The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Religion & Philosophy

Choose!

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 · >>
MadCornishBiker On January 14, 2014

Banned



St Columb Road, United Kingdom
#31New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 14:52:42
@Jennifer1984 Said

Erm.... actually, it does say when the sun was created. It must have been created on the first day, because if the sun had already existed, then there would have already been light. The sun must have been created on the first day to produce the light that God said would be so.


Not if, as science confirms may have been the case, there was too dense a cloud layer or dust cloud for the light to be visible on earth.

Your trouble is you are so determined to prove the bible wrong to justify ourself that you aren't prepred to think it through past the point that suits what you want.

@Jennifer1984 Said

As for the moon... well, that begs the question, doesn't it..? Exactly what is the purpose of the moon. What is the purpose of creating any of the planets, come to that...? If God created man in his image (oh, the vanity...!! but hey, isn't vanity a sin..?), as some sort of celestial hobby, then what is the purpose of all the other planets..? Surely they're superfluous to God's plan..?


What is the use of crating su with colour vision? We don't need it. There are so many things like that, some of whihc have obvious answers, some of which, literally, only God knows. Maybe we will one day.

Do you not think that some of it was designed simply for something good to look at, for us and for Him?

However the moon does have other uses. It's gravity causes tides which keep the oceans from going stagnant on us. It is, as the bible says "a luminary for the night". It is also a means of measuring time periods longer than one day. That's why the early calendars were usually lunar ones, especially the Hebrew Calendar.
Again, don;t just read think.

@Jennifer1984 Said

Which is the neat little loop hole which allows for your very convenient, and verrrry liberal interpretation of what constitutes a "day".


It's called "the English Language."

How about the fact that all of the first 6 days were carefully closed off with very much the same phrase, and yet the 7th has never been closed down? Could that be because it is not yet over? It was the basis for the "Sabbath" in the law, both the weekly one and the one every 7th years. Christ was called the "Lord of the Sabbath". Could that be because that day is still open for him to be called that?

Once again, lol, think.

@Jennifer1984 Said

Now we're blaming the English language..? Well, if God was so perfect, then why didn't he give us a better one, which would be more in his image. Oh yeah... that's another little incongruity, isn't it..? We are created in God's image, which is perfect, but the language we use to articulate ourselves is "poor".


It is not God's fault we have made English so ambiguous over the years. It was less so when I was a child, and even less so in Shakespeare's day, even less so in Chaucer's day, so much less ambiguous that we can barely understand it now.

What makes you think that the original language wasn't perfect before God was forced to confuse it to slow us down in our suicidal course back at Babel? You accuse me of making assumptions and yet your belief is full of them, as full of them as it is lacking in true thought and consideration. That is why your posts are always so easy to answer.

@Jennifer1984 Said

Sounds like a lack of joined-up thinking there, God..!!


As you display so eloquently, the lack of joined up thinking is all yours I'm afraid.

@Jennifer1984 Said

I have thought about it, but not as a slave to it. For religionists, the Holy Bible is unimpeachable and can.... nay, MUST.... be used and interpreted in any way which preserves the doctrine of divine perfection. You can't NOT see it in any other way.

Others, who are not enslaved by it have the luxury of being able to see the gaps.... the inconsistencies.... the illogicalities of it. We can look at it and say "That doesn't make sense". Religionists cannot do that because to do so would be blasphemy.

The Bible takes religionists and holds them in a grip that is unyielding. It denies you free thought. You're the one who doesn't think about it.

All you think about is how to justify it.

.


No, you have only thought of it as a slave to your own bodily impulses, not with any intention to truly understand it. It is you who is the slave, slave to your own desires. To our own self interests.

If I am a slave, I am a slave of God and Christ, and there is no better way to be a slave. Better than being enslaved by the mt of freedom. There is no such thing. In this war you can only be a slave to God or a slave to Satan. There are not alternatives because simply refusing to be a slave of God makes you a slave of Satan.

You have chosen to swap an eternal future in peace and happiness fro a few short years of sexual ecstasy in this life. Your choice, but you will reap what you sow unless you stop sowing it.
Eaglebauer On July 23, 2019
Moderator
Deleted



Saint Louis, Missouri
#32New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 19:19:57
@Glenn Said

So just to be clear, are you also admitting that your statement also was written in ambiguous language open to interpretation?


It doesn't matter if my argument was written in the most untranslatable vagaries ever conceived. I am the author and know the intent. Your response to me has nothing at all to do with the discussion.
xLETHAL_VIXENx On January 22, 2015
Logical Alien





Your pants, United States (gen
#33New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 19:37:32
Glenn can't buy arguments if his life depended on it.
Electric_Banana On February 05, 2024




, New Zealand
#34New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 19:39:52
"I'm your little glowing friend..well, maybe not actually your friend, but I am....",

Rather there is or isn't a God would it change anything?

Currently we all live in a world where there is and isn't a God at the same time and both dimensions still suck.
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#35New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 20:16:28
@nooneinparticular Said

In exactly the order science describes it? I don't remember science claiming that aerial creatures came after aquatic creatures and before land animals...


Indeed. If you read Dawkins, one of the best comedy writers of all time, birds evolved from lizards that kept jumping up and down to catch insects. Apparently, some of the lizards developed a little frilly lace section on their extremities that allowed them to jump up and flap their limbs for as much as one trillionth of a second longer than those that did not have these frilly adaptations. And from there, we got birds.

lefty On July 19, 2018
AKA: friendlybear





Oh, Canada
#36New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 20:18:55
@MadCornishBiker Said

Evolution, as taught by science and scientists dishonours God because it does not give Him the credit He deserves for His amazing design and creation of every living thing.


If there was proof of His existence, and proof of your theory?

@MadCornishBiker Said
It attempts to remove God from the equation because it's strongest supporters insist that God is a delusion.


No, not delusion, figment of imagination. God didn't enter the equation until some bright man decided that creating God would be a good way to explain the unexplainable and control others actions.

@MadCornishBiker Said
It doesn't disprove God, because as a theory it doesn't work. All the evidence that is available so far fits the creation account perfectly in it's form. Only man's interpretation of the evidence is at odds with that fact.


There's the delusion. Believing that the Bible is evidence .

@MadCornishBiker Said
Creation happened exactly as described in the Genesis account, and if you ignore the scientist's guesses at how old things are, everything happened in the order that the Creation account gives us, right down to the fact that the bible describes the "earth" as being a single continent (which Geologists have named "Pangea" ) in the middle of a single Ocean, which eventually split.


What does Pangaea have to do with the Bible? It wasn't the first or last supercontinent, so what relevance does it have to the Genesis account?

@MadCornishBiker Said
It's all there in scripture, in exactly the order science describes it. Is it any wonder then, that as I listen to them describing the history of this planet I feel like screaming "Listen to yourselves please" at the TV screen.


Again, that is if you accept it as truth. I might say the same thing when I hear you speak on this subject, but I do understand that the Jehovah's Witness cult has superior brainwashing skills.
Reviso On November 23, 2014

Banned



Trenton, Canada
#37New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 20:20:43
@bob_the_fisherman Said

Indeed. If you read Dawkins, one of the best comedy writers of all time, birds evolved from lizards that kept jumping up and down to catch insects. Apparently, some of the lizards developed a little frilly lace section on their extremities that allowed them to jump up and flap their limbs for as much as one trillionth of a second longer than those that did not have these frilly adaptations. And from there, we got birds.




The good economics of Reagan? Do you think the human genome my not be exhaustible, and human character a symbolic gesture to one's odd-ball heredity. Dawkins fails the time of thinking Man for "more research".
Reviso On November 23, 2014

Banned



Trenton, Canada
#38New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 20:31:22
The good economics of Reagan? There really is Character to explain Evolved by one's heredity and past biological Facts. Actually we always knew personality.
Reviso On November 23, 2014

Banned



Trenton, Canada
#39New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 20:36:14
@WASH Said

RELIG0N6 12-11-1988
ATHIESTIC AGNOSTIC, RELIGIOUS
I believe thatthe atheist, the agnostic, and the
believer when they say that there was no GOD and that there
may not be a GOD. I also agree with the Christians, Jews,
Moslems, and others in their basic belief that there is a GOD.
And they are absolutely right in the context of their inability
to view humanity as a continually evolving species.
There is no reason to deny Darwins "theory of
evolution" and there is no reason why we should not believe
in the existence of a universal super entity uniting all life
which was EVOLVING to the next level.
So life began with the formation of organic material,
which instinctively clung to life by adapting to changing
environments and progressively became more complex over
several tens of millions years to configure as humans such as
we.

Then ten or twenty thousands (maybe hundreds of
thousands) years ago an event occurred which added an unique
"quality" to the life of one or more humans- not physically
or mentally- but spiritually. I call it the "light of life".
An energy force uniting the life lines of the living progeny
to everlasting life after the carrier perishes..
EVOLUTON! It is not the last!
WASH



You mean Evolution would be the materialistic explanation for Nature failing our economic well-being, but Reagonomics could show us the way in the evolutionary look of all this pollution.
bob_the_fisherman On January 30, 2023
Anatidaephobic





, Angola
#40New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 20:43:04
@Reviso Said
The good economics of Reagan? Do you think the human genome my not be exhaustible, and human character a symbolic gesture to one's odd-ball heredity. Dawkins fails the time of thinking Man for "more research".


[smile]https://i.tfster.com/cache/i40.tinypic.com/fazj2d.jpg">

I am not entirely sure what you are saying there... If you are asking if I think that humans are determined by their genes - no, I do not. Humans are not, to my mind, automatons, although, I will admit it could be legitimately argued that some people are obvious exceptions to that rule.
MadCornishBiker On January 14, 2014

Banned



St Columb Road, United Kingdom
#41New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 22:04:05
@lefty Said

If there was proof of His existence, and proof of your theory?


There is a lot of proof of His existence, of His Power, His Wisdom and His love. You just need to "read" it and accept it for what it is.

Romans 1:20 "For his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable."

Why inexcusable? Because they refused to recognise the evidence for what it is. And yes it is a case of refused because most simply don't want to believe it, yet if you look at Creation closely it screams "design" at you, and the closer you get, right down to microbiological level and beyond, the louder it screams it.

Oh, and it isn't "my" theory.

@lefty Said

No, not delusion, figment of imagination. God didn't enter the equation until some bright man decided that creating God would be a good way to explain the unexplainable and control others actions.


Wrong, God was there before anything else, have you ever met anyone from those times who could deny it? No, you simply choose tot akt the words of those who should know better.

@lefty Said

There's the delusion. Believing that the Bible is evidence .


I have yet to find any other way of explaining the accuracy, and consistency of the bible. Archaeology has thoroughly proven the bible right, in every way. It is a fact that there is not one piece of reliable evidence against anything in the bible.

The bible, despite man's efforts to change it, still teaches the same things from Genesis to Revelation, though it does slowly expand on it's teachings as it goes along.

Some rather blind people claim it contradicts itself, but all that means is that they have failed to understand what it is truly saying. It doesn't, only man's misinterpretations make it appear that way. I have proven that on this site many times.

@lefty Said

What does Pangaea have to do with the Bible? It wasn't the first or last supercontinent, so what relevance does it have to the Genesis account?


Well according to Geologists it was both the first and only time that all the landmasses were fully connected as one continent, as the bible indicates in Genesis 1.

@lefty Said

Again, that is if you accept it as truth. I might say the same thing when I hear you speak on this subject, but I do understand that the Jehovah's Witness cult has superior brainwashing skills.


The JWs don't brainwash anyone, any more than the education systems do. They certainly didn;t me because the only reasons I even looked at them closely was because they believe what I already did.

"Brainwashing" is the cry of the ignorant who neither know, nor want to know, better. It is their excuse for not looking closely.

The irony is that the time will come when all will know the truth of that, but for many it will be too late. I don;t doubt there will be some even then who don't have the guts to admit it.
lefty On July 19, 2018
AKA: friendlybear





Oh, Canada
#42New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 22:20:23
@MadCornishBiker Said

There is a lot of proof of His existence, of His Power, His Wisdom and His love. You just need to "read" it and accept it for what it is.

Romans 1:20 "For his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable."

Why inexcusable? Because they refused to recognise the evidence for what it is. And yes it is a case of refused because most simply don't want to believe it, yet if you look at Creation closely it screams "design" at you, and the closer you get, right down to microbiological level and beyond, the louder it screams it.

Oh, and it isn't "my" theory.



Wrong, God was there before anything else, have you ever met anyone from those times who could deny it? No, you simply choose tot akt the words of those who should know better.



I have yet to find any other way of explaining the accuracy, and consistency of the bible. Archaeology has thoroughly proven the bible right, in every way. It is a fact that there is not one piece of reliable evidence against anything in the bible.

The bible, despite man's efforts to change it, still teaches the same things from Genesis to Revelation, though it does slowly expand on it's teachings as it goes along.

Some rather blind people claim it contradicts itself, but all that means is that they have failed to understand what it is truly saying. It doesn't, only man's misinterpretations make it appear that way. I have proven that on this site many times.



Well according to Geologists it was both the first and only time that all the landmasses were fully connected as one continent, as the bible indicates in Genesis 1.



The JWs don't brainwash anyone, any more than the education systems do. They certainly didn;t me because the only reasons I even looked at them closely was because they believe what I already did.

"Brainwashing" is the cry of the ignorant who neither know, nor want to know, better. It is their excuse for not looking closely.

The irony is that the time will come when all will know the truth of that, but for many it will be too late. I don;t doubt there will be some even then who don't have the guts to admit it.


All your arguments are invalid, as a result of being based on the Bible, (a work of fiction) and the teachings of a CULT
Reviso On November 23, 2014

Banned



Trenton, Canada
#43New Post! Mar 03, 2012 @ 23:11:53
Dawkins was wrong about Objectivism. Karl Marx was rather right; that is so because God (evil OR not) will always fill the Gap even though we're not sure objectively yet what the Gap is micro-physically about.
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#44New Post! Mar 04, 2012 @ 00:38:00
@bob_the_fisherman Said

Indeed. If you read Dawkins, one of the best comedy writers of all time, birds evolved from lizards that kept jumping up and down to catch insects. Apparently, some of the lizards developed a little frilly lace section on their extremities that allowed them to jump up and flap their limbs for as much as one trillionth of a second longer than those that did not have these frilly adaptations. And from there, we got birds.




That actually makes more sense than religion.

.
Jennifer1984 On July 20, 2022
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#45New Post! Mar 04, 2012 @ 00:39:03
@lefty Said

All your arguments are invalid, as a result of being based on the Bible, (a work of fiction) and the teachings of a CULT



Are you sure you spelled that last word correctly..?

.
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 4 5 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Be Respectful of Others

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   News & Current Events
Mon Oct 11, 2010 @ 19:21
2 360
New posts   Pics & Videos
Thu Feb 25, 2010 @ 18:15
6 544
New posts   Poetry
Mon May 18, 2009 @ 09:16
1 273
New posts   Poetry
Tue Oct 09, 2007 @ 13:49
4 456
New posts   Relationships
Fri Oct 27, 2006 @ 15:17
17 788