Is Science getting closer to God and the Bible?

[wahrheit]

Well if the above did actually happen, I certainly wouldn't blame it on God. God didn't make the building. The building was man made. Maybe the sin is in building such a shoddily built building (possibly by greedy owners or builders who cut corners.) And as far as the children I believe children who haven't reached the age of accountability go to heaven, so any suffering is very short in time compared to eternity and when you think about it Christ was not a stranger to a terrible and painful death.

Wow, that must be one of the worst and cheapest justifications of god's actions I ever read.

Let me see if I get the logic behind this:

Innocent parents die
--> can't blame them, won't look good, must find something else
--> hey, the building, yes, that's the ticket
--> greedy (sin!!!) builders made it
--> case closed! (And I don't give a hoot that the parents still died innocent)

Innocent child dies
--> that's easy, yippee!
--> The lord is a good guy, he don't want kids suffer that much
--> sends innocent kids straight to heaven, with only a bit of suffering

And should anybody still doubt me: Think of Jesus and what He did for you, that was one big suffering, so please be quiet!

 

[DOC]

He {DOC] never admits error.

From the Jefferson thread

I'm finally starting to see what you're all saying because I've been so busy looking at the big picture and posting my 221 posts in this thread that I made a mistake on that Jay Sekulow thing. I saw that quote about the schoolyard gate and I immediately started to think that I heard Sekulow say that on TV and didn't even notice that it was footnoted to a court case.

Ok, I made a mistake by saying "called" the Trinity decision instead of "during" the Trinity decision. But that was my mistake and it doesn't change the fact that hundreds of documents were examined in 10 years and the Supreme Court declared (because of that 10 year examination) "This is a Christian Nation".

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74960

 

[Safe-Keeper]

Well if the above did actually happen [...]

Earthquakes destroying buildings and buying people under rubble? That, my friend, does indeed happen. Wouldn't surprise me if suffering lasts for hours or even more than a day in some cases, too, if the location is remote.

[...]I certainly wouldn't blame it on God. God didn't make the building. The building was man made.

Dodging the question. God, according to you, allowed the earthquake to happen. Period. That's not love or goodness. That's neglect.

Maybe the sin is in building such a shoddily built building (possibly by greedy owners or builders who cut corners.)

OK, so the builders cut corners, so God allows an earthquake to punish the tenants?

And 'shoddily built building'? Do you know how much it costs to make building earthqake-resistent? Do you think the average third-world resident in earthquake areas can afford it just because the Japanese can?

And as far as the children I believe children who haven't reached the age of accountability go to heaven, so any suffering is very short in time compared to eternity [...]

So?

[...] and when you think about it Christ was not a stranger to a terrible and painful death.

So?!

 

[Ladewig]

Do trolls analyze Supreme Court Cases, Constitutional Amendments, early American political and military alliances like the New England Confederation, bring in quotes from the 1606 First Charter of Virginia, and talk about Jewish leaders who praised Pius XII actions during WWII?

Do trolls do that? Some do, some don't. Do you do that? I haven't seen much evidence that you analyze those things. I see much more parroting other people's views on those issues.

Anybody who tries to label me -- with the serious threads I've brought in -- a troll, really says a lot about themselves.

Again, you are missing the point. To me, it is of little importance if you are a genuine troll or if you genuinely believe all the stuff you spout off about. Given your habit of ignoring evidence while posting arrant nonsense, there is no reason to take your threads seriously.

People may try to lessen my credibility, but they are destroying their own in the process.

There is no name I could call you, no accusation I could make at you, and no criticism that I could level at you that would ever make my credibility fall as low as yours.

 

[Ladewig]

And as far as the children I believe children who haven't reached the age of accountability go to heaven, so any suffering is very short in time compared to eternity and when you think about it Christ was not a stranger to a terrible and painful death.

Do you have scriptural references to support this belief?

Well if the above did actually happen, I certainly wouldn't blame it on God. God didn't make the building. The building was man made. Maybe the sin is in building such a shoddily built building (possibly by greedy owners or builders who cut corners.)

Let's remove the builders from the equation by looking at the innocent children who died during the tsunami resulting from the 2004 underwater earthquake. Is it fair to blame children's suffering on God at that point? If not, let's go back to Noah's flood: is God responsible for children suffering there as they drowned?


ETA: If you blamed the house builder for the suffering and deaths of the children, then is it fair to claim that God built the earth and all earthquakes are evidence of His shoddy workmanship?

 

[Safe-Keeper]

And as far as the children I believe children who haven't reached the age of accountability go to heaven, so any suffering is very short in time compared to eternity [...]

Wait, what about children who have reached the 'age of reason'? Do I see looming ahead of me another 'well, their fault if they haven't been told about God' excuse?

 

[Marcus]

Get with the drill here, folks. If something good happens, it is automatically God's doing. As for bad things, why, Sky Daddy had nothing to do with those. If you win a football game, don't forget to give God the credit when the TV cameras show up. The losing team, and the suffering earthquake victims, are simply SOL.

 

[Cleon]

Do trolls analyze Supreme Court Cases, Constitutional Amendments, early American political and military alliances like the New England Confederation, bring in quotes from the 1606 First Charter of Virginia, and talk about Jewish leaders who praised Pius XII actions during WWII?

No, but then, neither do you.

What you do is put out junk history and try to pass it off as "analysis" and "information" when it is nothing but historical revisionism.

Anybody who tries to label me -- with the serious threads I've brought in -- a troll, really says a lot about themselves. People may try to lessen my credibility, but they are destroying their own in the process.

Your skill at cognitive dissonance and projection is really quite impressive.

 

[Safe-Keeper]

OK, before I let the natural disaster thing lie, I have a half-rhetorical question for the fundies: What would God need to do for you to stop considering Him good and loving? If you cannot think of a single such thing, you're in my eyes subscribing to blind loyalty, and there's no point in continuing this discussion.

 

[articulett]

Well if the above did actually happen, I certainly wouldn't blame it on God. God didn't make the building. The building was man made. Maybe the sin is in building such a shoddily built building (possibly by greedy owners or builders who cut corners.) And as far as the children I believe children who haven't reached the age of accountability go to heaven, so any suffering is very short in time compared to eternity and when you think about it Christ was not a stranger to a terrible and painful death.

Excellent. So when Andrea Yates killed her kids she was just ensuring that they'd live happily ever after and escape the possibility of hell. In fact, she sacrificed her own eternity for her beloved children according to both her beliefs and yours. Maybe god will smile kindly on this bit of martyrdom, eh? I mean, if the purpose of life is to get to heaven, and the purpose of motherhood is to ensure that your kids get to heaven-- then Andrea Yates proved that she is a woman of true faith. Would you risk eternal torment so that your kids were ensured a blissful eternity. Or would you let them live and risk eternal damnation?

 

[Ralph]

And as far as the children I believe children who haven't reached the age of accountability go to heaven, so any suffering is very short in time compared to eternity and when you think about it Christ was not a stranger to a terrible and painful death.

I don't doubt for a second that crucifixion is a terrible & painful way to die.

However bad it is though...it's over in a few days.

I'll take that over what millions of other human beings have suffered from though.....

I'd rather be crucified than to be severely burned and suffer for weeks or even months only to eventually die.

I'd rather be crucified than die a little bit at a time of brain cancer over a year and a half like one young man (29) I know recently did. His parents were always very devout christians.
They prayed every day as did their son. After about 6 months he started praying for it just to end but nope.....god decided to drag it out for another year.

Gotta keep giving those dumbass humans a "reminder" of who's in charge.

I'm not even going to get into the degree of suffering involved with the whole eternal lake of fire thing. Were such a thing actually true though...it would be far worse than anything Jesus suffered.

Yes--crucifixion'll ruin your day---but it's nothing compared to some of the other things god's inflicted on humanity.

 

[Ichneumonwasp]

I'm sorry, but I just have to ask. Don't even cat toys lose their appeal over time?

 

[six7s]

Do trolls analyze Supreme Court Cases, Constitutional Amendments, early American political and military alliances like the New England Confederation, bring in quotes from the 1606 First Charter of Virginia, and talk about Jewish leaders who praised Pius XII actions during WWII?

Anybody who tries to label me -- with the serious threads I've brought in -- a troll, really says a lot about themselves. People may try to lessen my credibility, but they are destroying their own in the process.

Dear DOC,

Please explain how you merit ANY credibility when you start threads like this, with links to absurdly stupid sites like creationevidence.org

Majestic
SCIENTIFIC ALLUSIONS IN SCRIPTURE…

Dr. Henry Morris of the Institute for Creation Research has compiled an impressive list of allusions to scientific principles in Scripture

Meteorology

• Relation of Electricity to Rain: Job 28:26; Jeremiah 10:13

It occurs to me that neither you nor your late friend Henry M. Morris^WP, formerly of The Institute for Creation Research have actually bothered to read the bile that allegedly supports your claim in the OP that "many scientific principles were actually presented first in the bile"

A probable boon to fostering your reputation as a 'credible' wooist is something called 'research', which can be facilitated by quite a few sites on teh interwebs

For example:
BibleGateway.com:
A searchable online Bible in over 50 versions and 35 languages.

Job 28:26

• King James Version
  
  
  ²⁶When he made a decree for the rain, and a way for the lightning of the thunder:​
• New King James Version
  
  ²⁶ When He made a law for the rain,
  And a path for the thunderbolt,
  ​

the lightning of the thunder
or
the thunder of the lightning

If at first you cock it up, try, try again

Jeremiah 10:13

• King James Version
  
  ¹³When he uttereth his voice, there is a multitude of waters in the heavens, and he causeth the vapours to ascend from the ends of the earth; he maketh lightnings with rain, and bringeth forth the wind out of his treasures.​
• New King James Version
  
  
  ¹³ When He utters His voice,
  There is a multitude of waters in the heavens:
  
  “ And He causes the vapors to ascend from the ends of the earth.
  He makes lightning for the rain,
  He brings the wind out of His treasuries.”​

Although the authors of your bible didn't know much about physics, they sure knew a lot about spin

 

[articulett]

Religion is supposed to encourage honesty, isn't it. But to me it just seems to make people feel more justified in their dishonesty and spin and feelings of moral superiority. Who cares about facts and such-- when you have faith.

 

[JoeEllison]

Religion is supposed to encourage honesty, isn't it.

No, it is supposed to encourage obedience, group identity, hatred towards outsiders, and defense of the religion by any means necessary. Dishonesty of one form or another seems to be a vital part of religion on some pretty deep level.

 

[joobz]

From the Jefferson thread

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74960

Well, DOC. I apologize. You have indeed admitted to mistakes.
my statement that You NEVER admit errors was wrong and I fully admit it. You'll notice that this wasn't the first time I've been willing to change my statements based upon new and truthful information.

Now, until you you own up to the greater errors you have made such as
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2921675&postcount=164
I must truthfully say, You almost never admit your errors.

 

[Marcus]

Who cares about facts and such-- when you have faith.

Yes, indeed. The very definition of religious faith precludes any interest in facts. Faith in the face of contrary evidence is actually more holy, as it proves your dedication.

 

[articulett]

Yes, indeed. The very definition of religious faith precludes any interest in facts. Faith in the face of contrary evidence is actually more holy, as it proves your dedication.

Yeppers-- eternal salvation and a golden halo to the person who can believe the most unbelievable story with the most conviction.

 

[Apathia]

Yeppers-- eternal salvation and a golden halo to the person who can believe the most unbelievable story with the most conviction.

Snake handling is an apt metaphor.

 

[DOC]

Well, DOC. I apologize. You have indeed admitted to mistakes.
my statement that You NEVER admit errors was wrong and I fully admit it. You'll notice that this wasn't the first time I've been willing to change my statements based upon new and truthful information.

Well thanks, but if you don't do personal attacks, you won't have to worry about apologies.

Does Randi have the three strikes and your out rule?