Great Bible quotes

[Nick333]

If thats what blows your hair back.. I'm sure we can find a blow up doll that looks like Asterix....

Hey you're the one who wants to screw Asterix. :p

[Safferbeauty]

Screw Asterix!

I just thought SB was starting a revolution!

What do you mean?

[ToxicBunny]

I have never at any stage mentioned anything about screwing Asterix... he's too small and puny for me..... Obelix.. now thats a different kettle of fish ALLLLL together.... :)

[Captain Beer]

What do you mean?

Doesn't matter.

Do you know what a revolution is?

[Nick333]

I have never at any stage mentioned anything about screwing Asterix... he's too small and puny for me..... Obelix.. now thats a different kettle of fish ALLLLL together.... :)

Now there are some love handles for ya. :D

[Safferbeauty]

I just realised something. This debating actually has nothing to do with what this thread was originally intended for. It was intended for great bible quptes so remind me why are we debating here?

[Nick333]

You have a very valid point. I have been at a stage of my life where I did what everyone wanted me to do but that is going to stop from now on

He took this to be a revolutionary declaration.

Good for you BTW.

[ToxicBunny]

Ummm thats a good point...
I think its Sunday, so most people who would be posting here have gone to church... The rest of us Heathens(or at least me that is a heathen) are just kinda filling in in their place for now...

[Nick333]

This long since seized to be a debate.

[Safferbeauty]

Doesn't matter.

Do you know what a revolution is?

To me it does matter. I was not exactly sure what a revolution meant but I looked it up and this is one of the deffiniteions

A revolution is a relatively sudden and absolutely drastic change. This may be a change in the social or political institutions over a relatively short period of time, or a major change in its culture or economy. Some revolutions are led by the majority of the populace of a nation, others by a small band of revolutionaries. Compare rebellion.

U will prob rip me off now

[Nick333]

I just realised something. This debating actually has nothing to do with what this thread was originally intended for. It was intended for great bible quptes so remind me why are we debating here?

Actually I think it was intended for silly bible quotes.

[Safferbeauty]

why silly? To a lot of people it isnt silly?

[Nick333]

When the LORD your God brings you into the land you are about to enter and occupy, he will clear away many nations ahead of you: the Hittites, Girga****es, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites. These seven nations are all more powerful than you.
When the LORD your God hands these nations over to you and you conquer them, you must completely destroy them. Make no treaties with them and show them no mercy. Do not intermarry with them, and don't let your daughters and sons marry their sons and daughters. They will lead your young people away from me to worship other gods. Then the anger of the LORD will burn against you, and he will destroy you. (Deuteronomy 7:1-4 NLT)

Show no Mercy. That was a great first album by which band?

[Nick333]

why silly? To a lot of people it isnt silly?

Boy bands aren't silly to a lot of people either. :p

[Captain Beer]

I will not discuss how silly R&B is, because for some people it isn't silly :D

[Nick333]

I will not discuss how silly R&B is, because for some people it isn't silly :D

Very commendable of you :D

[Nick333]

Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)

Surely you have to admit that telling someone they should be a good and content slave is a bit silly?

[Captain Beer]

I'm starting a revolution.

Everyone will be forced to listen to psy trance. Or else there is no hope of an afterlife with the almighty sequencer in the sky!

[Nick333]

Or else there is no hope of an afterlife with the almighty sequencer in the sky!

Do you promise? :sick:

[Captain Beer]

insert chosen deity here

[Nick333]

[DELIBERATE_OBSTUSENESS]Creed? Creed? Creed is even sillier than any boy band or R&B group.[/DELIBERATE_OBTUSENESS]

Hows this for an idea instead of milking the sheep of existing rerligions like all the evangelic types, why not sell D.I.Y religion kits. The kit can contain:

1x Leather bound volume consisting of blank pages to be filled in with your very own fairytails that we will show you how to make up with our patented step by step guide.

1x Users guide, including instructions for writing your own religious fiction.

1x Religious icon making tool kit.

1m 5mm copper wire for the use of religious icon manufacturing.

1x Religious icon design and manufacture for dummies book.

1x copy of How to win converts and manipulate suckers.

[Captain Beer]

Nick i'm thinking of getting into the televangelism business, wanna join?

You could be my marketing director.

[Nick333]

Nick i'm thinking of getting into the televangelism business, wanna join?

You could be my marketing director.

Excellent idea. First I'd like to get you to a hair stylist. How many kilograms of hairspray and styling cream do you think you could comfortably endure? Would you be willing to go for weekly teeth whitening treatments and facial surgery to give you a permanent grin? Or would you prefer the fire and brimstone school of preachiing which is making a fast comeback? In which case I know an excellent surgeon who specializes in a perpetual scowl.

Do you have any propensity to sexual perversion or perhaps a drug habit I should begin covering up?

[Captain Beer]

Yes if you could cover up my smoking, weed, drinking, and music habits then I think we are ready to go!

We must also use any money we collect to invest in property, and promise to build churches on the properties at a later stage.

I hate hairspray, but I am willing to use a wig.

[Safferbeauty]

This is actuallygetting a bit silly.. TD I have never disrespected you because of what u believe or dont believe but I feel that in some ways u and some people are. I have never forced you to become a Christian and I never will but yet I feel u r making fun of what I believe. How do u think that makes me feel?

[Captain Beer]

I'm making fun of televangelists. Not you.

[Safferbeauty]

It still feels like it. It really does hurt.

[Nick333]

Yes if you could cover up my smoking, weed, drinking, and music habits then I think we are ready to go!

We must also use any money we collect to invest in property, and promise to build churches on the properties at a later stage.

I hate hairspray, but I am willing to use a wig.

I think we will have to find you some less tame bad habits. Most evangellists worth their salt seem to veiw crack as bare minimum. Best not to take chances.

I will find a discrete lawyer to set up trust funds and off shore accounts as well.

Yes they are doing wonders with synthetic hair now. Im sure we could find you a truly tasteless one weighing in at as little as 7 or 8 kilograms.

Oh yes, I'm assuming you'd prefer the ex-model style of wife ( that are very much in fashion amongst evagellists these days) over the more traditonal overly made up troll of the older evangellist. Personally I would recommend the latter as they tend to get more into the spirit of things. After all we should be able to afford some top-class hookers once we get this thing off the ground.

[Nick333]

It still feels like it. It really does hurt.

You can make fun of what I believe if it will make you feel any better.

[Safferbeauty]

I don't feel the need to make fun of what you believe. 2 wrongs don't make a right.

[Nick333]

I don't feel the need to make fun of what you believe. 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Neither would be wrong. If you are so easily offended don't view said offending material, its really that easy.

Anyway it would seem you've won a small victory for tolerance fascism. :rolleyes:

[nthdimension]

Something is bothering me. I heard from a Christian that Jews, Buddhists, Hindus , Wiccans etc are all the work of Satan. Is this true?
100%

If you are not a Christian you are effectively in league with Lucifer.

[Safferbeauty]

100%

If you are not a Christian you are effectively in league with Lucifer.

That is quite an ouch thing to say to people. That is exactly the correct way to chase people away from Christianity

[Highflyer_GP]

That is quite an ouch thing to say to people. That is exactly the correct way to chase people away from Christianity
Or a way to scare those who are incapable of logical reasoning into converting.

[Safferbeauty]

I would never tell a person that they are going to hell if they are not a Christian. I also believe that I will see a lot of people up in heaven who did nothing but good in their lives. There are a lot of people like that in this earth today

[Nick333]

I would never tell a person that they are going to hell if they are not a Christian. I also believe that I will see a lot of people up in heaven who did nothing but good in their lives. There are a lot of people like that in this earth today

What do you base this belief on?

[Highflyer_GP]

I would never tell a person that they are going to hell if they are not a Christian. I also believe that I will see a lot of people up in heaven who did nothing but good in their lives. There are a lot of people like that in this earth today
Well when it comes to a monotheistic belief, you can't pick and choose which parts you want to believe in. You either follow the whole thing in it's entirety or not at all. By choosing not to, you've already condemned yourself in the eyes of the church.

[Safferbeauty]

What do you base this belief on?

God loves everyone. He loved us so much that he sent his only son into the world to save the world. There are going to be people that have never ever heard the gospel at all. How can u expect them to go to hell

[Nick333]

God loves everyone. He loved us so much that he sent his only son into the world to save the world. There are going to be people that have never ever heard the gospel at all. How can u expect them to go to hell

I don't expect anyone to go to hell. The people who wrote the bible, which you presumably base your faith on, do. (Actually you obviously don't.)

If I remember correctly it actually goes along the lines of " For God so loved the world, he sent his only son so that those who would believe in him would have eternal life."

Found the right quote:
John 3:16 teaches us: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

You see the requirement for eternal life is a belief in J3sus.

[Safferbeauty]

ok then explain this to me. there are still loads of people out there who have not heard about the bible do you think they go to hell. I would like to think not. I also wanna see you and TD in heaven one day too

[Highflyer_GP]

ok then explain this to me. there are still loads of people out there who have not heard about the bible do you think they go to hell. I would like to think not. I also wanna see you and TD in heaven one day too

That's what Evangelists and Jehova's Witness is there for ;)

Also if I recall, one of your duties as a xian is to witness (i.e. preach) to others.

[Safferbeauty]

but not everyone will hear by the time ***** comes there will still be people out there and I dont think we have a lot of time left either. I have heard people say give or take about 10 years but no one really knows

[Highflyer_GP]

SB Jesus is not coming, sorry to disappoint you. It's just a ploy to keep the faith going.

Almost every generation thinks that the apocalypse was near and that Jesus was coming to save everyone soon. Think back to the world wars, the cold war, the bubonic plague etc. - there were always doomsayers around predicting the end of the world.

[Nick333]

ok then explain this to me. there are still loads of people out there who have not heard about the bible do you think they go to hell. I would like to think not. I also wanna see you and TD in heaven one day too

What about the billions of people who died without ever hearing the "message" of the bible? Are they burning in hell or do they get reincarnated till they do hear about it.

The bible seems to tell us that they do burn in hell.

I haven't really got a problem with what you believe, I just don't understand where you get what you believe, from. The christian bible contradicts what you believe so clearly you can't claim to be a christian? Do you believe what you believe because someone you trust told you that it is true? If so why do you believe that they have the authority to decide what the bible says is untrue?
I'm honestly just trying to understand your point of view.

[Nick333]

but not everyone will hear by the time ***** comes there will still be people out there and I dont think we have a lot of time left either. I have heard people say give or take about 10 years but no one really knows

Saffer I despair for yoursake when I hear you say things like this. What do those people know? What makes them any different from all those who have been predicting the end of the world for millenia and have turned out to be wrong?

Honestly I think you're just to innocent and trusting for your own good.

edit : FFS woman start questioning what you are told. People will lie to you even if they don't mean to.

[nthdimension]

I would never tell a person that they are going to hell if they are not a Christian.


That is quite an ouch thing to say to people. That is exactly the correct way to chase people away from Christianity
No, it is simply reporting the facts. If you are not a Christian you are going to hell. If you do not exactly follow the teachings in the Bible you are going to hell. Those are the rules according to the religion.

[Safferbeauty]

The millions of people that have died and have not heard about the bible will be in heaven. I have not got exact scriptures but I will look them up for you. If you think I am too trusting then u have a right to believe that. If you look at the signs of the times, they are near. Look in revelations. Says there are going to be wars and flooding and so on. Look at the wars going on around the world and the Tsunamis. The times on this planet is coming to an end but just not sure when noe one truly does know when except for God

[nthdimension]

but not everyone will hear by the time ***** comes there will still be people out there and I dont think we have a lot of time left either. I have heard people say give or take about 10 years but no one really knows
Don't worry, it has been the end times for 2000 years. So it might be 10 years, ten seconds, or a billion years, given their wonderful track record of being totally wrong. The earth will probably be gone within about 5 billion or so years. Whenever the sun becomes red giant as it enters its old age before dying.

[Safferbeauty]

Why is it always religion. Religion has s c r e w e d up this planet. Something I don't understand about Christianity though. Explain this to me. How can people call themselves Christians when they do their once a week thing of going to church but the other 6 days they do nothing but sin? How can people live with their conciounce? (sp?)

[Highflyer_GP]

If you look at the signs of the times, they are near. Look in revelations. Says there are going to be wars and flooding and so on. Look at the wars going on around the world and the Tsunamis. The times on this planet is coming to an end but just not sure when noe one truly does know when except for God
There have been wars and natural disasters for thousands of years. As I said, each generation believes that the end is near and look to Revelations as a way of keeping the faith going. Things settle down, the next generation arrives and the cycle starts over again. The world was supposed to end hundreds of times already.

[nthdimension]

Says there are going to be wars and flooding and so on.
Well that really nails it down then.

[Nick333]

The millions of people that have died and have not heard about the bible will be in heaven. I have not got exact scriptures but I will look them up for you. If you think I am too trusting then u have a right to believe that. If you look at the signs of the times, they are near. Look in revelations. Says there are going to be wars and flooding and so on. Look at the wars going on around the world and the Tsunamis. The times on this planet is coming to an end but just not sure when noe one truly does know when except for God

There have always been wars and there have always been natural disasters. In fact there have been times of far worse war and times when there were far worse disasters. Ignorant fearful people have been seeing these things as signs of pending doom since J3us first said "I'll be back".
When I come back I'll post a few links of apocalyptic predictions from the last century that were wrong. Thats how much I want you to start thinking for yourself.

[raoul]

Also if I recall, one of your duties as a xian is to witness (i.e. preach) to others.

Thanks Highflyer_GP.

And Highflyer_GP said, let there be light.

If this is true, this explains what I had experienced so far. At that time, I thought it was one of my-pa-is-better-than-yours-kind-of-thing and just ignored it. Suffice to say, I will pay more attention henceforth, after all, they are just doing their 'duty'.

[Theophilus]

It seems that some people love quoting scripture out of context so I'll do my best to correct these errors. ;)

Firstly the old law (Moses' law) was ONLY given to JEWS.
At no time in history was any gentile nation expected to obey the law of Moses. It was given to a specific group of people for a specific time.
***** came and fulfilled and did away with the law of Moses.

The best book of the Bible to read about this is Hebrews.
- The old covenant is obsolete (Hebrews 8:13)
- The new covenant has been established (Hebrews 8:6)

Galatians 3:13-14 "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ *****, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit."

Galatians 3:19 "What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come."
In other words it was valid until ***** came and did away with the law.

Galatians 3:25 "Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law."

The law was replaced by faith.
We are now made righteous through faith and not through the law.
Go read the first few chapters of Romans if you are still confused.

Romans 3:21 "But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in ***** Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ *****. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,[i] through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in *****."

If you still have doubts about the law go and read Paul's letters to some of the gentile believers in Asia regarding circumcision and observing feasts. The Jews were trying to force the gentile believers to follow the law of Moses.

The problem is there are still many Christians that try to live according to a set of rules instead of by faith and that is a disaster. That does not mean that some of the laws were bad - it just means that we are no longer justified by the law.

w1z4rd I hope that makes things a bit more clear to you now.

[The_Librarian]

Just browsing here. Facts are that you will only be saved by belief alone. Fact is that when you draw a timeline from Creation, through the Great Flood and other Biblical events, you will find that the scale equates to 6000 years. We are nearing the end. The last remaining 1000 years will be spent feasting in Heaven whilst the Satan is bound to the, now empty and lifeless Earth.

[Theophilus]

A few that I managed to find contradictory yet amusing.
Regarding how many sons Abraham had

Nothing contradictory about Abraham having more than one son.

Abraham had Ishmael from his maidservant 14 years before Issac but Issac was the only son he had with Sarah.
I agree that the wording could have been a bit less ambiguous.
Maybe the original texts are more clear.

[Highflyer_GP]

Just browsing here. Facts are that you will only be saved by belief alone. Fact is that when you draw a timeline from Creation, through the Great Flood and other Biblical events, you will find that the scale equates to 6000 years. We are nearing the end. The last remaining 1000 years will be spent feasting in Heaven whilst the Satan is bound to the, now empty and lifeless Earth.
How did you deduce that these are facts?

[Theophilus]

What about how many of each animal Noah was supposed to have taken onto the ark:

Genesis 7:2
Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female.

Genesis 6:19
Of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark.

Also a nice misunderstanding.
It means that of every animal you need to take two (one male and one female) but for the "clean" animals sheep, doves, etc. you need to take 7 of each.

This is because some of the "clean" animals needed to be sacrificed.
If you sacrifice the last gender of a species then it becomes extinct.
God's not that stupid but it seems that some people are a little thick when it comes to literature.

[Theophilus]

Exodus 33:11
"And the Lord spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh to his friend.

John 1:18
No man hath seen God at any time.
http://www.krysstal.com/contradi.html
More here: http://www.krysstal.com/contradi.html

I'll bet the author of the doc left a critical piece of information out.
Moses was enveloped in a cloud when he spoke with God.
He couldn't see God but he still spoke with him face to face much the same way it's possible to speak face to face with someone in the dark without actually seeing them.
These "misquotes" are laughable.

[Highflyer_GP]

I'll bet the author of the doc left a critical piece of information out.
Moses was enveloped in a cloud when he spoke with God.
He couldn't see God but he still spoke with him face to face much the same way it's possible to speak face to face with someone in the dark without actually seeing them.
These "misquotes" are laughable.
Then the author should have written it clearly and concisely.

What's more laughable is that supposedly modern man still believes in a 2000 year old fairy tale.

[Theophilus]

Ok, j3sus, who's new rules include eternal condemnation to hell if you are not baptized-

"He said to them, Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.'"
(Mark 16:15-16)

Love and tolerance indeed.

Debbie, it doesn't quite mean that.
I means whoever hears the Gospel and does not believe will be condemned.
In other words whoever rejects the Gospel.

1. Those who heard the Gospel and believed are saved.
2. Those who heard the Gospel and chose not to believe are condemned.
3. Those who never heard the gospel are judged according to their deeds.

Revelation 20:12 gives us a small glimpse into the final judgment scene regarding those who never heard the Gospel but it needs to be combined with other scripture to get the full picture.
God isn't unfair - he'd never condemn someone if they didn't have an opportunity.

[Theophilus]

Then the author should have written it clearly and concisely.

Exodus 20:15 "When Moses went up on the mountain, the cloud covered it"
Exodus 20:16 "For six days the cloud covered the mountain, and on the seventh day the LORD called to Moses from within the cloud."
Exodus 20:18 "Then Moses entered the cloud as he went on up the mountain. And he stayed on the mountain forty days and forty nights."


What's more laughable is that supposedly modern man still believes in a 2000 year old fairy tale.

Well whether it's a fairy tale is up to one's personal beliefs.
There is a lot of archaeological and secular history backing up the Bible but one can always dismiss things with counter arguments from critics. Of critics there is no shortage.

The Bible was never meant as a book that aims to convert people - it's more of an instruction manual with some historical background.
It's through the conviction of the Holy Spirit and loving kindness that God brings people to repentance.
He only gets harsh with the really stubborn people. ;)

[seburn]

POSt whores jees!

[Captain Beer]

Just browsing here. Facts are that you will only be saved by belief alone. Fact is that when you draw a timeline from Creation, through the Great Flood and other Biblical events, you will find that the scale equates to 6000 years. We are nearing the end. The last remaining 1000 years will be spent feasting in Heaven whilst the Satan is bound to the, now empty and lifeless Earth.

No offence , but remember Ellen G White an co also predicted the world would end in the 1800s, then came up with an excuse when it didn't ;)

[Nick333]

It seems that some people love quoting scripture out of context so I'll do my best to correct these errors. ;)

Firstly the old law (Moses' law) was ONLY given to JEWS.
At no time in history was any gentile nation expected to obey the law of Moses. It was given to a specific group of people for a specific time.
***** came and fulfilled and did away with the law of Moses.

The best book of the Bible to read about this is Hebrews.
- The old covenant is obsolete (Hebrews 8:13)
- The new covenant has been established (Hebrews 8:6)

Galatians 3:13-14 "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ *****, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit."

Galatians 3:19 "What, then, was the purpose of the law? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come."
In other words it was valid until ***** came and did away with the law.

Galatians 3:25 "Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law."

The law was replaced by faith.
We are now made righteous through faith and not through the law.
Go read the first few chapters of Romans if you are still confused.

Romans 3:21 "But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. This righteousness from God comes through faith in ***** Christ to all who believe. There is no difference, for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ *****. God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,[i] through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in *****."

If you still have doubts about the law go and read Paul's letters to some of the gentile believers in Asia regarding circumcision and observing feasts. The Jews were trying to force the gentile believers to follow the law of Moses.

The problem is there are still many Christians that try to live according to a set of rules instead of by faith and that is a disaster. That does not mean that some of the laws were bad - it just means that we are no longer justified by the law.

w1z4rd I hope that makes things a bit more clear to you now.

Ah a "learned" Christian. Welcome Theophilus.

I notice you've address only those problems for which you have an answer. I realize that it would take a hell of a long time to address all of them but unless you do you can hardly have claimed to have made a good case for Christianity. As long as there is one chink in your claim there is no reason a reasonable person should believe position

Off course all the quotes you provide are ones written by Paul. As reasonable and intelligent human beings we would be unwise to accept the validity of anyones claims before we verify the authority of the claimant.
Of course when it comes to Christianity their is no valid reason to accept anything as authoritive. The best that we have is a third hand account from a self-proclaimed apostle of chri5t. For some mystifying reason the man who suposedly proclaimed himself lord and saviour couldnt have been bothered to write what he had to say down.

So what do we have besides four contradictory "histories" that are pure hearsay? Well the writings of a man who never new chri3t and who claimed his authority came directly from God.
The nasty Jews you refer to, who wrongly trying to force Judaism on the gentiles were in fact the disciple Peter(who new J3sus intimately and was given his authority directly from J3sus if the gospels are to be believed) and the brother of chri3t James. Of course Paul had the fact that he didnt require grown men to have their foreskins removed on his side.
Other than that why should anyone believe anything he said?

[Nick333]

Also a nice misunderstanding.
It means that of every animal you need to take two (one male and one female) but for the "clean" animals sheep, doves, etc. you need to take 7 of each.

This is because some of the "clean" animals needed to be sacrificed.
If you sacrifice the last gender of a species then it becomes extinct.
God's not that stupid but it seems that some people are a little thick when it comes to literature.

Doesn't come close to explaining how someone could possibly fit millions of animals on a wooden boat of any size.

Oh and Gods not stupid? What would have happened if no animals were sacrificed? Would he have been forced to whip some more ass?

[Nick333]

Debbie, it doesn't quite mean that.
I means whoever hears the Gospel and does not believe will be condemned.
In other words whoever rejects the Gospel.

1. Those who heard the Gospel and believed are saved.
2. Those who heard the Gospel and chose not to believe are condemned.
3. Those who never heard the gospel are judged according to their deeds.

Revelation 20:12 gives us a small glimpse into the final judgment scene regarding those who never heard the Gospel but it needs to be combined with other scripture to get the full picture.
God isn't unfair - he'd never condemn someone if they didn't have an opportunity.

So why are we required to believe in Chri5t at all. Is it because God couldn't wait till kingdom come to jump out of a cloud bank and shout "Suprise you all get eternal life"?

It seems a bit unfair that good people are tested twice by having to believe the hard to believe.

[seburn]

Its story book guys even christian will say that. The problem is ppl decide what they want to believe and what they don't.

In Fact half the ppl don't even bother with the old testiment.

Heh well no point in arguing about religion anyone will tell you that.

Believe wat you want ... lets kill this thread!

[Nick333]

QUOTE=Theophilus;763603]



Well whether it's a fairy tale is up to one's personal beliefs.
There is a lot of archaeological and secular history backing up the Bible but one can always dismiss things with counter arguments from critics. Of critics there is no shortage.
[/QUOTE]

There is no secular evidence for the bible. There is only evidence to believe that the some authors of the bible were around when they claimed to be and had some knowledge of recent events. Nothing supports any of their supernatural claims.

[Nick333]

Also a nice misunderstanding.
It means that of every animal you need to take two (one male and one female) but for the "clean" animals sheep, doves, etc. you need to take 7 of each.

This is because some of the "clean" animals needed to be sacrificed.
If you sacrifice the last gender of a species then it becomes extinct.
God's not that stupid but it seems that some people are a little thick when it comes to literature.

Oh and literature? Rofl

[The_Librarian]

How did you deduce that these are facts?

Because the Bible gives you enough information to work that out yourself.
Because I have seen for myself said timeline.
Because there are 7 days in the week, 6 to work, and rest on the 7th.
Because there were 7 years of prosperity, followed by 7 years of famine in ancient Egypt.

[Theophilus]

There is no secular evidence for the bible. There is only evidence to believe that the some authors of the bible were around when they claimed to be and had some knowledge of recent events. Nothing supports any of their supernatural claims.

*****' Resurrection and/or the persecution of His followers were documented outside of the Bible by the following historical authorities: Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas, Flavius Josephus, Thallus, Pliny the Younger, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and the Jewish Sanhedrin.
Beyond these ancient historians, there are documents from other sources such as the 2nd century Greek satirist Lucian. John Foxe wrote the classic Foxe's Book of Martyrs, describing in detail Christian suffering from the deaths of 1st Century Christians up to the persecutions during the reign of Queen "Bloody" Mary in England.

Even if there wasn't any historical evidence for the Bible I tend to wonder why Christianity spread like wild fire in the face of very severe persecution.
People don't face death just cause they like a story.
I mean if someone came to me and said Alice in Wonderland is true and I must become a follower I'd tell them to go hopping.
They must have had compelling evidence back then to cause them to convert and that makes me stop and think a bit.

[Nick333]

*****' Resurrection and/or the persecution of His followers were documented outside of the Bible by the following historical authorities: Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas, Flavius Josephus, Thallus, Pliny the Younger, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and the Jewish Sanhedrin.
Beyond these ancient historians, there are documents from other sources such as the 2nd century Greek satirist Lucian. John Foxe wrote the classic Foxe's Book of Martyrs, describing in detail Christian suffering from the deaths of 1st Century Christians up to the persecutions during the reign of Queen "Bloody" Mary in England.

Even if there wasn't any historical evidence for the Bible I tend to wonder why Christianity spread like wild fire in the face of very severe persecution.
People don't face death just cause they like a story.
I mean if someone came to me and said Alice in Wonderland is true and I must become a follower I'd tell them to go hopping.
They must have had compelling evidence back then to cause them to convert and that makes me stop and think a bit.

It always comes down to half truths with you lot. None of those mention Christs resurection as fact except the maybe the church fathers like Justin Martyr. NONE. Church fathers are hardly historically reliable sources. Specifically those who lived hundreds of years after christ. Prove me wrong or I will call you out as a liar. Mentioning that there was a religion that followed a guy called J3sus is hardly proof that J3sus was the son of God.

As for christianities survival it only had to survive three hundred years of persecution before becoming the pet religion of the roman empire after which it was in like sin and had no problem at all of growing and prospering. The Jews survived two thousand years of persecution. Plenty of other religions have survived persecution through out history. Should we take this as proof that they are all the true faith?

[The_Librarian]

*****' Resurrection and/or the persecution of His followers were documented outside of the Bible by the following historical authorities: Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas, Flavius Josephus, Thallus, Pliny the Younger, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and the Jewish Sanhedrin.
Beyond these ancient historians, there are documents from other sources such as the 2nd century Greek satirist Lucian. John Foxe wrote the classic Foxe's Book of Martyrs, describing in detail Christian suffering from the deaths of 1st Century Christians up to the persecutions during the reign of Queen "Bloody" Mary in England.

Even if there wasn't any historical evidence for the Bible I tend to wonder why Christianity spread like wild fire in the face of very severe persecution.
People don't face death just cause they like a story.
I mean if someone came to me and said Alice in Wonderland is true and I must become a follower I'd tell them to go hopping.
They must have had compelling evidence back then to cause them to convert and that makes me stop and think a bit.

Well said. :D

[Nick333]

Well said. :D

The blind following the willfully ignorant.

[Highflyer_GP]

Because the Bible gives you enough information to work that out yourself.
Because I have seen for myself said timeline.
You have seen 6000 years for yourself??


Because there are 7 days in the week, 6 to work, and rest on the 7th.

One of the after effects when the church was law, no doubt. Also explains why xmas and easter are public holidays while significant holy days of other religions aren't declared public holidays.


Because there were 7 years of prosperity, followed by 7 years of famine in ancient Egypt.

Ancient Egypt dates back thousands of years, way before the bible was written. This could easily have been written after said events, which would make it nothing more than a documentation of word of mouth as opposed to a "factual" prediction.

[Claymore]

*****' Resurrection and/or the persecution of His followers were documented outside of the Bible by the following historical authorities: Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas, Flavius Josephus, Thallus, Pliny the Younger, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and the Jewish Sanhedrin.


Coorect me if I'm wrong, bt I don't believe that any of those were contemporary - they were writing decades (or more) after the purported events, relying on complete hearsay.

[Nick333]

For Saffer


December 19, 1999 CE - Sun Magazine uncovered "Bible expert" Dotson Meade, who poured over the Dead Sea Scrolls (night and day, no doubt) to discover that WW III and an assortment of natural catastrophes would wipe out all life as we know it. He didn't mention what it might do to the life we're not so sure about or to the life we've never been properly introduced to.



January 1, 2000 CE - One would be hard-pressed to come up with a date that spawned more wild-eyed weirdness than this one. From the millennial hounds to the militia nuts, from "earth change" watchers to UFO fanatics, the sheer number and diversity of groups that locked onto this as their terminal target is amazing... and not a little scary. Bad enough, had it just been a flip of the calendar to kick the superstitious into heebie-jeebie mode, but then, what should come along but, the Y2K Bug! Now, I ask you, who knew so many loonies would jump to switch the number of the Beast from 666 to 00 overnight? It seemed as if there had hardly been time to blink before a simple little computer glitch got turned inexplicably into the ultimate Sign of Evil.

And who did we have to thank for that, boys and girls? Well, right on the front lines of fearmongering was the Christian Coalition who, along with the standard hysteria about the collapse of the economy and all social and civil institutions, claimed that President Clinton (a.k.a. "The Great Fornicator") would use the disaster to make himself Crazed Dictator of the USA. Of course, neither Jerry Falwell nor Pat Robertson could restrain themselves from whipping up their share of pocket-lining panic. Both had books and videos for sale that painted Y2K as, in Falwell's words, "God's instrument to shake this nation, to humble this nation." Considering the total collapse they had in mind, it's odd that both Messrs. Falwell and Robertson were charging for their wares. Since money wouldn't mean anything after the apocalypse, you'd think they'd have been giving their warnings away free... Wouldn't you?

Naturally, that towering edifice of shameless self-promotion Hal Lindsey began stumping for the End Times, again, with Y2K front and center in his collection of signs and portents. In addition, apocalyptic writers who otherwise couldn't have gotten published on a barroom bet sprang up like weeds. Ted Hall with his peppy survival guide, "Beat The Beast", (No, that's not what he meant, you randy lil' scamp, you! ) gave cheery, up-beat advice on apocalyptic preparations certain to have given the faithful one up on Old Scratch. Then, there was that Avon Lady of the End Times, Karen Anderson, who penned "Y2K For Women", a How-To guide for those simple, All-American gals who needed to know how they could face down the total collapse of civilization without sacrificing any of their femininity.

This, of course, is just a small, swift rundown of some of the more notable nutjobs that fueled this pointless little bonfire of the inanities. For a more in-depth description of the lunacy that was Y2K, read on...


January 3, 2000 CE - This was the "optimistic" outside date for Gary North's Y2K concocted Doomsday. Gary's one of those sorry little losers who thinks he’s never gotten enough attention in life and who, as a consequence, spends nearly every waking moment pining for the end of the icky, ookie civilization that has the Godless audacity to ignore him. Being a devout Christian Reconstructionist, (sort of a modern-day Fifth Monarchy Man, only minus the funny hat and knickers) his usual baddie-whomper of choice is God's Wrath. But that got set aside under a tactical tea cozy once Gary laid his eyes on Y2K. It was love at first byte. Envisioning scenes of global electronic anarchy bringing the whole secular world to its nasty knees, he immediately set out to spread panic about the bug as far and wide as he possibly could.

Subscribers to Scary Gary's pitiful newsletter and listeners to the Art Bell show (you didn't think he'd be the crank who got away, did you?) were treated to a litany of kooky catastrophe claims and even nuttier suggestions for dealing with them. From running off to build survival fortresses out in the boondocks, to buying diesel Mercedes Benzes, North's fans and followers had no dearth of pointless and bizarre activities to keep themselves busy with right up to Jan. 3. What they'll be doing nowadays is anyone's guess. But, don't be surprised to find a slew of Mercedes diesels cluttering up the used car section of your local classifieds in the coming years.

http://www.geocities.com/athens/oracle/9941/

All sorts of people, christians chief among them have been predicting the end of the world for millenia. Ive noticed that in this new century the predictions have become more and more vague. We used to get solid dates but since most of them from the 20 th century centred around the new millenium which obviously were all wrong they now gives us estimates ranging from very soon as in possibly next month to in the next ten years to definetly in the next fifty years.
Some of these guys will predict an exact date only to change it to another exact date when the day after dawns as days tend to do.
Google armagedon if youre brave. You'll get a bunch of sights that have been foretelling the apocalypse probably since the internet was created.

[Nick333]

Coorect me if I'm wrong, bt I don't believe that any of those were contemporary - they were writing decades (or more) after the purported events, relying on complete hearsay.

Youre not wrong. The non-church father sources all talk about the cult of christianity as a bunch of upstarts and superstitious morons. They hardly provide proof of the resurection like he would have us believe.

When there ill-concieved arguments and pointless bible quotes fail this type of christian will always resort to half-truths and white lies, because its ok to lie if its to the greater glory of God.

[The_Librarian]

The blind following the willfully ignorant.

Why did Nero fiddled while Rome burnt?

[Captain Beer]

Why did Nero fiddled while Rome burnt?

Where's my ADRA update? :p

[Nick333]

Why did Nero fiddled while Rome burnt?

To get to the other side? No that doesn't work does it?

Are you drunk?:confused:

[The_Librarian]

To get to the other side? No that doesn't work does it?

Are you drunk?:confused:

Wrong answer, and no, I'm not drunk.
Nero used the fires as an excuse to throw Christians into jail.

[Highflyer_GP]

Wrong answer, and no, I'm not drunk.


And where's my update to the claim that you saw a 6000 year old timeline for yourself? :p

[The_Librarian]

Where's my ADRA update?

I'm trying to find the correct contact person.


And where's my update to the claim that you saw a 6000 year old timeline for yourself?

Go work it out yourself. :p Today being a monday I reserve the right to be extra spikey today... :p :D

On second thoughts, I will see what I can find on the Internet.

[Theophilus]

Church fathers are hardly historically reliable sources. Specifically those who lived hundreds of years after christ. Prove me wrong or I will call you out as a liar. Mentioning that there was a religion that followed a guy called J3sus is hardly proof that J3sus was the son of God.

Well no one can prove that J3sus was the son of God.
I mean how on earth could you prove a claim like that except through the fulfillment of biblical prophecy which you believe are myths anyway.

We can however know that J3sus really existed from secular sources.


Flavius Josephus was a historian who lived from 37 A.D. to about 100 A.D. He was a member of the priestly aristocracy of the Jews, and was taken hostage by the Roman Empire in the great Jewish revolt of 66-70 A.D. Josephus spent the rest of his life in or around Rome as an advisor and historian to three emperors, Vespasian, Titus and Domitian. For centuries, the works of Josephus were more widely read in Europe than any book other than the Bible. They are invaluable sources of eyewitness testimony to the development of Western civilization, including the foundation and growth of Christianity in the 1st Century.

Josephus - Biblical Accounts Outside the Bible
Josephus mentions New Testament events and people in some of his works. For many skeptics, this is viewed as significant evidence against the myth and legend theories that plague early Christianity. Here are some excerpts:

Josephus mentions ***** in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3 (this paragraph is so phenomenal, that scholars now debate the authenticity of some of the more “favorable” portions of this text):

“Now there was about this time *****, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

Josephus mentions John the Baptist and Herod in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 5, paragraph 2:

"Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness."

Josephus mentions James, the brother of *****, in Antiquities, Book 20, chapter 9, paragraph 1:

"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of *****, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done."
http://www.allabouthistory.org/josephus.htm




Pliny the Younger
Was Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor
Wrote a letter to the Emperor Trajan in 112 A.D. regarding the Christians in his province
Verifies that Christians in 112 A.D. both worshipped Christ "as to a god", and were willing to die for their belief in Christ




Cornelius Tacitus
Born c. 52-55 A.D.
Served as senator, under Vespasian, and later (112-113 A.D.) governor of Asia
In "Annals" (c. 116 A.D.), he verifies the details of Christ's death at the hands of Pontius Pilate

"Christus, the founder of the name [Christians], had undergone the death penalty in the reign of Tiberius, by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate, and the pernicious superstition was checked for a moment, only to break out once more, not merely in Judea, the home of the disease, but in the capital itself, where all things horrible or shameful in the world collect and find a vogue." (quoted from McDowell, p. 49)

None of these men were church fathers so they had no reason to fabricate stories about someone fictitious.

As for the resurrection and J3sus claiming to be God - that can't be proven because we don't have enough historical evidence of that.
J3sus was never someone significant in the social arena.
He was never a ruler, king or governor.
He was a poor, rural type of man.
He associated with beggars, prostitutes, tax collectors and fishermen.
He never threw big wild parties and invite anyone of significance.
He was executed as a criminal.
In other words he was a nobody in the eyes of society - to most people some freak who went around claiming he was God.
The type of person that nobody would really bother to write home about.

[simple_simon]

Not even close to what I meant Simon, perhaps I didn't express myself well :( My point was more if we are fully obedient to the will of God we would trust him totally. I am fully responsible for my life and actions, but reliant on God.

We try and control our lives because we do not fully trust God, I put that down to human frailty more than anything else or stubbornness.

What I have seen from some Christians (I think the point you make very well) is this behaviour of, 'If I believe, trust and obey God and then SIT ON MY BUTT AND DO NOTHING, everything will be fine'. I've defined that myself as passive Christianity which is worth nothing.

I hope I have made myself a bit clearer :)

we are all entitled to our own opinions, i respect yours even though its not for me.

i'm not really into the obedient part of your arguement, i'm not a dog. plus it just doesn't sit well with me.

why would an aspect of god, encarnate only to be punished if you don't do as god says....given the following factors....direct communication is fuzzy at its best and this large ego portion of the encarnation...will do everything it can to fuzz it up more.

what you're saying is that there is no free will, because you must do as god says...or else.

whats the point of life then?

[Theophilus]

what you're saying is that there is no free will, because you must do as god says...or else.
whats the point of life then?

Free will but with consequences - just like any law.

Example :
There are speed limits on the roads - if you break them and are punished then tough cookies.
You still have a free will to break those rules and chose the "else" part.
Does that mean that the traffic laws are pointless and everyone should do as they please?

[Moederloos]

lol - gotta love the circular arguments from the "creationist" peeps.

[simple_simon]

Free will but with consequences - just like any law.

Example :
There are speed limits on the roads - if you break them and are punished then tough cookies.
You still have a free will to break those rules and chose the "else" part.
Does that mean that the traffic laws are pointless and everyone should do as they please?

thats just ridiculous. why would a part of god encarnate and then the other part of god "punish" the part that encarnated if it doesn't do as its told.

i'm sorry, this whole punishment side to religion is a joke.

its called.....thousands of years ago religious leaders where also the government, they made laws to govern people to create a structured society, they threw the whole gods laws into the fray to try put some authority behind their laws.

seriously dude you need to open your eye's

[simple_simon]

lol - gotta love the circular arguments from the "creationist" peeps.

its called people being confortable with how they have structured their reality....as soon as you pose questions that forces them to reconsider their reality they either, question it and find a new reality to create or they simply deny the evidence and carry on going in circles

[Moederloos]

thats just ridiculous. why would a part of god encarnate and then the other part of god "punish" the part that encarnated if it doesn't do as its told.

i'm sorry, this whole punishment side to religion is a joke.

its called.....thousands of years ago religious leaders where also the government, they made laws to govern people to create a structured society, they threw the whole gods laws into the fray to try put some authority behind their laws.

seriously dude you need to open your eye's

yup. And let's not even start on the whole "free will vs omniscience / gods plan" bulldust.

[Nick333]

@ Theophilus

So the only support for your claim that JCs resurrection was documented by secular sources is the highly controversial writings of Josephus. The thing about Josephus is that he was a Jew, if he believed what he is supposed to have written about J3sus why was he not a christian. There is to much reason to believe that the passages regarding JC were inserted by someone else.

My point here is you make the claim that there is secular evidence to support J3suss resurrection and quote all those "historians" when the only one of them who supports your claim is the one whose writings on the subject are the most suspect.

The best that any secular sources tell us is that there were Christians who believed that some guy that the Romans crucified was the son of god.
I could say the same thing of Christians today does that somehow support your beliefs?

This how learned "Christians" convince ignorant Christians of scientific "facts".
They make statements like yours safe in the knowledge that they wont be questioned by anyone who counts.

[Nick333]

Free will but with consequences - just like any law.

Example :
There are speed limits on the roads - if you break them and are punished then tough cookies.
You still have a free will to break those rules and chose the "else" part.
Does that mean that the traffic laws are pointless and everyone should do as they please?

More religious nonsense that only satisfies the ignorant and unquestioning.

Free will is not like traffic law at all. Traffic laws are logical rules that most choose to obey because the consequences for them don't just stem from being punished by the authorities, but from the rather immidiate results of possible maiming or death if they are disobeyed.
Similar can be said for most secular laws. Breaking laws that protect others in society affects society adversly. There are obvious reasons for choosing to obey the laws of your society.

Gods law of believing in him or burning in hell is more akin to the laws against free speech and freedom of association in Dictatorships. There is no other reason that they should be obeyed that benefit society as a whole. The only reason to obey such laws is punishment that is meted out for disobeying them.

[simple_simon]

i think we should coin another acronym for this forum for such cases in particular

wtfu - wake the **** up

[Moederloos]

Anyone here read "The God Delusion"? A must read.

Also, the Q&A session from a recent lecture by him (www.richarddawkins.net) is brilliant - but an hour long, so make time.

My favourite was the question by a young lady who asked "But what if you are wrong [about there being a god]?". His answer was not only very funny, but right on the proverbial nail.

[fivelza]

More religious nonsense that only satisfies the ignorant and unquestioning.

Free will is not like traffic law at all. Traffic laws are logical rules that most choose to obey because the consequences for them don't just stem from being punished by the authorities, but from the rather immidiate results of possible maiming or death if they are disobeyed.
Similar can be said for most secular laws. Breaking laws that protect others in society affects society adversly. There are obvious reasons for choosing to obey the laws of your society.

Gods law of believing in him or burning in hell is more akin to the laws against free speech and freedom of association in Dictatorships. There is no other reason that they should be obeyed that benefit society as a whole. The only reason to obey such laws is punishment that is meted out for disobeying them.

But then Christianity is not for you and so be it. This is where trying to debate something like this meaningless as you will always find some 'valid' argument against it. Any Christian who tries to defend Christianity on an intellectual level is on a hiding to nothing.


i think we should coin another acronym for this forum for such cases in particular

wtfu - wake the **** up

Come on Simon, just because it is not 100% in agreement with what you believe.

[Moederloos]

But then Christianity is not for you and so be it.

Not to be argumentative, but I cannot just "let it be". Religion dominates [my] world, and I am an atheist.

Until religion is destroyed, in entirety, we cannot have a progressive society.

Monsters under the bed etc are just so 14th century.

[simple_simon]

Come on Simon, just because it is not 100% in agreement with what you believe.

its not even 1%.

forgive my suggestion brother, its a monday morning.

[fivelza]

Not to be argumentative, but I cannot just "let it be". Religion dominates [my] world, and I am an atheist.

Until religion is destroyed, in entirety, we cannot have a progressive society.

Monsters under the bed etc are just so 14th century.

What do you define as a progressive society?

[Moederloos]

What do you define as a progressive society?

Two good starts would be:

1) A society where children are not indoctrinated wth religion from birth
2) A society (thankfully not ours) where 50% of the population are not relegated to slavery based on their gender

[fivelza]

Two good starts would be:

1) A society where children are not indoctrinated with religion from birth
2) A society (thankfully not ours) where 50% of the population are not relegated to slavery based on their gender

Why do you say that society is indoctrinating children now? If you look at how religion has been taken out of schools, it is already happening.

Point 2 agreed.

[simple_simon]

Two good starts would be:

1) A society where children are not indoctrinated wth religion from birth
2) A society (thankfully not ours) where 50% of the population are not relegated to slavery based on their gender

don't forget

3) A society where fear is not used to control it by any governing administration.
4) A society where all information (financial, etc) on public servants are made easily accessible and any hint of wrong doing can lead to immediate dismissal.

[arf9999]

Somewhere someone forgot to tell about the murder done by Pharaoh on all the male babies when Moses was a baby. Same that happened with Herod when Christ was born. Go read the Bible itself and not extracts with impressionable extortions and postulates.

If you want to include child massacres then do so it where you have some influence. Around us now, children are killed in abortions and as child control after they are born. Go into China and talk to them if you feel so strong. This is in your own time, not a fantasy into the past. Change life in China and then speak.

Fear of God sometimes is the biggest fear of all.

Matthew 2

16When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled:
18"A voice is heard in Ramah,
weeping and great mourning,
Rachel weeping for her children
and refusing to be comforted,
because they are no more."[g]

except that there is no historical record of this ever happening...

[simple_simon]

Why do you say that society is indoctrinating children now? If you look at how religion has been taken out of schools, it is already happening.

Point 2 agreed.

if you want your children to have a decent education and you are privileged enough to be able to afford a private school...try find one without a "st." in front of its title.

[BCO]

Anyone read Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion". I'm busy with it now.... fascinating stuff, although probably a little to aggressively written for religious types to stomach.

[simple_simon]

Anyone read Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion". I'm busy with it now.... fascinating stuff, although probably a little to aggressively written for religious types to stomach.

i've heard people chatting this book up, i'll give it a read sometime

[fivelza]

if you want your children to have a decent education and you are privileged enough to be able to afford a private school...try find one without a "st." in front of its title.

Are your asserting that you get a better education where religion is not involved? BTW..... pure government education here ;)

[Moederloos]

if you want your children to have a decent education and you are privileged enough to be able to afford a private school...try find one without a "st." in front of its title.

I am not sure by the above whether you think religious schools are good or bad, but from previous posts, I assume you think it is bad.

Anyways, any private school built on "Christian Morals" is

1) Discrimanatory (but then religion seems immune from attack on this front)
2) Contradictory in terms

I would sooner stick nails in my eyes than allow my children to be brought up "christians". Children deserve the right to be exposed to all things equally and make up their own minds.

[simple_simon]

Are your asserting that you get a better education where religion is not involved? BTW..... pure government education here ;)

it has absolutely nothing to do with religion in this case....purely money. "private" schools pay teachers more, hence you get the better of the available educators to teach your children. secondly, there are less children in a class (public schools you're sitting at 40 kids per class...private is half that), hence more personal teacher face time. i don't know why virtually every private school in sa has to be a st. whats his face.

private schools base their education on IEB examinations, etc. this has once again absolutley nothing to do with religion. just a differnt system of education that is superior to the one provided by government.

[fivelza]

I would sooner stick nails in my eyes than allow my children to be brought up "christians". Children deserve the right to be exposed to all things equally and make up their own minds.

Well I don't agree with the stick nails in my eyes bit here ;) I agree that parents should guide their children the way they see fit and not be reliant on schools.


it has absolutely nothing to do with religion in this case....purely money. "private" schools pay teachers more, hence you get the better of the available educators to teach your children. secondly, there are less children in a class (public schools you're sitting at 40 kids per class...private is half that), hence more personal teacher face time. i don't know why virtually every private school in sa has to be a st. whats his face.

private schools base their education on IEB examinations, etc. this has once again absolutley nothing to do with religion. just a differnt system of education that is superior to the one provided by government.

Agreed Simon :D

[simple_simon]

you basically can't protect your children from the religions of the world....the best you can do is provide them with enough balanced information on a subject and let them make up their own minds...they're going to do what they want anyway.

[The_Librarian]

For the SDA people - don't answer this one yet. I want to see if somebody else come up with the right answer :

What does "time and law" (Afrikaans : "tyd en wet") signify in the context of the Bible?

In Afrikaans, the whole verse is here : Daniel 7:25



25. En hy sal woorde spreek teen die Allerhoogste en die heiliges
van die Allerhoogste mishandel; en hy sal probeer om tye en wet te
verander, en hulle sal in sy hand oorgegee word gedurende 'n tyd en
tye en die helfte van 'n tyd.


English it is :


25 And he shall speak great words against the most High, and shall wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time.

[Safferbeauty]

Isnt that talking about the devil?

[Nick333]

Daniel was talking about an apocolyptic vision he'd had. The "he" in the story is this dude:


7 "After that, in my vision at night I looked, and there before me was a fourth beast—terrifying and frightening and very powerful. It had large iron teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left. It was different from all the former beasts, and it had ten horns.

Who do you think it is Librarian? George Bush? Bin Laden? One of us heathen that believe that the Universe is 15 billion years old?

[Safferbeauty]

The earth is not 15 billion years old. Its more like 6 thousand years old

[geekchick]

The earth is not 15 billion years old. Its more like 6 thousand years old

Why do you say that?:confused:

[The_Librarian]

All will be answered in due course. I want to see what answers I get before I start off with the explanation, interpretation and meaning of the visions Daniel had.

This will lead us to the final book in the Bible - Revelations.

[Rkootknir]

The earth is not 15 billion years old. Its more like 6 thousand years oldDear God... :sick:

The Earth is about 4.55 billion (+-1% two-sided error margin) years old.
The universe (you misquoted Nick333) is about 13.7 billion (+-2% two-sided error margin) years old.

[Nick333]

The earth is not 15 billion years old. Its more like 6 thousand years old

Now why could I be so anti-religion?

I feel a short essay on "Why we think the 6000 thousand years is a long time." or more to the point: "Why people are so ****ing stupid." or even "My cat probably thinks the world is ten".

[fivelza]

Now why could I be so anti-religion?

I feel a short essay on "Why we think the 6000 thousand years is a long time." or more to the point: "Why people are so ****ing stupid." or even "My cat probably thinks the world is ten".

Or does it really matter :D

[simple_simon]

The earth is not 15 billion years old. Its more like 6 thousand years old

interesting point of view. By the way what medication are you on?

the pyramids of giza are more than 10000yrs old.

the question is not whether which came first, the chicken or the egg.

it appears as though its the pyramids or the planet?

[The_Librarian]

interesting point of view. By the way what medication are you on?

the pyramids of giza are more than 10000yrs old.

the question is not whether which came first, the chicken or the egg.

it appears as though its the pyramids or the planet?

How do you know that the Pyramids really are 10000 years old?

[simple_simon]

How do you know that the Pyramids really are 10000 years old?

fingerprints of the gods
the orion mystery
the hidden records

i think there are a few more books also. those where just off the top of my head.

[Highflyer_GP]

The earth is not 15 billion years old. Its more like 6 thousand years old

Ok no offense but now you're just talking crap. Stop using your computer, cellphone, TV, or for that matter anything that makes use of electricity. After you've done that, find a cave for yourself to live in seeing that you think science is bull*****.

If this is really what you think, then you (and many, many other blind followers) don't deserve to make use of anything resulting from science. You're better off in a cave reading the bible under candlelight. Let's see who survives longer when hypocrisy is no longer in the equation.

[arf9999]

For the SDA people - don't answer this one yet. I want to see if somebody else come up with the right answer :

What does "time and law" (Afrikaans : "tyd en wet") signify in the context of the Bible?

In Afrikaans, the whole verse is here : Daniel 7:25



English it is :

What does it matter what it means? I mean any more than the hallucinations recorded in Revelations. This is more mythology mis-quoted, mis-translated and misunderstood.

[The_Librarian]

fingerprints of the gods
the orion mystery
the hidden records

i think there are a few more books also. those where just off the top of my head.

But what if these are based on mistaken assumptions?

These authors are doing a lot of guesswork and assumptions here.

[Highflyer_GP]

But what if these are based on mistaken assumptions?

These authors are doing a lot of guesswork and assumptions here.

Yeah and I'm sure that the authors of the bible never made any assumptions or guesses :rolleyes:

[Captain Beer]

But what if these are based on mistaken assumptions?

These authors are doing a lot of guesswork and assumptions here.

Same with the Ellen G White books :D

[Nick333]

Or does it really matter :D

Does the truth matter? Only if you're concerned with the survival of the human race, and the survival of life in general.

Lets see what has science done for the species again?
Well as a result of scientific research into how things work the majority of people lead longer and more comfortable lives. We have instant communications, relatively cheap and extremely safe travel to almost anywhere on the planet.

Where would we be if religion still told us all how and what to think? Um in the ****ing dark ages is where.

It does matter that everyone understands their world and their universe and their place in it, because the more people who are aware that our survival depends on that knowledge the better our chance of survival.

The more ignorance we have the more people we have who believe that the earth is doomed anyway so theres no reason to worry about the future. If you believe in J3sus your futures all sewn up and secured.

Well Im very sorry, but if after having received a decent education and knowing what scientific evidence there is to support what we know about the universe, you don't have the guts to face your own mortality with dignity, and choose to believe in fairy tales instead, then do the rest of us a favour and go live in a cave and stop wasting the resources that the rest of us need to live our lives and do something so that future generations can enjoy theirs.
Better yet stop breathing because someone who actually wants to live is more deserving of it.

Oh and stop spreading your illogical beliefs where children can have their minds warped by it. You can't be stopped from spouting your crap to grown-ups, but its a crime that innocent children are having their intellects permanently hobbled by it.

[Nick333]

But what if these are based on mistaken assumptions?

These authors are doing a lot of guesswork and assumptions here.

It doesn't actually matter how old the pyramids are. We know how old the mountains are because we know the processes by which they are formed. We don't have to worry that they are wrong because the scientists who have drawn these conclusions are very intelligent and skilled people, with the attention to detail and techniques and equipment that rivals those of the most talented forensic detective. Better yet their findings have been tested by thousands of other scientists with even better resources at their disposal. Even better still their will be even more scientists who will continue to study these findings and make more discoveries themselves. If we can send someone to a life in prison based on the findings of one scientist then I think we can trust the findings of thousands when it comes to the age of the earth. Or the age of the universe for that matter.

What have you got to base your belief that the earth is 6000 years old on? Oh ja the beliefs of a bunch of primitives who had no science at all.

[Nick333]

Here is some information on what we know, that proves the age of the earth.
Take note of the "proofs" offered by creationists. Notice that these "proofs" are not only bad science but also that creationist theory totally ignores real proof. Notice how scientific proof addresses and debunks pseudo-scientific, creationist "proof". The reason creationist "scientists" bother to make utter fools of themselves in front of there colleagues is that they aren't really trying to prove anything but are trying to create the impression that there is a scientific debate amongst scientists about the origins of the universe that includes creationism. The impression is being made for the benefit of the hordes of blissfully ignorant christians whose world view is threatened by the facts and who will never bother to question what they are told by their leaders. There is no scientific debate that includes a belief that the universe is 6000 years old. Anybody who tells you it is without a Phd in physics is ignorant. Anyone who tells you this and does have a Phd is a ****ing liar. Just like Theophilus bent the truth and offered white lies creation "scientists" think its ok to lie to you for the sake of your souls because they think you are to stupid to know the truth yourself.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html#creadate

Any god who doesn't want you to think for yourself has got something to hide.

[Highflyer_GP]

Nick it's pointless talking sense, some people are so scared to move out of their comfort zones that they're willing to remain stupid. And then they have the nerve to use the results of scientific progress to lead comfortable lives while at the same time questioning science because it doesn't correspond to their belief. Fscking leechers if you ask me.

[Nick333]

Nick it's pointless talking sense, some people are so scared to move out of their comfort zones that they're willing to remain stupid. And then they have the nerve to use the results of scientific progress to lead comfortable lives while at the same time questioning science because it doesn't correspond to their belief. Fscking leechers if you ask me.

I'm becoming more convinced that the truth needs to be screamed at people from about an inch away from their faces. After all Christians feel it is their duty to spread ignorance.
But you're right it does seem pointless most of the time. In fact I think I need a break from this debate for a while.

BTW apologies for not giving you the credit for the go live in a cave bit. Its a valid point. Even the Amish have a bit of a cheek using the wheel and the plow when you think about it. Talk about having your cake and eating it.

[Highflyer_GP]

LOL no need to credit me, I'm just glad that somebody else saw the irony in it.

[Raithlin]

Anybody who tells you it is without a Phd in physics is ignorant. Anyone who tells you this and does have a Phd is a ****ing liar.

I love your way of thinking. Anyone who has a PhD and tells you what you don't believe MUST be a liar. And you call us closed thinkers.:rolleyes:

I have avoided this thread for a while because the title is somewhat misleading. How wrong I was. Now I have to go and read the entire thread to catch up... :(

[Nick333]

I love your way of thinking. Anyone who has a PhD and tells you what you don't believe MUST be a liar. And you call us closed thinkers.:rolleyes:

I have avoided this thread for a while because the title is somewhat misleading. How wrong I was. Now I have to go and read the entire thread to catch up... :(

I have read their arguments and I know that there arguments are very obviously faulty. I also know what the agenda behind what they claim is. They are not exactly secretive about it. They don't have to be christians just want easy answers.

http://home.austarnet.com.au/stear/aig_no_research.htm

http://www.answersincreation.org/commentary/scientist_csc3.htm

What lengths creationists are willing to go to:

http://www.skeptics.com.au/journal/1998/3_crexpose.htm

And btw its got nothing to do with what I believe, its got everything to do with what science proves.

[Raithlin]

So what exactly does science prove? I'm talking empirical, observational science here, not what scientists say because it fits in with their worldview. Things like logic, gravity and all that. Stuff we can prove because we can observe it, and/or reproduce it. I know what everyone is saying - but nobody can prove it. Not that I've seen, anyway.

[Highflyer_GP]

Well nobody can prove a 6000 year timeline either, in which case you'd have to ask yourself who's more credible? A bunch of neanderthals scribbling away under candlelight or thousands of modern scientists who happen to be in agreement with each other?

[Nick333]

Well nobody can prove a 6000 year timeline either, in which case you'd have to ask yourself who's more credible? A bunch of neanderthals scribbling away under candlelight or thousands of modern scientists who happen to be in agreement with each other?

Yup that'll do it really. I was busy lining up the wiki links on scientific method and such, but seriously Raithlin if you want to be ignorant be ignorant, just know that you're also being stupid.

I'm officially out of this for now. I'm off to my new addiction: GuildWars.

[Raithlin]

Cheers Nick.

I'm not being stupid. I totally agree that we can't prove a 6000 yr timeline. Did I say anything about that? Creationists have their Bible - they use that as a source of reference. Everyone else has the fossil record, and anything else they can observe. Point is this: Both sides depend on certain assumptions, be it in a book or otherwise. By way of example, the fossil record is explained by creationists as the result of a global flood. Inflation (big bang) is explained quite nicely, I think, as a result of being created. Pyramids, obelisks, temples throughout the world with a similar structure are explained by the tower of babel.

That aside, there are other things that bother me about evolutionist arguments. If the fossil record is indeed correct, how is it that it is hardly ever (if ever) found in the order in which it should be? We find that a cambrian layer is above a jurassic layer, for example. Why?

Anyhow, I must go. I read an interesting discussion between a creationist and evolutionist about logic. I must go find it and post it here. I'd love to see the comments on it (You folks are always so creative with your insults).

[Raithlin]

Well nobody can prove a 6000 year timeline either, in which case you'd have to ask yourself who's more credible? A bunch of neanderthals scribbling away under candlelight or thousands of modern scientists who happen to be in agreement with each other?

Buildings were created that still stand today. The mathematical genius of the Mayan civilisation is comparable to current mathematics. Sure, people thought the earth was flat - unless you were a Jew, in which case you simply believed what the Old Testament told you - that the earth is a ball. Sure, the medicine wasn't great, nor was hygiene - unless you were a Jew, in which case you would follow the laws set out in the time of Moses - laws which are supported by science today in terms of hygiene in the medical field. This and more - Moses recorded the order of creation some 3000 years ago - and got it 100% correct as far as science is concerned. The chance of him getting that right by chance is quite large, btw. Check it out.

A bunch of neanderthals scribbling away under candlelight? I don't think so. We are not quite as far advanced as we'd like to think, compared to our ancestors.

[Sidenote]
The Mayan calendar dated back to 3114BC - and their calendar was as accurate as our current calendar. Interesting, that. ;)

[Poppy]

A few that I managed to find contradictory yet amusing.

Regarding how many sons Abraham had:

What about how many of each animal Noah was supposed to have taken onto the ark:

Also,

More here: http://www.krysstal.com/contradi.html
Firstly Abraham had a son with Hagar (Not legitimate becuase Hagar was Sarah's maid servant whom she gave to Abraham to beget a son), but because her (Hagar) son used to harrass Isaac, they were driven away, which is why he is said to have had only one son. Isaac was Abrahams only legitimat son.

Secondly you are so intent on finding contradiction you don't even read the passages properly. It says that Noah had to take two of every other animal into the ark, but he had to take SEVEN of the CLEAN animals into it.

[nthdimension]

Which of the two Genesis stories did Moses write and how does it match science? And if he did get it right can we see the statistical analysis that has been done to show the likelihood of getting it right by chance?

The Mayans were presumably very observant. That is how other civilizations figured out their calendars.

Realising that cleanliness can prevent disease is a matter of observation. Did other societies that knew this figure it out before or after the Jews?

The Mayans had an interesting number system and they had some mathematics, but can you point us to some analyses of its sophistication. By mathematicians of course.

[fivelza]

Does the truth matter? Only if you're concerned with the survival of the human race, and the survival of life in general.

Lets see what has science done for the species again?
Well as a result of scientific research into how things work the majority of people lead longer and more comfortable lives. We have instant communications, relatively cheap and extremely safe travel to almost anywhere on the planet.

Where would we be if religion still told us all how and what to think? Um in the ****ing dark ages is where.

It does matter that everyone understands their world and their universe and their place in it, because the more people who are aware that our survival depends on that knowledge the better our chance of survival.

The more ignorance we have the more people we have who believe that the earth is doomed anyway so theres no reason to worry about the future. If you believe in J3sus your futures all sewn up and secured.

Well Im very sorry, but if after having received a decent education and knowing what scientific evidence there is to support what we know about the universe, you don't have the guts to face your own mortality with dignity, and choose to believe in fairy tales instead, then do the rest of us a favour and go live in a cave and stop wasting the resources that the rest of us need to live our lives and do something so that future generations can enjoy theirs.
Better yet stop breathing because someone who actually wants to live is more deserving of it.

Oh and stop spreading your illogical beliefs where children can have their minds warped by it. You can't be stopped from spouting your crap to grown-ups, but its a crime that innocent children are having their intellects permanently hobbled by it.

Oh and all your arguments make perfect sense and backed up by science (which is perfect...right). Why can't we live in a world where both science and religion co-exist. From what you post, your world will only exist if it can be proven in science, well good for you...I don't need that.

My 'does it matter comment' relates to where you seem to be expecting that my faith has to be based on proven science, not that science does not matter.

[fivelza]

Nick it's pointless talking sense, some people are so scared to move out of their comfort zones that they're willing to remain stupid. And then they have the nerve to use the results of scientific progress to lead comfortable lives while at the same time questioning science because it doesn't correspond to their belief. Fscking leechers if you ask me.


I'm becoming more convinced that the truth needs to be screamed at people from about an inch away from their faces. After all Christians feel it is their duty to spread ignorance.
But you're right it does seem pointless most of the time. In fact I think I need a break from this debate for a while.

BTW apologies for not giving you the credit for the go live in a cave bit. Its a valid point. Even the Amish have a bit of a cheek using the wheel and the plow when you think about it. Talk about having your cake and eating it.

Knock yourselves out guys, your truth is not mine.

[Poppy]

I find it laughable that evolutionists cannot come up with anything better than the "big bang" to explain our existence or how the earth came about.

If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes in existence? Why have they not evolved?

If you went to the Sahara desert and came across a beautiful house with a pool and great looking furniture and all the amenities you can think of, would you assume that they house came to be there by chance just because there was no one there to answer your questions?

All the different life forms, different plants, animals, humans all came about by "accident". Whata a load of bull ****!

It's an idiot and ignorant fool who chooses not to believe in a creator.

[arf9999]

I find it laughable that evolutionists cannot come up with anything better than the "big bang" to explain our existence or how the earth came about.

If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes in existence? Why have they not evolved?

If you went to the Sahara desert and came across a beautiful house with a pool and great looking furniture and all the amenities you can think of, would you assume that they house came to be there by chance just because there was no one there to answer your questions?

All the different life forms, different plants, animals, humans all came about by "accident". Whata a load of bull ****!

It's an idiot and ignorant fool who chooses not to believe in a creator.

ok. right. and you've researched this?

[Poppy]

I don't have to spend countless hours doing research to know that there is a creator. All I have to do is look around me :rolleyes:

[Captain Beer]

Poppy you are very arrogant calling people idiots and fools.

You are the fool my friend!

Awesome way to push people even further away from the church!

[Raithlin]

Mayan Mathematics (http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Mayan_mathematics.html) - with references.

[Raithlin]

Nick it's pointless talking sense, some people are so scared to move out of their comfort zones that they're willing to remain stupid. And then they have the nerve to use the results of scientific progress to lead comfortable lives while at the same time questioning science because it doesn't correspond to their belief. Fscking leechers if you ask me.

I respond:

Some people are so scared to move out of their comfort zones that they're willing to remain stupid. And then they have the nerve to use the results of the Creation to live while at the same time rejecting the Creator because it doesn't correspond to their belief. Fscking leechers if you ask me.

A good example IMO of how the outcome depends entirely on the assumption. :rolleyes:

[Captain Beer]

I respond:

Some people are so scared to move out of their comfort zones that they're willing to remain stupid. And then they have the nerve to use the results of the Creation to live while at the same time rejecting the Creator because it doesn't correspond to their belief. Fscking leechers if you ask me.

A good example IMO of how the outcome depends entirely on the assumption. :rolleyes:

Who you calling stupid? Fscking moron!

I hear someone has just found a 500HP outboard motor from the ark :D

[icyrus]

I find it laughable that evolutionists cannot come up with anything better than the "big bang" to explain our existence or how the earth came about.

If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes in existence? Why have they not evolved?

If you went to the Sahara desert and came across a beautiful house with a pool and great looking furniture and all the amenities you can think of, would you assume that they house came to be there by chance just because there was no one there to answer your questions?

All the different life forms, different plants, animals, humans all came about by "accident". Whata a load of bull ****!

It's an idiot and ignorant fool who chooses not to believe in a creator.

Is that all you have. Quite laughable really.

I do thank you though for brightening my otherwise dull day. Its always amusing to see some of the levels of intellect that are about.

[Poppy]

I have plenty more where that came from, but I notice you did not explain or give me an answer to the questions I posed? so I wont waste my time arguing with an ignoranimous like you until you answer them.

[Captain Beer]

I have plenty more where that came from, but I notice you did not explain or give me an answer to the questions I posed? so I wont waste my time arguing with an ignoranimous like you until you answer them.

Take your head out your ass!

Just an idea.

[icyrus]

I have plenty more where that came from, but I notice you did not explain or give me an answer to the questions I posed? so I wont waste my time arguing with an ignoranimous like you until you answer them.

If you really were interested in answers they are easy to find. But you chose to remain wilfully ignorant.

[Alan]

*Dips toe into another "bash religion thread" *

Just answer the question. :o

Jeez :rolleyes:

[icyrus]

*Dips toe into another "bash religion thread" *

Just answer the question. :o

Jeez :rolleyes:

I'm not here to babysit the brainwashed and wilfully blind and ignorant. I highly highly doubt that poppy has any new questions to bring to the table that the flock of brainwashed masses hasn't come up with before.

Like I said, there are answers out there in very easy to find places for anyone with an internet connection. So the only plausible reason for being unaware of them is wilful ignorance.

[The_Librarian]

Where do we go after we die?

Where do we come from?

No doubt these has already be answered before, but I would like to see what's your answer to these two questions.

[icyrus]

Where do we go after we die?

Into the ground or into a furnace - depending on the last wishes of the deceased - are the most common, I guess there are others. Buried at sea?


Where do we come from?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conception_%28biology%29


No doubt these has already be answered before, but I would like to see what's your answer to these two questions.

You would have preferred a more philosophical answer right?

[Alan]

I'm not here to babysit the brainwashed and wilfully blind and ignorant. I highly highly doubt that poppy has any new questions to bring to the table that the flock of brainwashed masses hasn't come up with before.

Like I said, there are answers out there in very easy to find places for anyone with an internet connection. So the only plausible reason for being unaware of them is wilful ignorance.

Oh come on :rolleyes:

Well if she is so dumb why don't you make it even easier by posting the few answers here. If not for her then for other people on the forum. I'm sure they are interested in your thoughts.

PLEASE

[icyrus]

Oh come on :rolleyes:

Well if she is so dumb why don't you make it even easier by posting the few answers here. If not for her then for other people on the forum. I'm sure they are interested about your thoughts.

PLEASE

I would suggest Talk Origins (http://www.talkorigins.org/) as a start. I'm sure the willing can find their way from there.

[Alan]

I would suggest Talk Origins (http://www.talkorigins.org/) as a start. I'm sure the willing can find their way from there.

Don't be lazy. We want to see direct answers to her questions.

[Poppy]

Into the ground or into a furnace - depending on the last wishes of the deceased - are the most common, I guess there are others. Buried at sea?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conception_%28biology%29



You would have preferred a more philosophical answer right?

You managed to answer these question by refering to other sources, but why did you not answer my questions? :rolleyes:

I would prefer your own words please (methinks you brainwashed as you claim we are!)

[The_Librarian]

Talk Origin ---> Sounds interesting, but I don't agree with all of it as I believe in Creation.

Will have a read though...

Evolutionists decided to believe in Evolution

Creationists decided to believe in the Lord

We have made our choices about what we will believe in, and neither will give way to the other.

[Alan]

Talk Origin ---> Sounds interesting, but I don't agree with all of it as I believe in Creation.

Brace yourself :eek:

[nthdimension]

Mayan Mathematics (http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Mayan_mathematics.html) - with references.
Seems to match what I've read before. They had a sophisticated counting system. They had discovered zero. And they made meticulous astronomical observations. They, like modern scientists, applied their ingenuity to overcoming the limitations of their instruments. And they appear to have been willing to observe the universe as it is rather than insisting for instance that the year be a nice round number. But their mathematics was overall primitive compared to modern mathematics.

[nthdimension]

And then they have the nerve to use the results of the Creation to live while at the same time rejecting the Creator because it doesn't correspond to their belief.
This creation is defective. Can I get a refund?

[Safferbeauty]

Just an interesting thought popped into my mind. It was woman who committed the first sin. We were created to live in peace and harmony with one another. We were not created to be mean to each other

[icyrus]

You managed to answer these question by refering to other sources, but why did you not answer my questions? :rolleyes:

I would prefer your own words please (methinks you brainwashed as you claim we are!)

You want me to paraphrase scientific research? To what point and purpose?


Talk Origin ---> Sounds interesting, but I don't agree with all of it as I believe in Creation.

Will have a read though...

Good for you. Thats more than most creationists are willing to do.



Evolutionists decided to believe in Evolution

Creationists decided to believe in the Lord

The difference really is that one is based on science the other is based on where you were born and myth.


We have made our choices about what we will believe in, and neither will give way to the other.

Indeed your beliefs are yours to choose.

Personally, I don't have a problem with people who believe in creation - I have a problem with people who believe in it without questioning.

[The_Librarian]

Just an interesting thought popped into my mind. It was woman who committed the first sin. We were created to live in peace and harmony with one another. We were not created to be mean to each other

The satan is responsible for bringing sin and death into this world.

[texo]

If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes in existence? Why have they not evolved?

Poppy, if you want to debate facts, please get your facts straight. Evolution does not claim that we "evolved from apes", merely that both apes and humans descended from a common ancestor.

Your house-in-the-Sahara question leads me to believe that you're a supporter of ID, in which case, let me quote one of my heroes:

"To explain the origin of the DNA/protein machine by invoking a supernatural Designer is to explain precisely nothing, for it leaves unexplained the origin of the Designer. You have to say something like 'God was always there', and if you allow yourself that kind of lazy way out, you might as well just say 'DNA was always there', or "Life was always there', and be done with it."
--Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker : Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe without Design p. 141

[Nick333]

The satan is responsible for bringing sin and death into this world.

Ok lets play pretend for a second. God created satan. God knows everything that will occur. God new satan would rebel and bring sin and death into the world. Therefore God is responsible for bringing sin and death into the world.

Edit: Hmm...Is that why Mick had sympathy for old Lucy?

[The_Librarian]

Ok lets play pretend for a second. God created satan. God knows everything that will occur. God new satan would rebel and bring sin and death into the world. Therefore God is responsible for bringing sin and death into the world.

Edit: Hmm...Is that why Mick had sympathy for old Lucy?

No, God is not responsible.

Satan (or Lucifer) rebelled against God, for he wanted to exalt himself, wanted to have Creation worship him instead of God.

So it was Lucifer's own decision to rebel against the Lord.

God allowed it, and also allowed sin to spread on the Earth. He allows us freedom of choice, to choose between Him or Lucifer.

God can unmake satan, but to do so would put God at the same level of Lucifer, so therefore God will not do it.

Instead it will be proven that Lucifer's rebellion against God is to rebel against life itself.

[Rkootknir]

I find it laughable that evolutionists cannot come up with anything better than the "big bang" to explain our existence or how the earth came about.First of all: BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! ROTFLOLCOPTER.

Pray tell, what does the Theory of Evolution (TOE) have to do with the Big Bang Theory (BBT)? And what precisely is your objection to the TOE and BBT (remember they're not the same - although old Kent "I'm in jail for tax evasion" (http://www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061102/NEWS01/611020330/1006) Hovind - would have you believe otherwise)?
If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes in existence? Why have they not evolved?This is a joke, right? You're question is on par with "If you doubt this is possible, how is it there are PYGMIES + DWARFS??" (paraphrased from somewhere, can't remember where). Apes and humans share a common ancestor. All the apes didn't turn into humans one sunny Pliocenic day.

Read some books.
If you went to the Sahara desert and came across a beautiful house with a pool and great looking furniture and all the amenities you can think of, would you assume that they house came to be there by chance just because there was no one there to answer your questions?No, I would try to find out where the house comes from. You, I suspect, will immediately look into your favourite religious treatise (Bible, Q'uran, Talmudic scriptures, etc) and say: "Goddidit!"
All the different life forms, different plants, animals, humans all came about by "accident". Whata a load of bull ****!Where would you get the idea that everything came about by accident? Random mutations coupled with natural selection is one of the most "unaccidental" forces there are. Selective pressures will favour whatever mutation has the highest likelihood of survival.
It's an idiot and ignorant fool who chooses not to believe in a creator.Why? Please provide some evidence for your hypothesis.

[The_Librarian]

The difference really is that one is based on science the other is based on where you were born and myth.

Why does it matter where you were born?

As for myth - there is no myths in the Bible. Is there any explanation for the fact that the books of Daniel (in this instance, Daniel 2, Daniel 7, Daniel 8 and Daniel 11) as well as Revelation 13 (which was written in the past) make accurate references to historical events (Rise and fall of Medo-Persia, Greece, Roman Empire and divided Europe) and the subsequent rise of the Antichrist?

Can your science explain that? Or did they have a time travelling device at their disposal and recorded history thus, before it was even happening? :)

[Rkootknir]

Why does it matter where you were born?If you were born if Israel, you would almost certainly be Jewish. If you were born in Saudi Arabia, you would almost certainly be Muslim. If you were born in South Carolina, you would almost certainly be Christian.
As for myth - there is no myths in the Bible.Really? (Imagine Ace Ventura). My favourite counter example: 1 Kings 7:23 says: "Hy het ook die gegote waterbak gemaak, heeltemal rond, vyf meter in deursnee, twee en 'n half meter hoog, en met 'n omtrek van vyftien meter".

Sorry, I don't have an English Bible. Loosely translated: "He also moulded a water bucket. Completely round, 5m in diameter, 2.5m high and with a circumference of 15m."

Clearly according to the Bible: pi=3. Try drawing that circle.
Is there any explanation for the fact that the books of Daniel (in this instance, Daniel 2, Daniel 7, Daniel 8 and Daniel 11) as well as Revelation 13 (which was written in the past) make accurate references to historical events (Rise and fall of Medo-Persia, Greece, Roman Empire and divided Europe) and the subsequent rise of the Antichrist?What references?

[The_Librarian]

Try drawing that circle.

:) No, I won't even try... it is not revelant to the discussion.


What references?

I'm putting something together, will be back on this.

Have you read the Biblical chapters I've given?

[Poppy]

You want me to paraphrase scientific research? To what point and purpose?.

Well, we are actually giving you answers not letting other people do our talking for us.


The difference really is that one is based on science the other is based on where you were born and myth.

Myth? For all your tooting the answers that science has given, when you actually think about it, science has answered nothing! Not where or how we came about.


Personally, I don't have a problem with people who believe in creation - I have a problem with people who believe in it without questioning.

Oh really and yet you don't have a problem with whole heartedly believing in science without questioning it?

[Poppy]

Ok lets play pretend for a second. God created satan. God knows everything that will occur. God new satan would rebel and bring sin and death into the world. Therefore God is responsible for bringing sin and death into the world.

Edit: Hmm...Is that why Mick had sympathy for old Lucy?

TL answered you so well, but I'll add my two cents worth here too. God created man, but he did not create them as robots. We have a choice whether to do evil or not. Satan chose evil, it is not God's fault.

[Claymore]

I find it laughable that evolutionists cannot come up with anything better than the "big bang" to explain our existence or how the earth came about.

Evolutionist don't postulate anything about the origon of the universe or the earth. They research the evolution of living things.

I think you're thinking of cosmologists.


If we evolved from apes, why are there still apes in existence? Why have they not evolved?

Humans and apes evolved from common ancestors. Apes have indeed evolved, but they evolved differently to suit their own environments.

Evolution does not mean evolving into something more human-like or more advanced or whatever - it means adapting to best suit its environment.


All the different life forms, different plants, animals, humans all came about by "accident". Whata a load of bull ****!

Not at all. They evolved - nothing accidental there.

[Nick333]

Well, we are actually giving you answers not letting other people do our talking for us.

Ok so if it can't be explained in a couple of paragraphs it can't be true. Scientists need entire books to explain their findings because often their findings are based on years of research. Explaining the theory of evolution to someone like you would of course be pointless because saying: "The conditions on earth four billion years ago were such that the evolution of complex molecules from very basic components was inevitable. Once you have complex molecules it is inevitable that self-replicating molecules would evolve. Once self-replicating molecules evolve it is inevitable that simple life will evolve. Given a large enough universe it is highly likely that complex life will evolve. "
You'd still have to do a lot of reading to understand why we know this to be true. Something you don't seem interested in doing, but the explanation is there and easily available.
All you feel the need to do is say : "There is a God how else could we exist."
One simplistic little statement is all you can offer.



Myth? For all your tooting the answers that science has given, when you actually think about it, science has answered nothing! Not where or how we came about.

The where and how are answered questions (get an education ffs). There is no reason to believe that the question of why is God or that we will never know. Before Darwin people said we would never know the how of it because the how was God. They were wrong.


Oh really and yet you don't have a problem with whole heartedly believing in science without questioning it?

No one has to accept the findings of science whole-heartedly. Thats what science is about: continuing questioning and re-examining of findings.
The problem is that as soon as you write scientific findings off as bull**** because you believe in God you are no longer practicing science. People believe in scientific principles as the best means of understanding the universe. Wether or not they believe whole heartedly in specific findings is a matter of how much evidence there is and how well they understand it.
Religion doesn't offer explanations or evidence at all. It provides one answer to every question and if that answer is not enough for you then your'e basically ****ed.

Science = complex answers. A brain is required.

Religion = Only one answer. No brain required.

I suppose it could be said that religion is at least an equal oppertunity provider of "knowledge".

[icyrus]

Well, we are actually giving you answers not letting other people do our talking for us.

You are giving your opinions. I would hope you could see the difference between opinions and answers. As for what I have provided, I have provided links to scientific evidence and theories that are based on what is real not fairytales.


Myth? For all your tooting the answers that science has given, when you actually think about it, science has answered nothing! Not where or how we came about.

Science tries to explain the world we live in based on looking at the evidence and coming up with theories. You alternative is a broad "god did it". How is that an answer to anything?

If someone asked me how a computer works and I answered "god did it" would that be satisfactory?


Oh really and yet you don't have a problem with whole heartedly believing in science without questioning it?

Science is based on facts. If you were so inclined you could go and look at all the evidence upon which the theories are based. Its all there for you to review.

Science is not some cult where people are forced to believe in it or face eternal damnation.

[icyrus]

I suppose it could be said that religion is at least an equal oppertunity provider of "knowledge".

Great line. You should make that you sig.

[Raithlin]

This creation is defective. Can I get a refund?

Blame our ancestor.:rolleyes:

[PostmanPot]

Oh really and yet you don't have a problem with whole heartedly believing in science without questioning it?

science is questioned by OTHER scientists.

christians don't believe in gravity.

[Poppy]

First of all: BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! ROTFLOLCOPTER.

Pray tell, what does the Theory of Evolution (TOE) have to do with the Big Bang Theory (BBT)? And what precisely is your objection to the TOE and BBT (remember they're not the same - although old Kent "I'm in jail for tax evasion" (http://www.pensacolanewsjournal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061102/NEWS01/611020330/1006) Hovind - would have you believe otherwise)?This is a joke, right? You're question is on par with "If you doubt this is possible, how is it there are PYGMIES + DWARFS??" (paraphrased from somewhere, can't remember where). Apes and humans share a common ancestor. All the apes didn't turn into humans one sunny Pliocenic day.

So tell us oh great and wise one. From which common ancestor did we evolve from? And from whence did this common ancestor come from?


Read some books.No, I would try to find out where the house comes from. You, I suspect, will immediately look into your favourite religious treatise (Bible, Q'uran, Talmudic scriptures, etc) and say:...


"Goddidit!"Where would you get the idea that everything came about by accident? Random mutations coupled with natural selection is one of the most "unaccidental" forces there are. Selective pressures will favour whatever mutation has the highest likelihood of survival.Why? Please provide some evidence for your hypothesis.

Random? Selective pressures? Yeees, I'm sure in your mind that is how the house really came about! You've just proved my "hypothesis".

Nope! I would not look to my "favourite religious treatise" for answers. I wouldn't have to. I would know as any normal thinking human being that the house must have been created by someone, I would looke in and around the house for signs of the owner. I would look for items like pictures to identify the owner. I would not conclude that because the owner was no where in sight, the house must have come about the way evolutionist "assume", either by chance or accident or from a big bang or from the result of chemical reactions. :rolleyes:

[Raithlin]

One problem I've come across. Gene mutation has never (under experimentation, in labs across the world) resulted in extra information - always less. How can mutation then cause faster, better, etc.?

[PostmanPot]

Nope! I would not look to my "favourite religious treatise" for answers. I wouldn't have to. I would know as any normal thinking human being that the house must have been created by someone, I would looke in and around the house for signs of the owner. I would look for items like pictures to identify the owner. I would not conclude that because the owner was no where in sight, the house must have come about the way evolutionist "assume", either by chance or accident or from a big bang or from the result of chemical reactions. :rolleyes:

you're comparing a house to the earth?

[Poppy]

science is questioned by OTHER scientists.

May I express the same sentioments then? Creationists should be questioned by OTHER creationists.


christians don't believe in gravity.
:eek: Bullcrap! Back up that assumption with facts please!

[chiskop]

you're comparing a house to the earth?

No, I think he's comparing us to houses?

[Rkootknir]

So tell us oh great and wise one. From which common ancestor did we evolve from? And from whence did this common ancestor come from?Hope this helps. (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/)
Random? Selective pressures? Yeees, I'm sure in your mind that is how the house really came about! You've just proved my "hypothesis".Brush up on your reading comprehension. My reply was structured so that the two different questions (1. the house & 2. different life forms) were separated. Read it again.
Nope! I would not look to my "favourite religious treatise" for answers. I wouldn't have to. I would know as any normal thinking human being that the house must have been created by someone, I would looke in and around the house for signs of the owner. I would look for items like pictures to identify the owner. I would not conclude that because the owner was no where in sight, the house must have come about the way evolutionist "assume", either by chance or accident or from a big bang or from the result of chemical reactions. :rolleyes:Once again, out of context. I clearly said
No, I would try to find out where the house comes from.If you're going to misquote, then rather do it where people cannot see my actual post.:rolleyes:

[Raithlin]

The difference really is that one is based on science the other is based on where you were born and myth.Science supports the so-called myth, as does every other scientific field under analysis. The "science" that underpins evolution is not empirical, as stated before. It is based on assumptions (beliefs) made by the scientists involved.


Personally, I don't have a problem with people who believe in creation - I have a problem with people who believe in it without questioning. Me too - I have a problem with people who believe whatever they believe without questioning - it doesn't matter what side of the fence they sit on.

Personally, I'm getting sick of these so-called answers we creationists are getting. I have seen very little evidence posted (besides the odd site - may I suggest that www.answersingenesis.org be read alongside talkorigins.org; makes for very interesting reading either way) - most posts are simply insults to our intelligence. I spend a lot of time following up on your claims, and I don't need a link to do so either. Most of the time I end up on sites other than talkorigins too - I prefer the facts. Please refrain from jeers, flames, etc. and try to add something to the thread.

[Poppy]

Evolutionist don't postulate anything about the origon of the universe or the earth. They research the evolution of living things.
I think you're thinking of cosmologists.

If evolutionists do not have an answer for the origin of the earth then why dismiss what creationists have to say?


Humans and apes evolved from common ancestors. Apes have indeed evolved, but they evolved differently to suit their own environments.
Evolution does not mean evolving into something more human-like or more advanced or whatever - it means adapting to best suit its environment.
Not at all. They evolved - nothing accidental there.

Again I repeat "what is that common ancestor?" Are you saying that there was more than one original organism that we evolved from?

Again where did this original organism come from?

[Raithlin]

Again I repeat "what is that common ancestor?"

Adam. ;)

[The_Librarian]

Mmmmm... getting interesting now... :D

[Poppy]

Scientists need entire books to explain their findings because often their findings are based on years of research.

Yes and how many of these same scientists have had their lifes work proved wrong? How many researchs have over time been proved wrong? Whose to say that they have not doctored their results?

A classic example of the scientist who claimed to have cloned sheep only for the world to discover that he had lied. Please explain that.


Explaining the theory of evolution to someone like you would of course be pointless because saying: "The conditions on earth four billion years ago were such that the evolution of complex molecules from very basic components was inevitable. Once you have complex molecules it is inevitable that self-replicating molecules would evolve. Once self-replicating molecules evolve it is inevitable that simple life will evolve.

Yes but where did those complex molecules come from?


Given a large enough universe it is highly likely that complex life will evolve. "
You'd still have to do a lot of reading to understand why we know this to be true. Something you don't seem interested in doing, but the explanation is there and easily available.
All you feel the need to do is say : "There is a God how else could we exist."
One simplistic little statement is all you can offer.

You don't need a complex explaination to understand that something does not just appear out of no where. Molecules don't just pop up and start evolving.



Science = complex answers. A brain is required.

Religion = Only one answer. No brain required.

I suppose it could be said that religion is at least an equal oppertunity provider of "knowledge".

All you need is common sense Nick. You don't need years of research to tell you that there must have been a creator to create all your favourite foods or the air you breathe :rolleyes:

[icyrus]

Personally, I'm getting sick of these so-called answers we creationists are getting. I have seen very little evidence posted (besides the odd site - may I suggest that www.answersingenesis.org be read alongside talkorigins.org; makes for very interesting reading either way) - most posts are simply insults to our intelligence. I spend a lot of time following up on your claims, and I don't need a link to do so either. Most of the time I end up on sites other than talkorigins too - I prefer the facts. Please refrain from jeers, flames, etc. and try to add something to the thread.


If evolutionists do not have an answer for the origin of the earth then why dismiss what creationists have to say?

To believe in creations is to give up. While you are happy to use your computer and an internet connection to further push your point of view of the world, keep in mind that if everyone believed what you do there would be no computers etc...

Why do I say that? Because if you believe god is the answer to any questions you cant currently explain perfectly then there would be no reason to look for a different answer, no reason to discover anything.

Something I would like answered from a creationist: if I where to teach my children that computers work because they contain magical fairies who live in the box and perform any action the user requests in some mystical, magic way, how is this different from the idea of creation? It just as valid for the child to believe that as to believe in creation. What if I got all my neighbours to tell their children the same story, and their neighbours and their neighbours etc... What if we wrote a book about it?

[Poppy]

You are giving your opinions. I would hope you could see the difference between opinions and answers. As for what I have provided, I have provided links to scientific evidence and theories that are based on what is real not fairytales.

And who's to say that that is the truth? Who's to say it's not flawed evidence scientists are providing as facts?


Science tries to explain the world we live in based on looking at the evidence and coming up with theories. You alternative is a broad "god did it". How is that an answer to anything?

If someone asked me how a computer works and I answered "god did it" would that be satisfactory?

DUH! I would ask an expert to explain how it works to me. Knowing how it works will not lead me to conclude that it came about by chance. I will still know that it was created by someone. IBM, MC etc...



Science is based on facts. If you were so inclined you could go and look at all the evidence upon which the theories are based. Its all there for you to review.

Science is not some cult where people are forced to believe in it or face eternal damnation.

I'm not forced to believe and neither are you. I believe based on the evidence before me.

[Poppy]

you're comparing a house to the earth?

Use your "brain", same concept. The earth could not have come about by chance :rolleyes:

[Poppy]

Hope this helps. (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/)Brush up on your reading comprehension. My reply was structured so that the two different questions (1. the house & 2. different life forms) were separated. Read it again.Once again, out of context. I clearly said


[Originally Posted by Rkootknir
No, I would try to find out where the house comes from.

If you're going to misquote, then rather do it where people cannot see my actual post.:rolleyes:

So then what conclusion would you have drawn from looking for where the house came from? I'd love to know.

[icyrus]

And who's to say that that is the truth? Who's to say it's not flawed evidence scientists are providing as facts?

As opposed to the fairytales provided by religions? Are you saying that stories are of more value then scientific evidence?

The value of the evidence is there to be judged by other scientists and anyone with a brain.




I'm not forced to believe and neither are you. I believe based on the evidence before me.

Oh do share what "evidence" you have.

[icyrus]

Use your "brain", same concept. The earth could not have come about by chance :rolleyes:

And what do you base your expert opinion on?

[The_Librarian]

---slightly off topic---
At this rate of postings Poppy'll be the next postwhore... :D
---back to topic---

[Poppy]

To believe in creations is to give up. While you are happy to use your computer and an internet connection to further push your point of view of the world, keep in mind that if everyone believed what you do there would be no computers etc...

No that's not true. Solomon believed in God and yet he still built things. He created things and attributed the resources he was able to use to God.


Why do I say that? Because if you believe god is the answer to any questions you cant currently explain perfectly then there would be no reason to look for a different answer, no reason to discover anything.

Something I would like answered from a creationist: if I where to teach my children that computers work because they contain magical fairies who live in the box and perform any action the user requests in some mystical, magic way, how is this different from the idea of creation? It just as valid for the child to believe that as to believe in creation. What if I got all my neighbours to tell their children the same story, and their neighbours and their neighbours etc... What if we wrote a book about it?

That's not a valid comparison. Creationist believe that there is a creator. A better scenario would be telling your kids that the computer was created by MS or Dell etc, what would still remain would be explaining "how" that wonderful machine worked. That's where science would come in.

[nthdimension]

If you went to the Sahara desert and came across a beautiful house with a pool and great looking furniture and all the amenities you can think of
There is nothing in nature analagous to what you have described. Now if the house was functional, but crooked, the pool mishapen and leaking some water, the furniture made out of 15 different kinds of wood, the table uneven with 5 legs, chairs with too many backs, then we'd be talking about something resembling the cobbled together features of things that occur in nature. If you believe nature is made up of perfectly constructed machines then you know nothing of nature.

[icyrus]

That's not a valid comparison. Creationist believe that there is a creator. A better scenario would be telling your kids that the computer was created by MC or Dell etc, what would still remian would be explaining "how" that wonderful machine worked. That's where science would come in.

Rubbish. They are both just stories passed down without any backup. How are they different? How is saying god created earth different then saying fairies live in computers and make them work?

[Poppy]

As opposed to the fairytales provided by religions? Are you saying that stories are of more value then scientific evidence?

Stories? Hardly. The bible gave evidence of the earth being round long before "clever scientists with brains and all the answers" discovered the truth. For a time they even refused to believe it until they were forced to.

The bible (King Solomon) told of the cycle of rain long before science even discovered it to be the truth. Don't talk to me about stories :rolleyes:


The value of the evidence is there to be judged by other scientists and anyone with a brain. Oh do share what "evidence" you have.

Caught on to that did you? Unable to answer my questions so naturally you have to deflect right? LOL

[Poppy]

---slightly off topic---
At this rate of postings Poppy'll be the next postwhore... :D
---back to topic---

Lol :D

[nthdimension]

Is there any explanation for the fact that the books of Daniel (in this instance, Daniel 2, Daniel 7, Daniel 8 and Daniel 11) as well as Revelation 13 (which was written in the past) make accurate references to historical events (Rise and fall of Medo-Persia, Greece, Roman Empire and divided Europe) and the subsequent rise of the Antichrist?
Any such claimed predictions must not only be 100% accurate they must also be 100% unambiguous, i.e. written in plain English. Matching opaque predictions after the fact is not acceptable. Since the source of the predictions would know everything it would know the actual names of the countries, nations and individuals involved.

[icyrus]

Stories? Hardly. The bible gave evidence of the earth being round long before "clever scientists with brains and all the answers" discovered the truth. For a time they even refused to believe it until they were forced to.

The bible (King Solomon) told of cycle of rain long before science even discovered it to be the truth. Don't talk to me about stories :rolleyes:

So what is the bible if not stories written by man?




Caught on to that did you? Unable to answer my questions so naturally you have to deflect right? LOL

You questions have been thoroughly answered many times by many people.

And talk about deflecting - where is this amazing evidence you have of creation?

[Poppy]

There is nothing in nature analagous to what you have described. Now if the house was functional, but crooked, the pool mishapen and leaking some water, the furniture made out of 15 different kinds of wood, the table uneven with 5 legs, chairs with too many backs, then we'd be talking about something resembling the cobbled together features of things that occur in nature. If you believe nature is made up of perfectly constructed machines then you know nothing of nature.

:eek: OMG granted man is not perfect, but how would you explain the perfect functioning of the earth? (take away how much man is destroying it) How would you explain how the sun is just at the right distance from the earth. Not too close as to fry us and not too far as to freeze us? This is sad sad sad. *shaking head*

[Poppy]

Rubbish. They are both just stories passed down without any backup. How are they different? How is saying god created earth different then saying fairies live in computers and make them work?

What is rubbish? The fact that the computer was created by someone? And as I told you before icyrus your'e scenarios is invalid. We creationiost are not saying that fairies make the universe function. We are saying that the universe had a creator. There's a difference.

[icyrus]

:eek: OMG granted man is not perfect, but how would you explain the perfect functioning of the earth? (take away how much man is destroying it) How would you explain how the sun is just at the right distance from the earth. Not too close as to fry us and not too far as to freeze us? This is sad sad sad. *shaking head*

You're right it is sad. But we disagree on what is sad. What really is sad is that you are incapable of thinking for yourself, incapable of question or reason thought. You were told a story when you were a child and you cling to it so desperately that your answer to anything you don't understand is "god did it".

Fortunately for the continued survival of the human race, not everyone is like you.

[icyrus]

What is rubbish? The fact that the computer was created by someone? And as I told you before icyrus your'e scenarios is invalid. We creationiost are not saying that fairies make the universe function. We are saying that the universe had a creator. There's a difference.

So if I said that fairies created the computer then it would be valid?

[Poppy]

Any such claimed predictions must not only be 100% accurate they must also be 100% unambiguous, i.e. written in plain English. Matching opaque predictions after the fact is not acceptable. Since the source of the predictions would know everything it would know the actual names of the countries, nations and individuals involved.

This is too funny. Your own peers, "the scientists with brains" agree with the timing of the bible and the predictions made are not at all vague.

Take the mention of Alexander the Great for example in the bible. There is evidence on record of Alexander having been shown the predictions regarding himself. You and your peers need to chat.

[Poppy]

So what is the bible if not stories written by man?
You questions have been thoroughly answered many times by many people.

And talk about deflecting - where is this amazing evidence you have of creation?

All I can do is shake my head here. So because you cannot disprove the truth of what the bible says which has been proven to be true by your own peers I might add, you must resort to questioning who wrote the books?

I don't need to bring you evidence icyrus. It's all around you, you are part of that evidence, the whole universe is that evidence :rolleyes:

[Poppy]

You're right it is sad. But we disagree on what is sad. What really is sad is that you are incapable of thinking for yourself, incapable of question or reason thought. You were told a story when you were a child and you cling to it so desperately that your answer to anything you don't understand is "god did it".

Fortunately for the continued survival of the human race, not everyone is like you.

Oh please do not tell me what I am. I am just as capable of reasoning as you are. As much as you like to think you are superior you are not! If I was unable to think or reason for myself I would not be having this discussion with you :rolleyes:

[icyrus]

All I can do is shake my head here. So because you cannot disprove the truth of what the bible says which has been proven to be true by your own peers I might add, you must resort to questioning who wrote the books?

So the bible, in your opinion, is 100% true, accurate and undoubtedly the word of god himself and can then in no part ever be incorrect?


I don't need to bring you evidence icyrus. It's all around you, you are part of that evidence, the whole universe is that evidence :rolleyes:

You are beyond help. You see the existence of the universe as evidence of god. There is no further point in discussion with you. In fact it would be hard pressed to call this a discussion as al - you believe in your fairtytales and totally disregard science and logic.

[Poppy]

And for all your faith in science sustaining our survival, has it really done that? Are we not constantly on the brink of war due to science? Was hiroshima not almost wiped out due to science? Hydrogen, atomic, nueclear war heads, have they not been "created" by scientists? If we were to leave our survival in your hands, we would be wiped out due to your glorious science. :rolleyes:

[icyrus]

Oh please do not tell me what I am. I am just as capable of reasoning as you are. As much as you like to think you are superior you are not! If I was unable to think or reason for myself I would not be having this discussion with you :rolleyes:

You have yet to show an signs of being capable of it then. Like I said it my previous post - this is not a discussion. You have completely thrown out all of science as irrelevant and in its place you hold stories passed from primitive man as the entire and only truth.

[icyrus]

And for all your faith in science sustaining our survival, has it really done that? Are we not constantly on the brink of war due to science? Was hiroshima not almost wiped out due to science? Hydrogen, atomic, nueclear war heads, have they not been "created" by scientists? If we were to leave our survival in your hands, we would be wiped out due to your glorious science. :rolleyes:

Before their was nuclear weaponry there were sticks and rocks which humans killed each other with. Science does not cause people to kill each other, its merely a tool used by those who wish to kill.

[Poppy]

So the bible, in your opinion, is 100% true, accurate and undoubtedly the word of god himself and can then in no part ever be incorrect?

You are beyond help. You see the existence of the universe as evidence of god. There is no further point in discussion with you. In fact it would be hard pressed to call this a discussion as al - you believe in your fairtytales and totally disregard science and logic.


Be my guest and run! Run because you are unable to answer simple enough questions that you claim science has the answers for. I'd rather be beyond help than be a pompous parrot like you :D

Bye bye *waving to icyrus*

[Poppy]

Before their was nuclear weaponry there were sticks and rocks which humans killed each other with. Science does not cause people to kill each other, its merely a tool used by those who wish to kill.

Right! Did I tell you by the way that I'm really Princess Diana in disguise? :rolleyes:

[Poppy]

You have yet to show an signs of being capable of it then. Like I said it my previous post - this is not a discussion. You have completely thrown out all of science as irrelevant and in its place you hold stories passed from primitive man as the entire and only truth.

Soooo clever and yet unable to answer a simple question as to where the house or original organism came from. *sigh* Your cleverness and powers of reason are overwhelming. I stand in awe!

[icyrus]

Be my guest and run! Run because you are unable to answer simple enough questions that you claim science has the answers for. I'd rather be beyond help than be a pompous parrot like you :D

Bye bye *waving to icyrus*

Oh I am not going anywhere, I just said that its was pointless speaking to you. If I took your stance to "discussion" I would simple ask you how humans came in to being and when you answered with creation I would say "creation is bullsh*t, please answer my question".

In other words, despite being given the answers, you don't like them and dismiss them and then harp on about how no-one has answered your question.

[chiskop]

Right! Did I tell you by the way that I'm really Princess Diana in disguise? :rolleyes:

Ahhh, the cut and thrust of religious debate.

[Captain Beer]

Soooo clever and yet unable to answer a simple question as to where the house or original organism came from. *sigh* Your cleverness and powers of reason are overwhelming. I stand in awe!

Why don't you go marry moses or something :rolleyes:

[Poppy]

All your cleverness *sigh* wasted. Three huge brains and they still can't answer a simple question. Ai! ai! ai! ai! ai! :D

[Poppy]

Why don't you go marry moses or something :rolleyes:

My work here...is done! Bye!

[Captain Beer]

My work here...is done! Bye!

Ok bye :rolleyes:

How many church points did you earn for your work here?

[icyrus]

All your cleverness *sigh* wasted. Three huge brains and they still can't answer a simple question. Ai! ai! ai! ai! ai! :D

And on and on it goes. Do you even know what question you are asking anymore?

[nthdimension]

but how would you explain the perfect functioning of the earth? (take away how much man is destroying it) How would you explain how the sun is just at the right distance from the earth. Not too close as to fry us and not too far as to freeze us?
The functioning of the earth is not perfect.

The parameters of the universe support the existence of life. That does not mean those parameters were set up so that life could exist. Life exists therefore the parameters support life. There is life on earth therefore the earth falls within the planetary parameters necessary for life to exist.

[web]

In about a thousand years people are going to look back and think that The Lord Of The Rings was true?

I cant for the life of me understand peoples blind faith in the bible , but i think everyone has the right to believe in what they want. If you want to be a christian/Jew/Muslim its your right and thats all. Why do people argue about it ? Because thats what humans do.

[nthdimension]

Take the mention of Alexander the Great for example in the bible. There is evidence on record of Alexander having been shown the predictions regarding himself. You and your peers need to chat.
Then you'd be able to provide us with research done by historical scholars that verifies this claim, along with the text from the Bible that mentions Alexander the Great by name, giving specific dates and times for events that involve him.

[Raithlin]

To believe in creations is to give up. While you are happy to use your computer and an internet connection to further push your point of view of the world, keep in mind that if everyone believed what you do there would be no computers etc...

Why do I say that? Because if you believe god is the answer to any questions you cant currently explain perfectly then there would be no reason to look for a different answer, no reason to discover anything.

Something I would like answered from a creationist: if I where to teach my children that computers work because they contain magical fairies who live in the box and perform any action the user requests in some mystical, magic way, how is this different from the idea of creation? It just as valid for the child to believe that as to believe in creation. What if I got all my neighbours to tell their children the same story, and their neighbours and their neighbours etc... What if we wrote a book about it?
You're making an error of logic, based on the idea that you all have that believing in Creation and God means that you have to stop believing in science. Quite the contrary, I assure you.

As for the computers - it's not fairies, it's little elves. I thought you knew that! :D Be reasonable. You may as well tell your kids that we are all animals, evolved from rocks. :eek:

You maintain that we are all evolved from a common ancestor, and that ancestor evolved from soup with all the required ingredients (putting it simply). This all happened by chance, random processes (Natural selection can't be used this early on in the process - that would imply intelligent design. Natural selection is goalless by it's very definition), etc. That being the case, your brain is a product of chance. (Stop me if I'm wrong) Therefore, the thought patterns that determine your logic are also products of chance. If your logic is the result of chance processes, you can't be sure it evolved properly. You can’t be sure you’re even asking the right question because you can't trust your own logic.

Or is my logic screwed? :p

[Raithlin]

The parameters of the universe support the existence of life. That does not mean those parameters were set up so that life could exist. Life exists therefore the parameters support life. There is life on earth therefore the earth falls within the planetary parameters necessary for life to exist.

Good observation. How did those parameters/laws come about? By chance? How is it that everything functions within those parameters?

This may help (http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v1/n2/god-natural-law).

[chiskop]

You're looking at it the wrong way round.

The parameters do not support life; life grew within the confines of a set of predetermined parameters (distance from sun, atmospheric composition etc), and not the other way around.

In other words: What was here first: the planet, or life on the planet?

[The_Librarian]

You're looking at it the wrong way round.

The parameters do not support life; life grew within the confines of a set of predetermined parameters (distance from sun, atmospheric composition etc), and not the other way around.

In other words: What was here first: the planet, or life on the planet?

Why is the planet just the right distance from the Sun? Chance? Narf.

Why is the atmospherical composition the way it is? Chance? Narf again.

Somebody must have put the planet in precisely the right spot, spinning at just the right speed, and with just exactly the right atmospheric composition for life to exists...

For me the set of variables and parameters far exceed what chance would have to start life on its own. There are just too many "what ifs" in this equation for me to accept evolution.

But I welcome your views as it is refreshing to see things from a different viewpoint.

[Highflyer_GP]

Have you read the Biblical chapters I've given?
You cannot use the bible to prove the authenticity of the bible, that's somewhat retarded. It's akin to using your diary to prove your innocence in court.

:eek: OMG granted man is not perfect, but how would you explain the perfect functioning of the earth? (take away how much man is destroying it) How would you explain how the sun is just at the right distance from the earth. Not too close as to fry us and not too far as to freeze us? This is sad sad sad. *shaking head*
It's neither here nor there, we have evolved and adapted to live in this environment. This is a common Christian misconception that we're at the perfect distance from the sun to sustain life - therefore we're the result of God. To an alien species we may very well be too hot or too cold, because they have possibly evolved to adapt to a different environment.

Oh please do not tell me what I am. I am just as capable of reasoning as you are. As much as you like to think you are superior you are not! If I was unable to think or reason for myself I would not be having this discussion with you :rolleyes:
Your reasoning seems to be that if it can't be explained then it's the work of God. Just remember that at one stage lightning couldn't be explained, but you would most certainly have got a few idiots who thought that it was God showing his anger.

And for all your faith in science sustaining our survival, has it really done that? Are we not constantly on the brink of war due to science? Was hiroshima not almost wiped out due to science? Hydrogen, atomic, nueclear war heads, have they not been "created" by scientists? If we were to leave our survival in your hands, we would be wiped out due to your glorious science. :rolleyes:
I said it before in this thread, if you're so against scientific progress then go live in a cave or become an amish. Don't be a hypocrit, stop leeching of our progress and let your actions speak for itself because at the moment you just seem to be all talk.

[chiskop]

Why is the planet just the right distance from the Sun? Chance? Narf.

Why is the atmospherical composition the way it is? Chance? Narf again.

Somebody must have put the planet in precisely the right spot, spinning at just the right speed, and with just exactly the right atmospheric composition for life to exists...

For me the set of variables and parameters far exceed what chance would have to start life on its own. There are just too many "what ifs" in this equation for me to accept evolution.

But I welcome your views as it is refreshing to see things from a different viewpoint.
Like I said, you're looking at it from the wrong side.

The planet, with it's atmosphere and distance from the sun etc, was here first. That stands to reason. The bible and science agree on this point.

So, life began in these pre-existing conditions. It doesn't matter whether you believe that it was created or evolved, the point is that the planet was here and life (was) adapted to fill those conditions.

[nthdimension]

The fact that life exists on earth means the earth has the required parameters for life to exist. It in no way supports the idea that the earth was placed at a specific location so they life could exist.

The fact that we exist means this is a universe in which life can exist. It does not mean this universe was created to certain specifications so that life could exist.

[The_Librarian]

Like I said, you're looking at it from the wrong side.

The planet, with it's atmosphere and distance from the sun etc, was here first. That stands to reason. The bible and science agree on this point.

So, life began in these pre-existing conditions. It doesn't matter whether you believe that it was created or evolved, the point is that the planet was here and life (was) adapted to fill those conditions.

:o

Sorry, my bad, didn't read properly. You are correct on this point. :cool:

[nthdimension]

For me the set of variables and parameters far exceed what chance would have to start life on its own. There are just too many "what ifs" in this equation for me to accept evolution.
Is life really that improbable? Given a large universe it becomes more likely a certainty. Your chance of hitting a bullseye on a dartboard might be near zero if you throw once, but what if you throw trillions of times?

[Captain Beer]

Why did God make the universe so huge with all the different planets and millions of stars? Did he get bored?

[Safferbeauty]

He did it because he wanted to. He did it because he can

[Captain Beer]

He did it because he wanted to. He did it because he can

Because he wanted to?

Very philosophical answer.

[Safferbeauty]

u would say someting like that

[Captain Beer]

Like what?