Who Believes the Bible Is Literally True?

[DarkReign]

It is certainly regrettable that wars were fought in the name of Christianity, but I'm not going to apologize for being a Christian because of the sins of Christians 1,500 years ago any more than I will apologize for being white for the sins of white people 200 years ago. My Gospel doesn't tell me to storm the Middle East and massacre the unbelievers.

Right then, but will you apologize when your religion inevitably does cause world strife? I highly doubt you would even admit it if it does happen.

The time is coming....or maybe it isnt. I personally believe it is. The West will war with the Middle East. It will be more about ideology than oil, desert, etc. Ideology and religion.

It will be a media-spun Holy War. Call a spade a spade.

Likewise, it is regrettable that people use the Christian message as leverage for political or monetary gain. But my faith is not dependent on the rantings of Pat Robertson or Jerry Falwell. My faith is not dependent on any man, it's based on the words of Jesus Christ, and if you can find any of Christ's teachings that you feel could directly lead to nuclear holocaust, I'd be interested to hear that interpretation.

No, I never read the book. Wasnt exactly interesting and put me to sleep (im a voracious reader).

Pat Robertson et all are just blowhards. Theyre entertainment but yet do give glimpses of the secular society.

Who I look to are world leaders. Is it a coincidence that "The West" is comprised of mainly Christians? Is it a coincidence that "The East" is basically everyone else?

No, those arent coincidences. Those are 'lines in the sand' that will soon be crossed for reasons the agnostic probably dont care about. Jerusalem means nothing to me and holds no signifigance what-so-ever.

50% (<-- total guess) of the worlds' population doesnt see it my way. They do hold that piece of strip of desert with some sort of reverence because theyre told it is important for spiritual reasons.

Its was quite entertaining until the two sides decided we just might kill each other for ideologies I (and most everyone I know) could care less about.

But I am not a WASP. Therefore, I will never hold office. I forgot, I have to be Protestant. Go figure again why I look to world leaders for the direction of your faith.

[Extra Stout]

Right then, but will you apologize when your religion inevitably does cause world strife? I highly doubt you would even admit it if it does happen.

The time is coming....or maybe it isnt. I personally believe it is. The West will war with the Middle East. It will be more about ideology than oil, desert, etc. Ideology and religion.

It will be a media-spun Holy War. Call a spade a spade.

Do you seriously think the West will be going to war with the Middle East out of religious conviction? Seriously? Outside of the U.S., where exactly is there any religious conviction in the West?

Who I look to are world leaders. Is it a coincidence that "The West" is comprised of mainly Christians? Is it a coincidence that "The East" is basically everyone else?

This is possibly the most strained point ever. Are you imagining that Jacques Chirac and Angela Merkel are going to fight to the death to protect Israel or something?

[Spurminator]

Right then, but will you apologize when your religion inevitably does cause world strife? I highly doubt you would even admit it if it does happen.

The time is coming....or maybe it isnt. I personally believe it is. The West will war with the Middle East. It will be more about ideology than oil, desert, etc. Ideology and religion.

It will be a media-spun Holy War. Call a spade a spade.

My "religion" doesn't cause any of that.

War is about power. Religion would be used as an excuse or recruitment tool by leaders who have other objectives in mind.

"Holy War" and "Jihad" are propagandist terms. Right now, terrorists in the Middle East are drumming up support by claiming the West is waging a Holy War on the Middle East. But does that make it true? Is America's presence in the Middle East a result of George W. Bush's Christian beliefs? Likewise, is al Qaeda an organization whose purpose is to spread Islam? Is it because they "hate freedom"? Or do they have other objectives in mind?

Don't confuse propaganda with cause/effect.

No, I never read the book. Wasnt exactly interesting and put me to sleep (im a voracious reader).

Pat Robertson et all are just blowhards. Theyre entertainment but yet do give glimpses of the secular society.

Who I look to are world leaders. Is it a coincidence that "The West" is comprised of mainly Christians? Is it a coincidence that "The East" is basically everyone else?

No, those arent coincidences. Those are 'lines in the sand' that will soon be crossed for reasons the agnostic probably dont care about. Jerusalem means nothing to me and holds no signifigance what-so-ever.

50% (<-- total guess) of the worlds' population doesnt see it my way. They do hold that piece of strip of desert with some sort of reverence because theyre told it is important for spiritual reasons.

Its was quite entertaining until the two sides decided we just might kill each other for ideologies I (and most everyone I know) could care less about.

But I am not a WASP. Therefore, I will never hold office. I forgot, I have to be Protestant. Go figure again why I look to world leaders for the direction of your faith.

Jerusalem means nothing to me either, nor any Christian I know. Most of us just go to Church to praise God, pray, take communion, give offerings and fellowship with others. We don't get together in groups and agree to vote for political candidates who will wipe out the Palestinians.

I hope you meet more Christians at some point in your life. While you claim Pat Robertson is a blowhard, your entire view of Christians seems to be based solely on people like him.

[DarkReign]

[QUOTE=jochhejaam]

You don't speak for me pf, it may be beyond your comprehension but the fact that I believe it should tell you that it's not beyond mine. Speaking with certainty is exactly what's required by God in order to realize the plan of salvation, eternal life and being united with God and Christ in heaven.
Believing in the big-bang theory...now that is beyond my comprehension

See, thats exactly it. No Joch, people dont see it your way and the fact that you wouldnt even entertain the notion that you (gasp!) maybe wrong is what makes people puke all over your shoes.

You know youre right. With absolute certainty. No matter the evidence, no matter the consequence, you will follow the Word.

To you, thats faith.

To me, thats faulty.

[Spurminator]

Speaking with certainty is exactly what's required by God in order to realize the plan of salvation, eternal life and being united with God and Christ in heaven.

See, I disagree. Every Christian struggles with his faith or has doubts at some point in his life. I question the sincerity of anyone who claims he hasn't.

[DarkReign]

See, I disagree. Every Christian struggles with his faith or has doubts at some point in his life. I question the sincerity of anyone who claims he hasn't.

The Pope grapples with his faith everyday. Yet JJ is more pious.

Whatever.

You know, I entered this thread just to *yawn*, but then others started old arguments that have always degraded into Cadicism (sp?) class between all the Bible-thumpers here at Spurstalk.

It hasnt gotten that far (yet), but I will bow out now. No, I cant speak the facts of the Bible which has always been an undoing in these sort of situations. But then again, I was never trying to change anyone's mind.

Just trying to poke them with a stick for kicks.

[Phenomanul]

How, prey tell, is the system "one-sided"? Are people coming into schools and saying that Christianity is bunk, God is a myth, and that kids should eat the heads of live chickens? I didn't think so. Public schools not mentioning Christianity, Islam, Judism, atheism, or any other religious topic is not "one-sided." You are still free to teach your child anything you like. So, who is taking you for a fool? It's because they support "wacky" ideas like evolution? I forgot that you have already revealed the covert atheist agenda behind evolution...

Your beliefs are fine. But you aren't granted the liberty to teach that to my children in their public schools. I know you feel this is some sort of moral travesty, but you are just going to have to live with it. Or maybe you can evade taxes... and go to jail... and it will be God disciplining you.

You skipped the middle paragraph on purpose??? anyway... I don't plan on having 'religious' doctrines taught at school... You again confuse me for someone else, having both the premises behind ID taught at school, and the typical evolutionary theory in no way denies an education to your children... You are just too much of a hard-liner to admit it. The choice of what they wish to believe is still left up to them.... my cousin got an 'F' on one of his research papers where he had two sentences that tangentially referenced ID... and you scoffed at my 'one-sided' comment earlier??? I was outraged, that his teacher could be that 'closed-minded'...

ID does not exclusively imply the Christian GOD is behind creation (though that may be my line of thinking).... it just poses the question that many complex mechanisms, structures and design elements have no known chemical, physical or biological pathways... and then infers that higher order thinking and 'engineering' was involved.

Again, let's just agree to disagree... we are getting no where...

[clambake]

And God created the earth. God said "let there be light".

How many planets exist? How many suns?

Let's just all forget about science.

Think about that as our sister galaxy (andromeda) steams toward us at approx. 350 thousand miles an hour.

[Spurminator]

Pretend you believe in a completely divine, almighty deity. What limits would you place on him? Is there anything he would not be able to do?

[DarkReign]

You skipped the middle paragraph on purpose??? anyway... I don't plan on having 'religious' doctrines taught at school... You again confuse me for someone else, having both the premises behind ID taught at school, and the typical evolutionary theory in no way denies an education to your children... You are just too much of a hard-liner to admit it. The choice of what they wish to believe is still left up to them.... my cousin got an 'F' on one of his research papers where he had two sentences that tangentially referenced ID... and you scoffed at my 'one-sided' comment earlier??? I was outraged, that his teacher could be that 'closed-minded'...

ID does not exclusively imply the Christian GOD is behind creation (though that may be my line of thinking).... it just poses the question that many complex mechanisms, structures and design elements have no known chemical, physical or biological pathways... and then infers that higher order thinking and 'engineering' was involved.

Again, let's just agree to disagree... we are getting no where...

Neutrinos. No, science cant explain them.
Anti-matter. No, science isnt even sure if it exists, but there is evidence by proxy.

Youre smart. Very smart. Science does not accept easy answers or conclusions like ID.

If every time science ran into a problem they couldnt solve and decided " it. God must have did it this way.", you would still be lighting your lantern for light.

That is why ID and anything like it cannot be taught as anything more than what it is, a theology. Theology is not to be taught in publicly funded schools.

ID is the cheap way out. It is also a thinly-veiled, ill-conceived ploy to teach religion in schools. No matter its merits, it would set a precedent for morality discussion in schools. Then we would have to further divide the school system by religion.

Your ID cheap-science bull would create a huge storm because of what it would lead to. That and the fact that it is just plain lazy to excuse man's creation as God's work and look no further than that.

Thats standard operating procedure for religion though. Do what youre told, follow the rules, conform...or condemned. Youre sheep.

Baaaaaa....

[Extra Stout]

Neutrinos. No, science cant explain them.
Anti-matter. No, science isnt even sure if it exists, but there is evidence by proxy.

Youre smart. Very smart. Science does not accept easy answers or conclusions like ID.

If every time science ran into a problem they couldnt solve and decided " it. God must have did it this way.", you would still be lighting your lantern for light.

That is why ID and anything like it cannot be taught as anything more than what it is, a theology. Theology is not to be taught in publicly funded schools.

ID is the cheap way out. It is also a thinly-veiled, ill-conceived ploy to teach religion in schools. No matter its merits, it would set a precedent for morality discussion in schools. Then we would have to further divide the school system by religion.

Your ID cheap-science bull would create a huge storm because of what it would lead to. That and the fact that it is just plain lazy to excuse man's creation as God's work and look no further than that.

Thats standard operating procedure for religion though. Do what youre told, follow the rules, conform...or condemned. Youre sheep.

Baaaaaa....

I don't think ID is theology. Neither is it pure science. It could be seen as scientific philosophy. I don't think it harms children to have them consider the idea that there are some questions science may never be able to answer. That is not the same as the "God-of-the-gaps" fallacy which points to a particular phenomenon, declares that there is no scientific explanation, and decides that God must have brought it about supernaturally.

[pussyface]

haha..."scientific philosophy."

...nothing scientific about it...i'll stick with "theology."

[DarkReign]

That is not the same as the "God-of-the-gaps" fallacy which points to a particular phenomenon, declares that there is no scientific explanation, and decides that God must have brought it about supernaturally.

I believe it is. I think ID is most definately lazy thinking. Its an excuse.

"Well science cant explain everything, therefore God did it all."

Like I said, go light your lantern.

[Extra Stout]

haha..."scientific philosophy."

...nothing scientific about it...i'll stick with "theology."

So then you are absolutely positive that every single phenomenon that can be observed can be explained naturalistically? And you have irrefutable evidence to back that up?

[Phenomanul]

Neutrinos. No, science cant explain them.
Anti-matter. No, science isnt even sure if it exists, but there is evidence by proxy.

Youre smart. Very smart. Science does not accept easy answers or conclusions like ID.

If every time science ran into a problem they couldnt solve and decided " it. God must have did it this way.", you would still be lighting your lantern for light.

That is why ID and anything like it cannot be taught as anything more than what it is, a theology. Theology is not to be taught in publicly funded schools.

ID is the cheap way out. It is also a thinly-veiled, ill-conceived ploy to teach religion in schools. No matter its merits, it would set a precedent for morality discussion in schools. Then we would have to further divide the school system by religion.

Your ID cheap-science bull would create a huge storm because of what it would lead to. That and the fact that it is just plain lazy to excuse man's creation as God's work and look no further than that.

Thats standard operating procedure for religion though. Do what youre told, follow the rules, conform...or condemned. Youre sheep.

Baaaaaa....

And who told you I was banking on ID as a cop out??? Oh you assumed...

Much research is being driven from trying to understand the biological mechanisms that gave way to simple proteins such as insulin and larger molecules such as singular strands of DNA... questions propel research. And then after the data comes in.... you're still left with questions... that's the way research works....

But you would be a fool to think that science is the 'catch all, anwer all' field that many presume it is...

And this is why, I have to discredit the people who try to say I am blinded by my faith... my understanding of several fields allows me to think for myself and not just accept everything dished out by the scientific community as fact.... without said leverage I would have no scientific foundation to refute them... but I do... whether you like it or not. I'm a sheep???? I think not.

[pussyface]

bingo.
in scientific terms, it doesnt hold up on any level.
there is no obvious explanation= this proves God is the answer does not compute from the science perspective.

also, any philosopher worth their salt (the greeks/kant/beaudrillard/etc) would laugh off this implication as well. Logically, and philosophers are into logic, it just doesnt add up ("matter of faith," etc.)

[Spurminator]

I think it's sufficient to say Science has not found the answer to certain things. There just really isn't a place in Science class to teach the theory of a Supreme Being who designed the universe.

Perhaps in Philosophy class... and there's no need to worry about "brainwashing" there because no one pays attention in High School Philosophy... it's the elective you take if you need a nap after lunch.

I believe in a God that created a universe with an infinite number of things we can learn about through scientific study. This study does not need to prove or disprove the existence of God, it is what it is... and you either believe God created it or you don't.

The conflict between Science and Theology was created by Scientists and Theists. Fundamentally, there is no conflict there.

[2centsworth]

Science Confirms the Bible

http://www.livingwaters.com/Merchant...oduct_Code=284

[Phenomanul]

bingo.
in scientific terms, it doesnt hold up on any level.
there is no obvious explanation= this proves God is the answer does not compute from the science perspective.

also, any philosopher worth their salt (the greeks/kant/beaudrillard/etc) would laugh off this implication as well. Logically, and philosophers are into logic, it just doesnt add up ("matter of faith," etc.)

Says pf the scientist... right?

[pussyface]

"Perhaps in Philosophy class... and there's no need to worry about "brainwashing" there because no one pays attention in High School Philosophy... it's the elective you take if you need a nap after lunch."

I thought we were trying to have an intelligent discussion. kill yourself.

[pussyface]

says pf, a guy whose allegiance is to logic and not an old book of Jewish folklore called the Bible

[Phenomanul]

"Perhaps in Philosophy class... and there's no need to worry about "brainwashing" there because no one pays attention in High School Philosophy... it's the elective you take if you need a nap after lunch."

I thought we were trying to have an intelligent discussion. kill yourself.

People's Exhibit A: "Irony"

[Spurminator]

I thought we were trying to have an intelligent discussion. kill yourself.

We are. What are you doing here?

Go back and eat at the kids table.

[pussyface]

how does this rise to the level of irony? i suspect that word might not be apply here. explain.

its an often misused and misinterpreted word.

[Phenomanul]

how does this rise to the level of irony? i suspect that word might not be apply here. explain.

its an often misused and misinterpreted word.

You're first statement was "I thought we were trying to have an intelligent discussion."

You then follow that sentence with "kill yourself."

IRONY.