Faith in Creation

[Bearguin]

Re: Re: Re: Faith in Creation

I don't think so, because what would it matter what level of faith is needed to accept something is true if faith isn't a bad thing.

[Sidetrack to original topic]

I'm trying to explain what I mean better.

If my complaint with a religion is that it is based on faith, then a good counter to my complaint is "well it takes more faith to not beleive".

They are not saying that faith is a bad thing.

They are saying that I said faith is a bad thing but that I am using more of what I think is a bad thing to not believe. They are trying to accuse me of being a hypocrate. (I really need to learn to spell that).

So, if I think faith is a bad thing AND it takes more faith to not believe, then I am a hypocrate and their argument makes sense.

Of course thet have not shown the second statement to be true.

[/sidetrack to original topic]

 

[Kitty Chan]

Originally posted by Mosquito I am not going to comment on who's winning this thread, but...

Bearguin I see his latest post He still wins for pinning the original answer (Im just trying to have fun) <but he still wins>

What you're saying about Creation and Darwin is basically indistinguishable, unless The Committee For Making A Really Big Mess comes clear and explains what they did.

too funny and true.

Creation does NOT make more sense than evolution, it used to, a couple of centuries ago, but it doesn't anymore. No version of creation does. (I assume you are talking about the "Southern Baptist USA only, possibly actually only your local church"-version of creation). There are a whole lot of very different creation myths out there, and none of them seem to fit the data... Though several seem to claim they do, and do so better than everything else.

Im only speaking about the comment, the comment and what its saying. I know, Ive heard others say it.

Now, I wanna say here and Im gonna be honest, this is one of those lines that are supposed to stop atheists in their tracks and make em think. I do not agree with that. In fact things like that are only inflammatory and not part of, can I say reasoned thinking.

Evolution is not working out what happened. Scientists are working out what happened.

whoops I meant scientists

God did NOT say how it happened, God has, wisely, kept his mouth shut so as to avoid embarrassment.

Hmm no, In the begining God created . . . He did say, its just so many kick it around the block and add their 2 bits and mess it up. As you have pointed out.

When they come across something, they justifiy it with their reasonings rather than letting the words speak for themselves. Then other times some get insulted and try to remove the words from science, and embarass themselves.

Like Ive said before IF God is God then He would be a fan of science (having invented it) and those trying to remove it are mistaken.

 

[wollery]

In the beginning, there was total incoherence. And then, for some strange reason, it became evidently clear. Is this not the theory you subscribe to? Hmm ...

There's still a fair bit of incoherence around, some of it is evidenced in these forums!!

 

[Ryokan]

Darwin says it started and got set in motion

He said no such thing. Darwin only made some observations, and drew a few conclusions out of those observations.

 

[Johnny Pneumatic]

(And btw before Im flamed about what started God the answer is nothing started God, He said I am the begining and the end. He always is, so He has no start or end. As well, agree or not thats the answer. )

Maybe the universe is its own cause. If God can exist without a creator why not a universe?

 

[Johnny Pneumatic]

Hmm no, In the begining God created . . . He did say, its just so many kick it around the block and add their 2 bits and mess it up. As you have pointed out.

When they come across something, they justifiy it with their reasonings rather than letting the words speak for themselves. Then other times some get insulted and try to remove the words from science, and embarass themselves.

Like Ive said before IF God is God then He would be a fan of science (having invented it) and those trying to remove it are mistaken.

The huge problem is Genesis is very very wrong. It has birds coming before reptiles etc. Not to forget that if you trace the lifespans in the Bible back, Creation was a little over 6,000 years ago. "Allegory."; bullsh*t. Name me another Creation story from another ancient religion that wasn't meant to be literal. Why would God inspire a story so far from the truth? Why not tell us the Earth is 4,500,000,000 years old, that the Earth is spherical instead of a landmass out in the middle of a flat ocean, how Organic Evolution works, what creatures existed in the past but do no longer and why he's so inept so he can't create anything better than this. Planets aren't the best thing possible, try suprastellar and supramundane worlds . Microphones aren't damaged by the sounds of gunfire; can't God make ears as durable as imperfect humans are smart enough to create? This list could go on and on for days.

 

[Mosquito]

Bearguin I see his latest post He still wins for pinning the original answer (Im just trying to have fun) <but he still wins>

Problem with Bearguin is that he sticks to the original topic. I think he's some kind of troublemaker.

Im only speaking about the comment, the comment and what its saying. I know, Ive heard others say it.

Now, I wanna say here and Im gonna be honest, this is one of those lines that are supposed to stop atheists in their tracks and make em think. I do not agree with that. In fact things like that are only inflammatory and not part of, can I say reasoned thinking.

Those arguments, unfortunately have a tendency of being very strong from the fundy position, and either meaningless or completely non sequitor from a non-fundy position.

I've seen some of these "showstopper" arguments, and they are not really made for atheists, they are made for "angry with god"-christians, or something similar.

Hmm no, In the begining God created . . . He did say, its just so many kick it around the block and add their 2 bits and mess it up. As you have pointed out.

Hmm, no, On the first day Nothing happened. On the second day Nothing continued to happen, but with rather less enthusiasm. On the third day Nothing got bored and left, the Universe happened.

Not a word of or from God in that...

When they come across something, they justifiy it with their reasonings rather than letting the words speak for themselves. Then other times some get insulted and try to remove the words from science, and embarass themselves.

Like Ive said before IF God is God then He would be a fan of science (having invented it) and those trying to remove it are mistaken.

Science can be viewed as an alternative way of knowing god. One that includes asking god questions and listening to the answers.

Religion is trying to know god by talking with some doofus about what said doofus would like god to be like or reading some book written by somebody who claim to know god but semingly can't get simple facts straight. It's like learning about Elvis by reading "Elvis, a biography" by John "never did any research on Elvis, but the book is really fat and has lots of chapters, I think my Elvis is the coolest Elvis ever" Doe, (12).

Also, science talks in a language understandable by contemporaries, and within the cultural framework. Religion talks in a language that either did not make sense ever, or whose sense has long been lost to the chasm of language and culture.


Mosquito - runner up in this thread?

 

[Iacchus]

There's still a fair bit of incoherence around, some of it is evidenced in these forums!!

Ah yes, but as some of you folks like to claim, the Universe would exist wholly and completely with or without our being here. So, the fact that we may not be aware of reality in the ultimate sense (it's not possible), has nothing to do with it.

 

[Kitty Chan]

The huge problem is Genesis is very very wrong. It has birds coming before reptiles etc. Not to forget that if you trace the lifespans in the Bible back, Creation was a little over 6,000 years ago. "Allegory."; bullsh*t. Name me another Creation story from another ancient religion that wasn't meant to be literal. Why would God inspire a story so far from the truth? Why not tell us the Earth is 4,500,000,000 years old, that the Earth is spherical instead of a landmass out in the middle of a flat ocean, how Organic Evolution works, what creatures existed in the past but do no longer and why he's so inept so he can't create anything better than this. Planets aren't the best thing possible, try suprastellar and supramundane worlds . Microphones aren't damaged by the sounds of gunfire; can't God make ears as durable as imperfect humans are smart enough to create? This list could go on and on for days.

Well SkepticJ I was trying to be fair and say there are some christians who tend to mix up stuff and not include science as if its some kind of evil thing. Whereas my only comment was If God did create everything then He would have invented science too. And those christians should think about that before pronouncing it evil.

Half the stuff your talking about in these creation stories above I dont know about. Im just learning, havent figured it all out to some degree Im happy with. I just know that with the exception of some miracles God works within science and its "rules"

(rules as a word to generally describe various aspects of science)

and not to mention answer the original question you asked

 

[Kitty Chan]

Problem with Bearguin is that he sticks to the original topic. I think he's some kind of troublemaker.

Those arguments, unfortunately have a tendency of being very strong from the fundy position, and either meaningless or completely non sequitor from a non-fundy position.
I've seen some of these "showstopper" arguments, and they are not really made for atheists, they are made for "angry with god"-christians, or something similar.

Thats why Im throwing them under the bus

As for God saying how He did it, He did through the bible. So to say He never said a thing is unaccurate, sorry. If you dont believe the bible is inspired by God then fine. But if you do then He did say How He made it.

Science can be viewed as an alternative way of knowing god. One that includes asking god questions and listening to the answers.

Religion is trying to know god by talking with some doofus about what said doofus would like god to be like or reading some book written by somebody who claim to know god but semingly can't get simple facts straight. It's like learning about Elvis by reading "Elvis, a biography" by John "never did any research on Elvis, but the book is really fat and has lots of chapters, I think my Elvis is the coolest Elvis ever" Doe, (12).

Also, science talks in a language understandable by contemporaries, and within the cultural framework. Religion talks in a language that either did not make sense ever, or whose sense has long been lost to the chasm of language and culture.

Well, I dont try to know God by talking to a doofus, I go for various discussions, reading, scripture, prayer, just like was recommened by God to understand things. Never talk to one or two sources. Yea some of the language is hard but if you take a moment to think about things and research it out its not that bad. There are some things not understood completely, but the same goes for science anyway. Some things are not understood compeletly yet either.

As for science language its like shop talk and hard to understand but with the same thought and research it can be understood as well.

Mosquito - runner up in this thread?

Yes you can be second runner up

 

[Johnny Pneumatic]

Well SkepticJ I was trying to be fair and say there are some christians who tend to mix up stuff and not include science as if its some kind of evil thing. Whereas my only comment was If God did create everything then He would have invented science too. And those christians should think about that before pronouncing it evil.

Half the stuff your talking about in these creation stories above I dont know about. Im just learning, havent figured it all out to some degree Im happy with. I just know that with the exception of some miracles God works within science and its "rules"

(rules as a word to generally describe various aspects of science)

and not to mention answer the original question you asked

Ah, I see. Be happy you live in The Great White North(Canada), and not down here in The States with these morons.
I wasn't talking about any creation story other than Genesis.
You're a liberal thinking Christian, good for you. What I don't get, and maybe never will, is how a Christian or any other liberal religious person believes in part of their book, but not all. If part is wrong, and it's god's perfect word, then the whole thing is in doubt. If The Flood didn't happen, then why believe in Jesus' miracles? They're both fantastic tales. Actually a man bringing back the dead with the touch of his hands is harder to believe than a global flood, small floods actually happen.

 

[Mosquito]

As for God saying how He did it, He did through the bible. So to say He never said a thing is unaccurate, sorry. If you dont believe the bible is inspired by God then fine. But if you do then He did say How He made it.

Umm, now you're making one of those errors... You are assuming that I'll take the bible for granted. In effect you are assuming I'm already a believer of christianity...

Actually, if you believe the bible is the word of god, then god is either very forgetful or outright lying. Meaning the bible is not a good source of information on anything.

If you believe the bible is inspired, but written by men, errors can be expected and understood. But it also means that you're trusting the judgement of some potential doofus...

Well, I dont try to know God by talking to a doofus, I go for various discussions, reading, scripture, prayer, just like was recommened by God to understand things. Never talk to one or two sources. Yea some of the language is hard but if you take a moment to think about things and research it out its not that bad. There are some things not understood completely, but the same goes for science anyway. Some things are not understood compeletly yet either.

As for science language its like shop talk and hard to understand but with the same thought and research it can be understood as well.

Into which I read "I'm not specifically looking for a doofus to tell me about god". Are you sure your sources on god are not doofuses or the work of doofuses? How about liars? Religious organisations and litterature are full of them, as is evidenced by their strong need to hide/twist/distort f.ex. science.

Prayer, how do you know that is not just yourself making up stuff? How do you validate it?

How do you know that god recommended these things? Maybe god recommended getting stoned and watching the stars on a clear night as a good way to get in touch with him? And then some doofus with "superior moral" decided that something more "holy/acceptable" had to be put there instead? (And there are plenty of christians with "superior morality" than god and Jesus.)

Note that I'm not advocating getting stoned, stars or not. What I'm saying is how do you know that the truth is not different from what (your local) christians think?

It is very easy (and comfortable) to do intellectual in-breading, by not really questioning the local ideas. Doesn't mean said ideas are correct, though.

I understand that the mere being on these boards will expose you to a lot of ideas in direct conflict with christianity, but are you reading them with an open mind? Seriously considering that they may be correct (or less wrong, in any case) than your current ideas? Some ideas presented on these boards are very easy to "shoot down", some are hard, but on these boards somebody is likely to try which is one thing I like about these boards, there is very likely somebody with some good arguments that can teach you a thing or two, I've learned a lot from reading here. You get arguments from several sides (not necessarily only two) and then you can go with those that argue the best and learn from them.

Science will always try to change it's language to be understandable within the current culture, many concepts (especially in modern science) are inherently difficult to understand, but if somebody else starts looking for answers, they will come to the same results (science is reproducible). Religion does not have that ability, several religious ideas are common between religions, but if all traces of christianity were to be erased, it would never re-emerge.

Yes you can be second runner up

WOOHOO! Second runner up! That'll make me about #5? Ummm, maybe (woohum) is a better response... This thread doesn't have all that many participants...

Mosquito (hopefully not completely incoherent here...)

 

[aargh57]

What I don't get, and maybe never will, is how a Christian or any other liberal religious person believes in part of their book, but not all. If part is wrong, and it's god's perfect word, then the whole thing is in doubt. If The Flood didn't happen, then why believe in Jesus' miracles? They're both fantastic tales. Actually a man bringing back the dead with the touch of his hands is harder to believe than a global flood, small floods actually happen.

SkepticJ,

I believe that you said you used to be a Christian. I was wondering what denomination you were as even the most bible literal Christian denominations don't believe everything in their book. My mother was Catholic so I went to Catholic school but my Father and Stepmother were Pentecostals (pretty hard lined Christians who believe in the literal interpretation of the bible) so I got two very different perspectives. Catholics believe that their were a lot of non literal stories in the bible. For example, I remember hearing a priest say that numbers in the bible shouldn't be taken literally. The extremely old ages of the old testament people for example were just meant to show that living to an old age was a reward for living rightously. The Pentecostals, on the other hand, thought that if it said Moses lived to be 343 years old (not accurate from the bible, just for example) then he really lived for 343 years. They even believe a guy got swallowed by a whale for a few days and got puked up later on no worse for wear. However, even they ignored stuff like selling your daughter into slavery, etc. I think for the average person it's very easy to believe in a philosophy from a book that was written a long long time ago and still not believe in everything. After all, look what they're selling. Eternal life. Who wouldn't overlook some fine print to buy that.

 

[Johnny Pneumatic]

Missionary Baptist, the One Correct Christian Sect.


That's my point, if there's non-literal stories(because they're filled with crazy stuff that can't be true) that are just as filled with magic, injustice and incorrect history as the stories that most Christians do believe are true(Jesus' healing hand tricks) then why do they believe those tales? A global flood is more realistic to me than a godman who heals a few people with magic. Like I said in the upper post, floods happen. When has anyone ever raised someone from the dead with the touch of their hands? Never.

 

[aargh57]

Probably the same reason that people believe all sorts of other crazy stuff. Also, like I said in the last post, the alternative is to face the fact that when you're dead you're really dead. From seeing the crazy stuff that people believe from this site it's not surprising that people believe that there was one special guy that could make a buffet of fish and bread out of thin air, cure the blind, etc... and still reject some other stuff (or be ignorant). I also don't think that the average (non-fundie) believer critiques his bible that closely. It's enough for him to say, "I believe in God and Jesus and believe that the bible has a good message with some stories told as factual and some as allegories." If you believe in God why would it be hard to believe that he worked miracles?

 

[Johnny Pneumatic]

If you believe in God why would it be hard to believe that he worked miracles?

It wouldn't. But if some stories are allegory and others aren't; and there's nothing special that you can tell them apart by, then how do they know the Jesus story isn't just another one of the allegories? God, Satan, demons, heaven, hell, Jesus, all just allegories. Why not?

 

[Ryokan]

Like Ive said before IF God is God then He would be a fan of science (having invented it) and those trying to remove it are mistaken.

IF God is God, then He would be a fan of child molesters(having invented them), and those trying to remove them are mistaken.

Or maybe not?

 

[aargh57]

Skeptic J,

I think that your problem with this is that you're looking at the bible as a critical thinker not as someone who wants to believe. I'm not disputing any of your arguments about the bible I'm just saying that the average Christian doen't really think that deeply about that type of stuff. If they did, they would probably be your average atheist.

 

[Kitty Chan]

Ah, I see. Be happy you live in The Great White North(Canada), and not down here in The States with these morons.
I wasn't talking about any creation story other than Genesis.
You're a liberal thinking Christian, good for you. What I don't get, and maybe never will, is how a Christian or any other liberal religious person believes in part of their book, but not all. If part is wrong, and it's god's perfect word, then the whole thing is in doubt. If The Flood didn't happen, then why believe in Jesus' miracles? They're both fantastic tales. Actually a man bringing back the dead with the touch of his hands is harder to believe than a global flood, small floods actually happen.

Well I wouldnt be too hard on the states, the average "fundy" is just enthusiastic, its a cultural thing I think. We tend towards the British in the reserved dept. polite and all.

I dont know if Im Liberal (certainly not politically but Liberal is a dirty word in Alberta. Not for what you may suppose, just a little thing called the NEP that broke us in the 80's)

As for something wrong in the bible. hmm scripture says "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching". Now, I am with CS Lewis on this and that if it says that there is something to get out of it then one simply has to dig until they find it. Granted some things are harder to understand than others. But so is alot of things in this world and life.

(I will just say this about the flood, to date Ive not seen any "complete concrete" evidence for or against it. We just cannot say for sure, theres ideas but nothing 100% sure. So I will wait until something comes up, til then its moot)

Miracles of Jesus, you mention bring back the dead with the touch of His hands, Lazarus He stood outside the tomb and said come out. There was a woman who touched his clothes and Christ said who touched me? She was healed without Him doing anything. Then there is some who came for healing and He forgave them theirs sins instead.

People then and now are looking for signs and wonders, but Jesus did not always perform miracles for them, and said people should not look for them. That there would be hucksucklers that would perform wonders and fool even believers. He said one should test out these things and see if they are true.

Miracles and wonders are great, but they were not the point Jesus was trying to make, what God was trying to teach to people, who are stuborn, hardheaded and self serving. To focus on the miracles and ignore the instructions is to miss the point.

I think alot of people try to run things their way and not what God intended. They get hung up on these miracles or whatever else and forget that, Christ said love your neighbour. Thats that. It ends speculation about selling your daughter. molesting boys, killing nuns, ripping off people, stealing, lying and cheating.

Alot of people want God to fix it all, so they dont have to get their hands dirty. Christ said give what you have. So one tries to give at all times. If we were all truly giving then there would not have had to have Live8 this last weekend to get everyones attention to world hunger. People would have been taking care of one another already. Thats what Christ was calling those before and us now to do.

There is a lot of things to consider in the bible. However, the main thing which overshadows the rest of it is the command to love one another.

 

[Johnny Pneumatic]

As for something wrong in the bible. hmm scripture says "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching". Now, I am with CS Lewis on this and that if it says that there is something to get out of it then one simply has to dig until they find it. Granted some things are harder to understand than others. But so is alot of things in this world and life.

Actually it says "All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" and CS Lewis was full of bullsh*t. God, his shameless apologetics to cling to the Bible as truth make me so sick and angry! You'll have to dig very deep to find good in the murder of infants, rape of women and a global flood that killed many(at least it would have).