytizing?

So giving my opinion about creation is proselytizing (because I am Christian) while you giving your opinion about evolution is considered what? An opinion, a thought, an idea, an argument???

Again, how does something come from nothing? I'm not interested in a scientific 'thought' about evolution. I am looking for a scientific 'fact' to explain the origin of inorganic matter.

Franco
04-11-2012, 07:00 PM
John you are too funny and I use to live near Tuscaloosa so I know exactly what you mean;-) Swamp People were hatched in an old swampy-peat bog long before Adam lost his rib at Dreamland BBQ in Northport.

Earth is 4.5 billion years old. The universes are much, much older. There was no beginning of time, only change.

HPL
04-11-2012, 07:30 PM
[QUOTE=Duck Blind;951805][QUOTE=HPL;951801][QUOTE=Duck Blind;951792]Not following how the age of the earth supports your argument for evolution? How about the first living cell? Where did the cell come from? [QUOTE]

Go read the article at the link I referenced in the previous post.


[QUOTE]Scientist don't know exactly how inorganic became organic because they can't explain where inorganic matter came from.

So giving my opinion about creation is proselytizing (because I am Christian) while you giving your opinion about evolution is considered what? An opinion, a thought, an idea, an argument??? [QUOTE]

An answer to your question.


Actually, you asked a question to which I responded. Apparently you chose not to go read the article I suggested, then you made a statement concerning the creation of matter suggesting that current science is silent on that topic, to which I responded that there is quite a bit of learned thought on that topic also, but because that question has not been settled you choose to assume that it never will be. Would you stipulate that although the world looks flat to the unaided eye it is in fact a globe? Would you also concede that until a bit over 500 years or so ago the thought that the world is a globe would have simply been a theory? Science is an evolutionary process with future truths being built on current knowledge acquired through thought and experimentation. It does not disturb me that all things can't be proven by science right now. I will also readily confess that I may not have the intellectual capacity to fully understand current thought in theoretical physics (I absolutely can't get my mind around infinity for example, nor what the void into which the universe is expanding is, for instance), but that doesn't mean that the answers aren't out there.

road kill
04-11-2012, 07:35 PM
[QUOTE=Duck Blind;951805][QUOTE=HPL;951801][QUOTE=Duck Blind;951792]Not following how the age of the earth supports your argument for evolution? How about the first living cell? Where did the cell come from? [QUOTE]

Go read the article at the link I referenced in the previous post.


[QUOTE]Scientist don't know exactly how inorganic became organic because they can't explain where inorganic matter came from.

So giving my opinion about creation is proselytizing (because I am Christian) while you giving your opinion about evolution is considered what? An opinion, a thought, an idea, an argument??? [QUOTE]

An answer to your question.


Actually, you asked a question to which I responded. Apparently you chose not to go read the article I suggested, then you made a statement concerning the creation of matter suggesting that current science is silent on that topic, to which I responded that there is quite a bit of learned thought on that topic also, but because that question has not been settled you choose to assume that it never will be. Would you stipulate that although the world looks flat to the unaided eye it is in fact a globe? Would you also concede that until a bit over 500 years or so ago the thought that the world is a globe would have simply been a theory? Science is an evolutionary process with future truths being built on current knowledge acquired through thought and experimentation. It does not disturb me that all things can't be proven by science right now. I will also readily confess that I may not have the intellectual capacity to fully understand current thought in theoretical physics (I absolutely can't get my mind around infinity for example, nor what the void into which the universe is expanding is, for instance), but that doesn't mean that the answers aren't out there.

Have you ever been in love?
Or are all your relationships mathematical calculations?

RK

HPL
04-11-2012, 08:20 PM
Have you ever been in love?
Or are all your relationships mathematical calculations?

RK
Wow!! Now THAT'S what I call a non sequitur!!! Not a mathematician, a biologist, so of course I have been and still am in love. I REALLY LIKE biology!!!;-)

Pete
04-11-2012, 08:23 PM
Yes it does Ken.. but I will not give some of these God rejecters the satisfaction.They would only in their ignorance turn around and try to use it as fodder.

However if there is some one who truly wants to know for the right reason I would be more than happy to walk them through it. So they could see how the word reveals itself about these different subjects.
I will make you work for it. God loves when people work his word to find these truths.

Its crazy how some people who have never devoted much time in learning something can speak so boldly against such things they know nothing about..

Pete

Pete
04-11-2012, 08:29 PM
You are completely missing the point. It's not knowing POTENTIAL outcome that we are talking about here. Certainly if God exists and is omniscient and omnipotent, and if all is according to His plan, HE has free will, it is we who only have the illusion of free will. If everything happens according to God's plan, then all is pre-ordained, even the choices we think we are using our free will to make. I am not a student of formal logic, so I may be making some logical fallacy and if I am I wish someone would tell me what it is and explain it to me, but this is how I see it: If any being knows beforehand absolutely (not potentially) what the outcome of an event is going to be (and that would be part of the definition of omniscience), then the outcome is predetermined, and thus the choices (those would be the choices we make) that lead up to that outcome are also predetermined, so no actual free choice on the part of those whose choices are predetermined leading up to the predetermined outcome.
__


God gave man kind his will. You should try studying it for a few years. it will help clear up a lot of your misinformation and thus confusion about the subject.
You need to start out with at least one true premise if your going to logically follow any thing through. You have made so many erroneous statements and claim tha'st what Christians or the bible claim. I call bushwa..but I also know many so called christians think this way. What a mockery of God.

HPL
04-11-2012, 08:52 PM
[QUOTE]Yes it does Ken.. but I will not give some of these God rejecters the satisfaction.They would only in their ignorance turn around and try to use it as fodder.

However if there is some one who truly wants to know for the right reason I would be more than happy to walk them through it. So they could see how the word reveals itself about these different subjects.
I will make you work for it. God loves when people work his word to find these truths.

Its crazy how some people who have never devoted much time in learning something can speak so boldly against such things they know nothing about..
Pete[QUOTE/]

I really love the way the professed Christians like to call names and attack folks. I have not even suggested that I think that believing in a supreme being makes someone somehow less intelligent or less valuable. You will find that frequently people who question the existence of a supreme being have done quite a bit of study and often know more about the bible than many fundamentalist Christians. Nor have I said that there is no God (and have even been respectful enough of others to capitalize every reference to Him), I have simply said that I question His existence and that I also question His beneficence if He does exist. I grew up in a Christian household and spent the first 30 minutes of every school day in chapel from 1st-6th grade and went to church on Sunday, am well read and have had many discussions with many folks with various points of view. I am not ignorant of the teachings of Christianity. As I said, one would probably list me as agnostic most days (an agnostic is someone who holds that one can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a supreme being, by the way).

I just have to add that if you believe in an omnipotent God, and you believe that the "God rejecters" are stupid, you would also have to believe that God made them that way and that it is no fault of their own. Perhaps you really meant "in their ignorance"? A much gentler more Christian term.

sandyg
04-11-2012, 09:11 PM
Yeah, the answers are out there alright. But when we find them they still will not prove that God exists or doesn't exist. My life is so much better, so much more meaningful by my faith in Jesus Christ that I can't imagine not being comforted in Him. And if I'm wrong, what's the downside? And if I'm right, I'll be at peace and wrapped in love for eternity. This is a much better position to take than an agnostic or atheist wandering through the darkness shouting out that those with the Light are blind.

HPL
04-11-2012, 09:49 PM
Yeah, the answers are out there alright. But when we find them they still will not prove that God exists or doesn't exist. My life is so much better, so much more meaningful by my faith in Jesus Christ that I can't imagine not being comforted in Him. And if I'm wrong, what's the downside? And if I'm right, I'll be at peace and wrapped in love for eternity. This is a much better position to take than an agnostic or atheist wandering through the darkness shouting out that those with the Light are blind.
You might be surprised that I agree with the first part of your statement and that I am aware that faith is a great comfort to many. I also am aware that if you are correct I may be damned, but as we are taught that God knows what is in our hearts, it would be pointless for me to profess such faith. I don't believe that faith is something one can just decide to have. One can say one has faith, or even tell oneself that one should has faith, but if the intellectual (for lack of a better word) part of the brain has doubts, if God exists, he knows that you don't truly have faith and thus the conclusion is that one is damned.
Agnostics don't shout that those with the light are blind, only that they themselves don't see it.

coachmo
04-11-2012, 10:05 PM
HPL, so if an individual defends their belief then they're proselytizing. You may want to look up definitions to some of the words you choose to include in your rants. I haven't read any post where people are recruiting or trying to convert anyone unless you consider what you are doing as proselytizing. You know trying to convert all of us believers.

HPL
04-11-2012, 10:26 PM
HPL, so if an individual defends their belief then they're proselytizing. You may want to look up definitions to some of the words you choose to include in your rants. I haven't read any post where people are recruiting or trying to convert anyone unless you consider what you are doing as proselytizing. You know trying to convert all of us believers.
I am in fact well aware of what the words I have chosen (and believe me I type slowly enough to be able to choose my words carefully) mean. Perhaps you should look up "rant". Nothing "wild" or "impassioned" in any of my posts. Apparently you are picturing me sitting at my computer feverishly pounding out replies, face red, no doubt foaming at the mouth. Nothing could be further from the truth. Calm, polite, and respectful might be better descriptors of my intents and demeanor. I would never attempt to persuade someone that they should abandon their faith. I would not wish to be responsible for someone else's damnation if God exists. Nor have I said that I have little or no respect for someone based on their belief in a Supreme Being. Faith is a very positive thing in many people's lives. I have attacked no one here. However, you won't be able to convince me that the original post wasn't at least a little bit of proselytizing, nor will you convince me that proselytizing wasn't at least part of why you put up your first post. I am not sure why you think that proselytizing is some sort of dirty word. It is one of the main tenets of the Christian faith, and is the purpose for which missionaries have been sent to the four corners of the world by all major Christian denominations.

Ken Bora
04-11-2012, 10:27 PM
kinda odd this came up today Pete. Dad's second wife Ellen who was/is a smart girl. Well read, went to Egypt for a season. Used to think is is today. April 11. See it depends on what new testiment version you believe. but the romans do record and date cencus reports, and the stars are right. If Ellen was right, Happy Birthday Jesus. Sorry for all the stupid stuff folk do in your name. We should work on that shouldent we??






Yes it does Ken.. but I will not give some of these God rejecters the satisfaction.They would only in their ignorance turn around and try to use it as fodder.

However if there is some one who truly wants to know for the right reason I would be more than happy to walk them through it. So they could see how the word reveals itself about these different subjects.
I will make you work for it. God loves when people work his word to find these truths.

Its crazy how some people who have never devoted much time in learning something can speak so boldly against such things they know nothing about..

Pete

coachmo
04-11-2012, 10:47 PM
HPL, go back and reread your post #47! Come on at least be honest about the cheap jabs you direct towards Christians and I thought you typed real slow so all of us could keep up with you.

ARay11
04-11-2012, 10:50 PM
[QUOTE=Duck Blind;951805][QUOTE=HPL;951801][QUOTE=Duck Blind;951792]Not following how the age of the earth supports your argument for evolution? How about the first living cell? Where did the cell come from? [QUOTE]

Go read the article at the link I referenced in the previous post.


[QUOTE]Scientist don't know exactly how inorganic became organic because they can't explain where inorganic matter came from.

So giving my opinion about creation is proselytizing (because I am Christian) while you giving your opinion about evolution is considered what? An opinion, a thought, an idea, an argument??? [QUOTE]

An answer to your question.


Actually, you asked a question to which I responded. Apparently you chose not to go read the article I suggested, then you made a statement concerning the creation of matter suggesting that current science is silent on that topic, to which I responded that there is quite a bit of learned thought on that topic also, but because that question has not been settled you choose to assume that it never will be. Would you stipulate that although the world looks flat to the unaided eye it is in fact a globe? Would you also concede that until a bit over 500 years or so ago the thought that the world is a globe would have simply been a theory? Science is an evolutionary process with future truths being built on current knowledge acquired through thought and experimentation. It does not disturb me that all things can't be proven by science right now. I will also readily confess that I may not have the intellectual capacity to fully understand current thought in theoretical physics (I absolutely can't get my mind around infinity for example, nor what the void into which the universe is expanding is, for instance), but that doesn't mean that the answers aren't out there.


Your "scientific" views are based on thoughts and theory, generally written by other scientific theorists....yet to be proven.

Are Christians really wrong for believing in our thoughts and theory written by men who developed those theories which are yet to be proven? ;)

coachmo
04-11-2012, 10:53 PM
Come on now ARay11, HPL meant that in the most respectful way!!! PLEASE!!

HPL
04-11-2012, 11:03 PM
HPL, go back and reread your post #47! Come on at least be honest about the cheap jabs you direct towards Christians and I thought you typed real slow so all of us could keep up with you.
What cheap jabs? Someone one asked the question "how did life begin?" I posted a link to a site that discussed that very topic as science views it currently. How is that a jab? Then someone also made a blanket statement that science can't explain the origin of matter (paraphrasing) and I responded that in fact there is a good deal of scientific thought on that issue also (I didn't mention that there is at least some experimental data supporting some of that thought). In what way is that a jab? I think ya'll have persecution complexes.

Pete
04-11-2012, 11:05 PM
I really love the way the professed Christians like to call names and attack folks. I have not even suggested that I think that believing in a supreme being makes someone somehow less intelligent or less valuable. You will find that frequently people who question the existence of a supreme being have done quite a bit of study and often know more about the bible than many fundamentalist Christians. Nor have I said that there is no God (and have even been respectful enough of others to capitalize every reference to Him), I have simply said that I question His existence and that I also question His beneficence if He does exist. I grew up in a Christian household and spent the first 30 minutes of every school day in chapel from 1st-6th grade and went to church on Sunday, am well read and have had many discussions with many folks with various points of view. I am not ignorant of the teachings of Christianity. As I said, one would probably list me as agnostic most days (an agnostic is someone who holds that one can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a supreme being, by the way).


Show me where I called you a derogatory name.
Is that the best you got! You manufacture things in your mind. Like evolution. A truly giant leap of faith. And who says Christians have to be pussy's. Did you learn that in Sunday school too.

HPL
04-11-2012, 11:08 PM
[QUOTE=HPL;951819][QUOTE=Duck Blind;951805][QUOTE=HPL;951801][QUOTE=Duck Blind;951792]Not following how the age of the earth supports your argument for evolution? How about the first living cell? Where did the cell come from? [QUOTE]

Go read the article at the link I referenced in the previous post.


[QUOTE]Scientist don't know exactly how inorganic became organic because they can't explain where inorganic matter came from.

So giving my opinion about creation is proselytizing (because I am Christian) while you giving your opinion about evolution is considered what? An opinion, a thought, an idea, an argument???


Your "scientific" views are based on thoughts and theory, generally written by other scientific theorists....yet to be proven.

Are Christians really wrong for believing in our thoughts and theory written by men who developed those theories which are yet to be proven? ;)
Actually, to a great extent, the scientific view is based on visible, physical evidence and experimental results. Nor have I said that those who believe in God are wrong. I will say that physical evidence certainly strongly favors evolution and natural selection as an explanation as to how all known life has acquired it's current form and diversity, and you would be correct to believe that I don't respect the position of the evolution deniers, but that has little to do with how I feel about people of faith.

coachmo
04-11-2012, 11:08 PM
I don't feel persecuted at all. There is no way you could persecute me. I find your passive-aggressive internet behavior rather amusing. You are entitled to your beliefs and your opinions as much as the next person.

ARay11
04-11-2012, 11:09 PM
Come on now ARay11, HPL meant that in the most respectful way!!! PLEASE!!

Sorry, Coach. I did not intend any disrespect, it just occurred to me that this:

Science is an evolutionary process with future truths being built on current knowledge acquired through thought and experimentation. It does not disturb me that all things can't be proven by science right now. I will also readily confess that I may not have the intellectual capacity to fully understand current thought in theoretical physics (I absolutely can't get my mind around infinity for example, nor what the void into which the universe is expanding is, for instance), but that doesn't mean that the answers aren't out there.

Could just as easily be written as this:

FAITH is an evolutionary process with future truths being built on current knowledge acquired through thought and experimentation. It does not disturb me that all things can't be proven by FAITH right now. I will also readily confess that I may not have the intellectual capacity to fully understand current thought in theoretical FAITH (I absolutely can't get my mind around ETERNITY for example, nor what the void into which the HEAVEN is expanding is, for instance), but that doesn't mean that the answers aren't out there.

;)

HPL
04-11-2012, 11:11 PM
Show me where I called you a derogatory name.
Is that the best you got! You manufacture things in your mind. Like evolution. A truly giant leap of faith. And who says Christians have to be pussy's. Did you learn that in Sunday school too.
Well I see that you changed the use of "stupidity" to "ignorance" once I called you on it, but stupid is clearly an attack word. You didn't even have the guts to acknowledge the edit.

Pete
04-11-2012, 11:18 PM
kinda odd this came up today Pete. Dad's second wife Ellen who was/is a smart girl. Well read, went to Egypt for a season. Used to think is is today. April 11. See it depends on what new testiment version you believe. but the romans do record and date cencus reports, and the stars are right. If Ellen was right, Happy Birthday Jesus. Sorry for all the stupid stuff folk do in your name. We should work on that shouldent we??


OK Can you walk us through it scripturaly and scientifically .
I'd appreciate it.
Thanks
Pete

HPL
04-11-2012, 11:21 PM
Sorry, Coach. I did not intend any disrespect, it just occurred to me that this:

Science is an evolutionary process with future truths being built on current knowledge acquired through thought and experimentation. It does not disturb me that all things can't be proven by science right now. I will also readily confess that I may not have the intellectual capacity to fully understand current thought in theoretical physics (I absolutely can't get my mind around infinity for example, nor what the void into which the universe is expanding is, for instance), but that doesn't mean that the answers aren't out there.

Could just as easily be written as this:

FAITH is an evolutionary process with future truths being built on current knowledge acquired through thought and experimentation. It does not disturb me that all things can't be proven by FAITH right now. I will also readily confess that I may not have the intellectual capacity to fully understand current thought in theoretical FAITH (I absolutely can't get my mind around ETERNITY for example, nor what the void into which the HEAVEN is expanding is, for instance), but that doesn't mean that the answers aren't out there.

;)

Well...., not exactly. There is no experimentation involved and Faith is actually antithetical to the scientific method. If the tenets of Faith could be empirically proven, then faith would not be necessary. I believe that that is one of the main points of having faith and is in fact the second definition in my dictionary.

coachmo
04-11-2012, 11:21 PM
ARay11, you don't have to apologize I should have been clearer. I don't believe HPL was being respectful at all but rather being incredibly sarcastic. But hey I could be wrong, according to him I'm wrong about GOD as well.

Pete
04-11-2012, 11:23 PM
Well I see that you changed the use of "stupidity" to "ignorance" once I called you on it, but stupid is clearly an attack word. You didn't even have the guts to acknowledge the ed

That a lie
I changed it soon after I posted it because it was a poor choice of words and not as accurate as the word ignorant. Like within 5 minutes. Then I left. I had no idea anyone called me on it since I walked away from the computer for a few hours. See you think you know everything. But you are a person who assumes and then call your assumption truth.

Pete

sandyg
04-11-2012, 11:24 PM
Well...., not exactly. There is no experimentation involved and Faith is actually antithetical to the scientific method. If the tenets of Faith could be empirically proven, then faith would not be necessary. I believe that that is one of the main points of having faith and is in fact the second definition in my dictionary.

There is a God. We have witnessed the resurrection of DNF777!

HPL
04-11-2012, 11:32 PM
That a lie
I changed it soon after I posted it because it was a poor choice of words and not as accurate as the word ignorant. Like within 5 minutes. Then I left. I had no idea anyone called me on it since I walked away from the computer for a few hours. See you think you know everything. But you are a person who assumes and then call your assumption truth.

Pete
You should be very careful about using words like "lie" and "liar". Real problems have been started by those terms.

HPL
04-11-2012, 11:33 PM
There is a God. We have witnessed the resurrection of DNF777!
What's DNF777?

HPL
04-11-2012, 11:41 PM
ARay11, you don't have to apologize I should have been clearer. I don't believe HPL was being respectful at all but rather being incredibly sarcastic. But hey I could be wrong, according to him I'm wrong about GOD as well.
I was not and have not been being sarcastic. Believe me, if I am being sarcastic, you'll know it. I have honestly and sincerely answered several peoples questions about the scientific positions regarding how we got here and also commented on the real questions I have concerning a faith in a supreme being. I thought we might have a real, earnest philosophical discussion on the existence of a supreme being and what some of the beliefs of many of the true believers I know would seem to lead to. The problem I always run into is that most true believers don't want to address any of the questions that I might bring up.

ARay11
04-11-2012, 11:42 PM
Well...., not exactly. There is no experimentation involved and Faith is actually antithetical to the scientific method. If the tenets of Faith could be empirically proven, then faith would not be necessary. I believe that that is one of the main points of having faith and is in fact the second definition in my dictionary.

Sorry...correct wording would have been:

BELIEF IN GOD is an evolutionary process with future truths being built on current knowledge acquired through thought and experimentation. It does not disturb me that all things can't be proven by BELIEF IN GOD right now. I will also readily confess that I may not have the intellectual capacity to fully understand current thought in theoretical BELIEF IN GOD (I absolutely can't get my mind around SALVATION for example, nor what the void into which the HEAVEN is expanding is, for instance), but that doesn't mean that the answers aren't out there.

and if you think Christians are not consistently using thought, experimentation, and discovery to further their beliefs, you really need to get outside your box.

sandyg
04-11-2012, 11:59 PM
I was not and have not been being sarcastic. Believe me, if I am being sarcastic, you'll know it. I have honestly and sincerely answered several peoples questions about the scientific positions regarding how we got here and also commented on the real questions I have concerning a faith in a supreme being. I thought we might have a real, earnest philosophical discussion on the existence of a supreme being What made you think that? We believers don't need to discuss this subject. This is what makes us believers! and what some of the beliefs of many of the true believers I know would seem to lead to. The problem I always run into is that most true believers don't want to address any of the questions that I might bring up. That's because we are true believers. There's nothing to discuss. We aren't torn, you are!

See my comments in red.

HPL
04-12-2012, 12:00 AM
See my comments in red.
So why wouldn't you be interested in sharing without being dogmatic?

HPL
04-12-2012, 12:03 AM
Sorry...correct wording would have been:

BELIEF IN GOD is an evolutionary process with future truths being built on current knowledge acquired through thought and experimentation. It does not disturb me that all things can't be proven by BELIEF IN GOD right now. I will also readily confess that I may not have the intellectual capacity to fully understand current thought in theoretical BELIEF IN GOD (I absolutely can't get my mind around SALVATION for example, nor what the void into which the HEAVEN is expanding is, for instance), but that doesn't mean that the answers aren't out there.

and if you think Christians are not consistently using thought, experimentation, and discovery to further their beliefs, you really need to get outside your box.
The experimentation part is what I question in your statement, but then again as I said, if God's existence could be proved empirically, faith would be unnecessary.

sandyg
04-12-2012, 12:09 AM
So why wouldn't you be interested in sharing without being dogmatic?

Because both of our minds are made up. What's the point?

Pete
04-12-2012, 12:21 AM
No
You said I changed it when you called me on it. That's untrue. If it is untrue its either a lie or a case of something being mistaken.
Hey look I have the number 2012 on my post count. I wonder if it has any spiritual significance. OMG its an omen. The myans are coming
Pete

ARay11
04-12-2012, 12:22 AM
The experimentation part is what I question in your statement, but then again as I said, if God's existence could be proved empirically, faith would be unnecessary.

Christians strive daily To prove His word to be true. Even trying to prove it by worldly means... To prove events in the Bible to be true. I do think Christians have proven just as much as scientists have in regard to this debate... But have you sought those answers?

EVolition and creationism both are currently believed in by faith. One is a faith in man, the other a faith in God. But why must they be in opposition? I personally believe they coexist. Just as a previous poster mentioned....the lump of clay is simply a lump until the potter turns the clay.

HPL
04-12-2012, 12:56 AM
No
You said I changed it when you called me on it. That's untrue. If it is untrue its either a lie or a case of something being mistaken.
Hey look I have the number 2012 on my post count. I wonder if it has any spiritual significance. OMG its an omen. The myans are coming
Pete
It was changed shortly after I mentioned it and so the logical assumption was that it was in response to my remark. If not, then I was mistaken and that is what you should have suggested in your comment.

ppro
04-12-2012, 01:27 AM
I find some of the learned among us forget that it is the THEORY of evolution and not the LAW of evolution. As such I could claim that all the attempts over the many years to prove evolution as some fact has in itself proven this theory as false. That a large group of supposed great thinkers can not prove evolution as anything more than a theory over such a great time makes that theory seem false. The laws of science include that only life begets life. We try to rationalize and reason God's thoughts and actions using our supposed rational thinking. I think all would agree that our way of thinking and reasoning has changed greatly in a mere few hundred years. Could then God's ability to think and reason be on a plane so far advanced that our greatest thinkers are nothing more than infants in comparison. Possibly arrogance and false confidence in their own significance prohibits them to subjugate themselves to such a vastly superior being that they do not have the mental capacity to comprehend.

youngblood
04-12-2012, 02:30 AM
ppro i wish there was a like button on this

mudminnow
04-12-2012, 09:03 AM
ppro, a theory in science is pretty much a fact. Gravity is still a theory. There is enough scientific evidence to prove that evolution did happen but still not exactly how (punctuated equilibrium, static changes, yada yada) .

As a biologist i cannot deny that the earth is old, really old and that the first life on earth was the result of a crazy reaction making by Chance a protien, then by Chance protiens hooking together,the by chance the single cell organism eventually evolved, then by Chance multicelled organisms gained steam and here we are today.

As a christian and member of a conservative presbyterian denomination, I can be the rebel with my biology background. But anywhere in the fossil record that a leap in complexity occurs that is attributed to chance, i insert God. The fact that there is a chance that there is this planet that supports life is lucky to some, and providential to others.

Christians need to try to stop proving Jesus with facts, it doesn't work because it doesn't make sense. Having to explain easter to my two year old nephew was a little interesting.

" Hey you know that baby Jesus we celebrated a few months ago? Well now he gets tortured and slowly dies because of sin, but then he rose from the dead?" What???
I might as well say " this red balloon might pop covering the world with candy canes which may make you want to buy a nissan, don't you want to be a christian"

We can't prove the awesome power of the Gospel to people through facts,and the bible will never be able to be historically fact checked as to be accepted as a science book. but as christians we can pray and love others like Christ did.

ppro
04-12-2012, 09:37 AM
Sorry to say that Sir Issaac Newton explained the law of gravity, not the theory of gravity. We start with principles then progress to theory then if said theory can be proven then it is accepted as law. In no way do I try to explain God's being with facts or logic because I believe that we are incapable of explaining through reasoning an entity as complex as the God i believe exists. I have some teaching in the sciences and do believe in scientific reasoning. Just not in the proving if God exists.

road kill
04-12-2012, 09:41 AM
There was nothing "Non-Sequitor" about my post on love.

If you can not prove God with math and science, how could you prove love?
Especially since, to me at least, they are one and the same in my heart.
Is there math and science that can prove or disprove love?
If not, then the logic that follows would question if your relationships are mathematical equations or scientific law?

Or.....do you have FAITH in your heart??:cool:

Just askin'.........


RK

BonMallari
04-12-2012, 09:59 AM
There was nothing "Non-Sequitor" about my post on love.

If you can not prove God with math and science, how could you prove love?
Especially since, to me at least, they are one and the same in my heart.
Is there math and science that can prove or disprove love?
If not, then the logic that follows would question if your relationships are mathematical equations or scientific theory?

Or.....do you have FAITH in your heart??:cool:

Just askin'.........


RK

by my monthly credit card statement,and the fact that they know me by name at the Godiva chocolate store:rolleyes:

mudminnow
04-12-2012, 09:59 AM
Sir Isaac newton explained it a long time ago but it is still a theory because at atomic/sub atomic levels it does not work. I am glad you have some teaching in the sciences, me too (alot actually my name starts with DR., but there are still things you and I don't know and can learn from others

Gerry Clinchy
04-12-2012, 11:46 AM
by my monthly credit card statement,and the fact that they know me by name at the Godiva chocolate store:rolleyes:

Thanks, Bon, for lightening up this discussion :-)