|
Post by elizabethcoleman on Sept 13, 2017 6:31:27 GMT -5
I just feel if God made us, then our end is predetermined. I cannot see where 'free will' comes into it. An all powerful God has to know our ending, if he made us I'm sure. Then again it still doesn't address the issue of why God did this in the first place, instead of just simply creating a perfect people for himself. If he created the universe, he surely has the power to create humans who are programmed to love and obey him. Why play a game with humans on earth for thousands of years. Just cut out the thousands of years and create a perfect people from the start who will love and serve you without question. Really profound and reasonable questions here, stevie. I have pondered on your question too. Perhaps the love and obedience question is like the difference between having a dog and having a child (no offence to dog owners). One might love and obey you without question, and the other will likely disobey you often. But which love is more profound? Which would you prefer? For the record, I don't have children. I only have pets. But I can't pretend that the love I have for more pets is anything like the love of having a child.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 13, 2017 11:23:11 GMT -5
But created by what or by whom? It takes a hell of a leap from comcliding that spontaneous generation of life is a chemical nonsense to concluding that the only alternative is creation by an entity for which there is no evidence for the existence of, which required a tricky rib removal trick to get the human race off and running and who some four and a half billion years after creating the earth still watches what every one of the current seven billion results of his creation is getting up to in the bedroom every evening. On the scale of chemical nonsense this conclusion must be right up there with the most absurd alternatives. Matt10 So our scientist says that spontaneous generation of life is a chemical nonsense, and you say that the alternative of a Creator is equal nonsense; then what other alternatives would you suggest? I don't know? Always a valid option. Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean we need to give it credibility by default. I don't know is perfectly legitimate as an answer and more honest imo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 14:30:44 GMT -5
Personally, I LIKE what my many bible versions/ translations have to say about pure religion and undefiled...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 15:02:25 GMT -5
But created by what or by whom? It takes a hell of a leap from comcliding that spontaneous generation of life is a chemical nonsense to concluding that the only alternative is creation by an entity for which there is no evidence for the existence of, which required a tricky rib removal trick to get the human race off and running and who some four and a half billion years after creating the earth still watches what every one of the current seven billion results of his creation is getting up to in the bedroom every evening. On the scale of chemical nonsense this conclusion must be right up there with the most absurd alternatives. Matt10 So our scientist says that spontaneous generation of life is a chemical nonsense, and you say that the alternative of a Creator is equal nonsense; then what other alternatives would you suggest? Spontaneous generation of "life" (self replication) isn't at all chemical nonsense. www.quantamagazine.org/first-support-for-a-physics-theory-of-life-20170726/The answer "I don't know, let's figure it out" is what makes science fun! (This England guy is around my age. Doesn't he have better things to do than discover the thermodynamic properties of self-replicating matter??)
|
|
otto2
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by otto2 on Sept 13, 2017 16:05:05 GMT -5
So our scientist says that spontaneous generation of life is a chemical nonsense, and you say that the alternative of a Creator is equal nonsense; then what other alternatives would you suggest? I don't know? Always a valid option. Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean we need to give it credibility by default. I don't know is perfectly legitimate as an answer and more honest imo. Well it might be if we were qualified to have an opinion and our opinion carried any weight; but we're not, and it doesn't. Here's what the bible has to say about us: 'Man decays like a rotten thing, like a garment that is moth eaten' Job 13:28 'Man who is born of woman is of few days and full of trouble. He comes forth like a flower and fades away; He flees like a shadow and does not continue'. Job 14:1-2 'Do not put your trust in princes, nor in a son of man,in whom there is no help. His spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his plans perish.' Psalm 146:3-4 'For what is your life? It is even a vapour that appears for a little time and then vanishes away.' James 4: 14b Surely we cannot disagree with any of this. We delude ourselves that our opinion matters, it doesn't. We're not qualified to have one! Instead we take note of the One who told us that the stars in he sky are as numerable as the sand on the seashore, long before we ever found that out for ourselves. Heb 11:12 And the one who told us the world was round years before men discarded their belief that it was flat! Isaiah 40:22. And the One who told us thousands of years ago that the earth hung in space, on nothing. Job 26:7b We do know snow, because we've been told; and we're not qualified to disagree. But many like you choose not to know because you cannot countenance the idea of a righteous judge to whom you will have to give an account.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 13, 2017 17:32:10 GMT -5
I don't know? Always a valid option. Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean we need to give it credibility by default. I don't know is perfectly legitimate as an answer and more honest imo. Well it might be if we were qualified to have an opinion and our opinion carried any weight; but we're not, and it doesn't. Here's what the bible has to say about us: 'Man decays like a rotten thing, like a garment that is moth eaten' Job 13:28 'Man who is born of woman is of few days and full of trouble. He comes forth like a flower and fades away; He flees like a shadow and does not continue'. Job 14:1-2 'Do not put your trust in princes, nor in a son of man,in whom there is no help. His spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his plans perish.' Psalm 146:3-4 'For what is your life? It is even a vapour that appears for a little time and then vanishes away.' James 4: 14b Surely we cannot disagree with any of this. We delude ourselves that our opinion matters, it doesn't. We're not qualified to have one! Instead we take note of the One who told us that the stars in he sky are as numerable as the sand on the seashore, long before we ever found that out for ourselves. Heb 11:12 And the one who told us the world was round years before men discarded their belief that it was flat! Isaiah 40:22. And the One who told us thousands of years ago that the earth hung in space, on nothing. Job 26:7b We do know snow, because we've been told; and we're not qualified to disagree. But many like you choose not to know because you cannot countenance the idea of a righteous judge to whom you will have to give an account. It's wrong of you to assume that snow "chooses" not to know. She indicated she doesn't know enough to have a valid opinion. Neither do I, for that matter. Neither does 99% of the educated population -- because not everyone has the time to follow all the scientific discoveries as they come about. I apologize for not knowing these things, but I don't mind admitting that scientists are far more qualified than me to make such statements.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 21:25:50 GMT -5
I don't know? Always a valid option. Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean we need to give it credibility by default. I don't know is perfectly legitimate as an answer and more honest imo. Well it might be if we were qualified to have an opinion and our opinion carried any weight; but we're not, and it doesn't. Here's what the bible has to say about us: 'Man decays like a rotten thing, like a garment that is moth eaten' Job 13:28 'Man who is born of woman is of few days and full of trouble. He comes forth like a flower and fades away; He flees like a shadow and does not continue'. Job 14:1-2 'Do not put your trust in princes, nor in a son of man,in whom there is no help. His spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his plans perish.' Psalm 146:3-4 'For what is your life? It is even a vapour that appears for a little time and then vanishes away.' James 4: 14b Surely we cannot disagree with any of this. We delude ourselves that our opinion matters, it doesn't. We're not qualified to have one! Instead we take note of the One who told us that the stars in he sky are as numerable as the sand on the seashore, long before we ever found that out for ourselves. Heb 11:12 And the one who told us the world was round years before men discarded their belief that it was flat! Isaiah 40:22. And the One who told us thousands of years ago that the earth hung in space, on nothing. Job 26:7b We do know snow, because we've been told; and we're not qualified to disagree. But many like you choose not to know because you cannot countenance the idea of a righteous judge to whom you will have to give an account. I'm not sure that is what it actually says in Hebrews 11:12. But there you go. Not that we need to take any heed of what is written in Hebrews as (1) while it is unclear as to who wrote the book of Hebrews, it certainly wasn't written by the One to whom you keep referring and (2) it's not part of the law or the scriptures that Jesus referred to. You may like to believe that the One you are referring to had some input into the writing of Hebrews but there is no evidence whatsoever to support that view. I would suggest that if the One whom you are referring to really had input into the writing of the bible, He would not have made such glaring errors as claiming light appeared on the earth three days before the sun was created or that the earth came into being only 6,000 years ago when its true age is really several billion. The texts in the bible were written by men all of whom had their own opinions, and whether their opinions mattered or not, they wrote their opinions down. Some of what they wrote they got right and some they got wrong, just as some of what you write here you get right and some of it you get wrong. The bible is not a book of truth or history or scientific fact. It may contain some of these things but it also contains a large portion of myths, falsehoods and absurdity. Of course you may not believe that but that is only your opinion which, according to what you said above, hardly matters (did in understand that correctly?). Matt10
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 13, 2017 22:24:55 GMT -5
Report in UK Times newspaper today (11 Sept): " ONE IN THREE SCIENTISTS HAS FAITH IN GOD - Scientists are regarded as sceptical but only a quarter are atheists, figures suggest. Mori questioned more than 1000 people in professions including engineering, medical and technical research industries and found that 31% said they were religious and 60% said they were not. A more detailed breakdown showed that 25% were atheists, 21% were agnostic and 14% said that they were "spiritual but not religious". The breakdown also showed that 13% practised a religious faith while 18% said that they were "non-practising religious". Questioned further, 25% said that science and religion were contradictory and mutually exclusive, while 21% said that they were complimentary and that "one helps reinforce the other". Many more, 44%, agreed that science and religion "cannot be compared as they refer to different things" ...The Scientific and Medical Network said that the survey challenged the assumption that scientists were "hostile to religion and spirituality"." Here's an example of one of them (not necessarily in the survey but nevertheless a scientist): Dr Stephen Grocott - Fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute - 'I am afraid that as a scientist I simply cannot say strongly enough that spontaneous generation of life is a chemical nonsense and therefore, I am left with no alternative but to believe that life was created.' (Quoted in John F Ashton - In Six Days: Why 50 Scientists choose to believe in Creation (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2001)) Otto, I suppose that you are aware that John F Ashton is a "creationist" He is a chemist researching food technology but also a biblical creationist.
Also Dr Stephen Grocott and his wife Dr Dianne Grocott are both "young earth creationists" who believes that the six day creation story in the bible was exactly six days and not longer periods of time.
So, take that into consideration when you start evaluating their opinions. Their degrees in science doesn't matter when it comes to their religious beliefs.
<https://creation.com/the-creation-couple-creation-magazine-stephen-and-dianne-grocott-interview>
|
|
|
Post by howitis on Sept 13, 2017 22:40:12 GMT -5
I'm not sure I like Religion too much either......Jesus Christ on the other hand has been very good to me, in life I see His teachings as wonderful, compassionate and uplifting .....therefore in death I'm willing to put my trust and faith in Him the way I see it I can't lose. Enjoy your day everyone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2017 23:00:32 GMT -5
Here's an example of one of them (not necessarily in the survey but nevertheless a scientist): Dr Stephen Grocott - Fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute - 'I am afraid that as a scientist I simply cannot say strongly enough that spontaneous generation of life is a chemical nonsense and therefore, I am left with no alternative but to believe that life was created.' (Quoted in John F Ashton - In Six Days: Why 50 Scientists choose to believe in Creation (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2001)) Otto, I suppose that you are aware that John F Ashton is a "creationist" He is a chemist researching food technology but also a biblical creationist.
Also Dr Stephen Grocott and his wife Dr Dianne Grocott are both "young earth creationists" who believes that the six day creation story in the bible was exactly six days and not longer periods of time.
So, take that into consideration when you start evaluating their opinions. Their degrees in science doesn't matter when it comes to their religious beliefs.
<https://creation.com/the-creation-couple-creation-magazine-stephen-and-dianne-grocott-interview>
You can't fail to be impressed with Dr Grocott's explanation of how he came to the conclusion that what he believed about evolution was false. 'The pastor said, “The Bible says creation, so that’s the way it is.” So I just believed that,' Matt10
|
|
otto2
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by otto2 on Sept 14, 2017 6:54:35 GMT -5
Well it might be if we were qualified to have an opinion and our opinion carried any weight; but we're not, and it doesn't. Here's what the bible has to say about us: 'Man decays like a rotten thing, like a garment that is moth eaten' Job 13:28 'Man who is born of woman is of few days and full of trouble. He comes forth like a flower and fades away; He flees like a shadow and does not continue'. Job 14:1-2 'Do not put your trust in princes, nor in a son of man,in whom there is no help. His spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his plans perish.' Psalm 146:3-4 'For what is your life? It is even a vapour that appears for a little time and then vanishes away.' James 4: 14b Surely we cannot disagree with any of this. We delude ourselves that our opinion matters, it doesn't. We're not qualified to have one! Instead we take note of the One who told us that the stars in he sky are as numerable as the sand on the seashore, long before we ever found that out for ourselves. Heb 11:12 And the one who told us the world was round years before men discarded their belief that it was flat! Isaiah 40:22. And the One who told us thousands of years ago that the earth hung in space, on nothing. Job 26:7b We do know snow, because we've been told; and we're not qualified to disagree. But many like you choose not to know because you cannot countenance the idea of a righteous judge to whom you will have to give an account. I'm not sure that is what it actually says in Hebrews 11:12. But there you go. Not that we need to take any heed of what is written in Hebrews as (1) while it is unclear as to who wrote the book of Hebrews, it certainly wasn't written by the One to whom you keep referring and (2) it's not part of the law or the scriptures that Jesus referred to. You may like to believe that the One you are referring to had some input into the writing of Hebrews but there is no evidence whatsoever to support that view. I would suggest that if the One whom you are referring to really had input into the writing of the bible, He would not have made such glaring errors as claiming light appeared on the earth three days before the sun was created or that the earth came into being only 6,000 years ago when its true age is really several billion. The texts in the bible were written by men all of whom had their own opinions, and whether their opinions mattered or not, they wrote their opinions down. Some of what they wrote they got right and some they got wrong, just as some of what you write here you get right and some of it you get wrong. The bible is not a book of truth or history or scientific fact. It may contain some of these things but it also contains a large portion of myths, falsehoods and absurdity. Of course you may not believe that but that is only your opinion which, according to what you said above, hardly matters (did in understand that correctly?). Matt10 You understand me correctly Matt, my own opinion is worthless . I haven't always believed that; when I baled out of the 2's (without professing) aged 16 I spent the thick end of 30 years trying to prove to myself that all religion was tosh and I failed in that quest, agreeing in the end with Bernard of Clairvaux when he wrote in the 12th Century -'From the best bliss that earth imparts, we turn unfilled to Thee again'. And I'm sure that's the sense of things with Dr Grocott; I'm sure he's a man of no small intellect yet because of his knowledge of science he recognises that he's come up against a power that is infinitely beyond him and he resorts to simple belief. Both 'howitis' and 'continuer' have alluded to the same, and I would wish to join them in that sentiment. We can go round and round with the human reasoning, but some of us fail to find the satisfaction were looking for and then we come across the words 'Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding' Prov 3:5. It requires the eating of a fair slice of humble pie to obey those words but if we do, and we begin to read the Word of God we find that our condition is no different to the ancient people of Israel '"that you may remember and be ashamed, and never open your mouth anymore because of your shame, when I provide an atonement for all that you have done" says the Lord God.' Ezekiel 16:63 The Lord God who declared 'I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God' Isaiah 40:6 provided that atonement in His Son the Lord Jesus Christ, that 'whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.' John 3:16 Sir William Henry Bragg a lesser-known scientist who led a team which won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1915 said, 'Sometimes people ask if religion and science are opposed to each other. The are - in the sense that the thumb and fingers of my hand are opposed to each other. It is an opposition by means of which anything can be grasped.' Your point about light being on the earth 3 days before the sun was created? The answers are further into the Word: 1 John 1:15b 'God is light and in Him is no darkness at all.' And Revelation 21:23 speaking of the New Jerusalem 'The city had no need of the sun to shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is it's light.' And Bob; I believe you're right about it being wrong of me to accuse snow of 'choosing' not to know. Snow, you have my apologies.
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 14, 2017 8:06:52 GMT -5
Sir William Henry Bragg a lesser-known scientist who led a team which won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1915 said, 'Sometimes people ask if religion and science are opposed to each other. The are - in the sense that the thumb and fingers of my hand are opposed to each other. Science has progressed a lot since 1915, dogma has not. When the thumb says it's hot, and the fingers say it's cold, then you have a problem. Science is what works, religion is hope without evidence.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 14, 2017 10:35:38 GMT -5
I don't know? Always a valid option. Just because we don't understand something doesn't mean we need to give it credibility by default. I don't know is perfectly legitimate as an answer and more honest imo. Well it might be if we were qualified to have an opinion and our opinion carried any weight; but we're not, and it doesn't. Here's what the bible has to say about us: 'Man decays like a rotten thing, like a garment that is moth eaten' Job 13:28 'Man who is born of woman is of few days and full of trouble. He comes forth like a flower and fades away; He flees like a shadow and does not continue'. Job 14:1-2 'Do not put your trust in princes, nor in a son of man,in whom there is no help. His spirit departs, he returns to the earth; in that very day his plans perish.' Psalm 146:3-4 'For what is your life? It is even a vapour that appears for a little time and then vanishes away.' James 4: 14b Surely we cannot disagree with any of this. We delude ourselves that our opinion matters, it doesn't. We're not qualified to have one! Instead we take note of the One who told us that the stars in he sky are as numerable as the sand on the seashore, long before we ever found that out for ourselves. Heb 11:12 And the one who told us the world was round years before men discarded their belief that it was flat! Isaiah 40:22. And the One who told us thousands of years ago that the earth hung in space, on nothing. Job 26:7b We do know snow, because we've been told; and we're not qualified to disagree. But many like you choose not to know because you cannot countenance the idea of a righteous judge to whom you will have to give an account. Of course we're qualified to disagree. That's the trouble with religion, you've been taught that you are worthless without God or Jesus. Sad that. My lack of belief in Gods is no different from your lack of belief in all gods other than your own. Do you chose to not worship them because you can't countenance the idea of their righteous judgment? If you don't worship Allah any Muslim worth anything will tell you that you are going to hell. You likely tell him the same thing. Which one of you is right? I simply see no evidence for a God of any sort. I don't do anything nasty even if I don't believe in gods. I just think 'I don't know' is a valid honest answer.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 14, 2017 11:00:55 GMT -5
And Bob; I believe you're right about it being wrong of me to accuse snow of 'choosing' not to know. Snow, you have my apologies. Not a problem. It's truth when I say I don't know. I think it's a very valid answer when it comes to a lot of things. In my world anyway...
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Sept 14, 2017 23:44:00 GMT -5
Report in UK Times newspaper today (11 Sept): " ONE IN THREE SCIENTISTS HAS FAITH IN GOD - Scientists are regarded as sceptical but only a quarter are atheists, figures suggest. Mori questioned more than 1000 people in professions including engineering, medical and technical research industries and found that 31% said they were religious and 60% said they were not. A more detailed breakdown showed that 25% were atheists, 21% were agnostic and 14% said that they were "spiritual but not religious". The breakdown also showed that 13% practised a religious faith while 18% said that they were "non-practising religious". Questioned further, 25% said that science and religion were contradictory and mutually exclusive, while 21% said that they were complimentary and that "one helps reinforce the other". Many more, 44%, agreed that science and religion "cannot be compared as they refer to different things" ...The Scientific and Medical Network said that the survey challenged the assumption that scientists were "hostile to religion and spirituality"." Here's an example of one of them (not necessarily in the survey but nevertheless a scientist): Dr Stephen Grocott - Fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute - 'I am afraid that as a scientist I simply cannot say strongly enough that spontaneous generation of life is a chemical nonsense and therefore, I am left with no alternative but to believe that life was created.' (Quoted in John F Ashton - In Six Days: Why 50 Scientists choose to believe in Creation (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 2001)) My understanding of science is that it was not spontaneous as this scientist seems to claim but as a result of conditions that eventuated and allowed certain chemicals to interact. Surely as a chemist he is aware of that or is a hoax chemist being brought out to pedal the creationists viewpoint.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2017 10:16:43 GMT -5
I'm not sure that is what it actually says in Hebrews 11:12. But there you go. Not that we need to take any heed of what is written in Hebrews as (1) while it is unclear as to who wrote the book of Hebrews, it certainly wasn't written by the One to whom you keep referring and (2) it's not part of the law or the scriptures that Jesus referred to. You may like to believe that the One you are referring to had some input into the writing of Hebrews but there is no evidence whatsoever to support that view. I would suggest that if the One whom you are referring to really had input into the writing of the bible, He would not have made such glaring errors as claiming light appeared on the earth three days before the sun was created or that the earth came into being only 6,000 years ago when its true age is really several billion. The texts in the bible were written by men all of whom had their own opinions, and whether their opinions mattered or not, they wrote their opinions down. Some of what they wrote they got right and some they got wrong, just as some of what you write here you get right and some of it you get wrong. The bible is not a book of truth or history or scientific fact. It may contain some of these things but it also contains a large portion of myths, falsehoods and absurdity. Of course you may not believe that but that is only your opinion which, according to what you said above, hardly matters (did in understand that correctly?). Matt10 You understand me correctly Matt, my own opinion is worthless . I haven't always believed that; when I baled out of the 2's (without professing) aged 16 I spent the thick end of 30 years trying to prove to myself that all religion was tosh and I failed in that quest, agreeing in the end with Bernard of Clairvaux when he wrote in the 12th Century -'From the best bliss that earth imparts, we turn unfilled to Thee again'. And I'm sure that's the sense of things with Dr Grocott; I'm sure he's a man of no small intellect yet because of his knowledge of science he recognises that he's come up against a power that is infinitely beyond him and he resorts to simple belief. Both 'howitis' and 'continuer' have alluded to the same, and I would wish to join them in that sentiment. We can go round and round with the human reasoning, but some of us fail to find the satisfaction were looking for and then we come across the words 'Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding' Prov 3:5. It requires the eating of a fair slice of humble pie to obey those words but if we do, and we begin to read the Word of God we find that our condition is no different to the ancient people of Israel '"that you may remember and be ashamed, and never open your mouth anymore because of your shame, when I provide an atonement for all that you have done" says the Lord God.' Ezekiel 16:63 The Lord God who declared 'I am the First and I am the Last; Besides Me there is no God' Isaiah 40:6 provided that atonement in His Son the Lord Jesus Christ, that 'whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.' John 3:16 Sir William Henry Bragg a lesser-known scientist who led a team which won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1915 said, 'Sometimes people ask if religion and science are opposed to each other. The are - in the sense that the thumb and fingers of my hand are opposed to each other. It is an opposition by means of which anything can be grasped.' Your point about light being on the earth 3 days before the sun was created? The answers are further into the Word: 1 John 1:15b 'God is light and in Him is no darkness at all.' And Revelation 21:23 speaking of the New Jerusalem 'The city had no need of the sun to shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is it's light.' And Bob; I believe you're right about it being wrong of me to accuse snow of 'choosing' not to know. Snow, you have my apologies. You keep quoting scripture to me but as yet you haven't explained why I should take any heed of it. As I mentioned earlier, why should I take any heed of what is written in the Book of Hebrews? Who decided that whoever it was that wrote this text should be taken heed of? You? Jesus? Some Catholic Priest somewhere? Some Roman Emperor? Some random bloke who thought what he wrote down was important? Please explain to me I should pay any heed to what someone wrote to the Hebrews nearly two thousand years ago? Matt10
|
|
otto2
Junior Member
Posts: 57
|
Post by otto2 on Sept 16, 2017 11:54:03 GMT -5
You keep quoting scripture to me but as yet you haven't explained why I should take any heed of it. As I mentioned earlier, why should I take any heed of what is written in the Book of Hebrews? Who decided that whoever it was that wrote this text should be taken heed of? You? Jesus? Some Catholic Priest somewhere? Some Roman Emperor? Some random bloke who thought what he wrote down was important? Please explain to me I should pay any heed to what someone wrote to the Hebrews nearly two thousand years ago? Matt10[/quote] Not sure it can be done Matt, not with human reasoning anyway; and if I can't quote scripture..... But here's a thought; your last post is actually a fulfilment of scripture: (1 Cor 2:14) 'But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them because they are spiritually discerned.' But on the off chance that you really want to know the answer to your question, and at risk of quoting more scripture (because my own opinion on such matters is of no consequence); you'll find it's down to you. Speaking of wisdom: 'If you seek her as silver, and search for her as for hidden treasures; Then you will understand the fear of the Lord, and find the knowledge of God' (Prov 2:4-5) And speaking of God: (Jeremiah 29:13) 'And you will seek Me and find Me, when you search for me with all your heart.' Or just get on and enjoy your life, but on that note I'll leave you with a quote from (quote) 'One of the West's leading atheists', Malcolm Muggeridge, who in a stunning reversal in 1969 published 'Jesus Rediscovered', declaring his faith in Christ: 'I may, I suppose, regard myself as a relatively successful man. People occasionally stare at me in the streets; that's fame. I can fairly easily earn enough to qualify for admission to the higher slopes of the Inland Revenue Service. That's success. (now HMRC - it means he's a higher rate tax payer for those of you across the pond). Furnished with money and a little fame, even the elderly may partake of trendy diversions. That's pleasure. It might happen once in a while that something I said or wrote was sufficiently heeded for me to persuade myself that it represented a serious impact on our time - that's fulfilment. Yet, I say to you - and beg you to believe me - multiply these tiny triumphs by millions, add them all together, and they are nothing - less than nothing, a positive impediment - measured against one drop of that living water Christ offers to the spiritually thirsty.' (p77)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2017 3:42:00 GMT -5
Otto2, You are correct. It can't be done. There is no reason why anyone should pay any heed to what is written in Hebrews. Or most of the New Testament actually. Unless you make one up. Which begs the question why you keep quoting it to me. Who cares what some random bloke from the first century thinks about what length your hair should be. I'm glad we cleared that up.
As to Malcolm Malcolm Muggeridge, you're certainly scraping the barrel for a Christian conversion folk hero there. For a start I understood he wasn't an atheist but rather was an agnostic for most of his life so no great conversion from atheism there. According to his niece he was also a serial groper of women. I think I'll stick to my non belief thanks. Matt10
|
|
|
Post by iamsaved on Sept 17, 2017 8:55:08 GMT -5
I am currently very drunk and watching Chelsea v arsenal on my massive tv. My question to snow etc is why do you give a rumpy pumpy, go and live your life instead of debating these idiots on here
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 18, 2017 6:04:35 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2017 6:54:39 GMT -5
I'm not sure I like Religion too much either......Jesus Christ on the other hand has been very good to me, in life I see His teachings as wonderful, compassionate and uplifting .....therefore in death I'm willing to put my trust and faith in Him the way I see it I can't lose. Enjoy your day everyone. I believe in God, the father almighty, creator of heaven and earth and all that is within, I also believe In Jesus Our savior who died that our sins may be forgiven; He paid a debt for us that He did not owe. Such was His love for humanity.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 20, 2017 12:53:24 GMT -5
its above us somewhere maybe on a different plane of existence... argumentum ad populum(sp?)... again he doesn't want robots he wanst people who CHOOSE him... i believe there is one thing God can't do and that is to uncreate a spirit/soul(could be wrong) so thats why he just had to banish him to earth instead of "snapping his finger"... its called free will.... It isn't 'argument ab populum' when the people in question are arguing from evidence. No.
Argumentum ad Populum (popular appeal or appeal to the majority)
says something is true because the majority believes it to true
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 23, 2017 0:08:01 GMT -5
sorry to hear of your fall... Are you certain it is a fall? Yes, there are. Why do you suppose this is true? Does anyone know where these places will be? If he knows all the endings how is it that he doesn't know which each person will select? Not knowing this places a limitation on the knowledge that god has. Limiting the power of god, or in this case the knowledge of god, might be said to be blasphemy. This gives men more knowledge than god. An omniscient god who does not know what people will choose. Sort of redefines the term omniscient. I wonder where you stand on god being omnipotent? Omnibenevolent?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 23, 2017 0:16:02 GMT -5
So our scientist says that spontaneous generation of life is a chemical nonsense, and you say that the alternative of a Creator is equal nonsense; then what other alternatives would you suggest? Who are the scientists who are claiming that the spontaneous generation of life is a chemical nonsense? Interesting information regarding abiogenesis.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Sept 23, 2017 0:24:54 GMT -5
I believe in God, the father almighty, creator of heaven and earth and all that is within, I also believe In Jesus Our savior who died that our sins may be forgiven; He paid a debt for us that He did not owe. Such was His love for humanity. ::) Where does this concept of debt come from? How does a new born acquire debt? Ezekiel 18:20The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.This sounds like each individual is responsible for their own actions and their own fate.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Sept 23, 2017 1:03:18 GMT -5
I believe in God, the father almighty, creator of heaven and earth and all that is within, I also believe In Jesus Our savior who died that our sins may be forgiven; He paid a debt for us that He did not owe. Such was His love for humanity. That whole concept is evil in itself that an innocent person should have to die to save ANYONE, -least of all people his own father supposedly created mankind but made such a mess of the job that they had to be "saved!"
It is a myth of course but what a miserable, unfair, actually evil concept it is to start with! How can ANYONE even want to "worship" such being as that kind of a "father?"
What would we think of the morality of any father that did that to his son today? Would we agree with HIM and even "worship" HIM? I sincerely hope not!
Think about it! It doesn't even come close to being the kind of a father that any ethical person would hold up as a model of morality!
But just because it is a story that somehow makes the people who believe it feel good , -they ignore the implications of the evil in such a story as a reality!
|
|
|
Post by xna on Sept 23, 2017 13:34:54 GMT -5
That whole concept is evil in itself that an innocent person should have to die to save ANYONE, -least of all people his own father supposedly created mankind but made such a mess of the job that they had to be "saved!"
It is a myth of course but what a miserable, unfair, actually evil concept it is to start with! How can ANYONE even want to "worship" such being as that kind of a "father?" Well there you have it the divine plan.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 23, 2017 17:33:14 GMT -5
That whole concept is evil in itself that an innocent person should have to die to save ANYONE, -least of all people his own father supposedly created mankind but made such a mess of the job that they had to be "saved!"
It is a myth of course but what a miserable, unfair, actually evil concept it is to start with! How can ANYONE even want to "worship" such being as that kind of a "father?" Well there you have it the divine plan. Hopefully that's a spoof! It is exactly what children are being taught though. I don't understand how people don't see it? It seems so obvious to me just how much God is a man made concept to provide power over the people for some, comfort and security for others.
|
|