Do u beleave in God

[Mockingbird 0]

WHAT?!?!

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

You didn't read my reply carefully.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

According to your reply, the book we gonna learn how to live does contain some errors.

No, I sincerely believe that in its original form, it contained no factual errors. I might even go so far as to say that in its present form it doesn't contain statements which are untrue; the problems arise where people do not interpret it correctly and fairly... such as when someone insists that a figure of speech in a text should be interpreted literally. See, for example, the argument you are trying to prove-- that the bible is erroneous in saying that the moon is a "light." It most certainly MAY be considered a "light" in the way that word is used in the vernacular.

Quote

But does God tell us truth, or just lying to us like telling things the Moon is light, the Sun turning around the motionless Earth and things like that?

See reply above.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Quote

After all we all have faith, when you jump out of that plane you have faith that your chute is going to open. When you get in your car and put the key in you have faith that the car is going to start. You don't have proof that it will until it does.

This is simply wrong. I have a lot of evidence that my main or my reserve has a good chance of opening.

Scientific theories are backed by evidence and experiment, they have a high degree of reliability in describing and predicting the nature of reality. There is always a chance that new evidence will arise but we work with the best information available, to call that faith on par with religious faith is a gross misrepresentation.

Hi, Dorbie. I'm not replying to you specifically, but more to ones I've discussed this very concept with in the past.

Christianity is also backed by evidence, and those who look for and at the evidence and are willing to follow it WHEREVER it might lead them will find it convincing. Faith is merely believing beyond a reasonable doubt that a certain claim is true; it is assurance about the adequacy and reliability of the evidence for that claim.

What people (especially non-Judeo/Christian people) refer to as "religious faith" today is very often NOT what the the bible describes as faith. "Faith" is a word which has definitely morphed into something the bible wouldn't recognize.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

The Bible suggests the earth is flat, and the sky is a dome-like vault above it. We found out that wasn't true. Religion didn't end.

The Bible suggests that all life was created in a garden about 6000 years ago, and that nothing existed before that. We found out that wasn't true. Religion didn't end.

By "suggests" do you by any chance mean "is misunderstood to say"? The reason I ask is that the biblical authors, instructed/inspired to write by God, nowhere TEACH that the earth is flat, nor that nothing existed more than 6000 years ago. If one is a fair-minded reader, he'll have no problem with this.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[dorbie 0]

Quote

Christianity is also backed by evidence, and those who look for and at the evidence and are willing to follow it WHEREVER it might lead them will find it convincing. Faith is merely believing beyond a reasonable doubt that a certain claim is true; it is assurance about the adequacy and reliability of the evidence for that claim.

The second sentence is incompatible with the "WHEREVER" exploration of your first sentence.

It is not sound to cherry pick facts to match a pre conceived notion. There are alternative simpler explanations for the same evidence. Moreover we can subject a belief to a test based on the predictions it makes or apply Occam's razor to the available explanations surreounding a set of evidence and pick the simplest (and by that I mean most mundane "God" is not a simple explanation it is a vastly complex one).

Despite claims of prophecy Christians are unable to make predictions amenable to testing. The goalposts keep moving when successive failures occur and different predictions in the same faith vary widely.

My theory of parachute operation has a high degree of reliability in predicting success and even predicts the occasional malfunction. The theory is compatile with all available facts, jumping in not an act of faith it is a calculated risk for the reward of the experience.

Religious faith held beliefs are not amenable to any form of scientific testing.

[Mockingbird 0]

You are reading far too much into my two statements.

If one is not willing to follow the evidence for the reliability of scripture texts, the life of Christ and His claims wherever that evidence may lead him, he cannot arrive at truth. He'll only arrive at the presuppositions he began with; i.e., there is no such thing as the supernatural and therefore there is no such thing as God or the Jesus Christ of the bible.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[dorbie 0]

No, it is simply that such supernatural hypotheses are untestable in science.

One needs to generate testable predictions and cannot wiggle when testing.

Of course people do this all the time in Christianity, but when the wheels come off the latest End Times bandwagon you claim endless do-overs instead of concluding that the experiment was a failure and disproved the theory.

One can postuate that God created the Universe as is with all the elements, chemistry, geology and fossil record we see. But that is untestable. It is indistinguishable form conventional science. That is in fact a serious failing for such a theory and anyone can postulate an infinite number of deities or unknowable phenomena with similar powers, all equally plausible, however there is another more serious flaw, such a deity or process would be immensely complex, vastly more complex than the sum of phenomena we measure in the Universe itself. You end up trying to explain a complex thing by offering an even more complex unexplained thing with even less evidence to suport it, it is a step towards ignorance not away from it. Worse, we actually have very sound, simple, tested theories for most of what we observe in the Universe, these are mostly simple elegant explantions from which complexity emerges. They are the favored most plausible theories of Life the Universe and Everything, even if the masses continue wallow in ignorance due to their apathy and lack of competent education.

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

No, I sincerely believe that in its original form, it contained no factual errors.

Your belief does not prove your point.
I have shown several serious examples of contradictions inside modern Bible, which is - as we're told - a Book You Need To Learn How To Live From.

Quote

I might even go so far as to say that in its present form it doesn't contain statements which are untrue; the problems arise where people do not interpret it correctly and fairly...

That's what everyone is saying. However let me remind you about one thing. More than two THOUSAND(!!!) years have passed since introduction of the Bible, but the people still cannot agree on what message it sends to us, and whether there is any message at all. And the problem lies in "interpret it correctly". How do you know whether you interpreted something correctly? Every religion has its own interpretation, which it claims to be the only true interpretation. At the end you have to BELIEVE that your interpretation is correct. This doesn't make any sense.

Quote

See, for example, the argument you are trying to prove-- that the bible is erroneous in saying that the moon is a "light." It most certainly MAY be considered a "light" in the way that word is used in the vernacular.

You're hiding the facts. Bible says about TWO LIGHTS: Sun and Moon (and stars). While we do know that Sun is light (and a star, BTW), Moon is not the same light as Sun - actually Moon is the same "light" as water in my toilet bowl.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Nah, sure. I suppose that is why there is so little debate about global warming being caused by human emission of CO2 or sun spots.

Well, depending on your position about anything there is either a lot of debate, or not enough debate...
However this was not the main idea of my post. I wonder why you missed the rest.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

But what is the scriptural reference for your statement that suicide is one of the worst sins in the Bible?

But you didn't ask for scriptural reference.

Quote

I'll save you time. There is none. That is a Roman Catholic doctrine.

I'll save our time for the rest of discussion with the following question: what book this doctrine is based on?

Quote

Augustine argued in the fifth century that suicide was a violation of the sixth commandment, "You shall not murder" (Exodus 20:13). Later, Thomas Aquinas, being catholic and believing that confession of sin must be made prior to departure from the world to the next, taught that suicide was the most fatal of all sins because the victim could not repent of it. The problem with his view is that it represents a gross misunderstanding of eternal security, which Scripture clearly teaches. We are saved by the grace of God, not by works (Ephesians 2:8-9) and nothing can separate a Christian from the love of God (Romans 8:37-39).

And so?
There are several opinions available. You stick with one, I stick with another. As it is typical in the Bible discussion, neither of us could prove he is right, because it leads to interpretations (and beliefs in those interpretations). And the first link describes it in the best:


Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5 contain two similar version of the Ten Commandments. Both Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17 appear in the King James Version of the Bible as "Thou shalt not kill." This obviously cannot be interpreted literally, because people continually kill plants and animals for food. It has generally been interpreted as meaning that one should not murder a human being, except in cases of self defense or warfare. Christians are divided over whether these verses include suicide. Religious conservatives tend to say that it does; many liberals believe that there are circumstances where suicide is morally justifiable.


To make it clear, let me rephrase it in the following way: "and some Christians believe that suicide is one of the worst sins according to their interpretation of the Bible".

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

It appears you have been well indoctrinated by your former USSR. The majority has changed their mind a million times over the years.

This is correct. The problem is that you may not live long enough for this. Would it help you when you live in a country where reading Bible was a crime that you know that it probably won't be a crime 10 years after you die?

Quote

Thank God the USA is not the USSR! While one never knows what they will actually do until they are actually confronted what they will do in a time of crisis the safe bet (ask those who know me) I'd be the pastor standing up and going to the gulagog for my beliefs.

No, you would not - you'll change. Even the Soviet Union psychiatristic system was very good in this (you probably know how modern narcotics and good psychiatrists can change a person). I'd suggest you some scary books, but I'm not sure there is English translation available.
And yes - in a very unlikely case you don't change, you'll be shot. No kidding, when the majority is fighting, they are cruel.

Quote

I realize my thoughts sound foreign to you, but 52 years of freedom in the USA has taught me we have every opportunity to change what we don't like about our society if we do not grow weary in well doing.

Unfortunately you completely ignored this part of my posts where I'm talking about changes based on beliefs and morals, and why those changes are bad. I'd like to hear your opinion on that.

P.S. Could you please stop quoting your posts in bold? It is harder to read them that way.

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

You didn't read my reply carefully.

It is very easy to say something like that. But at the same time it is completely useless. Maybe I didn't understand what you meant, or there is still possibility that your reply was not clear. It would be waste of time guessing; could you please elaborate your answer?

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[georgerussia 0]

Quote

Christianity is also backed by evidence, and those who look for and at the evidence and are willing to follow it WHEREVER it might lead them will find it convincing.

This quote is incorrect. I personally "looked for it" since I was teenager, and my neighbor I loved to talk to was a Catholic priest (and a very patient and smart one, I have to add, because I was even worse kind of a$$hole than I'm now). So far all the "evidence" I have found, and I have shown was based on beliefs, not on facts. Which makes your quote a chicken-egg problem: you need evidence to believe (because there is no factual evidence), but the evidence will only become the evidence when you believe.

Quote

Faith is merely believing beyond a reasonable doubt that a certain claim is true; it is assurance about the adequacy and reliability of the evidence for that claim.

So could you show us this evidence? So far ALL the evidence I was shown and we discussed ended up as "well, you have to believe in that". Which disqualifies it as evidence in my eyes.

Let's start from the first one. I usually never discuss it with believers, because they cannot prove it, and it makes any discussion useless. However, as you claim you have evidence, let me ask you: do you have evidence that God ever exists? Just remember I'm looking for evidence (read: facts), not explanations or theories?

* Don't pray for me if you wanna help - just send me a check. *

[steveorino 7]

Quote

STEVE: Thank God the USA is not the USSR! While one never knows what they will actually do until they are actually confronted what they will do in a time of crisis the safe bet (ask those who know me) I'd be the pastor standing up and going to the gulagog for my beliefs.

------------------------------------------------------------


GEORGE: No, you would not - you'll change. ... And yes - in a very unlikely case you don't change, you'll be shot

Amazing! The arrogance! You never met me, yet you know empirically I would cave under pressure for my faith. Me, who would have died for my country, but wouldn't give my life for my God??

The fact you have no god and cannot conceive of anything greater than yourself does not mean others are like you!

Now, enough with this, I must skydive. sigh, somebody has to do it!

steveOrino

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

No, I sincerely believe that in its original form, it contained no factual errors. I might even go so far as to say that in its present form it doesn't contain statements which are untrue...

Christianity is also backed by evidence, and those who look for and at the evidence and are willing to follow it WHEREVER it might lead them will find it convincing...

If one is not willing to follow the evidence for the reliability of scripture texts, the life of Christ and His claims wherever that evidence may lead him, he cannot arrive at truth. He'll only arrive at the presuppositions he began with

Ok then. Show me the geological evidence for a global flood. Include if possible where the water came from and where it went.

Oh, and speaking of presuppositions I'll even let you use Answers in Genesis as a resource (that "research" institute which is actually proud of the fact that it will ignore any evidence that contradicts the bible).

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[hairyjuan 0]

righto Jakee!




if they would read Genisis 6:4, then readThe Twelfth Planet, ISBN 0-380-39362-x, and The Talmud of Jmmanuel, ISBN 1-893157-12-1 they would not Keep rattling on about how 'divinely inspired' their little book of mtyhs is.

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[Royd 0]

Quote

Ok then. Show me the geological evidence for a global flood. Include if possible where the water came from and where it went.

It hasn't happened yet, but all of the prognosticators on your side of the table say it's going to happen very shortly.

Better get that ark ready.

[Royd 0]

Quote

God's were created by men out of fear of the unknown. Not knowing where we came from. Not knowing where we are going. Not knowing why we are here. This fear caused men to look for answers. The easiest answer is God did it. I think the real answer is just that there is no answer. Not all questions have an answer.

If there is no answer to our existence, then, do you have the same derision for science?

[philh 0]

The sun , the stars and the moon are described in Genesis and moreover their purpose are described:
Genesis 1
16And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
17And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,

What one should notice is that the moon is described as a light, not giving light but is a light. This is exactly the kind of mistake we would expect an ancient ignorant group of men to make.
Now also notice that the stars are made after the creation of the Earth. This is another factual error,as possible as it is to make one, all astronomical observations and cosmoligical theories indicate that the stars existed before the Earth. Furthermore most stars are not visible to the naked eye and so the idea that they were made to light the Earth is also factually wrong. Again these are not just mistakes but exactly the kind of mistakes one would expect ancient ignornt men to make.
Also go back in Genesis and we find that plants and herbs are are made before the sun and the moon. This is yet anothher mistake because plants cant exist without photosynthesis. Yet anothher mistake and exatly the kind of mistake we would expect ancient ignorant men to make.
Now go back even further in Genesis and we find even more mistakes. Firstly water exists before any light and before the existence of the sun or other stars. This is impossible as water would freeze. Also day and night are created before the sun is created. Now Im aware some christians who are not crazy fundamentlists claim that this is a metphorical day that it refers to an epoch or something, But if that were true why does it define it this way?:
"and God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day."
Im sorry but this passage tells us the conventional 24hhr day is the apropriate definition , this indicted yet again that the bible was written by ancient ignorant men and that is factually wrong on may counts.

[MikeWoolford 0]

I think god is an imaginary friend for grown ups..

http://mysite.de/wildsideadventures

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Your belief does not prove your point.

Neither does yours, right?

We can't express our beliefs without giving proof that they are inerrant?

Quote

More than two THOUSAND(!!!) years have passed since introduction of the Bible, but the people still cannot agree on what message it sends to us, and whether there is any message at all.

Who are "the people" you are referring to who can't agree on the central message of the Bible? Every Christian I've talked to recently knows what the central message of the Bible is.

Quote

Every religion has its own interpretation, which it claims to be the only true interpretation. At the end you have to BELIEVE that your interpretation is correct. This doesn't make any sense.

True, every religion has its own creed, which is often, if not usually, exclusive. And in the evangelical Christian religion, all denominations have creeds (usually referred to as "doctrinal statements"), all of which have relatively minor disagreements. But the central belief is held by all Christians: acceptance of Christ as one's Savior is how each of us is made right with God. This central belief may be variously worded, but the concept is the same.

Quote

You're hiding the facts. Bible says about TWO LIGHTS: Sun and Moon (and stars). While we do know that Sun is light (and a star, BTW), Moon is not the same light as Sun - actually Moon is the same "light" as water in my toilet bowl.

Does the moon look like a light in the night sky? Have you ever been able to read something by the light of the moon?

To insist that the Bible is erroneous because it calls the moon a "light" is unfair and/or indicates a lack knowlege in literary interpretation.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

No, it is simply that such supernatural hypotheses are untestable in science.

Their testability is not indicative of their existence. Isn't that what makes them supernatural?

(I'm not insisting that you believe in the supernatural God. I just have hopes that at the end, each of us will have arrived at the truth.)

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Quote

You didn't read my reply carefully.

It is very easy to say something like that. But at the same time it is completely useless. Maybe I didn't understand what you meant, or there is still possibility that your reply was not clear. It would be waste of time guessing; could you please elaborate your answer?

What I mean is, please re-read my reply. If doing so doesn't make any difference in what you understand it to be saying, then I'll try again.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"

[Mockingbird 0]

Quote

Oh, and speaking of presuppositions I'll even let you use Answers in Genesis as a resource (that "research" institute which is actually proud of the fact that it will ignore any evidence that contradicts the bible).

Wow, do they really say that?

Quote

Quote

Christianity is also backed by evidence, and those who look for and at the evidence and are willing to follow it WHEREVER it might lead them will find it convincing...

If one is not willing to follow the evidence for the reliability of scripture texts, the life of Christ and His claims wherever that evidence may lead him, he cannot arrive at truth. He'll only arrive at the presuppositions he began with.

Ok then. Show me the geological evidence for a global flood. Include if possible where the water came from and where it went.

If I tried that, I'd be in over my head. (Get it? )
No, seriously, I'm unable to do that. True, I could go to Answers in Genesis or whatever, but I'm more interested in stressing that evidence exists for Christianity proper... i.e., for Christ and for his claims, and even for the bible which reveals him to us. But these evidences have been brought up many times over in Speaker's Corner-- true, maybe you haven't seen all of them, but they're there. And frankly, it would be much simpler to just refer to Evidence Which Demands a Verdict than to wade through all the posts which have pointed out a few of the same evidences. Simpler only if you're more interested in arriving at the facts than just volleying words back and forth. Anyway, I hope this clarifies my main concerns in the whole discussion.

I suspect that I come across here (in Speaker's Corner) as too self-assured, or even patronizing. Please believe me when I say that I realize that I DON'T have all the answers. I could lead people astray (tho' not on purpose!) as well as anyone. I'm doing the best I can with what I've learned over the past 50 years. The subject we discuss isn't an easy one. And yet the body of what I believe--- coming from the claims of Christ--- is quite uncomplicated. Profound, I think, but simple.

Blue skies & happy jitters ~Mockingbird
"Why is there something rather than nothing?"