|
|
Post by Simon Berriochoa on Apr 7, 2011 10:01:12 GMT -5
"How arrogant man, to claim he understands the acts of a god."
I am curious for people to comment on that saying.... What do you think it means?
|
|
|
|
Post by Michael Wells on Apr 7, 2011 11:21:55 GMT -5
Fitts, does your computer have punctuation? Lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon Berriochoa on Apr 7, 2011 11:22:24 GMT -5
Back to Rick's proposition...
I assume this intends to mean that there is new science that now supports scientific dating methods that are contrary to the conclusions previously held, subsequently everything is much younger than previously thought, additionally there is new scientific evidence that the current scientific laws around erosion and sediment dating are incorrect so the grand canyon is again very young. That the concentration of bones at one point coupled with the new dating technique and new evidence around erosion and sediment dating now point to human existence at a time when all but a small portion of the earth was underwater, presumably bones and sediment found elsewhere (what would now be areas of receded water) show human existence prior to the people on the highest hill, but not any older than original dating of the eldest humans. Basically this has now shown that the biblical version of Adam/Eve and Noah are chronologically possible… The above new science items would have to also stand up against every other conclusion that it touches in order to carry such weight. Such as the proven fact that humans are incapable of successfully inbreeding from a finite genetic pool such as Adam/Eve and Noah proposes.
There are two ways to look at this, philosophically and functionally.
Philosophically…. as a person that has formed their conclusions based upon the scientific evidence… how do I now reconcile the conflict created in my conclusions based upon new science vs. old science? It is kind of like the Easter Bunny I guess, as a small kid I concluded there was an Easter Bunny because the evidence provided to me by my parents showed there was one, as an adult where the evidence does not exist, I therefore conclude there is no Easter Bunny. In the absence of actually seeing the Easter Bunny I am left with no other choice but to conclude there is no Easter Bunny. Continuing to believe, there is, despite the obvious absence of evidence that it exists is simply illogical, so though it seems crazy to waffle from one camp to the other as a product of evidence I must concede to what can be proven or conversely not proven.
Functionally… This is asking me to compare one set of scientific findings to another… old dating method vs. new, (as I assume the evidence that created this new dating method is not a lost home video from God proving it out). Science is not absolute, in reality nothing is absolute, not a Webster version, but science is conclusion based upon an accumulation of evidence in direct application to other conclusions that stand on the absence of contradictory evidence but in concert with one another. Subsequently you would have to compare the two versions of the science and look for the factors that bolster or undermine the conclusion each creates. I would need to choose based upon the strength not singularly but in comparison to all other scientific evidence, I would then be forced to reach a conclusion as to which determination outweighs the other.
Question
If an advanced alien race showed up and put a video on CNN as evidence proving the evolution of mankind over the course of billions of years, would you then completely lose your faith in God?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Kaufman on Apr 7, 2011 11:24:55 GMT -5
Just got caught up.
K, couple questions. Rick you said one of your posts that you can't believe everything you read, so why do you believe everything you read in the Bible? It wasn't written by anyone more/less qualified that the people that write anything else. It's supposed to be the word of God, but it was still written by man, correct?
Another totally "thinking outside the box" question:
If aliens came down to Earth one day and told us that they created the Earth and everything in it as an experiment, would you stop worshiping your God and start worshiping these aliens?
Why the need to worship a/the creator? If that's the need, why not just worship your mom, dad, and everyone who came before you in order for you to be here?
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris Kaufman on Apr 7, 2011 11:29:49 GMT -5
Hah!! Simon you beat me to the Alien question.  |
|
|
|
Post by Michael Wells on Apr 7, 2011 11:29:57 GMT -5
No. I'd say God allowed that evolutionary process to occur.
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon Berriochoa on Apr 7, 2011 11:42:32 GMT -5
So in the face of absolute destruction of what you currently claim as evidence to your beliefs, you would simply disregard it, and for lack of a better term, "find another way to believe".
I have had theological debates with 100's of people in my life, once a Bishop.... The smartest thing I have ever heard, was from a 7th grade drop out, ex con ex drug using mother of 5 kids by the time she was 26.
She told me that she does not believe in the church or the bible, however she knows there is a god and that she has a personal relationship with him, further that relationship is what saved her life and made her the productive parent and person she now was.
|
|
|
|
Post by dixonglory on Apr 7, 2011 12:13:53 GMT -5
i think many searched for evidence for God's existence in the articles shown in the Internet.  for me it is like the story of the person who searches in the globe and map with hand lens for discovering a new island or a new country ;D ;D www.win-health.com/links.html&ei=_PKdTf3hN8aVOryqtKkE&zoom=1research to find out God will not be sponsored by a big company as i assume . so all those researches will not be genuine researches. jmo. most likely the research on orgin of human beings/universe will also be not that much enthusiastic compared to others.imo. |
|
|
|
Post by enginterzi on Apr 7, 2011 12:15:18 GMT -5
if there were proves about the evolution then people would not have needed to create lies such as piltdown man, to deceive humanity with the name of science.evolution and my faith can not come together as GOD clearly mentions how HE directly created the man.why would i cloud my mind and faith with imaginary advanced aliens who would video tape on CNN? i would not believe in GOD just because someone tells me that there is a GOD,without hearing and thinking of the message.what convinces me is the message.i say this because my faith may be judged to be imaginary as i judged the advanced aliens to be imaginary.even if i force my self to be convinced about the evolution i just find it a dishonest attempt (no disrespect intented).
|
|
|
|
Post by Simon Berriochoa on Apr 7, 2011 13:13:12 GMT -5
Engin I know that it is difficult for you to entertain such possible variations so maybe this discussion is not for you.
The true value of debate is not in the attempt to change the beliefs of ones opposition but to open yourself to the challenging of yours.
In practice proclaiming you cannot entertain challenges of your beliefs is like claiming you are the greatest armwrestler ever, unbeaten and undefeatale, yet refusing to put your arm on the table to test it.
I have never seen a book signed and authored by God himself, in absence of a verify-able version of that I am hard pressed to give the presence of a white bearded man in a robe more weight than the imaginary alien.
|
|
|
|
Post by enginterzi on Apr 7, 2011 13:26:21 GMT -5
Simon,
i do not think that you are in a place to tell me if this discussion is for me or not.your question just sounded silly for me,that is all.i have challenged my own belief hundreds of times even much more than others challenged me.so save your teaching to yourself.
i have seen a book which is signed by GOD but the signature i saw is unique,deep and meaningfull.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Benoit on Apr 7, 2011 13:38:59 GMT -5
God never signed any books, just for the record. Im in all seriousness looking for cold hard proof or atleast a step forward that god existed. I dont care when the grand canyon was made. I dont care if dinosaurs were real or not? It dosent matter. Evolution could have never happened, Im not saying I know how everything happened but it wasnt from the bible. Please give me information to prove me wrong. Ryan T what are your strongest points to make someone beleive. Rick im a dumb redneck too lol, you stated things never change, I was just giving examples of now and long ago of change. Religion I believe is what makes humans change. Animals can believe in anything because theres nobody to manipulate them all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Benoit on Apr 7, 2011 13:43:07 GMT -5
I dont want to confuse things but I do truly see the purpose of religion and god. Its to unite us and make people get along and follow morals. I do agree this is the best way, like telling kids to be good for santa, same concept. I like the idea and this is my favorite song out right now enjoy. I just dont believe he is actually there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan Thames on Apr 7, 2011 13:49:04 GMT -5
Man there is so much that can be said and already has been said that are very strong points in this thread alone. Whether your a Christian, Muslim or agnostic. (belief in something but unsure)
You would be foolish to believe that this is all accidental and coincidental.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Benoit on Apr 7, 2011 13:59:13 GMT -5
Where does the coincodence come from? what is coincodence? I just think of animals and they live just fine and they also know rules? Please just throw out a solid piece of evidence that jesus or god once lived. Thats all. Im agnostic btw Ryan. Im just trying to get to the bottom of this while I have a bunch of people around that may know.
|
|
