It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Science, Meet Your Maker!
page: 10share:
reply to post by newday
I am familiar with the idea that Elohim is plural. There isa Psalm about the divine council of Gods. I have read some studies by Michael Heiser on that. There is only one creator God and other "Gods" are the Arch angels and angels etc.
I agree there problems with organized religion. But that's mainly due to the depravity of man that the Bible talks about. Anytime you have a group of people even a church people are going to behave like well people.
Science has given us a lot inventions and medicine has cured many diseases and improved out quality of life. It has made it easier. 100 years ago most people worked all day just to eat. We no refrigerators to store food and no electricity of running water. Now we've gotten so smart people don't believe in God. That is a big mistake in my opinion. Science has given us many things but we aren't as accomplished as scientists pretend. We have no idea what makes life - really alive. At best science is only trying to figure out hoe God put things together.
I am familiar with the idea that Elohim is plural. There isa Psalm about the divine council of Gods. I have read some studies by Michael Heiser on that. There is only one creator God and other "Gods" are the Arch angels and angels etc.
I agree there problems with organized religion. But that's mainly due to the depravity of man that the Bible talks about. Anytime you have a group of people even a church people are going to behave like well people.
Science has given us a lot inventions and medicine has cured many diseases and improved out quality of life. It has made it easier. 100 years ago most people worked all day just to eat. We no refrigerators to store food and no electricity of running water. Now we've gotten so smart people don't believe in God. That is a big mistake in my opinion. Science has given us many things but we aren't as accomplished as scientists pretend. We have no idea what makes life - really alive. At best science is only trying to figure out hoe God put things together.
Originally posted by newday
It is not an accepted idea so no one is willing to put their approval on it, like the idea that the word, "elohym," is actually in the plural, "Gods," not singular, "God."
It is said that way to represent the three personality of the Godhead he is a triune God .
- Con
Originally posted by Conspiriology
It is said that way to represent the three personality of the Godhead he is a triune God .
The trinity is one of my favorite examples of a spell used by the keepers of religion to reduce people to powerlessness.
It is a beguiling like the Jews that followed paul around used, simple religious dogma to bewitch the people of Galatia.
If you accept the teaching your existence is reduced, you lower yourself from a real meaningful and active relationship with the creator in which He is able to effect your reality in definable measurable ways, to one where He is only an intellectual recognition, a philosophical concept alone, a figment of the mind, without the ability or the willingness to interact in the moments of your life in real time with absolute power.
Please bear with me and I will make a point you may find interesting..
Read what is said of the Galatians;
Ga 3:1 - 5
O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you...
Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Are ye so foolish?
having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
The idea of the trinity is used to do the same thing to people who begin their relationship with God by simply believing in Him, and then manifesting the evidence which God gives them for their belief, the comforter, the gift of holy spirit.
At a certain level of consciousness it is literary impossible not to, "know," of the existence of God, you may not, "believe," but you do, "know."
Knowing of God is not the issue if you want physical evidence of the reality and existence of God, as far as knowledge goes we are without an excuse.
Believing is required for the spiritual to manifest and produce an effect in the physical, and disbelief is belief, they are the same, just different lines for our belief to follow.
This is why a person can sometimes know next to nothing intellectually, not even be able to read or write, he could have lived in the jungle all his life with no contact to the outside world at all, and yet it is possible for him to do what we would recognize as the impossible.
Logic, knowledge, and reason, are not power spiritually, they are part of the natural world of the material, bio-chemical reactions, which do not and cannot bridge the chasm between the physical and the spiritual, meaningless lifeless thoughts in our mind.
The impossible spiritually is accomplished not by reason and thought, to accomplish a feat by reasoned thought is to use science and natural law to do it.
To manifest the spiritual, is to exhibit supernatural power, that is accomplished by believing.
Mt 17:18 - 20
And Jesus rebuked the devil; and he departed out of him, and the child was cured from that very hour.
Then came the disciples to Jesus apart, and said, Why could not we cast him out?
And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.
Logic and reason are way over rated in my opinion, because it is by believing that nothing is impossible for us.
Is there anything of any material substance in you thoughts?
The thoughts may be the end result of electrical and chemical reactions, but the ideas you recognize as thought itself is of a non-physical nature, there is nothing of any substance in it.
Thoughts are the product of physical processes.
God is the same, if you entertain the idea there is anything of the material substance of our universe, which is part of the nature of God, then you shut off a line of belief required that allows for God to manifest Himself and His power in your presence, without Him becoming a respecter of persons or of works, because you have failed to sanctify God in your life and keep yourself holy before Him.
The trinity is spiritual pollution a doctrine of the anti-christ spirit.
If you actually incline yourself to the notion and become persuaded and believe that it is the nature of God, then un-holy spiritual power can evidence itself at will to impede you from every walking by faith in God again.
This is what happened to the people of Galatia.
Certain religious Jews used the Law of Moses to bewitch them from the truth, to impede them from living by their believing, getting them to think that if they practiced the law and kept it then God would be with them that way, but that is trying to accomplish by works what can only be done by faith.
The only true way to worship God is by spiritual means, the manifesting of supernatural power, this can only be done by believing, and continuing to follow a certain line of thought to enlarge your believing more and more.
God is everywhere present, this is a line that must be followed to maintain your sanctification, to be separate and holy unto God, so He might reveal Himself in your life..
If you say there is something of us, or of the substance of the physical universe in the nature of God, then you never develop yourself along the line of the Omni presence of God.
The first thing you must believe to walk with God by faith, is that He exists always in real time, He is living and real, you must become fully persuaded of this reality, attain a state of believing, for God to give the evidence of it, which evidence becomes your faith in that regard.
Believing is not faith, believing is a law, faith is the evidence you receive for your belief.
You must carefully consider a certain line of thought to reach the place where you are fully persuaded that it is true, to believe.
If you introduce the idea of the trinity early in a believers spiritual development, it interrupts them before they have become fully persuaded of the true Omni present nature of God,
The trinity leads them down a line of thought to believe there is something of us in God, a line of unbelief that once you become fully persuaded of it, allows for the potential of unholy spiritual power to manifest itself in your life.
What I have said is expressed best by the apostle James in this expanded interpretation of James 4:8a.
Bring yourselves into the moment, acknowledge the presence of God and He will be with you, draw nigh unto God and He will draw nigh unto you.
God exists in the moment, He is everywhere present, For this reality to be manifested in your life, and for you to receive evidence of this reality, you must think on it until you believe it.
Teaching the trinity has prevented untold numbers of people down though the ages from manifesting holy spirit power in their lives.
Derailing them before they have gotten to where they need to be in their minds to experience in actuality, in definable measurable ways, the reality of the living ever-present almighty God.
Christianity is responsible for obstructing the working of the Holy Spirit in the lives of billions for thousands of years by propagandizing for demons the two greatest lies ever told, that there is life after death and Jesus is God.
[edit on 27-6-2008 by newday]
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
I am familiar with the idea that Elohim is plural. There isa Psalm about the divine council of Gods. I have read some studies by Michael Heiser on that. There is only one creator God and other "Gods" are the Arch angels and angels etc.
How do you think scripture should be interpreted?
What is your method for interpreting scripture?
Do you agree with these statements?
A man can think of God in his mind as anything, and call God by any name, Jehovah, Vishnu, the spaghetti monster, or even Satan, it does not matter to the creator, because He knows if the man is looking to Him honestly and no other, regardless of how the man thinks.
God looks upon the motives in our heart not the thoughts in our heads.
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
I agree there problems with organized religion. But that's mainly due to the depravity of man that the Bible talks about. Anytime you have a group of people even a church people are going to behave like well people.
What you are saying I understand, but it is not the full extent of situation, in my opinion.
The word religion as defined today has evolved in such a way that its meaning is an attempt to express two competing notions side by side at the same time, the ideas of government and belief.
Religion is thought to mean a belief in God and a system of worship, a system governing ones belief in God.
True worship does not have a system it has a process.
If God exists in reality, or is literally living and real, than to believe that is not religious in any way.
God can fully communicate His will, to any individual person or group of people at anytime and in anyplace.
If He exists and indeed is the force bringing people together, how is it religious?
People who hear and follow God are connected to the spiritual mind.
They must first deceive themselves and decline to the mind of the flesh, the natural mind, before they can be deceived by others.
Both religion and science are the product of the natural mind.
All of this world, all the governing systems, political, religious, social, economic, they are being manipulated from within, by men without a conscience using natural means, using religion, science, propaganda, and deceptions.
There is the natural mind, and the spiritual mind.
The spiritual mind is aware of itself and the natural mind, the natural mind knows only of itself and is not aware of the spiritual mind.
People who do not walk by the spirit are blind, all they know is what they are able to garner by way of their five senses, seeing, hearing smelling, tasting, touching.
They are cut off from receiving information, revelation knowledge, from within by the sprit.
Just as we are born of God, and there are children of the living God, so to are there those who are born of the devil, the children of the devil.
They exploit natural laws and nature, to manipulate and deceive all those who depend on their five sense for their information, those who will not look at life from the spiritual, using the eyes of the spirit.
The natural man cannot know the things of the spirit of God, because they are discerned by spiritual means, the things of the sprit are foolishness to the mind of the flesh.
This is where all the problems come from the two minds that are available, the spiritual mind and the natural mind.
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
Science has given us a lot inventions and medicine has cured many diseases and improved out quality of life. It has made it easier. 100 years ago most people worked all day just to eat. We no refrigerators to store food and no electricity of running water. Now we've gotten so smart people don't believe in God. That is a big mistake in my opinion. Science has given us many things but we aren't as accomplished as scientists pretend. We have no idea what makes life - really alive. At best science is only trying to figure out hoe God put things together.
Science is a deception, it offers power in part to keep you from completely escaping governmental control, from leaving the need for religion and discovering spiritual power.
It is born out of religion, as an effort by the rulers of this world not to loose their grip over our minds and our lives, when we decide not believe them and accept their authority.
Religion requires we deny the power of God and accept the doctrine of men in its place and for our guidance.
When we began to see we were being deceived and moved away from religion, science came out to greet us with bribes, saying we will give you power that religion can not.
Science allows us to escape religion but does not promote us to archive the true freedom of the full and complete power available in the spirit, so that we might be self sufficient having God, without any need of any government control from this world, we would have God to govern us all directly by revelation and to supply all our needs by supernatural manifestations.
All power in all, true spirituality would rule our lives individually, bringing us together for our shared benefit when required, without the need for men to limit and control our movements, outside the ability of others to rule over us, joined together in the spiritual mind of God..
Science offers bread crumbs denying us access to the loaf, keeping us distracted looking at life by our five senses, away from the things of the spirit of God.
Eph 1:18-19
The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of his calling, and what is the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints, And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
Science and religion are used to keep our eyes from being enlightened to the exceeding greatness of His power.
The power of true spirituality.
reply to post by newday
I totally disagree and rather than explain why, I will ask you first before going into all that I just won't waste time on some people and one of those are members of the cult called Jehovah's witnesses, so are you a JW?
No of course not, you don't subscribe to any religion that uses the Bible do you. It's ok, a lot of people have a problem with the concept of the trinity but saying it is of the anti christ and all that other stuff my "religion" has also taught me.
Religion is not "ALWAYS" wrong about God.
Before you say you didn't say that they are, let me tell you, you haven't said a thing that would indicate otherwise and all you have appeared to me as is a person who has a special gift but it is the gift that is special but you are not that special to me. My Bible is my standard of truth and what it says about a triune God was what I understand without anyone telling me that is what it means. If you are suggesting that part of the Bible is incorrect and was added to control people,, lets not waste another moment and agree to disagree because it is at that moment we are done.
Yeah im closed minded like that
and like you are like that
- Con
[edit on 29-6-2008 by Conspiriology]
I totally disagree and rather than explain why, I will ask you first before going into all that I just won't waste time on some people and one of those are members of the cult called Jehovah's witnesses, so are you a JW?
No of course not, you don't subscribe to any religion that uses the Bible do you. It's ok, a lot of people have a problem with the concept of the trinity but saying it is of the anti christ and all that other stuff my "religion" has also taught me.
Religion is not "ALWAYS" wrong about God.
Before you say you didn't say that they are, let me tell you, you haven't said a thing that would indicate otherwise and all you have appeared to me as is a person who has a special gift but it is the gift that is special but you are not that special to me. My Bible is my standard of truth and what it says about a triune God was what I understand without anyone telling me that is what it means. If you are suggesting that part of the Bible is incorrect and was added to control people,, lets not waste another moment and agree to disagree because it is at that moment we are done.
Yeah im closed minded like that
and like you are like that
- Con
[edit on 29-6-2008 by Conspiriology]
reply to post by newday
I agree God judges the heart more than the vocabulary. But I believe the scriptures in the Bible when God says he care deeply about his name. To call the name of Satan would be a direct blasphemy in my opinion. Thoughts are things and we are responsible for disciplining our thinking.
But we are called in scripture to be the "body of Christ" to work together. No one exists in complete isolation. Relationships with others is where the rubber meets the road as a far as morality goes.
I dont' know newday. 100 years ago the average person had to work all day just to keep food on the table. You had to grow it , raise it or hunt it. It was work just to survive. I am glad science came around and gave use refrigerators and ovens and electricity. If it wasn't for science you probably would be so busy trying not to starve you wouldn't have time to come up with these ideas. That's why only the rich aristocrats were the philosophers, theologians and scientists last century. everyone else was too bust trying to survive.
A man can think of God in his mind as anything, and call God by any name, Jehovah, Vishnu, the spaghetti monster, or even Satan, it does not matter to the creator, because He knows if the man is looking to Him honestly and no other, regardless of how the man thinks. God looks upon the motives in our heart not the thoughts in our heads.
I agree God judges the heart more than the vocabulary. But I believe the scriptures in the Bible when God says he care deeply about his name. To call the name of Satan would be a direct blasphemy in my opinion. Thoughts are things and we are responsible for disciplining our thinking.
What you are saying I understand, but it is not the full extent of situation, in my opinion. The word religion as defined today has evolved in such a way that its meaning is an attempt to express two competing notions side by side at the same time, the ideas of government and belief. Religion is thought to mean a belief in God and a system of worship, a system governing ones belief in God. True worship does not have a system it has a process.
But we are called in scripture to be the "body of Christ" to work together. No one exists in complete isolation. Relationships with others is where the rubber meets the road as a far as morality goes.
Science is a deception, it offers power in part to keep you from completely escaping governmental control, from leaving the need for religion and discovering spiritual power.
It is born out of religion, as an effort by the rulers of this world not to loose their grip over our minds and our lives, when we decide not believe them and accept their authority.
I dont' know newday. 100 years ago the average person had to work all day just to keep food on the table. You had to grow it , raise it or hunt it. It was work just to survive. I am glad science came around and gave use refrigerators and ovens and electricity. If it wasn't for science you probably would be so busy trying not to starve you wouldn't have time to come up with these ideas. That's why only the rich aristocrats were the philosophers, theologians and scientists last century. everyone else was too bust trying to survive.
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
I agree God judges the heart more than the vocabulary. But I believe the scriptures in the Bible when God says he care deeply about his name. To call the name of Satan would be a direct blasphemy in my opinion. Thoughts are things and we are responsible for disciplining our thinking.
Words in and of themselves are meaningless.
If I believe that the creator is called Satan, and I call Him that, then God knows if it is Him I am believing or not.
It is the ideas we associate with the words that count, and whether or not we believe those ideas.
You can discipline you thinking all you want to, but it will not get you anywhere with God, He is not a respecter of persons, of our thoughts or of our positions in life, in the end you either believe or you do not, and the amount of thought you put into things is only relative to the idea you are considering in the context of belief.
If you are trying to live your life and have a relationship with the creator by discipline, whether it be the disciplining of the body or the mind, you are being deceived.
It is a deceit for the purpose that you will not believe to manifest spiritual power.
You are trying to improve upon, by works through discipline, what God has made perfect, and that is not available.
What we need to do is put on the cloths God has so lovingly provided for us in the finished works of His son, this can only be done by believing, you can't think your way to it.
You put on what God has provided for you in Christ not what you think you need for yourself.
This is done simply by believing to receive it into manifestation in your daily activities.
There are nine definable measurable ways in which the gift of God manifests itself in our reality, so that you can identify if you are in fact believing or deceiving yourself, in effect proving for yourself what is and is not of the Spirit.
Worshiping God is not a system as much as it is a process of growth, like a tree it grows in reality, in discernable ways, both in power an ability, and in its time fruit is produced, people should be the same way in their relationship with God, if there is in fact a relationship.
If you are not manifesting spiritual power in the form of the nine exhibitions of holy spirit, then it should be evident you are not growing, and without spiritual growth there will be no fruit of the spirit produced in your life..
You see if you put on the things which God has provided for your spiritual growth, the need for personal discipline becomes moot, because it is growth without compulsion you are simply developing with God from one stage to the next, the old is falling away the new is being put on as you grow.
Discipline becomes what others may see and think of you, but it should never be the means you employ for spiritual development, discipline is of the natural mind and the flesh.
You will never turn your physical weakness into strength through discipline, instead you must allow the power of God to be made manifest in your weakness.
This is important to the idea of science, because science is our attempt to gain power over life and the universe by natural means, to make us strong in our weakness, but we can gain power over life by spiritual means.
There is no circumstance or situation that exists, no problem that confronts any of us which God has not provide an answer for.
The nine manifestation of holy spirit are God's solution in this world to mankind's problems.
The key is can we believe, not can we discipline our minds.
I would rather we utilized the solutions, God in his exalted objective position outside of space time, decided was best for us, than try and do it on our own in our own ways through science or religion.
Why not try doing things the way God has presented for us to do them and see if it works better?
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
But we are called in scripture to be the "body of Christ" to work together. No one exists in complete isolation. Relationships with others is where the rubber meets the road as a far as morality goes.
This is why I asked you about interpretation, what method of interpretation do you apply to scripture to find meaning and understanding?
Life the way God has provided for it to be lived has nothing to do with morality, you either are led by Him or you are not.
I've been led to other people by revelation, and God has led others to me.
As believers our relationship and fellowship with our fellow man should be at the direction of God, which means we must receive, word of knowledge, word of wisdom, discerning of spirits, to know who to see, when, why, and where to see them.
The term, "Body of Christ,"is illustrating how individuals who are operating the manifestation of holy spirit relate to one another, and to the broader community collectively.
In the context a member of the, "Body of Christ," is an individual who is receiving an/or imparting some spiritual manifestation or gift, it can be anyone, anywhere, at anytime from any religion because they are only required to be people who believe to receiver into manifestation the gift of holy spirit..
Once again however manifestations are exhibitions, definable and measurable displays of spiritual power, evidence in the physical world, there is a big difference between what is all in our heads, and what is actually occurring in reality.
Religion is a denial of the power of God, if people are deciding on their own to get together and it is not occurring as the result of revelation, and they are calling their get together a meeting of the, "Body of Christ," they are deceiving themselves.
Only God can bring the, "Body of Christ," together, and it is accomplished by supernatural manifestations of power, for their edification individually and collectively, and possibly for some benefit to all of humanity in a broader context.
All scripture whether if it is the Bible, the Koran, the book or Mormon, whatever thing it is that was received by inspiration from God, which individuals look to in believing, in an honest effort to find truth from the creator, the thing was received by revelation an revelation is required to interpret it.
It took the supernatural manifestation of power to produce it, if it is scripture, spiritual power was received and imparted in the making of it, therefore spiritual power is required to be received and imparted to gain understandings from it.
This is why it is written and understood that spiritual things are spiritually discerned.
If you are trying to use logic and reason in an effort to underhand and interpret scripture, you will never gain the interpretation in real time that God would have you receive from it, at best you will only understand how it was received and interpreted originally.
Without a real time interpretation imparted by revelation, then all you have for application practically, is at best a subjective meaning.
For an objective interpretation of scripture for practical application you must have God enlighten your understanding of it.
This is why most religious interpretations are in effect only dead words, if you try and apply them they will cause you more harm than good, because they will lead to the denial of the spiritual power available to you, that you need to overcome the things that confront you throughout the day.
Religion always denies the power of God and attempts to obstruct honest people form operating the gift of the holy spirit, this has always been the case even the Bible attests to that fact.
All of the major religions began as true movements of God, after the supernatural power is gone then they become religions.
If God is real and He is in fact the source or cause that is bringing people together, it is not and can not be a religion, because it would be the reflection of a spiritual process not a system of worship.
It should more accurately be called a spiritual happening, it is the way in which the power of God has manifest itself in the lives of those who are participating both on an individual and collective level, everyone else is just on the outside looking in, judging it to be religious.
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
I dont' know newday. 100 years ago the average person had to work all day just to keep food on the table. You had to grow it , raise it or hunt it. It was work just to survive. I am glad science came around and gave use refrigerators and ovens and electricity. If it wasn't for science you probably would be so busy trying not to starve you wouldn't have time to come up with these ideas. That's why only the rich aristocrats were the philosophers, theologians and scientists last century. everyone else was too bust trying to survive.
Your first three words say it all, we don't know, we never try the way of God, we let science and religion do the job of God for us in providing for our needs.
We all die someday, does a philosopher, a theologian, or scientist, die knowing more of the truth than an unlearned and ignorant man?
If the power of God exists and is real, such as the power to raise the dead, heal the sick, perform miracles, then why not take the time to prove it for yourself?
It takes time to grow in the things of God, but make no mistake about it, God is not only real, He gives us the power to overcome all things.
An exceeding great power, far superior in every way to anything science or religion could ever give or conceive of giving.
Supernatural manifestation of power is the way in which God determined for us to solve our problems, not science or religion, why should we reject that?
It is the love of God that moved to give the holy spirit to us so we would not be without the comfort of God in our lives, to need to trust in the flesh again.
Why do we go back to the weaker things, to look to the ways of man and this world, after that we have tasted of the greatness of the glory and power of God?
Is it not for fear?
We are given latent energy spiritually when we turn to God, If we do not learn to manifest supernatural power, that is in definable measurable ways in our lives, to utilize our God given spiritual potential, for all practical purposes we have rejected God and His gift, and rendered of no effect the sacrifice of our savior that made it all possible.
Religion would have us powerless and science will only give us enough power to keep us from turning away from the material substance of things and learning to utilize and manifest supernatural power from God.
In the end both religion and science are and will always be used against us, to keep us from knowing God in a real and meaningful way, ultimately together they will bring both the cause and method of our destruction and annihilation.
[edit on 5-7-2008 by newday]
reply to post by newday
But newday my friend you are too spiritually wise than to call GOD satan and so are most people.... (except the evil people I guess) so its just a little silly. A better analogy would be someone who was isolated and never learned to speak language.
I agree its not by works!!! Bu we still try to discipline ourselves out of gratitude and love for Christ. Paul spweaks quie a bit about "self control" we struggle against the flesh.
What solutions specifically?
Exactly how do you do that newday? Through prayer? I mean in piratical terms how?
I agree. I pray and read and use the principles of hermeneutics.
I disagree. I stick with the one Bible. Satan counterfeits the words of God with false scriptures that sound similar but are twisted. They might have some good things too but they disagree with each other directly so they can't all be right or from the same source.
I agree. The bible says the same thing too. After all religion was used to kill Christ. But its just a man made structure like politics. People need to be organized to function together - call it a necessary evil. It's a bad reflection on the sinfulness of human kind more than it is any system of religion though. People are selfish and fallen. And never forget there is another team (Satan) at work as well. He always perverts the truth to lies and love to hate.
Words in and of themselves are meaningless.
If I believe that the creator is called Satan, and I call Him that, then God knows if it is Him I am believing or not.
It is the ideas we associate with the words that count, and whether or not we believe those ideas.
But newday my friend you are too spiritually wise than to call GOD satan and so are most people.... (except the evil people I guess) so its just a little silly. A better analogy would be someone who was isolated and never learned to speak language.
You put on what God has provided for you in Christ not what you think you need for yourself.
I agree its not by works!!! Bu we still try to discipline ourselves out of gratitude and love for Christ. Paul spweaks quie a bit about "self control" we struggle against the flesh.
I would rather we utilized the solutions, God in his exalted objective position outside of space time, decided was best for us, than try and do it on our own in our own ways through science or religion.
What solutions specifically?
Exactly how do you do that newday? Through prayer? I mean in piratical terms how?
For an objective interpretation of scripture for practical application you must have God enlighten your understanding of it.
I agree. I pray and read and use the principles of hermeneutics.
All scripture whether if it is the Bible, the Koran, the book or Mormon, whatever thing it is that was received by inspiration from God, which individuals look to in believing, in an honest effort to find truth from the creator, the thing was received by revelation an revelation is required to interpret it.
I disagree. I stick with the one Bible. Satan counterfeits the words of God with false scriptures that sound similar but are twisted. They might have some good things too but they disagree with each other directly so they can't all be right or from the same source.
In the end both religion and science are and will always be used against us, to keep us from knowing God in a real and meaningful way, ultimately together they will bring both the cause and method of our destruction and annihilation.
I agree. The bible says the same thing too. After all religion was used to kill Christ. But its just a man made structure like politics. People need to be organized to function together - call it a necessary evil. It's a bad reflection on the sinfulness of human kind more than it is any system of religion though. People are selfish and fallen. And never forget there is another team (Satan) at work as well. He always perverts the truth to lies and love to hate.
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
But newday my friend you are too spiritually wise than to call GOD satan and so are most people.... (except the evil people I guess) so its just a little silly. A better analogy would be someone who was isolated and never learned to speak language.
What is spiritual wisdom?
A man can turn to God at anytime in his heart, and at any point in his life.
Before that time is it the creator the man serves?
The man could be of the Christian religion or he could be a Satanist, he could be highly educated or uncleaned..
Paul the apostle was a Jew, a Pharisee, and also a murderer, before he turned to God, what did Paul call God before his conversion?
Was it the creator or the creation that Saul was serving before the Lord appeared to him on the road to Damascus?
Even though Paul technically speaking from the Jewish point of view knew the correct name of God, it was not the creator he was looking to before the time of his conversion, was it?
If you can call God, by the religiously correct name and be wrong, why can't you call Him by the wrong name and be right?
Our thoughts are meaningless to God as is our physical actions, they only have meaning and purpose to us, to serve as help in believing the truth is there best use in my opinion, because with God you must believe that He is, nothing else will work.
If you can believe and receive the will of God in real time when it is needed, then there is nothing impossible for you to do.
Peter and Barnabas unlike Paul were not educated, they were from the common people of their time, they are described in the bible as unlearned and ignorant.
It is not silly that I say these things because our thoughts are foolishness to God.
This is a thing that all people who say they believe God need to understand.
It is fundamental, if a person desires to have physical proof God is in them and with them by manifesting the gift of holy spirit in their lives, it requires that they be aware that it is done by believing, we can not think our way to it, we must learn to believe beyond what we think of God and the truth or have thought of Him up until that moment, because it has not worked so far to produce evidence for us to see and call our faith from God.
If we as believers have not manifested spiritual power then it is because we do not believe God regardless of what we may think.
Physical proof in the form of one or a combination of the nine manifestation of holy spirit is the way we can have evidence for faith in God, it is how He has determined it should be done, our thoughts are not sufficient to accomplish our faith, they can only serve as help to persuaded us to believe.
Faith is what God gives for our belief, we cannot give ourselves faith we can only believe, the physical evidence that God provides in response to our believing becomes our faith.
God exists in real time, that is why it is important that we learn to manifest his gift, so we can see the evidence of that reality.
This is the way God has provided for us to be comforted and to have rest, receiving the evidence of His ever present nature in our lives is the only way we can know for certain that He is alive and real, with us and in us.
There is no other way to be sure, not by science or religion, all others ways will fail us, we can not think our way to the comfort and rest that comes from knowing that we know God is present and with us.
If science proves creation, how will that knowledge help people believe in the creator, what will they call Him?
Will having that knowledge make God more living and real in a persons life in anyway?
All those who believe will still believe and all those who do not will not?
What we think in our minds of God does not allow God to manifest in our lives, only what we believe in our hearts.
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
I agree its not by works!!! Bu we still try to discipline ourselves out of gratitude and love for Christ. Paul spweaks quie a bit about "self control" we struggle against the flesh.
You do not agree, you still think God respects discipline and I say this is not the case.
Self control, or temperance as it is so often translated in the KJV is a fruit of the spirit, it is a by-product or the natural outcome of our operation of the gift of holy spirit, which can only be accomplished by believing not through discipline.
We should make our goal in life to believe God not to be disciplined.
Discipline should never be the aim of our efforts with regard to our spiritual development and growth with God, only to believe.
God is living and real, life is ever changing if we can believe to receive wisdom and knowledge form God in real time He will direct us in the way we should go and things we need to do
Originally posted by Bigwhammy
What solutions specifically?
Exactly how do you do that newday? Through prayer? I mean in piratical terms how?
We do it by utilizing the power God has provided for us in His gift.
Do you think science is going to do the job of improving our relationship with God?
What about religion will it show us how to believe to manifest the power of God?
There is no problem or situation that confronts us which God has not provided a solution for.
Do you believe what you read in the bible?
Do you believe God gives power to men, the power to raise the dead and heal the sick, to command the forces of nature and of the universe, the power to do all things through Christ?
The problem is most people are willing to believe that God gives power to men like Paul, or Peter in the bible and certain,"special," people every now and again, but they do not feel that God gives it to them.
The truth is in practical terms all that is required is that we believe to receive the fulness of what God has done for all of us through the accomplished work of His son.
Manifesting spiritual power is like anything else it takes time to learn and become convinced that God has indeed given us the authority and power, to become persuaded that we can actually perform a miracle or great works of faith.
There are nine specific exhibition of the gift of holy spirit, when we come to God He gives all of us the full potential to operate all nine of these manifestations.
Religion and science serves more to distract and obstruct people from developing the ability God has given them, before they have learned how the power of God works and what they can do.
The truth is however, the power God gives us is in Christ through faith, not the power in the world through science or religion, people fear to trust, because it is unknown to them until the day they become aware, they love the things of this world more than they love things of God, they are accustomed to the workings and ways of this world not to the workings and ways of God.
But the things of this world are foolishness to God, and the wisdom of this world will come to naught, they are a dead end road to men and woman who say they believe God and proclaim themselves believers.
God is real, He is more than an intellectual exercise, He has laid out in great detail how we can overcome every obstacle and circumstance which confronts us, in a real and meaningful way, a spiritual process, through the manifestation of supernatural power.
You are not ignorant to what the scriptures say, do I speak the truth, or do I lie?
True worship of God is not and can never be accomplished by physical means such as discipline, or logic and reason.
Science and reason will never lead us to true worship of God, because God is Spirit not flesh.
They that worship God must worship Him in spirit and in truth.
An expanded understanding of the figure of speech, "in spirit and in truth," would be to say, "truly God must be worshiped by spiritual means."
Worship of God is not a system or discipline, it can never be achieved through religion or science.
True worship is a proses, a true spirituality where we walk and live by the energizing of the gift of holy spirit from God, we receive and impart revelation and inspiration from God in real time during the day to day activities of our lives.
We can not relate to God by our five senses, our physical perceptions, because unlike what we are lead to believe, only God is in an objective position, the most we can ever know or do in this world according to or by our senses knowledge understanding of things such as is gained through science and religion is at best subjective, we must walk according to the Sprit to be enlightened to the objective reality in life in real time, that is the only way any of us can know and do the truth as God sees it.
Ro 8:1b
who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.
2Co 5:7
(For we walk by faith, not by sight
A true spirituality is simply living with the benefits of having the spiritual manifested in our lives, it is not a system or discipline it is a process of growth and development, not unlike our physical growth and development.
Religion and science are systems and disciplines they can be poison in the milk of a spiritual newborn, we should avoid them until the time at which we have matured to a level spiritually that we can see them for what they are without thinking to much of them, in order that we are not hindered in our spiritual development and growth before we have learned to manifest spiritual power and ability in defendable measurable ways.
Until we witness and experience first hand the awesome and exceeding greatness of the power God has placed in us, we do not understand or see the things of our physical material universe objectively, from the eyes of God on high, before that time we cannot recognize the true nature of life, we have no concept of the dangers to the betterment and advancement of humanity science and religion represent, we mistakenly perceive them as offering us a way to escape our limitations and overcome the struggles that confront us, but before the presence and face of the almighty God they are nothing.
[edit on 8-7-2008 by newday]
[edit on 8-7-2008 by newday]
reply to post by Bigwhammy
It fails at explaining origins and invokes a "miracle"
It's called chemistry. Not a miracle. NOBODY with ANY credibility posits that a miracle happened, aside from creationists. We do not fully understand the process, but we have been able to replicate steps of that process which lend credence to the theory of Abiogenesis.
Now, the cool thing in the second video is when he's talking about the conditions near hydrothermal vents causing the lipid layer to basically become more porous to monomers and assisting in the polymerization - this is why we're so interested in going to Europa first to look for life in the solar system. There are strong indications that Europa has organic material, liquid water, and is heated by tidal friction from Jupiter's gravitational pull. This means hydrothermal vents.
(Well, ok, we'll probably go to Mars first - but only because it's far cheaper, faster, and easier - and it may have once harbored life there as well)
The thing I find very interesting is that in Genesis God doesn't create man out of thin air but from the dust. Which agrees with scientific materialism in a profound way, as we we are made out of the organic material of the earth and all life is carbon based.
Not really. I guess it depends on your definition of dust. Dust can be made of any solid matter. Most of it isn't organic, because most matter isn't organic. So really it's no more profound than any other creation myth which posits that mankind was created out of any sort of matter. You could just as easily say that Science agrees profoundly with ancient Egyptian accounts of creation because according to them, mankind was created from Atum's tears - and we are around 70% water. The genesis account is simply too vague in these terms to be considered accurate. Especially when the dust itself was just poofed into existence - when we know that the early universe consisted almost entirely of hydrogen and most of the elements we recognize on the periodic table (including those we were made of) were not created at the time of the Big Bang - but from the fission reaction in early stars creating the lighter elements and massive supernovas creating the heavier elements.
If you mean dust as in the kinda stuff you find around your home - well, most of that stuff is organic true. Mainly because it consists primarily of insect bits, skin cells/animal dander, feces, clothing fibers, etc.
As for science being faith, you can possibly argue that on a philosophical level. The key difference between science and faith is that science relies on evidence while faith does not. So even if you say that our understanding of the universe can be fundamentally flawed because we're assuming on faith that what we know about the universe is true and won't change - the repeatability, measurability, and predictability we've observed and demonstrated thus far is a - to me - far more reliable and workable solution to anything that religion has had to offer. Society simply cannot function without this so-called faith, because we could never move forward. Science would be stuck in the philosophical quagmire of differing interpretations and uncertainty because there's a possibility that it's not reliable. For example, I'd never be able to eat salt again, because hey - it's POSSIBLE that science is wrong and the Sodium-Chlorine bond will break down and their individual elements and kill me. Ever see the way sodium reacts in water? Imagine what would happen to you if every NaCl molecule in your body broke down to essentially pure sodium and pure chlorine.
Even if you assume that both science and religion are faith based, science at least can provide the fulfillment of that faith by allowing us to act upon it and get results. Religion can't.
[edit on 12-7-2008 by Lasheic]
It fails at explaining origins and invokes a "miracle"
It's called chemistry. Not a miracle. NOBODY with ANY credibility posits that a miracle happened, aside from creationists. We do not fully understand the process, but we have been able to replicate steps of that process which lend credence to the theory of Abiogenesis.
Now, the cool thing in the second video is when he's talking about the conditions near hydrothermal vents causing the lipid layer to basically become more porous to monomers and assisting in the polymerization - this is why we're so interested in going to Europa first to look for life in the solar system. There are strong indications that Europa has organic material, liquid water, and is heated by tidal friction from Jupiter's gravitational pull. This means hydrothermal vents.
(Well, ok, we'll probably go to Mars first - but only because it's far cheaper, faster, and easier - and it may have once harbored life there as well)
The thing I find very interesting is that in Genesis God doesn't create man out of thin air but from the dust. Which agrees with scientific materialism in a profound way, as we we are made out of the organic material of the earth and all life is carbon based.
Not really. I guess it depends on your definition of dust. Dust can be made of any solid matter. Most of it isn't organic, because most matter isn't organic. So really it's no more profound than any other creation myth which posits that mankind was created out of any sort of matter. You could just as easily say that Science agrees profoundly with ancient Egyptian accounts of creation because according to them, mankind was created from Atum's tears - and we are around 70% water. The genesis account is simply too vague in these terms to be considered accurate. Especially when the dust itself was just poofed into existence - when we know that the early universe consisted almost entirely of hydrogen and most of the elements we recognize on the periodic table (including those we were made of) were not created at the time of the Big Bang - but from the fission reaction in early stars creating the lighter elements and massive supernovas creating the heavier elements.
If you mean dust as in the kinda stuff you find around your home - well, most of that stuff is organic true. Mainly because it consists primarily of insect bits, skin cells/animal dander, feces, clothing fibers, etc.
As for science being faith, you can possibly argue that on a philosophical level. The key difference between science and faith is that science relies on evidence while faith does not. So even if you say that our understanding of the universe can be fundamentally flawed because we're assuming on faith that what we know about the universe is true and won't change - the repeatability, measurability, and predictability we've observed and demonstrated thus far is a - to me - far more reliable and workable solution to anything that religion has had to offer. Society simply cannot function without this so-called faith, because we could never move forward. Science would be stuck in the philosophical quagmire of differing interpretations and uncertainty because there's a possibility that it's not reliable. For example, I'd never be able to eat salt again, because hey - it's POSSIBLE that science is wrong and the Sodium-Chlorine bond will break down and their individual elements and kill me. Ever see the way sodium reacts in water? Imagine what would happen to you if every NaCl molecule in your body broke down to essentially pure sodium and pure chlorine.
Even if you assume that both science and religion are faith based, science at least can provide the fulfillment of that faith by allowing us to act upon it and get results. Religion can't.
[edit on 12-7-2008 by Lasheic]
Further, my views on creationists utter contempt for science and the scientific method eloquently and succinctly summed up by t-f00t in a response of
his to a "venomous little toad" named VenomFangX.
Our first world civilization is just a monument to the intrinsicly godless process we call science, which you have declaired to be so limited. Meanwhile, all religions have a track record of non-achievement for several thousand years. Indeed, it may well be argued that the only tangible benefit to civilization is by the feel-good factor it provides to people who would rather be happy than right. Religion makes people feel important. It makes them feel loved. It makes them feel righteous. It makes them feel good. Usually, as you so correctly state, it is entirely speculation with no grounding in reality. Unfortunately, religion is also a remarkably broad psycosemantic drug which makes people feel good whether they are helping baby squirrels, or butchering women and children. "We are doing God's Work" is merely the pervasive battlecry which can be used to justify anything.
Now I don't actually have too much of a problem with recreational drugs whether they be neurodepressants like alcohol or psychological like religion, or whatever kinky stuff consenting adults get off to by engaging in. As long as it doesn't scare the horses or become a significant problem for civilization. After all, having fun is a large part of what makes life worth living. However, without our first world civilization built on scientific discovery it really is pretty difficult to have fun, what with the famines, diseases, and freezing to death in winter and whatnot. Science is the big enabler for making life enjoyable. Your religious efforts involve attacking the scientific method that built our civilization. In the big picture, it is difficult to think of a more antisocial or illegal behavior you could engage in. In simplistic terms, you're engaging in an activity that F***s over our future for your own personal gratification. I have no problem with you getting your kicks out of your fantasies, but when these fantasies involve defecating in the fountain of knowledge that we all depend on for our survival and our quality of life, someone has to explain to you that you're being an anti-social jerk.
reply to post by Lasheic
Sorry there a scientific law call biogenesis.
You can say it's chemistry all you want, but chemistry has NEVER created life from non life. It has no evidence. Evolution can not even happen without something to evolve from. To deny intelligent cause is to invoke magic. Even Richard Dawkins invoked intelligent cause in Expelled he invoked "Aliens" but he failed to explain where they come from in his recursive loop of a fantasy world view. I guess the aliens came from magic. Either way a materialist is in a worse (no evidence) position than a theist who has historical, anecdotal, personal, fulfilled prophecies etc as real evidence... which is much better than the "magic soup" has going for it.
[edit on 7/13/2008 by Bigwhammy]
Sorry there a scientific law call biogenesis.
Law of biogenesis
"La génération spontanée est une chimère" ("Spontaneous generation is a dream") (Louis Pasteur)
Pasteur's (and others) empirical results were summarized in the phrase, Omne vivum ex vivo (or Omne vivum ex ovo), Latin for "all life [is] from [an] egg". This is sometimes called "law of biogenesis" and shows that modern organisms do not spontaneously arise in nature from non-life.
en.wikipedia.org...
You can say it's chemistry all you want, but chemistry has NEVER created life from non life. It has no evidence. Evolution can not even happen without something to evolve from. To deny intelligent cause is to invoke magic. Even Richard Dawkins invoked intelligent cause in Expelled he invoked "Aliens" but he failed to explain where they come from in his recursive loop of a fantasy world view. I guess the aliens came from magic. Either way a materialist is in a worse (no evidence) position than a theist who has historical, anecdotal, personal, fulfilled prophecies etc as real evidence... which is much better than the "magic soup" has going for it.
[edit on 7/13/2008 by Bigwhammy]
Originally posted by Lasheic
The key difference between science and faith is that science relies on evidence while faith does not.
You are mistaken, you are falsely assuming that because you have no evidence for your faith that no one else does.
The evidence does not support your claim.
What you are talking about is not faith, it is simple belief.
Belief can be misplaced, as is your belief that faith does not rely on evidence, this is an example of religious belief not faith.
I have argued without ceasing, that the main body of definition for the word religion should contain the idea of unfulfilled belief, because once you have received the evidence for your belief it becomes true and living for you, it becomes more, it becomes what the bible calls a mans faith.
Belief is what we give God, and faith is what God gives us for our belief, the evidence that we see as a result of our belief in God becomes our faith.
It is no different with people.
If I ask you to lend me a hundred dollars and say I will pay you back with interest in a week, you can believe me and lend me the money, or you don't have to.
If you believe me, that I will keep my word, then you lend me the money, and in two weeks I pay you back, my paying you back becomes your faith in me.
It works exactly the same with God, we believe His word, and when He fulfils His word in reality for us to experience, that becomes our faith in Him.
A believers faith is the evidence they experience in life and living of the unseen things of God.
God charges all those who profess themselves to be believers in Him to prove all things spiritual.
There are nine manifestation of the gift of holy spirit available to all believers.
These operations of power are definable and measurable by the individual.
The physical exhibitions of the gift of holy spirit make it possible to prove in reality by the evidence for ourselves what the good and acceptable will of God is.
Belief is what we give God, faith is what God gives us in response to our havening believed.
Originally posted by Lasheic
Even if you assume that both science and religion are faith based, science at least can provide the fulfillment of that faith by allowing us to act upon it and get results. Religion can't.
Science and religion are belief based not faith based, they begin with a belief in an idea or theory, then search to find evidence which will either serve to support or deny the premise.
Once again you are making false assumptions, science and religion are merely tools we use like any tools.
Take government for instance, it is a tool we use like science and religion, when we use it for the purpose we feel it is best suited for, it helps us achieve an end.
Science and religion are employed by men as a means to an end, they are designed to accomplish different things, you can't do through science what religion does, and you can't do through religion what science does, unless they are being misused.
Faith in God is the definition of result based.
Without evidence a person can not have a genuine faith in God, at the most all the person has is a belief.
Belief in God demands that we prove that He exists in reality, that He will reward our believing efforts to know Him in real terms, the evidence we receive and experience in our lives, the supernatural manifestation of the power of God, becomes our faith.
You can say; "what is the difference, belief or faith, it is just semantics," but you will be wrong again.
Belief does not require evidence and faith does, that is more than semantics.
Science has nothing to do with faith, science is about belief, unless of course the scientist is believing God to do his science.
If that is the case then God is giving the person revelation which will becomes something real, then the scientist could say; "I am doing my science based on faith, and here is the evidence, this is a teleportation device, behold how it works," then we see a monkey being transported from one side of the earth to another instantaneously.
Religion has nothing to do with faith, religion is about belief, unless of course the religious person is believing God to do his religion
If that is the case then God is giving the person revelation, which will become something real, then the religious person could say, " I am doing my religion based on faith, and here is the evidence, this man was born without legs, behold he is healed," and we see new legs suddenly appear."
Faith without works is dead, faith is evidence based, everything short of that is merely at best a dead belief.
reply to post by newday
that it the biggest load of crap i have ever read. saying something, no matter how loudly nor how often, does not make what you say true. spreading it out over lengthy wordy paragraphs also does not make it true. look up the definition of the word "faith" and see if maybe you didnt mean to write that in some other language that may work with what you say. in English, you seem to miss what faith is completely.
that it the biggest load of crap i have ever read. saying something, no matter how loudly nor how often, does not make what you say true. spreading it out over lengthy wordy paragraphs also does not make it true. look up the definition of the word "faith" and see if maybe you didnt mean to write that in some other language that may work with what you say. in English, you seem to miss what faith is completely.
Originally posted by re22666
reply to post by newday
that it the biggest load of crap i have ever read. saying something, no matter how loudly nor how often, does not make what you say true. spreading it out over lengthy wordy paragraphs also does not make it true. look up the definition of the word "faith" and see if maybe you didnt mean to write that in some other language that may work with what you say. in English, you seem to miss what faith is completely.
I couldn't have said it better myself. In fact I don't think their is any other way to describe all that BS but to say it like you did. Out of ALL the loads of crap I have ever seen in my life,, that tops em all. I know you must be as angry as I am for having read most of it and wasted so much time reading so much garbage.
I don't know what the hell whammy was waiting for. When he says you can call God Satan and he will know who you mean but he also knows, YOU know what his name is NOT and who his nemesis is by name.
Who does he think he is kidding! He completely misses the point about discipline, I mean TOTALLY! Whoosh! Right over his halowed head.
The most wordy piece of circumlocution saying a lot about nothing I have ever seen. Jeez read that for more than ten minutes,,
you'll become retarded.
- Con
reply to post by Bigwhammy
And this is true. Modern life does not arise from non-life. Nobody with any credibility says that it does. I believe this was covered in the openings of BOTH videos I posted. Abiogenesis does not postulate that modern eukaryotic cells with DNA and complex protein mechanics formed from nothing. RNA World Hypothesis, which is the current leading theory, says nothing of the sort.
Biogenesis and Abiogenesis are NOT the same theory. Please don't confuse them.
It has no evidence.
It has plenty of evidence, as demonstrated in the videos which are based on real research. We haven't replicated the ENTIRE process of Abiogenesis in the lab in a single experiment - but that goes a bit beyond "evidence". What you'd be asking for is more of a comprehensive recreation of the entire process. There is still much to learn about in this regard, but the evidence is there to reasonably and soundly point us in this direction.
Evolution can not even happen without something to evolve from.
Evolution in it's basest form require Mutation, Replication, and Selection. All of which these early chemical compounds and primitive RNA cells were capable of.
To deny intelligent cause is to invoke magic.
Not at all. There's a difference between saying "we don't know" in regards to a question, and then claiming magic. Magic is a (poor) answer, while a "we don't currently know" remains a question that stays open and begs more research. We know much about the process and have plausable naturalistic explanations (as opposed to supernatural explanations), and for that which we don't currently know, we are continuing the research to get those answers.
Even Richard Dawkins invoked intelligent cause in Expelled he invoked "Aliens" but he failed to explain where they come from in his recursive loop of a fantasy world view.
If that were Richard Dawkins honest answer, I'd say he'd poorly researched the subject and doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. However, IIRC, Dawkins "Alien" answer was in response to a baited question regarding if he could ever accept any intelligent processes in the origin of life. Being an atheist, Dawkins picked the most probable "intelligence" that's likely found in the natural world. That being extraterrestrials. However, even in that case, the intelligent alien race would have still gone through their own process of evolution.
However, Dawkins has made his position on the matter very clear - as this was not the first time that question has been asked to him. What he describes with his own words is nothing like how you present his views, or how expelled presented his views.
Either way a materialist is in a worse (no evidence) position than a theist who has historical, anecdotal, personal, fulfilled prophecies etc as real evidence...
How so? History does not support the bible. Sure some events and real people's names are woven into the stories - but this is no more evidence for the accuracy of the bible than the discovery of the ruins of Troy is evidence for the historical accuracy of Homer's Iliad and the Odyssey.
Anecdotal, personal accounts? These are traditionally the least reliable form of evidence. There's a story you should read called Rashomon which demonstrates the vulnerability of unsubstantiated human testimony. This is why people don't generally seriously entertain the idea of Atlantis, despite it being written about. There's simply no credible physical evidence for it and many of the stories don't corroborate.
The Rashomon Effect is well known in science and psychology.
Prophecy? Many of those prophecies are simply too vague to be substantiated. They can (and have) been attributed to thousands of different people and events since their writing - and the only prophecies which are said to have come true were those only contained within the bible refering to biblical events. There's no outside evidence to substantiate it. Further, the biblical prophecies are not unique. Most religions boast their own prophecies, miracles, and predictions which they claim to have come to pass. It's not a phenomena which is unique or special to Judeo-Christendom in any way.
which is much better than the "magic soup" has going for it.
Again, nobody with any credibility accepts the "Magic Soup" theory. Whether or not you feel contempt for the theory doesn't undermine it's validity or veracity. However, I would at least suggest that you get a basic understanding of the processes at work that are explained by the theory of Abiogenesis before expecting anyone to take you seriously when you criticize it.
Also: You may wish to read up on Emergence and Self Organization. These phenomena which are well known and have been demonstrated not just in chemistry, but biology, economics, cybernetics, mathematics, society, and physics. The origin of life is only one example of this. Complex systems have been shown to be constructed from the bottom up, rather than from the traditionally accepted top-down approach.
These two phenomena are, at the heart, what is really behind the contention some people have with Abiogenesis and Evolution vs. ID. They are simply reluctant to relinquish the time-honored image of the "boss" who is in control. Emergence and Self-Organization shows that there doesn't have to be a "Boss" in the process - and that complex concepts, materials, and behaviors can be formed from the interactions of multitudes of individual components following simple rules. Swarms are a good obvious example of this in behavioral terms. A swarm of bees does not have a leader that directs them where to gather food or what creatures to attack. They don't think and give direction the way a human commander on the battlefield would to his troops. They can also build amazingly complex structures, not designed by the queen or any authority, but by simple mindless interactions of stimulus from the environment or other bees.
[edit on 13-7-2008 by Lasheic]
This is sometimes called "law of biogenesis" and shows that modern organisms do not spontaneously arise in nature from non-life.
And this is true. Modern life does not arise from non-life. Nobody with any credibility says that it does. I believe this was covered in the openings of BOTH videos I posted. Abiogenesis does not postulate that modern eukaryotic cells with DNA and complex protein mechanics formed from nothing. RNA World Hypothesis, which is the current leading theory, says nothing of the sort.
Biogenesis and Abiogenesis are NOT the same theory. Please don't confuse them.
It has no evidence.
It has plenty of evidence, as demonstrated in the videos which are based on real research. We haven't replicated the ENTIRE process of Abiogenesis in the lab in a single experiment - but that goes a bit beyond "evidence". What you'd be asking for is more of a comprehensive recreation of the entire process. There is still much to learn about in this regard, but the evidence is there to reasonably and soundly point us in this direction.
Evolution can not even happen without something to evolve from.
Evolution in it's basest form require Mutation, Replication, and Selection. All of which these early chemical compounds and primitive RNA cells were capable of.
To deny intelligent cause is to invoke magic.
Not at all. There's a difference between saying "we don't know" in regards to a question, and then claiming magic. Magic is a (poor) answer, while a "we don't currently know" remains a question that stays open and begs more research. We know much about the process and have plausable naturalistic explanations (as opposed to supernatural explanations), and for that which we don't currently know, we are continuing the research to get those answers.
Even Richard Dawkins invoked intelligent cause in Expelled he invoked "Aliens" but he failed to explain where they come from in his recursive loop of a fantasy world view.
If that were Richard Dawkins honest answer, I'd say he'd poorly researched the subject and doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. However, IIRC, Dawkins "Alien" answer was in response to a baited question regarding if he could ever accept any intelligent processes in the origin of life. Being an atheist, Dawkins picked the most probable "intelligence" that's likely found in the natural world. That being extraterrestrials. However, even in that case, the intelligent alien race would have still gone through their own process of evolution.
However, Dawkins has made his position on the matter very clear - as this was not the first time that question has been asked to him. What he describes with his own words is nothing like how you present his views, or how expelled presented his views.
Either way a materialist is in a worse (no evidence) position than a theist who has historical, anecdotal, personal, fulfilled prophecies etc as real evidence...
How so? History does not support the bible. Sure some events and real people's names are woven into the stories - but this is no more evidence for the accuracy of the bible than the discovery of the ruins of Troy is evidence for the historical accuracy of Homer's Iliad and the Odyssey.
Anecdotal, personal accounts? These are traditionally the least reliable form of evidence. There's a story you should read called Rashomon which demonstrates the vulnerability of unsubstantiated human testimony. This is why people don't generally seriously entertain the idea of Atlantis, despite it being written about. There's simply no credible physical evidence for it and many of the stories don't corroborate.
The Rashomon Effect is well known in science and psychology.
Prophecy? Many of those prophecies are simply too vague to be substantiated. They can (and have) been attributed to thousands of different people and events since their writing - and the only prophecies which are said to have come true were those only contained within the bible refering to biblical events. There's no outside evidence to substantiate it. Further, the biblical prophecies are not unique. Most religions boast their own prophecies, miracles, and predictions which they claim to have come to pass. It's not a phenomena which is unique or special to Judeo-Christendom in any way.
which is much better than the "magic soup" has going for it.
Again, nobody with any credibility accepts the "Magic Soup" theory. Whether or not you feel contempt for the theory doesn't undermine it's validity or veracity. However, I would at least suggest that you get a basic understanding of the processes at work that are explained by the theory of Abiogenesis before expecting anyone to take you seriously when you criticize it.
Also: You may wish to read up on Emergence and Self Organization. These phenomena which are well known and have been demonstrated not just in chemistry, but biology, economics, cybernetics, mathematics, society, and physics. The origin of life is only one example of this. Complex systems have been shown to be constructed from the bottom up, rather than from the traditionally accepted top-down approach.
These two phenomena are, at the heart, what is really behind the contention some people have with Abiogenesis and Evolution vs. ID. They are simply reluctant to relinquish the time-honored image of the "boss" who is in control. Emergence and Self-Organization shows that there doesn't have to be a "Boss" in the process - and that complex concepts, materials, and behaviors can be formed from the interactions of multitudes of individual components following simple rules. Swarms are a good obvious example of this in behavioral terms. A swarm of bees does not have a leader that directs them where to gather food or what creatures to attack. They don't think and give direction the way a human commander on the battlefield would to his troops. They can also build amazingly complex structures, not designed by the queen or any authority, but by simple mindless interactions of stimulus from the environment or other bees.
[edit on 13-7-2008 by Lasheic]
Originally posted by re22666
that it the biggest load of crap i have ever read. saying something, no matter how loudly nor how often, does not make what you say true. spreading it out over lengthy wordy paragraphs also does not make it true. look up the definition of the word "faith" and see if maybe you didnt mean to write that in some other language that may work with what you say. in English, you seem to miss what faith is completely.
Exactly what part of the things I said is crap, the idea of God being real and providing anyone who believes with evidence of His existence, is that the part you have a problem with?
Is it the idea that there is a difference between belief and faith spiritually speaking?
That should be easy even for someone like you to understand, because the word most often translated into ( believe or faith ) in english, in its original language is a homonym, with as many as four known meanings and perhaps more.
Maybe science is your God and you resent me calling it a tool?
Take comfort in the fact that I said the same of religion it is a tool also, merely a means to an ends.
Are you afraid of God?
If there is no such thing as God what is there to fear?
Does the thought that God gives individuals who believe HIm the ability to operate miraculous power greater than that of science, frighten you?
reply to post by newday
Belief does not require evidence and faith does, that is more than semantics.
You're wrong. Faith is not based on evidence, while beliefs favor evidence (though do not exclusively require evidence).
Faith: Merriam-Webster
Belief: Merriam-Webster
It would be more accurate to say, on a non-philosophical level, that we believe the sun will rise tomorrow. We do not have "faith" that it will, because the evidence in favor of the sun rising tomorrow strongly suggests that it will.
Belief does not require evidence and faith does, that is more than semantics.
You're wrong. Faith is not based on evidence, while beliefs favor evidence (though do not exclusively require evidence).
Faith: Merriam-Webster
1 a: allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1): fidelity to one's promises (2): sincerity of intentions2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust3: something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs
Belief: Merriam-Webster
1: a state or habit of mind in which trust or confidence is placed in some person or thing2: something believed; especially : a tenet or body of tenets held by a group3: conviction of the truth of some statement or the reality of some being or phenomenon especially when based on examination of evidence
It would be more accurate to say, on a non-philosophical level, that we believe the sun will rise tomorrow. We do not have "faith" that it will, because the evidence in favor of the sun rising tomorrow strongly suggests that it will.
Originally posted by Lasheic
because the evidence in favor of the sun rising tomorrow strongly suggests that it will.
Yeah,, another words,,,
Faith.
that we believe the sun will rise tomorrow.
is having faith but one can "believe" anything he wants. Having faith in what you believe is when your belief has been tested and the evidence indicates it is sound belief so you can have faith in it. Faith doesn't need proof, it just needs evidence.
Do YOU believe we are the product of Darwinian Natural Selection and random mutation ? Can you prove it? or do you just have faith in it?
- Con
[edit on 13-7-2008 by Conspiriology]
new topics
-
Of course it was DEI
Dissecting Disinformation: 1 hours ago -
2nd Day Thanksgiving!...(leftovers!!)
General Chit Chat: 3 hours ago
top topics
-
New Disney Star Wars Films Failing Test of Time?
Movies: 15 hours ago, 5 flags -
2nd Day Thanksgiving!...(leftovers!!)
General Chit Chat: 3 hours ago, 3 flags -
Of course it was DEI
Dissecting Disinformation: 1 hours ago, 3 flags
active topics
-
Of course it was DEI
Dissecting Disinformation • 4 • : Bluntone22 -
Mass UAP events. DC. Machester Airport, UFOs over sub base in CT, Nuke bases.
Aliens and UFOs • 25 • : rickymouse -
2nd Day Thanksgiving!...(leftovers!!)
General Chit Chat • 5 • : rickymouse -
New Disney Star Wars Films Failing Test of Time?
Movies • 18 • : Popoll -
Unidentified Flying Objects Over U.S. Military Bases in Northeast UK, as of roughly 11 a.m. CST.
Aliens and UFOs • 32 • : Kangawoo2 -
The Party of Peace - Trump Cabinet Picks Targeted with Death Threats
US Political Madness • 51 • : RazorV66 -
-@TH3WH17ERABB17- -Q- ---TIME TO SHOW THE WORLD--- -Part- --44--
Dissecting Disinformation • 3416 • : duncanagain -
Results of the use of the Oreshnik missile system in Dnepropetrovsk
World War Three • 263 • : DontTreadOnMe -
Anyone like the Scorpions?
Music • 23 • : Flyingclaydisk -
The Cost of True Discipleship—Count the Cost
Religion, Faith, And Theology • 5 • : alwaysbeenhere2