Religion The God Question (continued in Part 2 - link in last post)

[tesseract]

I don't understand your thinking, Tesseract. You reject the creationist view of a young earth, but reject evolution - which has a stack of evidence. Surely it would be more consistent to reject mainstream science's view completely?

It seems you've lumped all creationists with the same view. If all creationists had the same view, there would only be one religion. It'd be convenient for opposers of creationism to have their targets all hold the same view, for then they could focus their attack.

 

[Malifice]

It seems you've lumped all creationists with the same view. If all creationists had the same view, there would only be one religion. It'd be convenient for opposers of creationism to have their targets all hold the same view, for then they could focus their attack.

Tesseract; on this point, do you see no issue with using the Bible claiming to be true as proof of the truth of the Bible?

Surely every religion can (and has) make this exact claim (and by your logic) must all be all equally true.

They can also point to prophesies and predictions and so forth in the relevant texts to verify this claim.

You dont see parallels in perhaps in a religion like Scientology to see just how easy it is to convince people of blatantly outlandish shit in the guise of religion?

 

[jdisc]

The bible is evidence, though not proof. The bible can't rightfully be dismissed as evidence simply because one does not believe its validity.

 

[jdisc]

/thread.

 

[jdisc]

the fact of the matter is this; while the christian god's promise of eternal life is appealing, the Papua New Guinean mud god, Pikkiwoki, is promising a pig and as many coconuts as you can carry.

DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY COCONUTS I COULD CARRY?

 

[tesseract]

Tesseract; on this point, do you see no issue with using the Bible claiming to be true as proof of the truth of the Bible?

Surely every religion can (and has) make this exact claim (and by your logic) must all be all equally true.

They can also point to prophesies and predictions and so forth in the relevant texts to verify this claim.

You dont see parallels in perhaps in a religion like Scientology to see just how easy it is to convince people of blatantly outlandish shit in the guise of religion?

The problem lies with fallible humans and their flawed reasoning of the scriptures, not with the bible.

Matthew 7:21-27 speaks as to my stance, and is contrary to my supposed logic. It goes to show that the mere claim to being a Christian or a believer isn't a guarantee that those ones will be viewed favourably by the lord at the end. Given the diversity of belief in religion, and what God's words in the bible commands humans to do in order to show their love for God, most religions don't do what God asks of them. So, not all are the same. Not all are right. In fact, the bible says that few are the ones finding the way that leads to life everlasting. This, to those that believe what the bible says, shows that most supposed Christians will be found to be false in the end.

 

[tesseract]

Ghossein is going all Wonna on this thread.

 

[Malifice]

The problem lies with fallible humans and their flawed reasoning of the scriptures, not with the bible.

Matthew 7:21-27 speaks as to my stance, and is contrary to my supposed logic. It goes to show that the mere claim to being a Christian or a believer isn't a guarantee that those ones will be viewed favourably by the lord at the end. Given the diversity of belief in religion, and what God's words in the bible commands humans to do in order to show their love for God, most religions don't do what God asks of them. So, not all are the same. Not all are right. In fact, the bible says that few are the ones finding the way that leads to life everlasting. This, to those that believe what the bible says, shows that most supposed Christians will be found to be false in the end.

In no way did that answer (or even address) my question.

 

[jdisc]

Ghossein is going all Wonna on this thread.

mad?

 

[tesseract]

In no way did that answer (or even address) my question.

Given that you said "on this point" when quoting my response to bombermick, I believed your question to be an extension of bombermick's and my discussion.

My second paragraph, but also my first, goes aways to answering your claim as to my logic and the rest of your post. You try to show how creationists of all persuasions can be lumped together by such claims, and I show what the bible says as to why they can't be lumped together.

 

[tesseract]

mad?

Nah. I don't take this forum too seriously. Wonna away.

 

[jdisc]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v6/n2/scientific-accuracy
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v6/n2/archaeological-finds

The Bible claims the universe had a beginning. Philosophers and scientists rejected that claim for over two thousand years, but now astronomers believe the universe had a beginning, the so-called big bang.

The Bible claims that God created animals “after their kind.” Nineteenth-century biologists argued that animals evolved from other, very different animals, but today biology confirms that creatures reproduce within their own kind.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha oh my god this is the funniest thing i've ever read.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Where do they get this shit?

 

[jdisc]

Where do they get this shit?

bible says the universe had a beginning, science says the universe had a beginning

bible must be true then..... you can't really argue with the logic

 

[fishardansin]

The bible made many claims that can be written off as a metaphor!!!

BUT... nearly every historical claim that the old testament made has been proved to either be false or at the very least a myth based on a true story, eg the Noah story and the black sea flooding 10k years ago.

 

[Pie eyed]

Very, very true.

Even better if "god/s" ever showed themselves it would end the debate.

Yet, shrieking silence from god/s behalf for millennia now.

15 billion years actually.
The man can certainly keep a secret.

 

[Pie eyed]

bible says the universe had a beginning, science says the universe had a beginning

bible must be true then..... you can't really argue with the logic

Not necessarily. The bible claims the universe had a beginning end of story and that they know who began it and when, science theorizes that the universe may have had a beginning, but may also in fact be infinite have no beginning or end. Science has an open mind on the subject while leaning toward the current evidence that the universe did have a beginning.

Only once the Bible gives a completely unsupportable cause for this beginning does the discussion arise about the authenticity and evidence for the Biblical claim. Adding further fuel to the discussion are the equally adamant claims of different beginnings from other cults.

 

[Monniehawk]

Given that you said "on this point" when quoting my response to bombermick, I believed your question to be an extension of bombermick's and my discussion.

My second paragraph, but also my first, goes aways to answering your claim as to my logic and the rest of your post. You try to show how creationists of all persuasions can be lumped together by such claims, and I show what the bible says as to why they can't be lumped together.

Hmmm... a misinterpretation.
Where else is that possible.....?

 

[bombermick]

Given that you said "on this point" when quoting my response to bombermick, I believed your question to be an extension of bombermick's and my discussion.

My second paragraph, but also my first, goes aways to answering your claim as to my logic and the rest of your post. You try to show how creationists of all persuasions can be lumped together by such claims, and I show what the bible says as to why they can't be lumped together.

My issue you accept an old earth, but reject evolution for seemingly no other reason than the Bible says so. IF you must start with that conclusion you still need science and logic to support it, otherwise it's blind acceptance.

 

[holy diver]

15 billion years actually.
The man can certainly keep a secret.

Exactly.

This is why I find it entertaining that people buy into these obviously antiquated and debunked belief systems but get upset when it's pointed out to them.

Is it the promise of life after death that keeps the duped within the faith? The delusion once we are deceased there is somehow a level 2 and more credits to play the game of life? Because we can't empirically prove or disprove life after death?

Do they not recognise their own cognitive dissonance if they rightly disbelieve psychics speaking to the dead and ghost hunting as nonsense fit only for TV consumption.



Are preachers/priests/pastor's et. al. cold reading for their flocks? Claiming to know the mind of god/s.

 

[holy diver]

 

[holy diver]

 

[jdisc]

Is it the promise of life after death that keeps the duped within the faith? The delusion once we are deceased there is somehow a level 2 and more credits to play the game of life? Because we can't empirically prove or disprove life after death?

Do they not recognise their own cognitive dissonance if they rightly disbelieve psychics speaking to the dead and ghost hunting as nonsense fit only for TV consumption.

it all boils down to a fear of death and some amount of gullibility.

 

[jdisc]

 

[holy diver]

it all boils down to a fear of death and some amount of gullibility.

I'm guessing death is like before we are born. Not much to be scared of really.
Real immortality is having our kids carry on some of our genetic makeup.