Creationism.

[Tryharder62]

I am more than willing to admit that there is uncertainty in science.

By the same token, I have never found anything approaching 100% certainty in religion.

Then I respect your convictions. I have found more evidence that I agree with in Creationism. I have also felt the faith, that gets so quickly thrown out the window, during some pretty dark times in my life. I wouldn't be here without it. Literally, wouldn't be here. I just wish people could respect my convictions too.

 

[stickwork]

Then I respect your convictions. I have found more evidence that I agree with in Creationism. I have also felt the faith, that gets so quickly thrown out the window, during some pretty dark times in my life. I wouldn't be here without it. Literally, wouldn't be here. I just wish people could respect my convictions too.

Respect em.

Don't believe them.

 

[Tryharder62]

Respect em.

Don't believe them.

Thank you.

 

[BoyNextDoor]

All I am saying is that Science doesn't have the 100% answer yet as everyone seems to be so unwilling to admit. Man, would it be so terrible if Scientists from both sides just continued to look for the truth. If you look - it is clear that more study needs to happen. That is all I am saying.

Unlike what I feel is being done alot on this thread, I don't want to bend information to fit my ideas. I want information that can stand on it's own. You don't want to admit even the flaws that have been substantiated. Most would rather pound their feet, tell me I'm a retard, and live in their own self-righteous world.

Information like there was a guy that rose from the dead and walked on water and turned water into wine?

 

[Tryharder62]

Information like there was a guy that rose from the dead and walked on water and turned water into wine?

Yes, just like that.

 

[stickwork]

Information like there was a guy that rose from the dead and walked on water and turned water into wine?

Belly of Buddha.

 

[fair_warning]

Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase
Martin Luther King

Yes, that is a wonderful definition of faith. It clearly articulates a committment to something without any proof of its existence.

I respect your right to believe in God and the Bible. Utimately, you can choose to believe whatever you wish. And I think it is great that you credit your religion with making you want to be a better person and that it has helped you through some dark times in your life.

However, I will argue strongly against anyone who states that there is evidence supporting the existence of a God and that some of this evidence is contained in the Bible.

I support the notion that religion, or the need that many people have to believe in something is a natural phenonmenon, a by-product of evolution.

 

[stickwork]

Yes, that is a wonderful definition of faith. It clearly articulates a committment to something without any proof of its existence.

I respect your right to believe in God and the Bible. Utimately, you can choose to believe whatever you wish. And I think it is great that you credit your religion with making you want to be a better person and that it has helped you through some dark times in your life.

However, I will argue strongly against anyone who states that there is evidence supporting the existence of a God and that some of this evidence is contained in the Bible.

I support the notion that religion, or the need that many people have to believe in something is a natural phenonmenon, a by-product of evolution.

Would you just. Hold me.

A little?

 

[fair_warning]

Would you just. Hold me.

A little?

Why?
Bit unsteady on your feet?
Been drinking?

 

[stickwork]

Why?
Bit unsteady on your feet?
Been drinking?

Bad Mom!

 

[fair_warning]

Bad Mom!

yep, that's me

 

[stickwork]

yep, that's me

ok, i'm scared.

you're doing nice shit.

but in a diff way.

 

[box13]

Job 38:31 “Can you bind the chains of the Pleiades? Can you loosen Orion’s belt?
Job 38:32 Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons or lead out the Bear with its cubs?

What the fuck is that all about? Doesn't God have a basic understanding of astronomy?

The "chains" of the Pleiades refers to the the fact that they are moving together, in the same direction, and perhaps gravitationally influenced.

The "loosen" of Orion's belt refers to the fact that they are each moving away from each other.

The "constellations in their seasons" should be obvious for someone who understands that the Earth revolves around the Sun, and that the Sun is moving through the Milky Way.

All of these things make sense to someone who understands astronomy, at least to the extent that we do within the last 50 or so years. Not sure what the point of your question is.

I support the notion that religion, or the need that many people have to believe in something is a natural phenomenon, a by-product of evolution.

If you replace your word "religion" with something like "creation story", and then include "evolution" in that category, then your statement makes more sense (you can get excited about the little dot that exploded, became rapidly expanding gas, formed the minor elements, coalesced into suns and planets where life arose -- sometimes, but lets remember that it's never been replicated or observed, yet, and that biodiversity has been in steep decline for 100s or 1000s of years).

We all (or at least most) have some need to understand where we are from, where we are, where we are going, what happens when we die. Evolution provides that too. Kind of. However, your statement becomes rather circular. At least as circular as any might sound. With all respect, I'm afraid that "evolution" has become quite a religion of sorts. With all the horrors and insatiable demands on human behavior and sacrifice as any in history.

 

[fair_warning]

If you replace your word "religion" with something like "creation story", and then include "evolution" in that category, then your statement makes more sense (you can get excited about the little dot that exploded, became rapidly expanding gas, formed the minor elements, coalesced into suns and planets where life arose -- sometimes, but lets remember that it's never been replicated or observed, yet, and that biodiversity has been in steep decline for 100s or 1000s of years).

We all (or at least most) have some need to understand where we are from, where we are, where we are going, what happens when we die. Evolution provides that too. Kind of. However, your statement becomes rather circular. At least as circular as any might sound. With all respect, I'm afraid that "evolution" has become quite a religion of sorts. With all the horrors and insatiable demands on human behavior and sacrifice as any in history.

I don't think that creationism and evolution should ever be in the same 'category'. One uses science to explain a process and the other...well, it
is an alternative to science. And biodiversity loss? I understand this area very well - I spent a lot of time studying this for a post graduate degree. Biodiversity loss is simply a result of our impact on the natural world, directly or indirectly. The rise of man has heralded the demise or countless species.

And I am baffled what you are referring to when you state that like region, evolution has " all the horrors and insatiable demands."

What I believe doesn't have any bells and whistles and good bits. There are no prizes for believing and no eternal damnation for not. Stephen Hawking once said "We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special." I like this.

 

[Tryharder62]

I don't think that creationism and evolution should ever be in the same 'category'. One uses science to explain a process and the other...well, it
is an alternative to science. And biodiversity loss? I understand this area very well - I spent a lot of time studying this for a post graduate degree. Biodiversity loss is simply a result of our impact on the natural world, directly or indirectly. The rise of man has heralded the demise or countless species.

And I am baffled what you are referring to when you state that like region, evolution has " all the horrors and insatiable demands."

What I believe doesn't have any bells and whistles and good bits. There are no prizes for believing and no eternal damnation for not. Stephen Hawking once said "We are just an advanced breed of monkeys on a minor planet of a very average star. But we can understand the Universe. That makes us something very special." I like this.

Ah, there is a wonderful "prize" for believing. Eternal life with Christ.

Three tests can be applied to the bible to see if it exhibits characteristics of a divine book that is without error. 1. External evidence 2. Internal evidence 3. Bible prophecy.

External evidence from both archeology and non-Christian writers confirms that the Bible - Both the Old and New Testaments - is a trustwrothy historical document. Archeologist Joseph Free has said that "Archeology has confirmed countless passages which has had been rejected by critics as unhistorical or contrary to known facts." Renowned Jewish Archeologist Nelson Gluek confidently said that "It may be stated categorically that no archeological discovery has ever controverted a biblical reference."

Examples: Some scolars said that Moses couldn't have written the first five books of the Bible because writing was largely unknown in his day. Then, archeology proved otherwise by the discovery of many other written codes of the periods: the code of Hammurabi, he Lipit-Ishtar code and the laws of Eshnunna.

Another example: Critics used to say that the biblical description of the Hittite Empire was wrong because the Hittite Empire (they thought) didn't even exist? Then archeologists discovered the Hittite Capital in 1906 and discovered that the Hittite's were actually a very vast and prominent civilization. Archeological and linguistic evidence is increaslingly pointing to the 6th century B.C date for the book of Daniel, in spite of many critics who attempt to late-date Daniel and make it a prophecy after the detailed events it predicts.

For the New Testament, Dr. G.R Habernas points out that within 110 years of Christ's crucifixion, approximately eighteen non-Christian sources mention more that "One hundred facts, beliefs, and teachings from the life of Christ and Early Christendom." These Items mention almost every major detail Of Jesus' life, including miracles, the Resurection, and His claims to diety." Sir William Ramsey, one of the greatest archeologists to ever live, demonstrated that Luke made no mistakes in refereces to 32 countries, 54 cities and 9 islands.


The internal evidents test reveals the bibles amazing consistency. The Bible was written by over 40 authors, in 3 languages, on 3 continents, over a span of 1500 years and covers hundreds of controversial subjects, Yet, the authors all spoke with agreement. From Genesis to Revelation, there is one unfolding story--God's redemption of mankind.

Finally prophecy. See Josh McDowells book evidence that demands a verdict. There are hundreds of specific prophecies in the bible that have been literally fullfilled, In some cases centuries after the completion of the Bible. Some prophecies fullfilled by Jesus are Micah 5:2, which revealed where He was born; Isaiah 53 detailing his suffering, work at the cross and ressurection. Psalm 22 is a striking prophecy of his crucifiction.

Lastly. How can we know whether or not the Bible we have today is the same as what was written? The discovery of the Dead Sea Scroll, which date from 200 B.C to AD 68 included a copy of every Old Testament book except for one. Comparison with the texts of a thousand years later shows little or no vatiation and change beetween them.

 

[phrodeau]

The "chains" of the Pleiades refers to the the fact that they are moving together, in the same direction, and perhaps gravitationally influenced.

The "loosen" of Orion's belt refers to the fact that they are each moving away from each other.

The "constellations in their seasons" should be obvious for someone who understands that the Earth revolves around the Sun, and that the Sun is moving through the Milky Way.

All of these things make sense to someone who understands astronomy, at least to the extent that we do within the last 50 or so years. Not sure what the point of your question is.

What crap you claim.

Chains means gravity? Then why bring up the Pleiades? And there's no mention of local gravitation, which Job might have had a clue about.

If God really meant those things, He could have made them much more clear. But according to you, God used some deep poetic imagery and talked way over Job's head, and everyone remained ignorant of those things for thousands of years. Nice one, God, really impressive.

The Sun's motion through the Milky Way doesn't noticeably affect the constellations. Constellations don't have seasons; they're always there, year-round.

 

[Oscuridad]

I think it is so funny that you can say you "are not well versed as to explain all the time, thought, observation, and math that has informed what you so glibly dismiss." If I said the same thing about my belief in the bible I would be laughed right out of here. It is like saying yes, I believe in that, but I have no idea why. And I am ignorant? No!!!!

That I do not feel qualified to explain it does not mean I don't grasp it myself. Just that in trying to move the understanding into another mind, I lack the vocabulary to be clear without being misleading and/or confusing.

Admitting the inability to do a thing that should be done properly is not a weakness. It is a mark of self-awareness that instead of blundering on in clueless self-assurance, I would seek someone with better skills to do it right.

And yes you would. "God did it" is the sort of evidence or "theory" that denies any attempt at deeper understanding, so not being able to explain what you meant by that would be pretty sad.

 

[Oscuridad]

Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase
Martin Luther King

Yes, he was a noted scientist... wasn't he?

 

[Tryharder62]

Yes, he was a noted scientist... wasn't he?

My bad! Didn't know I couldn't quote any one else but scientists. Here it goes -

The most beautiful system of the sun, planet, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and domination of an intelligent and powerful being. Sir Isaac Newton.

I find it improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing principle. God to me is a mystery but is the explaination for the miracle of existance, where there is something instead of nothing. Alan Sandage -winner of the Crawford price in astonomy.

 

[Peregrinator]

The "chains" of the Pleiades refers to the the fact that they are moving together, in the same direction, and perhaps gravitationally influenced.

The "loosen" of Orion's belt refers to the fact that they are each moving away from each other.

Awesome.

 

[Tryharder62]

That I do not feel qualified to explain it does not mean I don't grasp it myself. Just that in trying to move the understanding into another mind, I lack the vocabulary to be clear without being misleading and/or confusing.

Admitting the inability to do a thing that should be done properly is not a weakness. It is a mark of self-awareness that instead of blundering on in clueless self-assurance, I would seek someone with better skills to do it right.

And yes you would. "God did it" is the sort of evidence or "theory" that denies any attempt at deeper understanding, so not being able to explain what you meant by that would be pretty sad.

The thing is Oscuridad, I agree with you. Admitting to an inablility to explain what you believe is a mark of self-awareness. It is just not something I can do as a creationist. I would get jumped on so hard you wouldn't believe it.

 

[Oscuridad]

My bad! Didn't know I couldn't quote any one else but scientists. Here it goes -

The most beautiful system of the sun, planet, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and domination of an intelligent and powerful being. Sir Isaac Newton.

I find it improbable that such order came out of chaos. There has to be some organizing pricnicple. God to me is a mystery but is the explaination for the miracle of existance, where there is something instead of nothing. Alan Sandage -winner of the Crawford price in astonomy.

It's a good thing Newton wasn't a cosmologist. As he had no data to back that statement up. Mind you, perhaps he didn't feel he had to. And there is an end to his science, experimentation/observation, and a beginning to his faith, which is antithetical.

This is like a puddle praising the lord for making a hole that's exactly the right shape for it to live in. Giving over to god as the final glue that explains that which is unknown is the sort of claptrap that got us thunder-gods in the first place. mind you, I shouldn't complain. "God in the gaps" gets thinner and thinner as we learn more and more about our universe, and will eventually be squeezed out altogether.

I think that people making statements about their faith, regardless of their expertise, public notoriety or knowledge is a cop-out.

"These people say so" is an appeal to authority, and unless that authority can offer evidence as to the testable, provable substantiation of your occult claims... it's meaningless.

 

[Oscuridad]

The thing is Oscuridad, I agree with you. Admitting to an inablility to explain what you believe is a mark of self-awareness. It is just not something I can do as a creationist. I would get jumped on so hard you wouldn't believe it.

This may be because of two things...

1. the postulation that there is a god is a contentious one that remains both unlikely and unproven. That 10,000 people agree with you is not evidence. Evidence is evidence.

2. the childish simplicity of the claim is such that the inability to understand or explain it would be... mockable.

 

[Tryharder62]

It's a good thing Newton wasn't a cosmologist. As he had no data to back that statement up. Mind you, perhaps he didn't feel he had to. And there is an end to his science, experimentation/observation, and a beginning to his faith, which is antithetical.

This is like a puddle praising the lord for making a hole that's exactly the right shape for it to live in. Giving over to god as the final glue that explains that which is unknown is the sort of claptrap that got us thunder-gods in the first place. mind you, I shouldn't complain. "God in the gaps" gets thinner and thinner as we learn more and more about our universe, and will eventually be squeezed out altogether.

I think that people making statements about their faith, regardless of their expertise, public notoriety or knowledge is a cop-out.

"These people say so" is an appeal to authority, and unless that authority can offer evidence as to the testable, provable substantiation of your occult claims... it's meaningless.

I did not say "these people said so." I was dismissed in an earlier post on faith for quoting Martin Luther King instead of a Scientist, so I quoted some Scientists. I don't need anybody in authority to tell me what I believe. I don't feel it is a cop-out to tell you what I believe and articulate why. At this point in time I feel archeological study has hit it closer than scientific study. Unlike you, I look forward to further scientific evidence that instead of squeezing God out, will bridge the gap between the two theories.

 

[EllieTalbot]

Is it worthwhile to read this whole thread?

Curious in Calcutta,
Ellie