Not to mention the books that are in the Bible were hand picked by some King several hundred years ago and tossed out the ones he didn't like.

For fun, try the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. That Jesus, such a prankster.

Can the science community create a human being from scratch without using something from the human to start with? Sort like a big bang moment.

Pretty sure the bible is full of eye witness accounts of what was taking place at the time. Versus the assuming that the scientific community does.

There are books in the Bible that were written contemporaneously to the events described? Mind if I ask which ones?

God obfuscated the physical characteristics of the earth's geology in order to trip up the non-believes. It's like a prostitution sting and observable provable science is the under cover harlot asking the johns of reason if they need a date. You indisputable fact huggers can go straight to hell or believe in the unbelievable. It's your choice.

If you omit the prostitution metaphor, that's just about how an old pastor friend of mine sold it to his congregation. (and this man had a PhD in psychology, ffs...).

When posed the question of "why do you say the earth is only a few thousand years old when our scientific instruments show that it's much older?"

The answer was "God made everything "look old" to fool our instruments and test our faith." Sitting in that same service was a college professor with a doctorate in physical/inorganic chemistry, one of the hardest disciplines there is, and he never batted an eye or raised so much as a peep of an objection to such tripe.

That was my moment of clarity when I realized why televangelists are immensely rich: they are good at selling horsesh*t to gullible people. Not necessarily stupid people, just people who are looking for some sort of God-spackle to fill in the otherwise inexplicable cracks in their lives.

If you omit the prostitution metaphor, that's just about how an old pastor friend of mine sold it to his congregation. (and this man had a PhD in psychology, ffs...).

When posed the question of "why do you say the earth is only a few thousand years old when our scientific instruments show that it's much older?"

The answer was "God made everything "look old" to fool our instruments and test our faith." Sitting in that same service was a college professor with a doctorate in physical/inorganic chemistry, one of the hardest disciplines there is, and he never batted an eye or raised so much as a peep of an objection to such tripe.

That was my moment of clarity when I realized why televangelists are immensely rich: they are good at selling horsesh*t to gullible people. Not necessarily stupid people, just people who are looking for some sort of God-spackle to fill in the otherwise inexplicable cracks in their lives.

The mental gymnastics involved make me want to pull out what little I have left of my hair. And yet, people claim faith is so much easier than science, but they have to simply make up excuses for why their worldview doesn't fit the actual evidence and observations.

Not to mention the books that are in the Bible were hand picked by some King several hundred years ago and tossed out the ones he didn't like.

Not true at all. But keep trying

Not true at all. But keep trying

Are you saying there were no 'books' kept out of the Bible or a King didn't decide?

Not true at all. But keep trying

The canon evolved fairly early on. Many books were thrown out, though.

I think most of the New Testament canon was set prior to the creation of the King James Version.

You need something other than "it's written in the Bible" to convince someone who doesn't believe in the Bible to begin with. I can write a fake history book and make up fake names of people who say that they saw the fake events in my book. You need proof that is external to the material you are trying to prove true.

I will give you a Historical Book, circa 1976. This was "pushed" as fact. All the scholars stood behind this statement. All stated this was true. The Oklahoma / Texas and the rest of the US purchased this History....and this factual point was stated .... [ C. Columbus discovered America in 1492. ]

They did not use the word "landed on the shores" / "accidently beached on a shore" / "first euro trash to hit the beaches of Miami" / ...The Edcuational / Scholars stated this as (fact).

...now the revisionist in history now have a different POV. In less than 40 years, they have altered their statements. This fact in 1976 was not "up to debate" by any group.

Today, I am very open to the information, just a bit more sceptic on the one pushing it.

Not true at all. But keep trying
Some people are fine with urban myths or things they make up on the
fly.

https://bible.org/seriespage/bible-holy-canon-scripture

I particularly enjoy the self - authentication part. It's true! Why? Because the book says so!!

Can the science community create a human being from scratch without using something from the human to start with? Sort like a big bang moment.

... It's pretty clear. It's all just made up by men along the way.

... Nope. Not me. Thankfully the church cant execute me for my own
discoveries and investigations.
I'm not sure how you came up with that. But one thing is for sure,
your not wanting to have a sensible discussion about this shows a
weakness in your convictions.

I like the Einstein quote in your signature. That's why I don't allow
someone else to determine what I know to be true.

Can the science community create a human being from scratch without
using something from the human to start with? Sort like a big bang
moment.
No.

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRQS_qRNpwrt0OuI4Y0qhgS5u08gSfRd-C-Y20gLjvpHl7Rmqiy

Can the science community create a human being from scratch without using something from the human to start with? Sort like a big bang moment.

At this moment, no. That's certainly no reason to capitulate and just say "god did it all". Just because we don't understand something at this moment is no reason to stop learning. We didn't know what caused disease 100 years ago, and we've made incredible strides in immunology, but no scientist will tell you that we are on the the downward slope of medical research. As soon as you figure out one thing, you realize how much more there is.

Ok something simpler how about a blade of grass.

I think it was created by God on the second or third day. How else could it have happened we all know man can't do it.

Just a few months ago we couldn't confirm the existence of the Higgs
Boson either.
Don't include me int the WE or in the church of yesteryear. As you
know there is no evidence that there isn't a God. But there is an very
large amount of evidence that shows man to be lacking in the knowledge
of the universe and it's coming into existence.

I'm very interested in having a sensible discussion. Why do you think I'm
not interested?
Your response didn't depict a willingness to discuss this any further.
I apologize since it appears I was in the wrong.

God the Father , The Son , The Holy Spirit.

It's obvious that science has done some amazing stuff. I find it sad though that something so simple as a blade of grass can't be reproduced, but yet that same crowd thinks it just happened by chance.

"Science and religion can be compared to the layers of an onion. Science starts on the outside and peels off layer after layer as new knowledge is acquired. But science can never get to the center of the onion because science can't go back to the beginning of eternity to KNOW what started it all. Religion starts at the center of the onion and words its way outward. It starts at the center because religion requires a leap of FAITH... religion already knows what's at the center of that onion and the answer is god. It is those layers of onion that keep me from accepting theories like the "big bang' theory as the finite answer to creation. So… maybe there was a big bang, but what's under the next layer of onion? What came before the big bang? Something has to exist to make something else. That something may only be a chemical element, an atom, or a part of an atom… but where did that atom come from? Energy doesn't just create itself. This is where faith comes in handy, because it allows us to say "Yes, I believe that god is at the center of the onion. I don't have empirical evidence that he is there, but I don't have any empirical evidence that he's not there, so I'm going to believe it anyway." In my case, I believe that I do have evidence - in that blade of grass."

For me the evidence is everything that surrounds me. I sometimes just stand in awe at the perfection he created for us.

[QUOTE=Sid Burgess;718878]But you are making the entire existence of a deity based on your understanding of science. In the 50s, we didn't know how to land on the moon. In the 60s, we did.

I'm not all sure about that why have we not been back and why has nobody else been there?

I think it was created by God on the second or third day. How else could it have happened we all know man can't do it.

(Face palm)

Don't include me int the WE or in the church of yesteryear. As you
know there is no evidence that there isn't a God. But there is an very
large amount of evidence that shows man to be lacking in the knowledge
of the universe and it's coming into existence.

Not having perfect understanding of a massive, by human estimation infinite, universe, is not evidence of the divine.

"Science and religion can be compared to the layers of an onion. Science starts on the outside and peels off layer after layer as new knowledge is acquired. But science can never get to the center of the onion because science can't go back to the beginning of eternity to KNOW what started it all. Religion starts at the center of the onion and words its way outward. It starts at the center because religion requires a leap of FAITH... religion already knows what's at the center of that onion and the answer is god. It is those layers of onion that keep me from accepting theories like the "big bang' theory as the finite answer to creation. So… maybe there was a big bang, but what's under the next layer of onion? What came before the big bang? Something has to exist to make something else. That something may only be a chemical element, an atom, or a part of an atom… but where did that atom come from? Energy doesn't just create itself. This is where faith comes in handy, because it allows us to say "Yes, I believe that god is at the center of the onion. I don't have empirical evidence that he is there, but I don't have any empirical evidence that he's not there, so I'm going to believe it anyway." In my case, I believe that I do have evidence - in that blade of grass."

By your very argument, god had to have a predecessor. Who was that?

For me the evidence is everything that surrounds me. I sometimes just stand in awe at the perfection he created for us.

Perfect? How is the appendix perfect? It serves no purpose yet kills numerous people? That's just one. Explain. Now.

Primitive religions were designed to explain the unknown. Why does the sun rise in the east and set in the west? Well, some sub-deity pulls it across the sky. Why do we have seasons? Well, different deities control different aspects of life at different times. Etc. It goes on ad infinitum. Fact is, as we replace the unknown with knowledge, religion becomes less useful. If you want to use it to infuse social order, or morality, that's a legitimate use. But believing in a young planet or creation puts you on the wrong side of knowledge and progress. I don't doubt that many on here will go to their graves believing that the earth was made in 6 days and that science is hokum. Thankfully, their type is disappearing.

Primitive religions were designed to explain the unknown. Why does the sun rise in the east and set in the west? Well, some sub-deity pulls it across the sky. Why do we have seasons? Well, different deities control different aspects of life at different times. Etc. It goes on ad infinitum. Fact is, as we replace the unknown with knowledge, religion becomes less useful. If you want to use it to infuse social order, or morality, that's a legitimate use. But believing in a young planet or creation puts you on the wrong side of knowledge and progress. I don't doubt that many on here will go to their graves believing that the earth was made in 6 days and that science is hokum. Thankfully, their type is disappearing.

You don't actually believe that "the sun rises in the east and sets in the west"? Do you?
I'm sure that you don't. On account o' that would be sorta ignorant and/or uninformed.
In fact, it may be related to the advice, in The Bible, regarding not getting involved in pointless arguments that "profiteth" nobody.

By your very argument, god had to have a predecessor. Who was that?

You're very clever, young man...but it's turtles all the way down.

Perfect? How is the appendix perfect? It serves no purpose yet kills numerous people? That's just one. Explain. Now.

Or the part where there's an amusement park in the middle of a waste disposal facility right between your legs...Or where we eat and breathe out of the same hole (how many people choke to death on their food every year?)...We should have a blowhole.

If we were "designed", then we better be a beta test design...Because we've got some issues.


/thanks NDGT

Perfect? How is the appendix perfect? It serves no purpose yet kills numerous people? That's just one. Explain. Now.

"For years, the appendix was credited with very little physiological function. We now know, however, that the appendix serves an important role in the fetus and in young adults. Endocrine cells appear in the appendix of the human fetus at around the 11th week of development. These endocrine cells of the fetal appendix have been shown to produce various biogenic amines and peptide hormones, compounds that assist with various biological control (homeostatic) mechanisms. There had been little prior evidence of this or any other role of the appendix in animal research, because the appendix does not exist in domestic mammals."

Or the part where there's an amusement park in the middle of a waste disposal facility right between your legs...Or where we eat and breathe out of the same hole (how many people choke to death on their food every year?)...We should have a blowhole.

If we were "designed", then we better be a beta test design...Because we've got some issues.


/thanks NDGT

One of my favorite NDGT's

“When scientifically investigating the natural world, the only thing worse than a blind believer is a seeing denier.”

"For years, the appendix was credited with very little physiological function. We now know, however, that the appendix serves an important role in the fetus and in young adults. Endocrine cells appear in the appendix of the human fetus at around the 11th week of development. These endocrine cells of the fetal appendix have been shown to produce various biogenic amines and peptide hormones, compounds that assist with various biological control (homeostatic) mechanisms. There had been little prior evidence of this or any other role of the appendix in animal research, because the appendix does not exist in domestic mammals."

You have a rather arbitrary way of choosing when to use/disregard science.

"For years, the appendix was credited with very little physiological function. We now know, however, that the appendix serves an important role in the fetus and in young adults. Endocrine cells appear in the appendix of the human fetus at around the 11th week of development. These endocrine cells of the fetal appendix have been shown to produce various biogenic amines and peptide hormones, compounds that assist with various biological control (homeostatic) mechanisms. There had been little prior evidence of this or any other role of the appendix in animal research, because the appendix does not exist in domestic mammals."

And then it spends the latter portion of its life getting infected and trying to kill you...

Or the part where there's an amusement park in the middle of a waste disposal facility right between your legs...Or where we eat and breathe out of the same hole (how many people choke to death on their food every year?)...We should have a blowhole.

If we were "designed", then we better be a beta test design...Because we've got some issues.


/thanks NDGT

Would you rather piss or crap out of your forehead instead? Lol

Chew your food well and you won't choke.

And in your theory did man come first or woman? Or did they both just happen by chance?

And then it spends the latter portion of its life getting infected and trying to kill you...

This is another question for the science community to answer I know tons of people that have an appendix and haven't died yet, maybe just maybe the appendix gets infected because of something the person has done or eaten or drank. It obviously serves a purpose in the developmental stages of life , but you can also live without it just like a kidney, gallbladder ,ears, fingers, arms, legs,eyes,and so on duh.

This is another question for the science community to answer I know tons of people that have an appendix and haven't died yet, maybe just maybe the appendix gets infected because of something the person has done or eaten or drank. It obviously serves a purpose in the developmental stages of life , but you can also live without it just like a kidney, gallbladder ,ears, fingers, arms, legs,eyes,and so on duh.

Scientists discover true function of appendix organ - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2007-10-10/scientists-discover-true-function-of-appendix-organ/693946)

"The thing is that if we observe what's been happening through evolution, the higher on the evolutionary scale we are and the more omnivorous animals become, then the smaller and less important the appendix becomes and humans are a good example of that.

Maybe it was better suited in the beginning when foods weren't cleaned and prepared like they are today. I'm not a doctor so I can't tell you.

And then it spends the latter portion of its life getting infected and trying to kill you...

Payback's an appendix.

Maybe it was better suited in the beginning when foods weren't cleaned and prepared like they are today. I'm not a doctor so I can't tell you.

You're not a physicist or biologist either but you're quick to dismiss their findings and research.

And in your theory did man come first or woman?

Well, if you're a considerate lover...oh wait. Another thread.

If we're talking about God as grand designer, he's a poor one, (the waste treatment plant(s) near the fun-ride amusement park analogy has already been made), but consider our sleep cycle. Any engineer who would design a machine that is 'down' 1/3 of the time would be shown the door, and rightfully so. What sort of whimsical god would design something like that? First, he made us virtually immortal, then we pissed him off and he cut our lifespans, then we only lived to the 900s or so, then I guess we pissed him off again and he cut us to threescore and ten?

And if he knew everything would play out the way it has, why even make it in the first place? Just do the whole damn thing in his head. Or maybe it is...we're a persistent daydream of an idle god...

Funny how people that deny science enjoy it's results in almost everything in their lives.

Wouldn't it sorta suck to learn God is just Walter Mitty in a coma, or we're all really just living in someone's locker?

Oh-o J, can you see?

Well, if you're a considerate lover...oh wait. Another thread.

If we're talking about God as grand designer, he's a poor one, (the waste treatment plant(s) near the fun-ride amusement park analogy has already been made), but consider our sleep cycle. Any engineer who would design a machine that is 'down' 1/3 of the time would be shown the door, and rightfully so. What sort of whimsical god would design something like that? First, he made us virtually immortal, then we pissed him off and he cut our lifespans, then we only lived to the 900s or so, then I guess we pissed him off again and he cut us to threescore and ten?

And if he knew everything would play out the way it has, why even make it in the first place? Just do the whole damn thing in his head. Or maybe it is...we're a persistent daydream of an idle god...

Would you rather piss or crap out of your forehead instead? Lol ever here of gravity I hope you didn't pay for an education.

Would you rather piss or crap out of your forehead instead? Lol ever here of gravity I hope you didn't pay for an education.

If that's how we all had been evacuating for a hundred thousand years, it wouldn't be strange. But it would still be bad design.

And talking smack about somebody's education while confusing here and hear...I LOVE IRONY.

And talking smack about somebody's education while confusing here and hear...I LOVE IRONY.

Syntax, grammar, spelling and sentence structure aren't his strong points, but I usually choose to ignore it. Critiquing someone's command of the English language is just a few steps shy of invoking a comparison to nazis.

Not an English major but never claimed to be and proof reading isn't a strong suit either.

Not an English major but never claimed to be and proof reading isn't a strong suit either.

Perhaps then, you should read your bible for guidance. May I suggest John 8:7 as a good starting point.

What evidence is that a god exists?

DubyaNotes Philosophy (even Cliff would think this is too abbreviated).
I am able to prove God's existence (to my satisfaction) through philosophy.
The first question to answer, I think, is, "Do I exist?" Descartes answers this with, "I think, therefore I am."
The next question to address is, "Do you exist?" That's a flawed question, though, as the answer is almost unimportant. If I think you exist, then you do, in my mind. There are a couple of philosophical schools that take this question in different directions, but the end result is the same. Either you exist in reality or in my personal reality. Finally, if you don't exist (if I'm the be-all-end-all), why am I not the supreme being in my universe? I'm not, so there must be fellow participants in this universe.
The next question is, "How did we get here?" There are considerable schools that claim to have this answer, but my conclusion is that it's a very complex set of events that have us here, orbiting the sun at just the right distance to sustain life, with the necessary building blocks, etc. for our existence. I belive it is highly unlikely that it pure coincidence or happenstance. I belive that there must be a creator.
Further philosophical theories to nail down will take you down the road to believe that there does exist a creator that is god-like.
Again, there are many creator options but the one thing that sets Christianity aside from the rest is that Christianity has a living god.
You can prove this. Concurrent Roman historians document Jesus Christ's existence and his death. Further, there is the evidence of the empty tomb, which was guarded over by Roman Centurions. All the witnesses to his resurrection (ranging from locals to officials, from sympathetic followers to opponent institutions) had NOTHING to benefit from their statements that they saw an empty tomb and a living Jesus.
In my opinion, this corroborates the basic foundation of Christianity. Where it goes from here is much more open to debate, and one I do not desire to engage any further.
My bottom line: I believe that you can prove the existance of a creator philosophically. I believe you can prove the Jesus myth to be true through historical record.

The Jesus myth is a hard one. Lots of documentation. But at the same time, we had people believing in other crazy gods and explaining phenomenon as acts of their deities. I'm not quick to believe the hysteria that was sweeping the region. The irony is that this god you speak of has chosen, in modern, scientific times, to cease showing himself in any verifiable way. That is immensely challenging and demands an alibi to be created to explain it.
If the fact that a bad case of the stupids existed because most misunderstood Jesus' mission or intention means that the rest of the people who could corroborate the Jesus myth (fact, in my book, but hey, I'm not really here to argue with a mean spirit, as I suspect you are not, as well -- OY, the double negatives, please forgive my syntax!!!) were wrong, then you must think that ALL of the people in DC are right up there with Cletus, the voice box of any Tea Party faction. The presence of stupidity or hysteria doesn't mean that all of society is stupid or hysterical.


Also, no, the complexity of life and one's inability to fathom said complexity, isn't grounds for fabricating a deity. It just isn't. We can't see 99% of the spectrum of light. Are we to believe that our understanding and our ability to sense the universe around us is the limit to anyone or anything's ability? You see complexity without purpose and I see complexity with awe but am not compelled to credit anyone. I see too many examples (and we are finding more every day) of exoplanets that could support life. Our distance to the sun isn't precisely special. Earth could swap orbits with Mars and we could still support life.
I understand your statement, but what would you credit? Is it really possible that all this exists just by coincidence? The answer, of course, is yes. It's possible, but the preponderance of the evidence (in my opinion) points to a creator.

DubyaNotes Philosophy (even Cliff would think this is too abbreviated).
I am able to prove God's existence (to my satisfaction) through philosophy.
The first question to answer, I think, is, "Do I exist?" Descartes answers this with, "I think, therefore I am."
The next question to address is, "Do you exist?" That's a flawed question, though, as the answer is almost unimportant. If I think you exist, then you do, in my mind. There are a couple of philosophical schools that take this question in different directions, but the end result is the same. Either you exist in reality or in my personal reality. Finally, if you don't exist (if I'm the be-all-end-all), why am I not the supreme being in my universe? I'm not, so there must be fellow participants in this universe.
The next question is, "How did we get here?" There are considerable schools that claim to have this answer, but my conclusion is that it's a very complex set of events that have us here, orbiting the sun at just the right distance to sustain life, with the necessary building blocks, etc. for our existence. I belive it is highly unlikely that it pure coincidence or happenstance. I belive that there must be a creator.
Further philosophical theories to nail down will take you down the road to believe that there does exist a creator that is god-like.
Again, there are many creator options but the one thing that sets Christianity aside from the rest is that Christianity has a living god.
You can prove this. Concurrent Roman historians document Jesus Christ's existence and his death. Further, there is the evidence of the empty tomb, which was guarded over by Roman Centurions. All the witnesses to his resurrection (ranging from locals to officials, from sympathetic followers to opponent institutions) had NOTHING to benefit from their statements that they saw an empty tomb and a living Jesus.
In my opinion, this corroborates the basic foundation of Christianity. Where it goes from here is much more open to debate, and one I do not desire to engage any further.
My bottom line: I believe that you can prove the existance of a creator philosophically. I believe you can prove the Jesus myth to be true through historical record.

I guess it could be coincidence but when you have essentially infinite possibilities (billions of galaxies each with billions of stars and planets) it becomes more about probable odds than just a coincidence. I like your effort of explaining it from a philosophical perspective but I still dont give much weight to the "well earth is so perfect that is had to be made by God" argument. Even more so when you consider that every day we are discovering many new earth like planets orbiting in the goldilocks zone. Outer space is quite large yall. We cant the only special planet out there.

I get that. I just don't jump to the conclusion that because I don't understand the how, I must insert a deity. One which doesn't 'show himself'.

I agree with you, Sid. When somebody tells me to "look around" and ask myself how there could NOT be a God. I always ask them to look around and ask themselves who could have possibly created a God that created all of this. Then, of course, who created something that could create a God that created all of this...ad infinitum.

Sid, you are just ON POINT. I can't be contrary to anything you're saying and I agree 100%.

I read this book once that basically claimed God was a scientist, which makes perfect sense in a world that can't prove what he actually was/is beyond pure belief so if you take that into account, it purely makes sense why God chose to create the universe. I can't believe that the universe exists for no reason whatsoever and honestly, your god (Dubya and every other Christian, not Sid) is my creator. If everything in the universe is made of God/creator then creator made me in a long line of random sequence.

Dubya, you should read 'Conversation with God' books by Neale Donald Walsh. Very interesting. Keep an open mind.

Edit: Just thought of the book I was reading above:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Case-For-Creator-Investigates/dp/0310242096


Not an English major but never claimed to be and proof reading isn't a strong suit either.

You must work for the Oklahoman! :cool:

I get that. I just don't jump to the conclusion that because I don't understand the how, I must insert a deity. One which doesn't 'show himself'.


The wind is invisible also do you not believe it is real either?

The wind is invisible also do you not believe it is real either?

You can see, touch, hear, feel the wind. You can test for its presence, you can contain it, manipulate it, create it and destroy it. You can discern its composition. You can prove the wind.

I find it odd that when there is a beautiful morning then god made it........but the f5 tornado that causes tremendous death and destruction? Not a chance.