What do you believe regarding creation and evolution?

Jet Black · Sep 2, 2003

emjohn45 said:
It all boils down to faith. Do we or do we not believe that God is able to do what he has said he has done? If not that is each ones choice. However, it is not God being deceptive, rather it is man being deceived by man's own foolishness.

This is what I think.

no-one has ever said that God is incapable of doing these things, we are simply saying he didn't, because we know the way the world works, and from that we can build up a good picture of how it looked in the past. From looking at all the various things in the universe we see that it looks billions of years old. now God could have cerated everything in 6 days, but from the way everything looks, he didn't.

If he did, that makes hom deceptive, and it makes the universe the divine equivalent of sellotaping breadcrumbs o the wondow and then laughing when birds knock themselves out in their quest for food. God sat back chuckling at us makes it even worse from a theological point of view, because you have now got a God who thinks that it is funny that people are going to hell.

Jet Black · Sep 2, 2003

emjohn45 said:
Why should it bother anyone that he made a mature universe?

th econcept of a mature niverse is stupid. the only thing that God "needed" to make mature would be an ecosystem. There would be no need for him to make the cosmic microwve background and so on

To whom does it appear much older and why? Because it is grand in it's expanse...is that what makes it "appear" older?

since it is expanding, the size makes it look old. Also the cosmic microwave background- the most perfect black body spectrum there is - can only be explained in terms of an expanding usinverse that is 13.7 billion years old. The ages of all the stars, the supernovae that we see millions of light years away that would never have happened if the universe was only 6000 years old. The geological strata that can only be explained through natural processes taking millions of years. The ratios of the nuclear isotopes, that are in exactly the same ratios that one would expect were the world a few billion years old. Endogenous retroviral sequences also give a good age when looking at the older ones, as do looking at variations in the y-chromosome over time... the list goes on and on. do you need me to explain how even more scientific disciplines make us look old... other than geology, cosmology and molecular biology?

Perhaps it is because science says that it is older through their speculations and theories...none of which can be proven by the way...is that what makes it "appear" older?

aah yes the old "it's a theory" card. We don't make theories up over breakfast you know. someone has an idea, a hypothesis if you like. it is applied, tested, people try to find whether it is wrong or not, and if it holds up to testing, then it can be combined with other hypotheses to produce a general description of something, a theory, which itself makes predictions. It is when those predictions that are made are falsified that is important, because that either destroys the theory, or means the theory needs modification. it is a continual process, and all good theories are tested.

Gracchus · Sep 3, 2003

emjohn45 said:
And why doesn't the account in the Bible agree with creation itself? Because man says so...not good enough.

Creation tells us what the Lord did. Men wrote the Bible, much of it for political and financial reasons. Any truth found in it is incidental, though occasionally it is found. One should read religious texts as you would pan for gold. Pick out what is worthwhile and throw away the dross. If we have eaten of the fruit that enables us to discern the good and the evil, then we should use that, accepting mortality as a gift.

emjohn45 said:
Man has yet been able to comprehend the smallest part of the vastness of God. Man's wisdom it total foolishness to God. No doubt God chuckles at man's feeble attempts to deride his wisdom.

I believe that mankind can be worthy of respect. You do not respect yourself so the god you have created does not respect you.

You're speaking for yourself, John. In mathematics and physics and chemistry and biology and all the sciences we begin to discern the mind of God, and by filling our hearts with mercy and kindness we discern the heart of God and become what we are meant to be.

emjohn45 said:
Man cannot even duplicate the simplest things that God has done...yet man tries to put himself on God's level and tells God that he is deceptive. And why does man do this?

There are a great many things that man has done that God didn't do. Wipe out smallpox and polio for instance. And what you don't seem to understand is that we are saying that God is not trying to deceive us, but that many of the men who wrote the Bible were mistaken, or pursuing their own desires.

emjohn45 said:
Because man can not understand how God did it and since man can not understand and because man puts his trust in man's feeble wisdom and trite sayings...God must therefore be deceptive.

Your god is deceptive, and a sadistic moron to boot. The real God gave us minds to use, and free will to make our own decisions.

emjohn45 said:
Quite foolsih from my point of view...but again my point of view doesn't really matter. Only God's point of view is that which really matters.

That is your point of view. You have abdicated reason and observation by your own testimony. Thus your point of view is worthless.

emjohn45 said:
It all boils down to faith. Do we or do we not believe that God is able to do what he has said he has done?

For you it boils down to whether one believes nonsensical dogma.

emjohn45 said:
If not that is each ones choice. However, it is not God being deceptive, rather it is man being deceived by man's own foolishness.

Again, you are speaking for yourself. We, the ones who have contradicted you, have said that God is not being deceptive. Our point is that you have deceived yourself and abdicated intellect and responsibility. You think that believing nonsense fulfills your duty, and believing nonsense is difficult. But it contributes nothing to the welfare of your neighbor, and spurns the reason with which humans are endowed.

emjohn45 said:
This is what I think.

By your own admission, what you think is worthless twaddle.

emjohn45 · Sep 3, 2003

Well, it seems that my "twaddle" rattled a few cages. I guess that only shows the instability of faith in science.

=====================================

Science in it's purist form shows results that can be repeated by others.

Theory does not follow this rule...nor can it as it is only speculation. As each speculation is added to the other the theory is formed. Nevertheless, it is all speculation as it can never be proven.

So, how do they "prove" that the universe is x billion years old? Hmmm. Because they gage the speed of light...but light existed before there were stars. I wonder how they gage that?

My friends, your faith is in science and the puny attempts by man to make themselves "godlike". If that is how you want to use your "free will" that is your choice.

However, science will fail you. God will not.

It is far more foolish to believe that everything started with a "bang" then to believe that God created it all.

His power is great. His words are true. He will always exist. He does not need to be kept alive as he is the source of life.

Man on the other hand cannot even keep his own heart beating but yet has the audacity to proclaim that his wisdom and observations must be true and God's word is not.

No doubt when that man dies...wisdom will die with him.

Faith in God or faith in man. This is what it is all about.

It is not about the speed of light, the mass of stars, black holes, super novas or the like. Remember, God created them all.

We cannot understand them, but he created them. Yet we think we know more than the one who created the very things we find difficult to understand.

That is foolish.

Let me say that again.

God created the universe. We study the universe to try and understand it. We have a difficult time even getting to the edge of our solar system let alone the galaxy. We know so little about what is going on in the universe.

Nevertheless, we stand in defiance to the very God who created that we find difficult to understand and we boldly proclaim that we are wiser than him. We shout that his word is unacceptable.

That is foolish.

Why do we do this? It is because of arrogance and self importance. We think we know more than God.

We have little bits of information. Fragments compared to the vastness of the universe...yet in man's arrogance he proclaims that God is not wise but a deceiver and that God's word cannot be trusted.

That is foolish.

Unless one knows all there is to know. Unless one can see what God sees. Unless one can reach the ends of the universe in an instant...then and only then could one even consider oneself to be in a position to impune the integrity of God.

And quite frankly, I don't think any of us here knows all there is to know, has seen what God sees or is able to reach the ends of the universe.

Unless we are able we are only speaking foolishness when we speak against God.

Nevertheless, God is compassionate and will gladly forgive us if we come to him in Jesus name.

This is what I think.

Arikay · Sep 3, 2003

"Theory does not follow this rule...nor can it as it is only speculation. As each speculation is added to the other the theory is formed. Nevertheless, it is all speculation as it can never be proven."

Good for "theory" now can you give us a definition of "scientific theory?" There is a difference ya know.

And you are right, it can never be proven 100%. Few scientists are arrogant enough to think we know all, and thus nothing can be proven 100% but it can get very close.

"So, how do they "prove" that the universe is x billion years old? Hmmm. Because they gage the speed of light...but light existed before there were stars. I wonder how they gage that?"

Do you know what you are talking about?
Light is light. Light from a star and light from another source are still both "light"

"My friends, your faith is in science and the puny attempts by man to make themselves "godlike". If that is how you want to use your "free will" that is your choice."

well, can you show me where a scientist thinks science will make them "god like?"

We will of course ignore all the times you have used things created by science.

"It is far more foolish to believe that everything started with a "bang" then to believe that God created it all."

1) the name "big bang" was actually given to the theory by an atheist oppenent that believed in the steady state theory. The first ideas of the Big Bang were actually thought up by a christian

2) The big bang is only about what happend after First Cause. It does NOT say god didn't create. Matter of fact, one possible first cause is God.

"Why do we do this? It is because of arrogance and self importance. We think we know more than God."

I think there is an irony here.

Lets say God created the universe.
The Universe has evidence that says how it was created.
Thus, if god created the universe, he created the evidence scientists study.

You are saying that your interpretation of the bible, is more correct that evidence from god.

emjohn45 said:
[snip]

revolutio · Sep 3, 2003

emjohn45 said:
*snip*

Define faith.

Jet Black · Sep 3, 2003

emjohn45 said:
Well, it seems that my "twaddle" rattled a few cages. I guess that only shows the instability of faith in science.

=====================================

So, how do they "prove" that the universe is x billion years old? Hmmm. Because they gage the speed of light...but light existed before there were stars. I wonder how they gage that?

rather than reading and replying to what I and others said we have..... A TROLLISH RANT.... well done, you won today's prize.

Normally I don't reply to trolls, but this is such a sound butchering of science, and such appaling lack of knowledge that, light in your last post, I feel compelled to address it.

The universe is dated by a number of methods, one being the distance to stars.... light may have been emmited, but he doesn't say that cosmic rays (actually particle showers) were emitted, so I am going to assume that they weren't. Cosmic rays are slower than light but come from specific sources. were these cosmic rays created in transit jut to make it look like supernovae? Another thing is the Cosmic microwave background..... This Black body spectrum is a leftover from shortly after the Big Bang when matter an energy decouples and hydrogen became transparent to light. Singe the matter and energy were in equilibrium, there is a black body spectrum. now after billions of years of cooling (13.7 +/-2% to be more exact) we end up with a spectrum that is at 2.7K. Why is this there? is it another trick?
All the galaxies that are really far away... why do they LOOK young as well? or is this just another joke created by a deceptive God?

you won't reply to this, you will just give another trollish rant, but I hope it educates others.

Plan 9 · Sep 3, 2003

Plan 9 said:
What is interesting to me is that readers almost always recognize metaphors in the Bible and rarely take them literally (with the notable exception of Finas Dake, who believes that Heaven is a planet). One example is Ruth 2:12: " May rich recompense be made to you by Yahweh, the God of Israel, to whom you have come, to find shelter beneath His wings". (Jerusalem Bible). There are many similar O.T. passages, but I, so far, have met no one who concludes from them that God has literal wings.
Bible readers are also accustomed to reading Jesus's parables in the N.T. and, again most do not think that there is a literal man who found a treasure in a field and bought it or that Jesus was referring to literal wise and foolish virgins.
Similes are used regularly in both the O.T. and the N.T.
In addition there are some N.T. passages which make use of hyperbole:
John 21:25: "There were many other things that Jesus did; if all were written down, the world itself, I suppose, would not hold all the books that would have to be written." (Jer. Bible)
My dictionary (Webster's New World College Dictionary, Third Edition 1997) defines a parable as "a short, simple story, usually of an occurrence of a familiar kind, from which a moral or religious lesson may be drawn."
Although some may not choose to do so, Christians who interpret the some Genesis accounts as teaching stories still remain othodox believers as long as they accept the lessons taught by them as fact, just as most Christians who assert that they interpret the N.T. literally, accept the message of Jesus's parables as truth, while knowing them to be teaching stories.

emjohn45 said:

Are we so "enlightened" now that God's word has become myths and fables? How did we become so wise that we can "pooh pooh " the very God who keeps our hearts beating....

Click to expand...

If by "myths and fables" emjohn means strories which teach moral, ethical and spirtual truths without without being literally true, then Christians have a responsiblity not to automatically "pooh pooh" them, since Jesus used parables to teach.

I don't see how it harms me (or anyone else) to entertain the idea that I may have misinterpreted my sacred documents long enough to listen as objectively as possible to what others have to say about them. Even if I don't change my mind as a result of hearing someone else's viewpoint, I still stand to learn a great deal from doing so. I also find it fun.

Emjohn, I can see that you're having a great time answering the other posts and probably no one feels that mine is nearly as enthralling, but I would be interested in reading your response to it, should you have the time to reply.

Gracchus · Sep 4, 2003

emjohn45 said:
Well, it seems that my "twaddle" rattled a few cages. I guess that only shows the instability of faith in science.

It is your faith that can not stand in the face of science, because you have invested too much in poetry and myth. You still don't get it, no one called God a liar. It was written that if the evidence found in the actual created universe was incorrect then the only possible conclusion would be that God was trying to deceive us. And such is not the case. The evidence shows the universe to be 13-14 billion years old. The evidence indicates that the earth is 3-4 billion years old. The evidence shows there was no world wide flood.

emjohn45 said:
Science in it's purist form shows results that can be repeated by others..

You're right, as far as you go. And what is it's "purist form"?

emjohn45 said:
Theory does not follow this rule...nor can it as it is only speculation. As each speculation is added to the other the theory is formed. Nevertheless, it is all speculation as it can never be proven..

No emjohn45, theory is what science tests. A theory is formed to explain observations. If it is a useful theory it will predict that other observations will be found to hold true. Predictions can be tested. If the observations are those predicted by the theory, the theory is strengthened. If the actual observations are those not consistent with the theory, then the theory must be discarded or modified. If the theory is tested by many different successful predictions, the theory is well founded. Evolution is successful in predicting the findings in many areas of science. Genetics, developmental biology, cytology, biochemistry, biogeography, and paleontology are all consistent with evolutionary theory.

emjohn45 said:
So, how do they "prove" that the universe is x billion years old? Hmmm. Because they gage the speed of light...but light existed before there were stars. I wonder how they gage that?.

It is the nature of the light that tells us how far the observable universe extends. The composition and physics and chemistry of the star can be studied in its spectrograph, and not just in its visible light, but also in its radio and gamma emissions.
Radioactive dating, has been tested, and hundreds of different decay series have been found consistent with each other and with samples of known age. And the same decay series can be found in the farthest stars, so we know that the same rates of decay can be derived from light that has traveled for billions of years.
KJV Psalm 19:1

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.

emjohn45 said:
My friends, your faith is in science and the puny attempts by man to make themselves "godlike". If that is how you want to use your "free will" that is your choice..

It is you who are claiming special status as God's spokesman. Your own statements confirm your vast and abysmal ignorance of science.

emjohn45 said:
However, science will fail you. God will not..

My fate is irrelevant. I can hold up my head. I have lived and loved and learned. Mark Twain wrote a piece entitled "To a Heathen Sitting in Darkness". But he didn't really expect the heathen to read it. He wrote it for the "Christians". I do not expect my words to touch your mind (It is an awfully small target.) but others may hear and take something worthwhile from them.

emjohn45 said:
It is far more foolish to believe that everything started with a "bang" then to believe that God created it all..

God can start with fireworks if He wants to. I love fireworks.

emjohn45 said:
His power is great. His words are true.

Our words are symbols, often imprecise. God's words are realities. Even your holy book says He spoke the universe into existence.

emjohn45 said:
He will always exist. He does not need to be kept alive as he is the source of life.

This is pertinent neither to the science nor the theology under discussion. It appears to be the frantic affirmation of someone who doubts his own belief. Perhaps your god is dead, i.e. falsified.

emjohn45 said:
Man on the other hand cannot even keep his own heart beating but yet has the audacity to proclaim that his wisdom and observations must be true and God's word is not..

God has given us free will to use as we see fit. He has given us discernment, that we may discover truth and be convinced of the truth, regardless of the temporal "authority" of kings and priests, (and self-appointed prophets).

emjohn45 said:
No doubt when that man dies...wisdom will die with him..

But Newton's wisdom did not die with Newton, nor did Einstein's wisdom die with Einstein.

emjohn45 said:
Faith in God or faith in man. This is what it is all about..

I think it was Tom Sawyer who said, "Faith is believing what you know ain't so." In any case that is not what is all about for me, and for many others. For some it is about music and poetry and art. For some it is about the pursuit of truth. For some it is about healing and comforting. For you it is trying to believe what ain't so. That is very difficult in the modern world. I don't know why you try. It doesn't appeal to me. Still, as the Romans said, "De gustibus non disputandum est."

emjohn45 said:
It is not about the speed of light, the mass of stars, black holes, super novas or the like. Remember, God created them all..

And.?

emjohn45 said:
We cannot understand them, but he created them. Yet we think we know more than the one who created the very things we find difficult to understand. That is foolish.

Speak for yourself, John. I am willing to believe that you cannot begin to comprehend them. I am almost certain you have never even tried.

emjohn45 said:
Let me say that again..
God created the universe. We study the universe to try and understand it. We have a difficult time even getting to the edge of our solar system let alone the galaxy. We know so little about what is going on in the universe..

But we are learning more. Almost daily come discoveries and new understanding. Not to you of course. Babylonian cosmology satisfies you, and you see no need to change it.

emjohn45 said:
Nevertheless, we stand in defiance to the very God who created that we find difficult to understand and we boldly proclaim that we are wiser than him. We shout that his word is unacceptable..

You speak for and about yourself, John. You do not speak for me.

emjohn45 said:
That is foolish..

You have judged yourself.

emjohn45 said:
Why do we do this? It is because of arrogance and self importance. We think we know more than God..

Truly, you are convicted out of your own mouth.

emjohn45 said:
We have little bits of information. Fragments compared to the vastness of the universe...yet in man's arrogance he proclaims that God is not wise but a deceiver and that God's word cannot be trusted..

It would seem that your bits of information are very few and very little indeed, and some are even false and you cling far more desperately to the false than to the true, and it would seem that you will cast away the true bits rather than give up the false ones.

emjohn45 said:
That is foolish..

Out of your own mouth, you judge yourself.

emjohn45 said:
Unless one knows all there is to know. Unless one can see what God sees. Unless one can reach the ends of the universe in an instant...then and only then could one even consider oneself to be in a position to impune the integrity of God..

No one but you impugns the integrity of God. You have said that his words, written in the rocks and blazoned across the sky are false. You place your faith in a book written for various purposes by ignorant men in languages you do not understand for audiences that had to believe through myth and miracle, because there was little real knowledge as we understand knowledge.

emjohn45 said:
And quite frankly, I don't think any of us here knows all there is to know, has seen what God sees or is able to reach the ends of the universe..

Did you know that Kurt Goedel proved that there are true statements that cannot be proved by logic or mathematics? And there are some statements that can not be proved to be either true or false. I'll bet you didn't know that.

emjohn45 said:
Unless we are able we are only speaking foolishness when we speak against God..

It is you who speak against God. You put your faith in the dead letter, and not the living spirit.

emjohn45 said:
Nevertheless, God is compassionate and will gladly forgive us if we come to him in Jesus name..

I remember a story about two rabbis. One says to the other, "I told God that I would forgive him if he would forgive me." The second rabbi frowned and said, "You let Him off too easy. You should have made Him forgive everyone."
God will dispose of me as He will. I am content.

emjohn45 said:
This is what I think.

But you could be wrong?

armed2010 · Sep 4, 2003

*wipes tear from eye* bravo gracchus *applauds*

Brimshack · Sep 4, 2003

Well Plan 9, I for one think you have the right idea. Most origin narratives around the world are used to teach moral lessons rather than to expound theories of cosmology. In fact, I rather think that the literalist movement in Christianity could fairly be described as discounting the messages themselves insofar as they would rather extrapolate intellectual characatures from what is in many instances sound moral teachings. The book of Genesis is not a 'myth', but those who pretend to base their view of reality upon it have certainly created one in their own minds.

emjohn45 · Sep 4, 2003

My friends, here is my very basic point.

It takes faith to believe in God. It takes faith to believe that the Bible is God's word. It takes faith to believe that what the Bible says is true.

Until one is able to understand God's ways and thoughts we will never be able to understand the ways of his universe and how he did it.

One may say that he gave us a free will and because he gave us a free will that we then use that will to search out the universe and the "facts" that we can obtain from it. We then proclaim these "facts" to be truth.

However, this is contrary to what God says. God says, "My thoughts are not like your thoughts and my ways are not like your ways."

In order to understand the universe, we must first understand the Creator of the universe.

It is better to spend our time learning of the Creator and then applying what we learn of the Creator to the universe.

However, that is not usually the case. Usually man tries to understand the universe and then applies what they deem to be "facts" about the universe to the Creator of the universe.

To do so is foolish and God himself proclaims it to be foolish.

So, it takes faith to believe what God has said. The scriptures say this:

It is by faith that we believe that God framed the world and made that which can be seen out of that which cannot be seen (that is his spoken word).

God said let there be light and there was light. Before there was a sun or stars there was light.

As science stands today, they would say this is not possible. However, the Bible says that what is impossible with man is possible with God.

If one believes that then they agree with God. If they don't then they don't agree with God.

For faith is agreeing with God.

Again, until we can have the thoughts of God, we will never understand God or the ways of God.

God gave us the Bible in order to help us learn his thoughts. However, his thoughts are not obvious...because God wants us to seek him out in order to understand his thoughts.

Why? In order to give us freedom...true freedom.

Freedom from fear, freedom from hate, freedom from despair, freedom from pride, freedom from rage, freedom from self pity, freedom from lust, freedom from lying, freedom from a multitude of things that hamper our daily life.

We do not have to pursue God. That is our choice, nevertheless the result of not doing so is a genuine lack of peace and love in our lives.

So again, my basic point is this: It is about faith.

Faith seems foolish to any who do not agree with God. Faith seems ignorant and archaic to those who choose not to pursue the truth of God.

Nevertheless, it is faith that pleases God.

There is an answer to every question...if we truly want to know and sincerely seek an answer from the Father he will show us.

If we seek we will find...but many times the answer escape our intellect because our intellect has been tainted by our lack of freedom.

We must humble ourselve before God, acknowledge to him that we are feeble without him and he will begin to show his thoughts and ways to us.

The ways of God are not the ways of man. What man has done is taken what they have gleened from their studies and created their own story or myth of how the universe came into existance.

They have pieced it together without God and his thoughts. They are free to do this, but God says it is not my way or my thoughts.

If man really wants to know then man will ask God. They will not put their hope for answers in studying the creation...the answer does not lie there...the answer is in seeking out God, not the universe.

Since he made the ear he is quite capable of hearing when one speaks to him.

Since he made the mouth he is well able to answer the one who truly seeks him out.

The one who thinks he knows...though he has not sought out God on the matter...does not know.

Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God.

I realize that many think that faith and the universe are not the same thing...but the Bible says the opposite.

It is by faith we believe that God framed the world...it is that basic, that simple.

This is why it takes a humble heart to agree with what God says. For it is beyond our comprehension to think that all that we see came about just because God said, "Let there be..."

Likewise, it is even further beyond our ability to apprehend the thought that he did not do so in billions of years...but rather if a very, very short time.

Believe it or not. Agree or disagree.

Yet, let God be true and every man a liar.

Nothing else matters...God alone holds the very universe together and keeps everyone of our hearts beating.

If we don't understand, it is not God's fault. He has told us how to come to a knowledge of Him and his ways...if we truly want truth we will seek him out...if we don't we won't.

This is what I think and what I have come to know to be true.

Jet Black · Sep 5, 2003

emjohn45 said:
<snip>

an off topic rant!

Jet Black · Sep 5, 2003

emjohn45 said:
Until one is able to understand God's ways and thoughts we will never be able to understand the ways of his universe

fine, turn off your cumputer an TV then.

and how he did it.

assuming "he" exists

In order to understand the universe, we must first understand the Creator of the universe.

see my first reply

However, that is not usually the case. Usually man tries to understand the universe and then applies what they deem to be "facts" about the universe to the Creator of the universe.

no, we apply the facts of the universe to the universe.

God said let there be light and there was light. Before there was a sun or stars there was light.

oh, a literalist

As science stands today, they would say this is not possible. However, the Bible says that what is impossible with man is possible with God.

are you saying he is a liar then?

If one believes that then they agree with God. If they don't then they don't agree with God.

no, they don't agree with your interpretation of the bible. this is entirely different.

For faith is agreeing with God.

it is believing in God, agreeing with the bible word for word is different.

sorry, your rant is too long. I lost interest here.

armed2010 · Sep 5, 2003

emjohn45 said:
My friends, here is my very basic point.

It takes faith to believe in God. It takes faith to believe that the Bible is God's word. It takes faith to believe that what the Bible says is true.

If only science could go off of blind faith. All that meaningless research could be replaced with faith, and it would instantly be true!!

Until one is able to understand God's ways and thoughts we will never be able to understand the ways of his universe and how he did it.

Ya, I wonder how zeus did it. Or wait, Thor? Odin?

One may say that he gave us a free will and because he gave us a free will that we then use that will to search out the universe and the "facts" that we can obtain from it. We then proclaim these "facts" to be truth.

However, this is contrary to what God says. God says, "My thoughts are not like your thoughts and my ways are not like your ways."

I wonder why everything that god apparantly did, doesnt reflect the real world. Is it science thats wrong, or god?

In order to understand the universe, we must first understand the Creator of the universe.

In order to understand a watch, must I understand the person who made that watch?

It is better to spend our time learning of the Creator and then applying what we learn of the Creator to the universe.

Its too bad that everything we learn from our "creator" directly conflicts with real life.

However, that is not usually the case. Usually man tries to understand the universe and then applies what they deem to be "facts" about the universe to the Creator of the universe.

So basically, we should believe something, then go out and find proof for it, instead of finding proof for something, and then belieivng?

To do so is foolish and God himself proclaims it to be foolish.

Ya, the scientific process is such a silly concept.

So, it takes faith to believe what God has said. The scriptures say this:

It is by faith that we believe that God framed the world and made that which can be seen out of that which cannot be seen (that is his spoken word).

If only faith could be the answer to all things in the universe.

God said let there be light and there was light. Before there was a sun or stars there was light.

So basically, all of the starlight we see was made before the stars, and all the supernova light bursts and such, are basically things that never happend? Is god trying to trick us or something?

As science stands today, they would say this is not possible. However, the Bible says that what is impossible with man is possible with God.

The bible says? Maybe I should go quote the "wizard of oz". Because as everyone knows, you cant see the wizard of oz without being swept away in a tornado!!

If one believes that then they agree with God. If they don't then they don't agree with God.

God apparantly doesnt agree with reality, because reality doesnt reflect gods word.

For faith is agreeing with God.

Blind faith can agree with any god and anything

Again, until we can have the thoughts of God, we will never understand God or the ways of God.

God gave us the Bible in order to help us learn his thoughts. However, his thoughts are not obvious...because God wants us to seek him out in order to understand his thoughts.

Isnt god not the author of confusion though? If hes not the author of confusion, why would his thoughts not be obvious? We have over 40,000 denominations of christianity because of these unobvious thoughts.

Why? In order to give us freedom...true freedom.

Ya, the freedom to be wrong. Unfortunately, if we happen to be wrong, we get to spend a nice long eternity in hell for our lack of understanding.

Freedom from fear, freedom from hate, freedom from despair, freedom from pride, freedom from rage, freedom from self pity, freedom from lust, freedom from lying, freedom from a multitude of things that hamper our daily life.

Anyone can have freedom from this. It doesnt take a god to get away from ones fears and such.

We do not have to pursue God. That is our choice, nevertheless the result of not doing so is a genuine lack of peace and love in our lives.

I have no lack of peace or love in my life. I am very happy, and have never felt as good as I do now ever since I left christianity. If anything, my feelings of peace and love have trippled!

So again, my basic point is this: It is about faith.

All hail blind faith!!!

Faith seems foolish to any who do not agree with God. Faith seems ignorant and archaic to those who choose not to pursue the truth of God.

Im sure anyone could say the same thing about any god. Would you think im foolish to have faith that I would become a butterfly in 2 days?

Nevertheless, it is faith that pleases God.

Yup, good old blind faith. Hail to the chief!

There is an answer to every question...if we truly want to know and sincerely seek an answer from the Father he will show us.

So god can tell me how to create an advanced particle accelerator able to create tiny quantum singularities from single atoms?

If we seek we will find...but many times the answer escape our intellect because our intellect has been tainted by our lack of freedom.

Yes, truly we are too dumb to know when GOD ALL MIGHTY is contacting us

We must humble ourselve before God, acknowledge to him that we are feeble without him and he will begin to show his thoughts and ways to us.

So basically dumb yourself down to a low point, and let the light shine in?

The ways of God are not the ways of man. What man has done is taken what they have gleened from their studies and created their own story or myth of how the universe came into existance.

Yup, and most of those myths are called "religions"

They have pieced it together without God and his thoughts. They are free to do this, but God says it is not my way or my thoughts.

Scientists used to believe gods thoughts, but testing and research have shown gods thoughts to be....misleading.

If man really wants to know then man will ask God. They will not put their hope for answers in studying the creation...the answer does not lie there...the answer is in seeking out God, not the universe.

So god can tell me how to build an atom smasher?

Since he made the ear he is quite capable of hearing when one speaks to him.

Doesnt seem like he hears many people

Since he made the mouth he is well able to answer the one who truly seeks him out.

Ya, through a series of coincidents, god will show himself to be true!

The one who thinks he knows...though he has not sought out God on the matter...does not know.

So, does man not know how to make a computer, because they have not sought god out on the matter? So this is why windows keeps crashing!!

Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God.

I realize that many think that faith and the universe are not the same thing...but the Bible says the opposite.

Good old bible, telling how the world is

It is by faith we believe that God framed the world...it is that basic, that simple.

Once agian, if only faith could answer all our problems

This is why it takes a humble heart to agree with what God says. For it is beyond our comprehension to think that all that we see came about just because God said, "Let there be..."

If it is beyond our comprehension, then how do we know that its beyond our comprehension?

Likewise, it is even further beyond our ability to apprehend the thought that he did not do so in billions of years...but rather if a very, very short time.

Ya, the real world is such a tricker, looking billions of years old and such. Silly world.

Believe it or not. Agree or disagree.

Yet, let God be true and every man a liar.

Even though its apparantly the other way around.

Nothing else matters...God alone holds the very universe together and keeps everyone of our hearts beating.

Yup, good old blind faith.

If we don't understand, it is not God's fault. He has told us how to come to a knowledge of Him and his ways...if we truly want truth we will seek him out...if we don't we won't.

Yup, good old blind faith.

This is what I think and what I have come to know to be true.

Plan 9 · Sep 5, 2003

Brimshack said:
Well Plan 9, I for one think you have the right idea. Most origin narratives around the world are used to teach moral lessons rather than to expound theories of cosmology. In fact, I rather think that the literalist movement in Christianity could fairly be described as discounting the messages themselves insofar as they would rather extrapolate intellectual characatures from what is in many instances sound moral teachings. The book of Genesis is not a 'myth', but those who pretend to base their view of reality upon it have certainly created one in their own minds.

In one of my anthropology classes, we the good luck to spend some time studying the culture of the Bakka, a clan of what used to be called "pygmies", who lived exactly as their remote ancesters had lived in an African rainforest.
We saw a film in which an older, unmarried man was telling what appeared to be a fairly long story to the clan's children. Anyone could tell that the this story was both funny and occasionally, just a little scary from the reaction of the children to it. They were obviously enthralled by it and man was an excellent storyteller.
It turned out to be the about a woman who had her baby stolen by a chimpanzee and who had to try one plan after another before finally succeeding in getting the chimpanzee to return her baby to her.
After the man had finished the story, the rather large Causcasian anthopologist who was living with clan then asked on of the mothers if he could hold her infant, She agreed and then he held his open hand out, palm up, and she placed her baby there and the baby was no longer than his hand.
He gave the infant back and then explained that the Bakka elder had a very serious point to make to the children and that he needed them to understand a sson in their lives as possible to watch out for chimpanzees, who love meat, do sometimes steal their babies, who are easier to catch and kill than the rain forest's monkeys, who are about the same size as Bakka children.
The story was carefully crafted to to exciting enough enough to hold the childrens' full attention and be memorable, without overly frightening them, so it was a 'tall tale' and the children enjoyed it all the more because they assumed that it wasn't a true story, but it spoke to them of reality just the same. It had been passed down from generation to generation in this form because it was the perfect tool for teaching teaching the children to never forget to stay well away from chimpanzees. It was far more effective than a straightforward and gory factual account of a chimpanzee kiling and eating a child.
Genesis is far more beautiful, serious and complex and contains many moral and ethical lsssons in an equally memorable and concise form. I read in one of Lucaspa's posts that the creation account(s) was originally sung, which is an ideal method of passing along a structured body of information to an illiterate audience, so that it can be easily memorized and sung over and over. The tune, of course, would have also added further meaning. Knowing that, I'm even more impressed with its perfection. The vast majority of the people thoughout the ages who have valued the creation account as sacred needed information from it of more immediate importance to them than cosmology. Scientists, no matter in what time they live or how primitive we might now consider them to be, must have the freedom from want, physical toil and they must enjoy relative safety in order to gain the necessary learning to pursue new knowledge and then convey it to the larger society, so that everyone benefits.
The rest of us need our explanations in terms we can understand and if we don't have a background in cosmology, then including long and detailed information regarding cosmology in a story designed to reveal moral, ethical and sprititual truths will just confuse and mislead us with incomprehensible facts and as Brimshack has pointed out, will result in our learning a characature of these truths, rather than the truths themselves. This is why Jesus chose to teach through the use of parables, even though He was capable of confounding experienced theologians at the age of twelve.

Brimshack · Sep 5, 2003

Beautiful.

To share another anecdote: When I first came out to Indian country, I asked an elder why he thought gangs were coming onto the reservation, his answer was simple: "The separation of the sexes." He was referring to a portion of the emergence narratives in men and women decided to live apart.

It begins rather humorously with First Man and First Woman eating dinner together, some meat from a game animal. After the meal, First Woman sits back, sighs, and says iut was a wonderful mean. Then she thanks her ****** for the meal. First Man can't understand why she is thanking her ****** for meat that he brought home, and tells her so. She responds by telling him that if it were not for her ******, he would never get out of bed in the morning, and he wouldn't do anything all day, so she oed her gratitude to her ******.

The argument escalates and eventually all the men leave (I hope I haven't reversed the two; iut's been awhile.) and they are separateed by a stream. Both sexes begin to experience problems. The women cannot feed themselves and both genders lust after anything they can get their hands on. Each experiments with masturbation, and monsters are born as a result. Many try to swim across the river and drown. Eventuially, they rejoin, and the story proceeds to the next episode.

So, what was the elder telling me. In a sense he was telling me that society is still experiencing problems because of the separation of the sexes. But he was also alluding to the high divorce rate. And of course, the main point of the story is that men and women need each other, to wit, that they should not separate (get divorced). For the elder, I think it's fair to say, he believed both aspects of the story, both the literal account of the story and its moral lessons. But of course taking the story literally involves a host of factual problems, which traditionalist/fundamentalists must twist and manipulate in order to make their cosmologies sound factually plausible (not unlike the so-called 'creation-scientists). The moral lesson conveys a sense of value clearly enough, and the high rate of single parents was at least a plausible explanation for the growing gang problem. That implication, at least, was quite sound. And such lessons have been taught in this tribe for thousands of years, the literal meanings being entirely irrelevant. Only in the present age does the need to read a theory into such narratives emerge, and it kills the playfulness as well as the moral vision of the stories when people attempt to do so.

Brimshack · Sep 5, 2003

I can't say "******?"

I wonder what would be an acceptable substitute

Jet Black · Sep 5, 2003

Brimshack said:
I can't say "******?"

I wonder what would be an acceptable substitute

how about *****?

Plan 9 · Sep 5, 2003

Brimshack said:
Beautiful.

To share another anecdote: When I first came out to Indian country, I asked an elder why he thought gangs were coming onto the reservation, his answer was simple: "The separation of the sexes." He was referring to a portion of the emergence narratives in men and women decided to live apart.

It begins rather humorously with First Man and First Woman eating dinner together, some meat from a game animal. After the meal, First Woman sits back, sighs, and says iut was a wonderful mean. Then she thanks her ****** for the meal. First Man can't understand why she is thanking her ****** for meat that he brought home, and tells her so. She responds by telling him that if it were not for her ******, he would never get out of bed in the morning, and he wouldn't do anything all day, so she oed her gratitude to her ******.

The argument escalates and eventually all the men leave (I hope I haven't reversed the two; iut's been awhile.) and they are separateed by a stream. Both sexes begin to experience problems. The women cannot feed themselves and both genders lust after anything they can get their hands on. Each experiments with masturbation, and monsters are born as a result. Many try to swim across the river and drown. Eventuially, they rejoin, and the story proceeds to the next episode.

So, what was the elder telling me. In a sense he was telling me that society is still experiencing problems because of the separation of the sexes. But he was also alluding to the high divorce rate. And of course, the main point of the story is that men and women need each other, to wit, that they should not separate (get divorced). For the elder, I think it's fair to say, he believed both aspects of the story, both the literal account of the story and its moral lessons. But of course taking the story literally involves a host of factual problems, which traditionalist/fundamentalists must twist and manipulate in order to make their cosmologies sound factually plausible (not unlike the so-called 'creation-scientists). The moral lesson conveys a sense of value clearly enough, and the high rate of single parents was at least a plausible explanation for the growing gang problem. That implication, at least, was quite sound. And such lessons have been taught in this tribe for thousands of years, the literal meanings being entirely irrelevant. Only in the present age does the need to read a theory into such narratives emerge, and it kills the playfulness as well as the moral vision of the stories when people attempt to do so.

YES!! You must understand the teaching story and tell it in the creative manner in which it's always been understood and told. If you do that, you can plausibly apply the lesson of the story to situations that the creators of the story might never have been able to imagine.
And the story which the elder told you is so much fun that you're rewarded for listening to it right away and want to continue to thnk about it! Good stories which teach are a gift one person gives another. Was the storyteller Navajo, by any chance? It's sounds like Southwestern to me...
I wish I still had the text of the story the childrens' caregiver told about the woman whos baby was stolen, but my trailer burned down and it was many years ago, so I can't recall the nature of her "trials", her efforts to get her baby back, but it was also instructive to the children that when one method one didn't work, she learned from that and tried a new new tack until she finally prevailed over the extremely clever chimpanzee.

What do you believe regarding creation and evolution?

Which statement most accurately reflects your beliefs regarding creation & evolution?

God created the universe (@ 6-12 thousand years ago) and life; I totally disagree with the theory of

God created the universe (@ 6-12 thousand years ago) and life; I accept microevolution but otherwise

God created the universe (@ 14-17 billion years ago) and life; I accept microevolution but otherwise

God created the universe (@ 14-17 billion years ago) and life; I disagree with the part of theory of

God created the universe (@ 14-17 billion years ago) and life; after creating life, God used evoluti

God created the universe (@ 14-17 billion years ago) but not life. Life developed on our planet as s

There may be some creative force or intelligence that started our universe, but it is not the God of

Since there is no god, both the universe and life began by chance (or quantum uncertainty). I fully

I don't know

Other [If this is checked, please set out in detail what you believe]

Jet Black

Guest

Jet Black

Guest

Senior Veteran

Member

HI

Apatheist Extraordinaire

Jet Black

Guest

Absolutely Elsewhere

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Jet Black

Guest

Jet Black

Guest

Well-Known Member

Absolutely Elsewhere

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jet Black

Guest

Absolutely Elsewhere

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency