SHEEPEOPLE

[dlamberth]

Of course that speaks well of those of us who do not reject God. But my comment was a lament for those who even go well beyond their own rejection of God, to criticize out of an obvious and expressed hatred. Here we are on a "Christian" forum where it can only be looked at as active aggression. When Christians are aggressive, it is to bring good [news]. Granted, there are bound to be exceptions on both sides, and these few may only be those exceptions.

In reading your response, what comes to mind is something from the Gospel of Luke (using my words): "If people do not welcome you, shake the dust off your feet and move on". I think we easily get all a twitter about what others say about God, but I'm absolutely convinced that God can take care of His Own Person. And that we need to recognize that truth while at the same time not getting caught up in the attitudes of others or what they say, and move on.

.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

The "historical Jesus" argument does not establish his alleged divinity.

He was just an apocalyptic preacher, an otherwise normal human being, no magic, or he was myth. Those are the two options you would have me pick from?

And yet you would have me believe that entire myths arose that changed nations, when those miracles never occurred? That all is random - yet so precise we can apply the same laws of physics over and over again, and get the same results every time.

Denial and excuses is the last defense. No one is claiming magic but you, just the ability to manipulate the energy all things are made from and which exists in all things - science. No one is denying the possibility of a consciousness existing even when you see billions around you every day, except you.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Atheism is a theological position on the existence of deities. Why must you always conflate them with astrophysicists, or imply that mainstream cosmology is incompatible with beliefs in gods, even the Christian God?

Because it is?

I mean it was, after all, a priest that proposed modern cosmology, so why wouldn't it be compatible? Even though Michael I can assure you does not believe in that creation story. And certainly not the 95% Fairie Dust you require us to have faith in to support that creation theory.

If I chose to accept a flawed theory - I would have more claim to the Big Bang than you would - being a priest is the one that set it all in motion. But a flawed theory is a flawed theory - regardless of what man claimed it.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Do you feel that you are more qualified than Dr. Collins, or have better access to the evidence?

Do you think I am a Christian?

Not at all. Just your misinterpretation of what I said. Unlike you that accepts whatever their high priest cosmologists and evolutionist tell them - I actually study things - and rely on the data. You know, the data where finches that interbreed and produce offspring was once thought to be reproductively isolated and separate species? But then some continue to believe the same thing their priests tell them - despite the DNA evidence. Imagine that faith if you will for but a moment.

Imagine the faith it takes to continue to believe any animal mating and producing fertile offspring since they arrived on the islands were ever separate species. Imagine the faith it takes to still believe that - just because their high priests command it to be so. I have no problem with your right to practice your religion - I just insist you at least correct your mistakes in belief before asking I accept the same flawed interpretation.

 

[ScottA]

In reading your response, what comes to mind is something from the Gospel of Luke (using my words): "If people do not welcome you, shake the dust off your feet and move on". I think we easily get all a twitter about what others say about God, but I'm absolutely convinced that God can take care of His Own Person. And that we need to recognize that truth while at the same time not getting caught up in the attitudes of others or what they say, and move on.

.

Thanks.

 

[Davian]

The fact there is counterfeit money is even evidence of the real thing.

The Invisible Pink Unicorn may actually exist? She will be very happy to hear that.

 

[Smidlee]

The Invisible Pink Unicorn may actually exist? She will be very happy to hear that.

Mickey mouse has some characteristics of a real mouse and Garfield has some characteristics of a real cat and even Spongebob Squarepants have some characteristics of a real sponge. Guess what? A unicorn has some characteristics of a real horse. Thanks for reinforcing the very point I made. Counterfeits is evidence of the real thing.

 

[dlamberth]

This "spiritual discernment" - is it any different from guessing?

From this Lover of God's perspective, sometimes (I think way too often) spiritual discernment isn't any different than guessing. Sometimes though, great insight and understanding does comes to a person. Personally, I find myself somewhat skeptical when a person claims special spiritual insight and so I test what they say against my own spiritual discernment.

.

 

[joshua 1 9]

You mean, your interpration of the Bible.

Jesus said:"I am the way, the truth and life. No one comes to the father except through Me." What that means would be subject to definition, interpretation, and so on. He is required to be 100% pure truth. There can be no error in the Bible even if our interpretation is not accurate. So you can not trust or depend on me. You can trust and depend on Jesus.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Mickey mouse has some characteristics of a real mouse and Garfield has some characteristics of a real cat and even Spongebob Squarepants have some characteristics of a real sponge. Guess what? A unicorn has some characteristics of a real horse. Thanks for reinforcing the very point I made. Counterfeits is evidence of the real thing.

I do not question that you trust in Mickey Mouse. As for me and my house we trust in God and His Only Begotten Son Jesus the Christ. As for Garfield we use to import that and made pretty good money off of it for a while. I esp liked the clock with the moving tail.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Speak for yourself. At this point in the discussion, gods are still just characters in books.

That is a start. We come into this world knowing nothing. So at least you have learned that you can read about God in a book.

 

[dlamberth]

Do you think that perpetual machines are possible, that we can have things that are free of entropy?

The evolutionary complexity of the cosmos from hydrogen of the Big Bang to helium to the fire of the stars which gave birth to other sequences of transformation than to planets and the earth which birthed its biosphere which birth consciousness than birthed self-consciousness, seems to be free of entropy. I'm wondering what self-consciousness will evolve into.

.

 

[Davian]

1. If the context of this forum includes "Life",

Nice quote mine.

I expect that I can offer real life,

I expect, if you have not done so by now, that you cannot do so, whatever you mean by "real".

as opposed to created (contrived) life.

Contrived, implying artificial or unrealistic? Just not in any way that you can demonstrate?

Unfortunately that [real] life is not the norm here, so there are limits to what can be presented.

Apparently, you are limited to unevidenced assertions.

Here, watch I will provide some evidence: ... Want to see it again? See what I mean? I/we can show you but you can't see it.

I cannot see what you have only imagined.

So...because of YOUR limited sight...

You are not claiming that I cannot see something, but that mainstream science is wrong. Is that not more accurate?

we

Who is this "we" that you speak for?

can only "tell" you.

Then I see no reason to believe you.

But don't blame us for your own short comings.

I do not see not believing every unevidenced claim that is trotted through these forums as a shortcoming, thanks. You have that same shortcoming, do you not? You don't believe in every god/alien/Bigfoot/Loch Ness monster story you are told, do you?

There is indeed more,

So you assert.

and you know it,

How do you know what I think? Did you buy that cheap mind-reading apparatus that was on sale down at Walmart?

and insisting on visible evidence is just a cop out.

Insisting that I accept your opinions as fact is arrogance. But let's keep in mind that this is a science forum, and not the Exploring Christianity forum.

Don't bring a gun to a knife fight? Right!

Don't bring unevidenced assertions to a science forum.

The differentiating is on you.

But I can only work with that you give me, and that has been pretty thin indeed.

I am only pointing out that all are not the same. ... Wanna see it again?

Your unevidenced religious assertions? Not particularly.

 

[Davian]

In reading your response, what comes to mind is something from the Gospel of Luke (using my words): "If people do not welcome you, <snip>

I do not see how he has not been made welcome here - but I do not see that being made welcome should extend to accepting his unevidenced religious claims at face value. He has had more than ample opportunity to make his case.

 

[Davian]

And yet <snip>

Don't go moving the goalposts yet. Are those the two options to choose from?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Are you telling me what I think? Can you read minds?

Of course that speaks well of those of us who do not reject God. But my comment was a lament for those who even go well beyond their own rejection of God, to criticize out of an obvious and expressed hatred. Here we are on a "Christian" forum where it can only be looked at as active aggression. When Christians are aggressive, it is to bring good [news]. Granted, there are bound to be exceptions on both sides, and these few may only be those exceptions.

From what I have been told there are people that were raised in church and their aggressive attitude somehow comes out of that.

 

[Davian]

Because it is?

I see that many Christians accept evolutionary theory and mainstream cosmology. I don't know what your problem is.

I mean it was, after all, a priest that proposed modern cosmology, so why wouldn't it be compatible? Even though Michael I can assure you does not believe in that creation story.

I have no idea what Michael believes.

And certainly not the 95% Fairie Dust you require us <snip>

Quote to me where I required you to believe anything.

 

[Davian]

Not at all. Just your misinterpretation of what I said. Unlike you that accepts

How do know what I accept or believe?

whatever their high priest cosmologists and evolutionist tell them - I actually study things - and rely on the data. You know, the data where finches that interbreed and produce offspring was once thought to be reproductively isolated and separate species? But then some continue to believe the same thing their priests tell them

It never ceases to amaze me to see religionists use their own terms in the pejorative.

- despite the DNA evidence. Imagine that faith if you will for but a moment.

Why would it require faith?

Imagine the faith it takes to continue to believe any animal mating and producing fertile offspring since they arrived on the islands were ever separate species. Imagine the faith it takes to still believe that - just because their high priests command it to be so.

Again, it never ceases to amaze me to see religionists use their own terms in the pejorative.

I have no problem with your right to practice your religion

What religion?

- I just insist you at least correct your mistakes

What mistakes?

in belief before asking I accept the same flawed interpretation.

Where did I ask you to accept anything? Have you mistaken me for someone else?

 

[Davian]

Mickey mouse has some characteristics of a real mouse and Garfield has some characteristics of a real cat and even Spongebob Squarepants have some characteristics of a real sponge. Guess what? A unicorn has some characteristics of a real horse. Thanks for reinforcing the very point I made. Counterfeits is evidence of the real thing.

That Jesus was a real man, and his divinity the fiction?. I now see the how your horse-unicorn analogy works.

 

[Davian]

From this Lover of God's perspective, sometimes (I think way too often) spiritual discernment isn't any different than guessing.

That is how it appears.

Sometimes though, great insight and understanding does comes to a person. Personally, I find myself somewhat skeptical when a person claims special spiritual insight and so I test what they say against my own spiritual discernment.

.

I find myself skeptical of claims that cannot be shown to comport with reality.