|
|
First, it is in principle not possible to prove that an organ is useless, because there is always the possiblity that a use may be discovered in the future. This has happened with over a hundred alleged useless vestigial organs which are now known to be essential.
Vestiagal organs can be removed and without any change to the functioning of the human body, i.e * they are no longer nessarcery for survival or functioning of the human body *. Medical science has come so far now, we have even mapped the human genes, there is pretty much nothing left that isn't known, this argument that more uses could be found would be valid maybe 50 years ago, but not so much now.
Second, even if the alleged vestigial organ were no longer needed, it would prove devolution not evolution. The creation model allows for deterioration of a perfect creation. However the particles-to-people evolution model needs to find examples of nascent organs, i.e. those which are increasing in complexity.
aha, it works either way, devolution and evolution, and the relatively recent advances in medical technology mean that we have only just grasped the intricate workings of the monecules and chemicals within the body, basically, it couldnt have been measured centuries ago because their medical knowledge was very basic, and so we in the modern world have nothing to compare it with.
also, organs increasing in complexity would happen over huge time scales like the rest of the theory of evolution, unmeasurable by human lifespans,
so for all you know, there could be nascent organs, there probably are.
the basic argument that vesigal organs is that "Loss of features is relatively easy by natural processes; acquisition of new characters, requiring new DNA information, is impossible." ??
so you can loose features naturally but you cant gain them? because we have seen examples of genetic mutation (new DNA information!) and survival of the fittest happening in basic archeology and remains from the last few centuries! why would we be loosing functions if we had been created by an omnipotent creator?! surely we would have been made to function as we are?
funny how creationists are conveniently overlooking what they cant explain and stressing the facts they can.
as for the bible quotation, the whole text doesnt render it null does it, the argument is still valid: man was not there at the creation of earth. the bible was written by man. No one saw or recorded the creation. we guessed or theorised.
P.s sorry aboot the columns thing I was confusy myself with silly hebrew beleifs, must have linked it to the old testament in my memory haha.
21/08/04 :: 20/12/04 :: 22/11/06 :: 16/06/07 :: 16/08/08 :: 28/08/11
Have you seen fattys leg? Its fucking fucked! :: Matt
ZAFO!
|
|
|
There are at least three possibilities as to why ostriches, emus, etc have wings:
a) They derived from smaller birds that once could fly. This is possible in the creationist model. Loss of features is relatively easy by natural processes; acquisition of new characters, requiring new DNA information, is impossible.
Punch me if I'm wrong, but that sounds rather like evolution to me. Simplified, I'm sure, but it's still evolution.
As cool as a year 7 on the first day of term...
|
|
|
at what point in our human destruction of the earth or the chance visitation of a comet or sumthing will God help us out and save his creation?
|
|
|
when the time is right, he will come again.
and i like tea, i think we were talking about human evolution. yes, there is evidence for animal evolution. but i believe strongly that man did not evolve from anything; because of Biblical reasons and because of scientific reasons. the Bible says we are made in God's image, monkeys are not; so if we evolved from monkeys and we were once a half monkey / human hybrid at one point in time that undermines the meanings of being made in God's likeness (not physically but in an intellectual, emotional sense). why, if we evolved from monkeys, do monkeys still exist? isnt evolution continuance of developing and readapting of animal DNA? surely then, if we descended from apes, apes would not exist anymore, and humans would not be so numerous as they are. and has ever occured that due to so many completely different "species" of "neolithic man" being present at the SAME TIME on earth, prove that they are in fact different animals to homo sapiens (as we so intelligently call ourselves) and instead the application of survival of the fittest can be used; instead of humans being "evolved" from monkey like humans, the others (neolithic man and its subdivisions) perished (the weakest) and humans reigned supreme, and if you can name any other creature that has impacted the world even a tiny bit as much as humans have then ill conclude that we are not unique. but it is obvious to see that humans are not "advanced in evolution", but we are placed first in the order of the world in order to rule it, because we are made in God's image.
and to reject this call, and suggest that we are merely "advanced animals", is an insult to God and his purposes for you.
and paul answered this before, but in the same way that we know there is wind because we can see its effects (and everyknow and then we can see it manifest into visibility) the same way it is obvious to see that there is God because of his effects of history, and over the reborn Christian which is something that cant be comprehended, and like the wind manifests into weather, God revealed himself in Jesus, and still does today in the Holy Spirit. and hell reveal himself again, and your screwed if you dont accept his free forgiveness.
|
|
|
when the time is right?
if he really did build this earth he'd have been there during our conflicts, our epidemics and famines. how much evil and pain will we go through before its proven there is no higher creator?
|
|
|
evil is not God's creation, we can take all the blame for that. the second we rejected God at the very beginning of history, we put ourselves on a collision course with the destiny we created; death and destruction. and we needed something to interceed and save us from this, so Jesus came and we can safely say that though the world is going to be destroyed and all will die, we have no need to fear death, because Jesus has conquered death in his resurrection and promised instead of eternal death, we can recieve FREE eternal life, i mean why would you not accept that offer?
he put us in charge of the earth, and look what we've done to it.
|
|
|
Quote
DESARENEZITIC :
To simuse - Evolution is NOT fact no matter how much you would like it to be, it is a belief system. I'm certainly glad you're not teaching anyone I know. I think "bunch of fiction" sums it up perfectly.
I'm glad I'm not teaching anyone you know either, if they're as arrogant as you. But anyway, you're right in one respect ...you show me ONE SINGLE SHINING FACT that supports Creationism and I'll teach it in a flash. Oh look, you can't. What a shame.
Quote
[What we DON'T need is anyone pushing ONE viewpoint on anyone especially children who take everything their teacher says as fact. How about we look at both viewpoints and teach how children HOW to think not WHAT to think.
Don't use your agenda to try and teach me my job, thanks. You can think what you like - it's a free country. But what I, and 99% of the population don't want, is people pushing their own belief systems over FACTS. And that applies whether it's Creationism or a belief in UFOs.
Quote
If you try to tell me we came from nothing that turned into amoebas that turned into fishes that crawled out onto land that turned into reptiles that became mammals that became teachers, well I wouldn't laugh in your face because that's quite rude but you get my point.
I don't get your point at all. Evolution is a proven process (despite some holes in the theory) however much you might mock.
I don't have any choice, regardless. There is a national scheme of work that requires us to teach certain facts. And that's FACTS, not belief systems. Quite frankly I couldn't give a stuff whether you believe we were all created in 7 days by some invisible omnipotent super-being who remains mysteriously elusive, or whether you believe we're all descended from Barney the Purple Cuddly Dinosaur (frankly, both are equally believable), in the end if you believe in society then you have to bow to the will of the majority. In this case, that means kids learning science rather than the unprovable.
If you want your kids to learn belief systems as fact, move to Kansas. They'd welcome you.
130200Bristol 250600Glastonbury 080401Notts 190801VFest 011101Leicester 240802Reading 281103Nottingham 031203NEC 050604RockAmRing 201204EarlsCourt 280606ShepB 200806Lowlands 181106Sheffield 221106Wembley 160607Wembley 101109NIA 280811Reading 301012LG
|
|
|
calling people arrogant is not an argument. you're obviously "teaching" your kiddies falsity, by saying it's fact. IT IS A THEORY. you think its fact, but scientifically it is still a theory, because it has NOT been proven, you even said "there are still some holes in it". im pretty sure if there are holes in a theory, that makes it NOT a fact.
well, i think human evolution is as ridiculous as us all being descended from barney the purple dinosaur, as you so hilariously point out. do you teach comedy too?
it is evident to a scientist that in the "creation" of the world, it went through "stages" of development. it happened the way the bible says it did. there was the earth shapeless and formless. then the atmosphere expanded and water and land appeared. then land started to produce vegetation or "lifeforms". soon after plants appeared, then animals in the water and in the air and on the land. then animals appeared in many different species and the earth teemed with living creatures. then man appeared, and he ruled over all the living creatures and no other creature has effected the world in such a way as man (specifically in a negative way, as the current global weather debate testifies to).
now if science disagrees to that, tell me. because i was under the impression that it didnt; and that is the order outlined in Genesis. is that ONE SINGLE SHINING FACT, as you so hilariously put it?
well its a shame that you're "national scheme" does things that way, because our goverment schools are pushing to teach "intelligent design", which means nothing in this world, is explainable without a creator.
dont assume what you're saying is fact, when the science regards it as a theory. evolution is simply a belief, a belief, like a belief in santa, a belief in Jesus Christ. but why would you believe something if you're not 100% certain, why would you believe if there are "holes" in the theory.
i believe in Jesus because its 100% obvious to me, through history, God's word and the Holy Spirit. and this faith is unique, because its not something that i gained. i recieved it, and am grateful.
evolution has never been an 100%er and never will be, there are very few things that are, but for me; God became man in Jesus, physically died and physically rose again to give us the faith that we were all so ignorant not to have, and now he is Lord and Saviour of all who are willing to be saved.
|
|
|
Quote
nat smythe :
why, if we evolved from monkeys, do monkeys still exist? isnt evolution continuance of developing and readapting of animal DNA? surely then, if we descended from apes, apes would not exist anymore, and humans would not be so numerous as they are. and has ever occured that due to so many completely different "species" of "neolithic man" being present at the SAME TIME on earth,
The entire species didnt have to evolve at once, instead, different groups of the species which lived in different areas of the world would develop in their own way, the great apes emmigrated as different "families" or herds to different areas, some evolved over time in one way, completely isolated from the other, which is why we only find the great apes naturally in certain parts of the earth. not everywhere.
Just like we see Lions in one part of the earth and domesticated tabby cats in the other, over time they have separated and the genetics have been bred to the point where they look entirely different. same species though arent they!!
and it has been prooven that apes have fantastic intelligence for animals! to the point where they have learnt mathematics or sign language as a means of simple communication, just like the neolithic man once had, they are just like we were thousands upon thousands of years ago.
Quote
because we are made in God's image.
I thought, we dont know what god looks like? No one has ever seen him, after all. besides, Im sure with all this sin causing devolution we must have changed our appearance over time. Humans are inherantly sinful, after all, all this change.... evolution maybe?
21/08/04 :: 20/12/04 :: 22/11/06 :: 16/06/07 :: 16/08/08 :: 28/08/11
Have you seen fattys leg? Its fucking fucked! :: Matt
ZAFO!
|
|
|
Quote
nat smythe :
calling people arrogant is not an argument. you're obviously "teaching" your kiddies falsity, by saying it's fact.
Oh, so I'm a liar now. Still not arrogant, my friend? Evolution is the closest theory we have that fits all the available evidence. By your reasoning we could say the same about gravity. Would you claim that doesn't exist either? And thanks for the quote marks. Still claim you're not arrogant?
Quote
well, i think human evolution is as ridiculous as us all being descended from barney the purple dinosaur, as you so hilariously point out. do you teach comedy too?
Yes if you think it's funny. I thought it was a pertinent point. The pertinent words in your reply are "I think". Great, you think that. Well done. Most people don't. Get my drift?
Quote
it is evident to a scientist that in the "creation" of the world, it went through "stages" of development. it happened the way the bible says it did. there was the earth shapeless and formless. then the atmosphere expanded and water and land appeared. then land started to produce vegetation or "lifeforms". soon after plants appeared, then animals in the water and in the air and on the land. then animals appeared in many different species and the earth teemed with living creatures. then man appeared, and he ruled over all the living creatures and no other creature has effected the world in such a way as man
But ... but ... didn't it all appear in 7 days? With Adam and Eve and a snake? Forgive me if my Bible Study is a bit rusty, but either that's not what it says or it contradicts itself horribly. Which is it?
Quote
well its a shame that you're "national scheme" does things that way, because our goverment schools are pushing to teach "intelligent design", which means nothing in this world, is explainable without a creator.
It's a shame your government schools wish to teach ... I won't say fiction (though it's tempting), but unprovable ideas, over provable facts with evidence to back them up.
Quote
dont assume what you're saying is fact, when the science regards it as a theory. evolution is simply a belief, a belief, like a belief in santa, a belief in Jesus Christ.
And that's simply rubbish. There is provable scientific fact behind evolution. Granted, it's not perfect, but that's still 100% better than either a belief in Santa or Jesus (I take the two on the same level).
Quote
i believe in Jesus because its 100% obvious to me, through history, God's word and the Holy Spirit. and this faith is unique, because its not something that i gained. i recieved it, and am grateful.
Good for you, I'm happy. Now stay happy yourself and stop trying to insinuate your beliefs onto those who don't believe, it doesn't look good on you.
You tossed off my (flippant) remarks about dinosaurs without answering the question - that doesn't surprise me, because you have no answer. Now try again - explain the physical evidence of species that once existed and no longer do, long before the effects of man. You do that successfully, I'll engage you in serious argument. I'm waiting....
130200Bristol 250600Glastonbury 080401Notts 190801VFest 011101Leicester 240802Reading 281103Nottingham 031203NEC 050604RockAmRing 201204EarlsCourt 280606ShepB 200806Lowlands 181106Sheffield 221106Wembley 160607Wembley 101109NIA 280811Reading 301012LG
|
|
|
i gave you an answer, successfully, and you ignored it.
do you really think, you are not trying to "insinuate" your beliefs on me? please be tolerant, because limiting speech is limiting democracy my friend.
maybe you can explain with your superior intellect why we exist, why we feel pain, why we feel guilt, what hope is there for mankind?
to screenager, being created in the image of God is not a physical thing. it is documented in the way that we value life, we have emotions, we desire justice; i dont think animals desire justice.
|
|
|
You haven't answered me, still.
I am not trying to insinuate my beliefs onto you, you are free to believe what you wish ... I am merely trying to work out why you wish to do the same to other people.
So come on, an answer to my question?
And there's a lot more after that one.
130200Bristol 250600Glastonbury 080401Notts 190801VFest 011101Leicester 240802Reading 281103Nottingham 031203NEC 050604RockAmRing 201204EarlsCourt 280606ShepB 200806Lowlands 181106Sheffield 221106Wembley 160607Wembley 101109NIA 280811Reading 301012LG
|
|
|
Quote
nat smythe :
to screenager, being created in the image of God is not a physical thing. it is documented in the way that we value life, we have emotions, we desire justice; i dont think animals desire justice.
I think they do, My dog sits beside me and licks my tears away when i cry. they defend their households from strangers and are seen defending their owners in house fires, My Buster cries, he has dreams and wakes up in a good mood, or might have a nightmare, whimper in his sleep and wake up all grumpy and not want to talk to me. He is happy when I come home to see me, and looks longingly out the window when I leave for school.
Animals live in families and packs, mothers protect their young, mourn over death, howl and cry when their children die and try to stop you from removing its corpse from her side.
Thats proof enough for me that they have a soul and emotion,
why is it that the more devout christians take the bibles word literally for fact until they cant explain it, then it becomes "representation" or "symbolic"??? where do you know how to draw the line? either everything is literal or everything is symbolic right? you cant pick and choose between them to suit the argument can we?
21/08/04 :: 20/12/04 :: 22/11/06 :: 16/06/07 :: 16/08/08 :: 28/08/11
Have you seen fattys leg? Its fucking fucked! :: Matt
ZAFO!
|
|
|
the best person by far to ask on the creationist theory is paul (DESARENEZITIC).
i gave you proof that the Bible account (regardless of the number of 24 hour days, or symbolic days it took) is credible and applicable with scientific discovery. whether you believe if those "days" were 24 hours or a millenium, a Christian must hold the belief that got could have done it in seven 24 hour days. and why in the Bible would it mention "days" when in fact it was millions of years. however, the Bible does say "to the Lord, 1000 years are like a day". but i'm 100% certain that paul can answer all "creation" questions you've got. for questions on Genesis go to paul, for questions on Revelation go to me; theyre our specialities.
Christians value truth, and care for others. combined, it means proclaiming to others the good news we have. i dont know anyone else who proclaims out of love and care (that includes religion, and you're evolution theory). feel free to call me "arrogant" and a "zealot", but i can support these claims. so feel free to resist, but recognize this; we still care about you, enough to try and point you towards the risen Jesus and know that he has saved you.
fire those other questions away, ill answer them. but for Genesis ill let my elder answer hahaha. i believe the Genesis account literally, because i see no reason why not to.
to screenager, when something is symbolic, the Bible tells us it is. but all the symbols in the Bible have a "literal" purpose, and need to be taken literally. because we believe the Bible is the word of God, why would we think otherwise?
dogs don't control the world do they? i assume dogs don't pursue justice, and beg "why?" when their own species dies, they dont feel empathy with other dogs only animal instincts, i could go on making probably unfounded generalizations (that no one really knows) but can we agree though; humans are unique. and that is because we are made in the image of God. animals (or dogs) are human's companions, but by no means our equal, because we rule over them, we have been placed in authority over them; that is a distinguishing factor of being like God. like God is in authority of us, we are in authority over the physical kingdom God has imposed us over. in a sense, we have a responsibility in the way that we have been made in the image of God, a responsibility to rule and recognize our creator.
|
|
|
Humans dont control the world, they control society of other humans, the earth, its oceans and skies and wild animals arent under our control. We have created an intelligent society among ourselves, yes, this is the whole point here really, intelligence. we ASSUME we are in control, because no one is there to tell us otherwise.
Dogs feel mourning when other dogs die. empathy is a psychological mechanism. a process of cognition (thought or rational explaination) + physiological arousal (chemical secretions in the brain released during times of stress, such as a death).
which comes to your point of unfounded generalizations, because for all we know, they could feel it just as we do, but the only thing that could make that emotion exclusive to humans would be the Cognition, because its seen that dogs have brains in their skulls, the workings of which are quite similar to ours. same physiological arousal. different cognition.
here look I am going to point out somethng obvious: dogs cant talk. haha. ok so we cant communicate with them, they cant really communicate with each other either.
However humans can, if you werent able to communicate with others, how would you have learnt mathematics? or grammar? or science? or social skills? or religon?
so going by this reasoning: we are dominant over the animals because of our superior intellect? a dog could easily savage a man, the reason we have control over them and domesticate them is because we have the brains right?
I suppose the profoundly retarded and disabled humans who have IQ's of under 30 are the same as dogs then, do they go to heaven? what would make them human or 'in gods image', as it were? what about children or unborn children who dont know anything yet because they havent lived in society yet??
because then the argument becomes that it isnt intellect, its biological, at which point the whole thing falls apart, because humans are biological organisms just like any other creature. so what is it?! Why are we separate? if its not emotion, intellect, strength?
ahh this sparks off so many further debates, i love this thread 
personally, I am quite fond of animals and pets, I hate to think of my pets as "less than me". They are my animal guests, they sleep in a warm bed and eat roast chicken and salmon for tea, I treat them with love and respect like family, thats why we have pets after all, for companionship.
21/08/04 :: 20/12/04 :: 22/11/06 :: 16/06/07 :: 16/08/08 :: 28/08/11
Have you seen fattys leg? Its fucking fucked! :: Matt
ZAFO!
|
|
|
maybe its because humans have "souls".
|
|
|
Well at this point I would redirect you to the previous post I made:
Quote
screenager2004 :
Quote
nat smythe :
to screenager, being created in the image of God is not a physical thing. it is documented in the way that we value life, we have emotions, we desire justice; i dont think animals desire justice.
I think they do, My dog sits beside me and licks my tears away when i cry. they defend their households from strangers and are seen defending their owners in house fires, My Buster cries, he has dreams and wakes up in a good mood, or might have a nightmare, whimper in his sleep and wake up all grumpy and not want to talk to me. He is happy when I come home to see me, and looks longingly out the window when I leave for school.
Animals live in families and packs, mothers protect their young, mourn over death, howl and cry when their children die and try to stop you from removing its corpse from her side.
Thats proof enough for me that they have a soul and emotion,
on top of that, an animal will know if it has done something wrong: you can tell if they have eaten or ripped something because it will shy away from you with its tail between its legs before you have even seen what theyve done! (conscience? altruism?)
and we see records of them saving lives too!
seeing as we dont have any medical ways or tests to proove whether dogs have souls or not, we cant conclude they dont. I think they do, my pets are capable of love, affection, emotion, moodiness, dreaming, protecting, defending, healing, cheering up, conscience, all the signs of a soul.
this is where you and I differ, I suppose, I beleive in god through my own discovery, I found my soul through my own life experiences, I take a rationalist point of veiw: I beleive and love god through my own learning, I find reason and proofs behind the things I beleive, (i.e. archaeology: evolution, Love towards an owner: animal rights and mans place alongside animals, I beleive god was the one who created the big bang, and his help led our evolution towards the point we have reached today, i beleive christ did exist, but he wasnt the son of god, but nevertheless a great man and a great holy leader who might just have saved the souls of thousands with his teachings).
In my opinion this is the best way to go about it because I am developing my own links with my creator, instead of following a family or a church and doing what they say, then finding an attatchment to it.
Instead of taking all my beleifs from a book, if I am wrong then cast me into hell, go for it, but at least I will know I lived my own life and born my own love for god, instead of submitting to an authority and falling in line like the other millions. I led a good life regardless.
21/08/04 :: 20/12/04 :: 22/11/06 :: 16/06/07 :: 16/08/08 :: 28/08/11
Have you seen fattys leg? Its fucking fucked! :: Matt
ZAFO!
|
|
|
(edit: tidy up a bit.)
nat smythe :
Quote
"3.3 Now there was about this time Jesus, 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."
that's Jewish historian Josephus on Jesus. if any of you know anything about ancient history it can be noted that these notable historians all documented Jesus as well as around 10 more; Pliny the younger, Tacitus, Seutonius and the infamous Celsus and Lucian. and of course the Jewish annals contain a sufficient section (or sections) on Jesus. and of course the four accounts of the Gospels and the many epistles are regarded not just as theology but as factual history and is a constant source for ancient historical reference. so there is no grounds to doubt Jesus existence, and so far as ancient historians prove, his deeds as well. the fact that sources suffering from quarelling bias can agree on the acts of Jesus' life is a testament to the historicity and truthfulness of the Gospels.
Sorry, but if people at the time believed that Jesus did rise from the dead, then the chroniclers around that time will record this. There is no scientific or historical "proof" here at all: you have made many claims and have no evidence to back them up. (Please refer me to books/articles/pages which could back up what you say.)
Quote
now that is tangable evidence. no other religion relies on tangable evidence. Mohamed was dictated by the angel Gabriel (not tangable), Buddha recieved englightenment (not tangable), the Shruti and the Smriti hindu writings are the produce of "visions" and therefore, are not tangable.
Christianity is not free of visions either. Paul, in his letters, say that he has seen visions of Jesus in Galatians:
"I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ." ( http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians%201:11-12;&version=31).
Responding to an earlier point: you say must believe everything in the bible, nothing less, nothing more, to be a Christian. Are you aware that there have been many different Bibles, with different books included or excluded for various different reasons? Furthermore, there seems to be some contradiction (or at least doublethink) between your claim that revelations/visions are unreliable as proof, yet there is plenty of the bible which contains vision. How can you then believe the whole bible?
Quote
so when you ask those religions, "PROVE TO ME THERE IS A GOD", they cannot.
Neither can you. (Not to mention you've used Buddhism as an example, which doesn't use God.)
Quote
but for Christians, we can prove to you there is. because God revealed himself, unlike the cowardly gods of other religions.
Your god and the Jewish God are the same being. I don't enjoy you slagging off all other religions here. You're taking the tone of someone who feels they have the moral high ground, and it's doesn't make the debate go any smoother.
(from another post)
Quote
ill prove to you that God exists when you prove to me that wind exists.
Absolute proof is impossible. However, when enough people agree on something without any trace of doubt, that can be taken to be knowledge. Not only can I feel wind every day, so can someone standing next to me. Indeed, everyone on the planet with skin can feel wind. There is no argument over whether wind exists. The fact that you can't have a reasonable debate over wind is very strong evidence for wind's existence. There is no proof here because there can be no proof for anything: the only thing you can know for certain, if you take the position of the ultimate sceptic, is that you exist.
Quote
by the way, who said human evolution is fact? by my understanding it is still just a theory that has been regarded highly by many scientists and equally regarded by those who know nothing of science. the most intelligent people i know say evolution is child's talk.
Evolution is something that is widely misunderstood, especially it seems by strongly believing Christians. I have a sneaking suspicion that you do not fully comprehend evolution; if you would please give a statement of what you feel evolution is, I would be more willing to debate on this issue.
Quote
to simuse, id like to see you explain love, compassion, greed, hate, guilt, and loneliness to your "kids" using darwinism. is the fact that darwinism takes its scientific stand on unknown ground and states it "fact" a sufficient argument against it?
Please elucidate on what you mean by "takes its scientific stand on unknown ground". It's not at all clear what you mean.
On Creationism
Quote
it is evident to a scientist that in the "creation" of the world, it went through "stages" of development. it happened the way the bible says it did. there was the earth shapeless and formless. then the atmosphere expanded and water and land appeared. then land started to produce vegetation or "lifeforms". soon after plants appeared, then animals in the water and in the air and on the land. then animals appeared in many different species and the earth teemed with living creatures. then man appeared, and he ruled over all the living creatures and no other creature has effected the world in such a way as man (specifically in a negative way, as the current global weather debate testifies to).
I am, hereafter, refering to the KJB edition.
The word "day" is used in Genesis (verse 1:5) before any system of night or day relative to earth is established (all that is established is the dualism of light and dark by that point). It says, "And the evening and the morning were the first day". There can be no morning or evening without the orbit of the eath around the sun -- this means that there is clearly a metaphor here.
Quote
1:14 And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
It is not until the beginning of the fourth day that god actually creates days! If you do not wish to have a self-contradictory approach, then this implies very very very strongly that the story is metaphorical.
Furthermore, there are two, differing, accounts of creation of men and animals in Genesis. The first comes on the fifth day, before man is created:
Quote
1:20 And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.
1:21 And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
...
1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
The second:
Quote
2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.
2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.
...
2:22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.
2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
Now, not only are men both created after animals and before, but woman and man were both created at the same time, and one after the other.
It greatly pains me to see people with such strong faith fail to read their own books.
there he goes. one of god’s own prototypes: some kind of high-powered mutant never even considered for mass production. too weird to live and too rare to die.
|
|
|
Quote
It greatly pains me to see people with such strong faith fail to read their own books.
This is what really annoys me about people - not just devoted Christians - who quote the Bible to further their own agenda. Either the whole thing is historical, or it's merely a collection of stories*. You can't pick and choose the bits that back up your own faith / viewpoint and then dismiss the bits that conflict with it.
*problem being that there is a lot of contradiction in it, fitting the idea that it was pieced together by various contemporary observers.
Oh and Nat, an answer...?
130200Bristol 250600Glastonbury 080401Notts 190801VFest 011101Leicester 240802Reading 281103Nottingham 031203NEC 050604RockAmRing 201204EarlsCourt 280606ShepB 200806Lowlands 181106Sheffield 221106Wembley 160607Wembley 101109NIA 280811Reading 301012LG
|
|
|
well its either historical, stories, literal fact or representational imagery.
oh, but I LOVE it how you can pick and choose which parts are which to suit your own arguments.
21/08/04 :: 20/12/04 :: 22/11/06 :: 16/06/07 :: 16/08/08 :: 28/08/11
Have you seen fattys leg? Its fucking fucked! :: Matt
ZAFO!
|
|
|
the Bible is clearly made up of some sections that are literal historical records and some sections that are symbolic but are meant to be taken literally.
that King James translation is terrible, try this instead; no contradiction here: Genesis 2, NIV
18 The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."
19 Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20 So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.
But for Adam no suitable helper was found. 21 So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. 22 Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.
23 The man said,
"This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called 'woman,'
for she was taken out of man."
24 For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.
25 The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.
furthermore, when it reads "male and female he created them"; it is always drawn out in a poetry like stanza as verse 23 (said by Adam) was up there. it is a statement (a hymn even) that God created man, male and female; but is not connected in the chronological structure of the first chapter of Genesis, hence its hymn like appearance.
and takkaria, i dont think the God of the universe needs a sun to "dictate" his days.
i want solid emperical evidence of human evolution, why can it be trusted? and why if we "came" from apes, do apes still exist in abundance.
i trust the early historical documents of Jesus. i remember a famous Jewish historian several years ago (forive me, i forget his name) who said that "there is no doubt whether Jesus came, performed miracles, died or rose again; but whether he is the God incarnate is questionable". i can research his name again, if you wish. but there were 70 documents around Jesus time and still are, that document Jesus existence, many documenting his death and resurrection. that is more than any other figure before the modern age; Jesus has left no room for history to disprove him (look, i'm not an oxford historian, but if you are desperate i will find the documents off someone who is). but whether he is God himself is not a matter of history, it is a matter of God-given faith.
carrying on from the metaphorical wind debate. can one feel wind if underground? so can one feel the presence of God if not saved? no, not unless it is a conversion experience.
i think absolute proof is possible. i believe that the world is proof of God. 90% of the world agrees with me on that. but the world may point to God, but it doesnt point to Jesus on the cross; history and the Bible (which is history) point to that. but only can one except Jesus with the election of God and the Holy Spirit, not by weighing of emperical evidence.
regarding visions. the entire koran is a vision dictated to mohamed. the Bible is not a vision. but a collection of history. yes, visions take place in history. but you need history to support visions / prophecies. how else would you know they are true. on Paul's conversion experience to Damascus the rest of his companions hear his vision but see nothing. and prophecies are proved when they come true; the new covenant was fulfilled in Jesus, and we are awaiting the fulfillment of his final promise; the kingdom to come. but he has given us a sign of this future kingdom by letting us share in the kingdom with the Holy Spirit now. we can't prove to atheists that we are filled with the Holy Spirit, you will only understand if you yourself except Jesus as your Lord or Saviour.
and also, your first statement was, "sorry, but if people at the time believed that Jesus rose from the dead, then chroniclers would record this".
i gave you an example which you quoted; Josephus
"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. "
to Screenager. how can you regard God as your Lord and Saviour if you cant put your finger on who he is. to my conclusion, i am taking the rationalist view by following God incarnate (Jesus) and his Word, and you are not (by not putting your finger on anything). im sure that you mustnt be content with a God that does not reveal himself, and you must doubt at times, your simple theism. but with Christ, you can be 100% because he revealed himself; God became low, low as a man just to bring those lost to safety. there is no "moral code", and takkuria said, i dont think i or anyone else is on a higher moral ground, yet, all have fallen short of the Glory of God. but i am confident that i am saved, and theres no reason you shouldnt be either.
thats a massive post.
|
|
|
Quote
i think absolute proof is possible. i believe that the world is proof of God. 90% of the world agrees with me on that.
Really?? Have you suddenly managed to reconcile not only the inconsistencies of the Bible, but also of all the world's religions too?
Quote
i remember a famous Jewish historian several years ago (forive me, i forget his name) who said that "there is no doubt whether Jesus came, performed miracles, died or rose again"
I'd love to see his proof of that! "No doubt" indeed!!! Really? How many independent confirmations of those miracles have you got?!
And I see you've not answered my question yet? Don't worry, you're in good company, because when the heavy-duty religious thinkers go to work on it, they come up with this sort of thing
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/2.asp
Sample quote
"Some people think that dinosaurs were too big, or there were too many of them, to go on this Ark. However, there were not very many different kinds of dinosaurs. There are certainly hundreds of dinosaur names, but many of these were given to just a bit of bone or skeletons of the same dinosaur found in other countries. It is also reasonable to assume that different sizes, varieties, and sexes of the same kind of dinosaur have ended up with different names. For example, look at the many different varieties and sizes of dogs, but they are all the same kind-the dog kind! In reality, there may have been fewer than 50 kinds of dinosaurs.
By the way, the Flood of Noah’s day probably occurred just over 4,500 years ago. Creationists believe that this event formed many of the fossil layers around the Earth. (Additional fossil layers were formed by other floods as the Earth settled down after the great Flood.) Thus, the dinosaur fossils which were formed as a result of this Flood were probably formed about 4,500 years ago, not millions of years ago."
130200Bristol 250600Glastonbury 080401Notts 190801VFest 011101Leicester 240802Reading 281103Nottingham 031203NEC 050604RockAmRing 201204EarlsCourt 280606ShepB 200806Lowlands 181106Sheffield 221106Wembley 160607Wembley 101109NIA 280811Reading 301012LG
|
|
|
Quote
nat smythe :
to Screenager. how can you regard God as your Lord and Saviour if you cant put your finger on who he is. to my conclusion, i am taking the rationalist view by following God incarnate (Jesus) and his Word, and you are not (by not putting your finger on anything). im sure that you mustnt be content with a God that does not reveal himself, and you must doubt at times, your simple theism. but with Christ, you can be 100% because he revealed himself; God became low, low as a man just to bring those lost to safety. there is no "moral code", and takkuria said, i dont think i or anyone else is on a higher moral ground, yet, all have fallen short of the Glory of God. but i am confident that i am saved, and theres no reason you shouldnt be either.
I have my finger on who he is! I know him in my heart and the world I see around me, in the souls of living creatures and the selflessness we feel despite the seemingly chemical workings of our brain! I have my finger on my beleif in god because I apply the proof and the world I have been put into into theory, for example: the chances of the big bang occuring are so pheononenally small and lucky, to me it must have been the workings of God, "let there be light" and all.
the way I see it, In christianity, God didnt come down to earth, A man called Jesus claimed he did. The man Jesus did exist as seen in historical records, but his being the son of god can never be confirmed. The whole "virgin giving birth" is easily explainable, as you can in fact conceive a child without intercourse, so it isnt a "miracle" as such, we see it happen today in modern times.
and in the way I see it, a self found religon is truer to my heart than a pre set one. I didnt want any influence from any religon when I found my own god, because then I knew the God I found would be found PURELY by myself, and not shown to me by someone else, that way, I know for certain its true. and I cant doubt, or wonder over the credibility of the proof i have been shown. and since then, I have never doubted. because he has revealed himself inside me, and not to a "freind of a freind of a freind", 2000 or so years ago.
and yea that was a mighty impressive size of post there!!!
21/08/04 :: 20/12/04 :: 22/11/06 :: 16/06/07 :: 16/08/08 :: 28/08/11
Have you seen fattys leg? Its fucking fucked! :: Matt
ZAFO!
|
|
|
was your question explain evidence of species that stopped existing before man's effects? how about dinosaurs? they obviously weren't around when man was, but they obviously weren't suitable for the earth's environment to survive, and hence; do not exist anymore. i find no reason why the Bible rules out dinosaurs, but i see no reason why dinosaurs effect our life in any way too. so its not really an important.
evidence of dinosaurs can be found in archaeology. as well as millions of animals, creatures whatever you want to call them, that no longer exist because of natural selection or events that subsequently destroyed them. i believed God destroyed them for a reason, and before man existed. is that what you wanted?
to screenager, you obviously want to have your own beliefs of God and a concept of God that you created. that is fine, but if you find that your concepts have no grounds, feel free to do this. if you pray for it, Jesus will reveal himself to you, not just 2000 years ago, but now today. he did today, and he does to all who follow him.
|
|
|
well my heart is open and willing for him to reveal himself, I hope he does.
I would take this point just to thank you and the other posters on this thread, for such an in depth, intellectual debate so far, you have taught me so much, opened my mind to things i wouldnt have thought about before, its good to see, because you dont get it much these days, unfortunately, much more interesting stuff like myspace to talk about apparently. :S
21/08/04 :: 20/12/04 :: 22/11/06 :: 16/06/07 :: 16/08/08 :: 28/08/11
Have you seen fattys leg? Its fucking fucked! :: Matt
ZAFO!
|
