tothewire
dorian
Enkill_Eridos
kayms99
lawman2
centered2
obama the antichrist
bingo little
princessxxx
horsservice
1minionsopinionBill Keller’s Devotional for 11-06-09
Posted by kayms99 on November 7, 2009
A 50 million year old fossil? News broke a few months ago that they had discovered a 50
MILLION year old fossil. Every time I hear one of these stories I cringe, since it only
reinforces in the minds of the masses that this world did NOT come into existence the way
God, the Creator Himself, said it did in the Bible. It only bolsters the myth generations
who have now grown up in schools have been taught, that we “evolved” from a
drop of pond scum and that we are little more than a genetic accident with no meaning or
purpose.
Of course, to believe there is a 50 million year old fossil means you believe in the
scientific dating method used to make that determination. Here is why carbon dating and
all other methods used for dating these types of archaeological finds are flawed. When
God spoke the earth into existence, it was created in a mature state. Unless you knew the
mature age at the moment God spoke the world into existence, it is IMPOSSIBLE for any
dating methods to be accurate!!!
There is probably nothing that angers me more than Christians, followers of Christ, who
don’t have the guts to stand up for the Truth of the Bible. Believers who feel the
pressure of this lost world we live in to compromise the immutable truths of the Bible. A
new term we have created to talk about Biblical creationism is “intelligent
design.” I get livid every time I hear that word used since we have created it
solely for the purpose of being able to share our beliefs on how this world we live in
and we came to exist. I submit to you today that “intelligent design” is simply
a gutless word for those too afraid to say we believe what the Bible teaches about
creation in Genesis 1-2:3!
There are two competing views on how this world and how we came to exist. One is the
theory of evolution that suggests over millions of years we evolved. This is the position
held by those in the scientific community that reject the notion of “God.” The
other view is that there is a Supreme Being, a God who created everything. This is the
position people of faith and those in the scientific community who accept the reality of
a “God” hold. Let me end decades of arguments on this issue right now and tell
you exactly how this world and we came to exist. GOD TELLS US IN GREAT DETAIL IN GENESIS
CHAPTER ONE THROUGH CHAPTER TWO VERSE THREE!
My friend, this world and all that is in it, including us, came into existence EXACTLY
how the Bible tells us in Genesis 1-2:3! For every child and young adult out there that
is in school, your homework assignment today is to read the first chapter of Genesis
through the first 3 verses of chapter 2. Now you will never have to wonder or guess again
how we came to be or how this world and all that is in it came to exist. GOD SPOKE IT
INTO EXISTENCE EXACTLY AS THE BIBLE SAYS! GOD CREATED MAN FROM THE DUST OF THE EARTH AND
MADE HIM IN HIS IMAGE EXACTLY AS THE BIBLE SAYS! PERIOD! END OF DEBATE!
First of all, the theory of evolution is just that, a theory. A completely foolish one I
might add. Not only have a large percentage of those in the scientific community
abandoned it, the only reason it is still taught is because those who reject the
existence of God have to have some explanation how this world came to exist and how we
came to be. That is why I pity those who champion this theory, since even they have no
explanation when you take what they believe back to the very beginning.
They say we evolved from monkeys. As you walk them backwards all the way to the very
beginning, you are still left with the unanswered question of where did that first cell
come from? It is the same problem those who try to explain the existence of the earth and
all that is in it without there being a “God.” You take them back to the very
beginning and you are still left with the unanswered question of how did that first event
come to be without the involvement of a “God.”
The biggest problems with those who hold to a position that this world, we, came into
existence without a “God,” is that it means this is all an accident and we
exist by mere chance with no real plan or purpose. If you believe we evolved from pond
scum to monkeys, then our lives are utterly meaningless and this life has no purpose to
it at all. For those who truly believe this, they are to be pitied among all men. What a
sad existence if you go through this life believing you were an accident and your life
has zero meaning or purpose.
That leaves us with the position held by those who do believe there is a “God”
who created the earth and all that is in it, including us. I spent several semesters in
seminary studying all of the various theories put forth to explain Biblically how the
Bible could be correct and there could still have been million of years involved in the
creation process. Theories that accepted the existence of a “God,” but not
exactly how the Bible describes creation.
After many hours alone with the Holy Spirit and God’s Word, I came to one conclusion. THE
ONLY ACCOUNT OF HOW THIS WORLD CAME TO EXIST AND HOW WE CAME TO BE WAS GOD’S ACCOUNT IN
GENESIS CHAPTER 1! God literally spoke the world and all that is in it into existence in
6 literal days. and this world we live in is less than 7,000 years old!
Here is the problem if you take any other position. Once you start making excuses for
what God’s Word says, once you start finding ways for it to say something other than what
it clearly and literally says, you are now playing a dangerous game. If the Biblical
account of creation is not exactly as God says, what else isn’t exactly as God says?
Did the walls of Jericho really come down the way the Bible says, or is there another
explanation? Did the Red Sea really part as the Bible says, or is there another
explanation? Did Noah’s ark really exist as the Bible says or is their another
explanation? Did Jesus really rise from that tomb on the third day as the Bible says, or
is there another explanation? ARE WE REALLY SAVED BY FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST AS THE BIBLE
SAYS, OR IS THERE ANOTHER EXPLANATION?
You see the problem? Once you start to doubt one part of God’s Word, you have to start to
doubt other parts of the Bible. My friend, you are free to believe whatever you want
about the creation of this earth and all that is in it, about how we came to exist. I am
NOT going to argue with you. There are many great ministries out there that deal with
these issues. There are tons of great books that go into great detail on this subject. I
choose to put my faith and belief in God’s Word alone. I believe in BIBLICAL CREATIONISM.
This world and all that is in it and we came to exist EXACTLY how God says in His Word!
I love you and care about you so much. One hundred years ago, even those who rejected God
and His Word knew that God created the heavens and earth and created them as well. Fifty
years ago, those in the scientific community that rejected God was doing its best to
propagate this laughable theory of evolution even though the vast majority of people
thoroughly rejected it. Now, in 2009 after 40 years of no prayer and Bible teaching in
school, having allowed society to take God out of every aspect of public life, those who
hold to the Biblical account of Creation are laughed at as narrow-minded mental midgets
while those who “know how to think” hold to a theory that says we came from
pond scum and makes our life nothing more than an accident with no purpose.
For those who know the Bible to be God’s inspired, inerrant Word, representing Absolute
Truth and our final authority in all matters, we have NOTHING to apologize for and
nothing to be ashamed of. We certainly have no reason to be trying to hide our beliefs by
creating terms like “intelligent design” so we appear to be more intellectual
to this nonbelieving world. The fact we are even discussing what is so clear from God’s
Word only shows how void of God and His Truth our society has become.
The last thing those who know Chris as their Savior and hold to the Truth of His Word
need to be doing is compromising or minimizing the power of that Truth. The world is
HUNGRY for the truth we possess. The next time someone asks you how the world came to
exist, how we came to be, tell them the answer is exactly as described in Genesis 1-2:3.
God Himself tells us the answer and that is good enough for me!
In His love and service,
Your friend and brother in Christ,
Bill Keller
The Bicycling Guitarist said
What an idiot. He might as well insist that the earth is flat, since the Bible clearly teaches that too. So Kay, you consider this guy to be a reliable source of information? LOL
This illustrates the point I’m trying to make about fundie Christians. Why should I take their word about ANYTHING, especially spiritual matters that are a matter of faith, when they are so clearly and OBVIOUSLY wrong about something that has as much physical evidence as evolution? Since they are so clearly and OBVIOUSLY wrong about something that I can easily check, they are PROBABLY wrong about everything else they believe too.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Christians finally admitted they were wrong about the sun going around the earth. Sooner or later those lunatic fringe cult Christians that still deny evolution will fade away. Kay, was this post your way of answering my question about what you think of the evidence for evolution? So you have a closed mind to truth, huh? Would God lie to us? Why would he make it LOOK like evolution happened if it didn’t?
Enkill_Eridos said
This is funny, I like BK’s rants sometimes. Now lets put my two cents in the mix, liven things up a bit. How do we know that God created the Earth Mature? Because of a parable? So if someone blessed a raw seed and gave it to people to eat it would flourish and we would know Jesus’ message? That is a laugh. The Bible was written in parables to describe a process and a being that is really indescribable. So a parable said God said this and it was so, its funny really since God itself has no gender, race. God is an Omnipotent being that can be everywhere at once. A being who is apart from time as we know it. A being that operates on a level we can only half imagine. This is the theological description of God. This is actually one of the few things Judaism and Christianity agree on theologically. So we take a book of parables that’s only purpose is to show the Will of God. A book that jumps from the beginning to Cain and Abel. Which Cain and Abel was around the coming of age between 13-20. The bible said Moses lived to be 150 years, and as time went on the lifespan shortened. All of these things was filler to the parables that laid out gods laws and commandments to those that followed him. Genologies of the different Jewish tribes, Jewish Histories, Trials and Tribulations of the Jews. This is what makes up the inbetween in the old testament. Stories of prophets and holy men that did great things because they obeyed and followed the commandments of the Most High God. Parables that showed if you obey God, he rewards you. Disobey him and he punishes you. Looking throughout the bible the beginning is really irrelevant. Also the most devoted to God and his teaching was able to learn and understand more about the universe and how it came to be. Those practitioner’s agree that the story of creation is looking at a series of events as God saw it. God is outside of time and space as we know it. Seven days to God could have been millions or billions of years as the Earth turned. Most that do not understand this simple fact, that our sense of time and God’s are really different. This is theologically taught both in Judaism and Christianity. But BK and a handful of other preacher’s resist that theological teaching stating it is not important. To me they are saying God is nothing more than a man, who thinks like a man, reckons time like a man, but yet knows all? Sounds like ego stroking to me. This is the mystery of life, what if God laid this all out to actually show us the time and effort it took to create a world that we his creations can live on? See the funny thing is if God came to a scientist and told the scientist exactly how long it took as we reckon time that scientist would be crazy. But if God told someone who paid a seminary college to teach that person about God, he is a prophet or close to God? So why is it a stretch to say God could have done things like it says in the bible but to him it was seven days and to the Earth it was Millenia? Maybe just maybe the whole parable of creation was to explain how day and night came to be, how the numbers of days in a week, month, year was determined. The only way the common human could understand it at that time. What if the only really important parts of the bible are the ones talking about God’s Laws and Commandments. Which the Old Testament only holds maybe 2% of those Laws and Commandments. But those are said to be the most important. What if everything else is filler to answer the common man’s questions. Now we find answers closer to the truth and we shun them for fairy tales? Parables meant to teach man about a being more powerful than we can imagine and how he made us, in a way we could at that particular time understand? HOW IS THIS A STRETCH?
1minionsopinion said
“Unless you knew the mature age at the moment God spoke the world into existence, it is IMPOSSIBLE for any
dating methods to be accurate!!!”
Can I pause to laugh at that one? Is he serious? He really believes this? How many other people also believe this? Good grief. No wonder atheists can’t compete. We can’t function at that level of ignorance and still breathe in and out. Maybe Kellor can’t either and is suffering from oxygen deprivation.
That’s so silly. Why believe that instead of accepting the age of a fossil as the age figured out by every technique science has at its disposal for measuring that stuff? They don’t make those numbers up. No devil is coming around to add zeroes to the computer readouts. That’s the age. The bones are that old. It’s not inconceivable. It’s really really cool!
“Did the walls of Jericho really come down the way the Bible says, or is there another explanation? Did the Red Sea really part as the Bible says, or is there another
explanation? Did Noah’s ark really exist as the Bible says or is their another explanation? Did Jesus really rise from that tomb on the third day as the Bible says, or
is there another explanation? ARE WE REALLY SAVED BY FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST AS THE BIBLE SAYS, OR IS THERE ANOTHER EXPLANATION?”
There is always another explanation. Was Jericho in an earthquake zone?
I think the Red Sea might be. Quakes do funny things to water, don’t they?
And which version of Jesus rising do you go by? Each gospel tells the story differently. Which one is right? You do know why Easter has to move every year, right?
As to the CAPS LOCKED QUESTION I’d say it’s unfortunate that belief and faith are all that’s needed. Nothing in there about good deeds or being a good person or nice or kind or honest or truthful or trustworthy. Just have to believe in Jesus and everything will be A-OK.
What a good deal those believers have. The rest of us have so many more ways we need to measure up.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
And that first event argument falls apart too. So you invoke God to explain the origin of the universe. Then what’s the origin of God? If God has always existed, why can’t the universe always have existed?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
I see Bill Stupid uses the Omphalos argument, that the world was created with the illusion of age. He also makes the false claim that evolution has been abandoned by most scientists, and the equally false claim that if one accepts evolution one is an atheist. Bullshit! The reason nearly all scientists and educated people in the world accept the FACT of evolution is because of the overwhelming evidence, literally mountains of evidence of many different types that each stand alone yet also corroborate each other in stunning ways sometimes. IF it didn’t happen, then the God of the Bible is a malicious prankster. That’s the bottom line. What’s your answer to this, Kay, or should I say, Black Knight?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Accepting the fact of evolution does not mean that God was not involved. Denying the fact of evolution shows one is either ignorant of the evidence, too stupid to understand it, wicked enough to know it exists but deny it anyway, or insane. Which are you, Kay? You can’t claim ignorance since I’ve shared links with you about the evidence, so that leaves stupid, wicked or crazy (or some combination of the above).
Enkill_Eridos said
I want Kay or Bill to answer how parables are fact? Does that mean all of Asop’s Fables actually happened. Every story in the bible has a deeper meaning. It’s funny we talk about life and preserving life when we are destroying a very complex organism that is keeping us alive. I believe the Earth is very much alive. I’m talking on a much much higher level than us. I mean the Earth does so many wondrous things that keeps it from blowing up. Earthquakes, and Volcanoes is one example. They can be very destructive but that’s because we build things on fault lines and by dormant Volcanoes that can become active at any time. We know why Earthquakes and Eruptions happen. We know why naturally occurring forest fires happen. We talk about human life like it’s sacred and ignore the very organism keeping us alive. We know that without Earthquakes and Volcanoes the pressure in the Earth’s Core would be too much. We wouldn’t know what would happen and I really don’t want to find out. But the Earth from the Core to the Ozone keeps us alive. The trees convert carbon dioxide into oxygen, there are warnings the Earth gives before an Earthquake or Volcano erupts. We are too blocked off to get these warnings or too thick headed to actually heed them. Organisms change to survive the Earth does the same. From the gradual separation of continents to the actual rotation of the Earth. It all keeps the Earth together it keeps it alive. We are just a tiny part in the big picture. I think we are so vain that we think we are the biggest part of it. The Earth will put us in our place, hopefully a majority will listen. But a life giving planet is not a simple thing it has to be just the right distance from the sun, just the right size, everything has to be in synchronicity. That happens with time how can someone refute this? How can someone say this changing to adapt to the Earth’s changes to stay in sync with the planet is wrong? Without it we wouldn’t be able to survive.
princessxxx said
well, now you see where kay gets all her crazy ideas from,
including the idea that she can get away with lying and not be called out. lol
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Bill Keller is a liar. Whether he does so from ignorance, stupidity, malice or insanity I do not know, but it is certain that he is speaking untruth regarding evolution.
Wow. It is so incredible to me that anyone can be so out of touch with reality as to think the earth really is flat just because that’s the way they interpret a book of Bronze Age fairy tales…
Thing is though, he is probably making good money spreading his lies to people who WANT to hear those lies, because the truth is uncomfortable for them. I have too much integrity to do that. I love truth too much to do that.
princessxxx said
keller speaks untruth about everything.
he is a convicted felon, insider trading, laundering money, conspiracy.
“ignorance, stupidity, malice or insanity”
how about, all of the above.
Enkill_Eridos said
You know they can and probably do say the same thing about us? and our interpretations of the Divine and its plan for us?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
yeah but there IS a difference regarding evolution…we have the fossils!
The Bicycling Guitarist said
and there ARE many transitional fossils. Creationists say there aren’t. They lie.
and most scientists accept evolution as a FACT. Creationists say they don’t. They lie.
and you don’t have to be an atheist to accept that evolution happens. Creationists say you do. THEY LIE!!!
What’s that in the Bible about bearing false witness?
kay~ms said
TBG said: “He also makes the false claim that evolution has been abandoned by most scientists, ”
He did not say that… he said “Not only have a large percentage of those in the scientific community abandoned it, ”
See how easily INCORRECT ASSUMPTIONS get made?? You saw “most” because that is what you wanted to see.. it supports your claims that Creationists lie. How many other incorrect assumptions on this subject have you made?? ( concernig Bill’s statements alone, you’ve done this twice now). And more to the point.. how many scientists make incorrect assumptions because it is what they want to see and it supports their view / belief??
Thanks for helping to point that out.
You said: “And that first event argument falls apart too. So you invoke God to explain the origin of the universe. Then what’s the origin of God? If God has always existed, why can’t the universe always have existed?”
This argument doesn’t work.. you know why?? Because we are here! And so the real question is.. does it make more sense that existance was created by a Supreme Being or just happened by accident… that we evolved from POND SCUM. And therefore there is no purpose or meaning to our existence.. it just happened. That is what the evolution of “man” proposes. We aren’t “men” we are advanced pond scum. I want to see scientists come up with a meaning out of that.
You said: “Accepting the fact of evolution does not mean that God was not involved. Denying the fact of evolution shows one is either ignorant of the evidence, too stupid to understand it, wicked enough to know it exists but deny it anyway, or insane. Which are you, Kay? You can’t claim ignorance since I’ve shared links with you about the evidence, so that leaves stupid, wicked or crazy (or some combination of the above).”
I’m the one (like Bill) who chooses to believe the word that God gave us. Whether it’s literal or based on a different definition of time… IT’S NOT THAT IMPORTANT! The Bible’s explanation is good enough for me. The most important thing is to not reject His love and the gift that He gave us.
Share the discoveries in classrooms but don’t teach theory as fact until it is actually a proven fact. If scientists are still having problems and disagreements concerning archeological finds and how to interpret them then it’s not ready to be presented as fact.
Anonymous said
kay has a comment in moderation.
1minionsopinion said
“I want Kay or Bill to answer how parables are fact? Does that mean all of Asop’s Fables actually happened”
The story of the crow, the pitcher and the rocks might be. Studies have been done to see if crows can think their way to unique solutions and it’s pretty damned remarkable how they utilize tools. A lot of animals do, but I found a video online of a crow’s ingenuity that just floored me:
http://www.sciencemag.org/feature/data/crow/
Also:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/10/071004-crows-tools.html
The Bicycling Guitarist said
You can lead Kay to evidence but you cannot make her think.
I’m with Frank Schaeffer on this one. Somehow he cured himself of fundamentalism and I applaud him for it, but for those still afflicted society should not and must not restructure itself to accommodate the village idiots. Let’s move on and leave them standing on the hill waiting for their end times.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Perhaps I am a bit harsh towards Kay. There were some posts where she acknowledged that the evidence of nested hierarchies seemed to strongly indicate macroevolution happens, and other posts where she acknowledges that she doesn’t know how God created. I meant to substitute the word Creationists where I have Kay in the previous post, but then I got annoyed that after several days she hadn’t answered any of my questions directly, then posted this drivel. If she really believes Bill Keller speaks for God, then God help her!
princessxxx said
kay says, “TBG said: “He also makes the false claim that evolution has been abandoned by most scientists, ”
He did not say that… he said “Not only have a large percentage of those in the scientific community abandoned it, ”
how different are these claims? what is the difference between a large percentage and most?
and yet another example of kay twisting words and the truth.
the truth is, a large percentage have NOT abandoned evolution.
just keep on lying kay. keep on twisting everyones words around.
no one notices. hehehe.
TBG, you don’t have to be hard on kay if you don’t want, that’s my job.
and yes, kay does believe keller speaks for god.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Kay the Black Knight village idiot says: “Share the discoveries in classrooms but don’t teach theory as fact until it is actually a proven fact.”
Done. It is being taught as fact because it is.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
If humans did NOT evolve from apes as all the evidence suggests, how do YOU account for all the evidence? How do you account for even the few bits of evidence I challenged you with in other posts? If we didn’t evolve from apes, then your God must be a trickster to plant false evidence to try to mislead us.
1minionsopinion said
Gravity is just a theory, too. You know what makes more sense? Air pressure. Air pressure is pushing us onto the earth because it’s so heavy. Doesn’t seem heavy when you walk right through it, but how high can you jump? Not very. Only balloons and planes and insects and birds can manage to achieve any lift in this insane air pressure we have. That’s why we’re not all swimming in the sky.
Don’t believe me? Try this on for size. Get a glass and a sturdy piece of cardboard. Fill the glass with water, cover the top with the cardboard and carefully tip the glass over. If you’ve done it properly, you can take your hand away and the cardboard won’t fall down. Gravity theory would dictate that the cardboard should fall and the water should fall, but they don’t. Why? Because air is so strong it can hold cardboard up and keep water in an inverted glass. Isn’t that amazing? I think that totally disproves gravity. I think all the science books need changing, but I know nobody will fight for that like they ought to be.
How come my provable air theory can’t be part of the “Teach the controversy” campaign? I’d rather believe air is the reason over gravity. I don’t believe gravity exists. Magnets can drag stuff around too, but you aren’t going to say the earth is magnetized. It can’t be. I don’t believe in magnetic poles. If that was true, all our vehicles would start drifting in those directions if we left them in neutral with no parking breaks on. That doesn’t happen so magnetic poles can’t possibly exist. It’s all a lie Obama supporters dreamed up to justify getting better parking places.
—–
Remind you of any arguments you’ve seen lately?
I think calling evolution a Theory confuses too many people. “Theory” suggests that scientists have an alternate scientific possibility on hand that can explain how old everything is and how everything’s changed over the years.
Unlike my air pressure example and experiment, there isn’t another scientific theory that can explain the adaptability of species over thousands and thousands of years as neatly and consistently as the evolutionary model does. That is why evolutionary model is accepted by nearly all scientists in related evolutionary fields. It explains everything that’s been found so far and to my knowledge, there is no scientific discovery as of yet to suggest it is invalid in any way, shape, or form.
Do scientists bugger up theories related to evolution? More often than they’d like to admit, probably. They find skeletal remains they’ve never seen before, they make a hypothetical suggestion as to its origins and sometimes they jump the gun on reporting its significance. Other scientists will catch the boo-boo at some point, though, and readjust the original assumption to fit the new information. Skeletal remains that are misidentified will never be a means of disproving the validity of evolution.
Evolution is true enough to satisfy most questions of how we came to be this way.. at least for people who are capable of comprehending just how long an eon is.
princessxxx said
TBG, did you catch this line?
” For every child and young adult out there that
is in school, your homework assignment today is to read the first chapter of Genesis
through the first 3 verses of chapter 2. Now you will never have to wonder or guess again
how we came to be or how this world and all that is in it came to exist. GOD SPOKE IT
INTO EXISTENCE EXACTLY AS THE BIBLE SAYS! GOD CREATED MAN FROM THE DUST OF THE EARTH AND
MADE HIM IN HIS IMAGE EXACTLY AS THE BIBLE SAYS! PERIOD! END OF DEBATE!”
- bill keller.
he wants everyone to be a village idiot
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Thank God that the Founding Fathers of the United States (who for the most part were NOT Christians) were wise enough to put separation between church and state. That line will hopefully never be taught in public schools in this country.
As for private and home schools, even though that it could be considered child abuse, let ‘em teach whatever they want. The world needs people to flip burgers and dig ditches.
It is a shame that there are so many people who are so STUPID as to deny what is quite possibly the most well-proven FACT known to man: that life evolves. Every time I get into a discussion with someone like that I feel like I am talking to someone who is trying to convince me that the earth is flat.
The funny thing is that evolution does not conflict with Genesis. Man does come from the dust of the earth. The earth does bring forth animals after their kind. The origin of life came from the chemicals and environment, and chemistry is not random. Once life started, evolution explains how it diversified, and natural selection is not random either.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
To admit that the evidence exists but that one chooses not to believe it because of religious convictions, that would be something I could respect. But to lie about the evidence, that’s just sad.
It is funny that Bill “village idiot” Keller indirectly DOES admit to some of the evidence, by having to come up with such a lame excuse as God created the earth in a mature form in order to account for the scientific data about the age of the earth. Why stop there though? Why not say that God created us all last Tuesday with memories of lives we never lived, etc.?
1minionsopinion said
“State your convictions and stand by them. Don’t try to play these word games. If you feel God’s presence in your life, then just say so. But don’t tell other people what they know in their experience. And don’t define other systems of thought according to Christian ideology. God is simply a non-issue to science because there is no way to objectively test the hypothesis. Attacking science doesn’t prove the Christian God nor does it do much of anything else besides.”
Saw this in an article that’s better written than more stuff I manage. Heh:
http://benjamindavidsteele.wordpress.com/2009/11/10/re-proof-for-gods-existence/
Enkill_Eridos said
Most of the founding fathers where Masons and Rosicrucians. They belonged to esoteric societies..I think I commented on this in another topic. I would also like to state that some believed in God and Jesus, just didn’t have the same views as Christianity. The fact that many Presidents also where Free-Masons or Rosicrucians
Here is another fact thanks to The World Factbook. Protestant 51.3%, Roman Catholic 23.9%, Mormon 1.7%, other Christian 1.6%, Jewish 1.7%, Buddhist 0.7%, Muslim 0.6%, other or unspecified 2.5%, unaffiliated 12.1%, none 4% (2007 est.) So around 77% of the US population is actually Christian. I would say that is a decline. I wonder what the 2010 Census will say?
Maybe I should do a post about Census jobs?
kay~ms said
P asked: “how different are these claims? what is the difference between a large percentage and most?”
A “large percentage” is subjective… it is based on what ever the bases is… if 10 years ago it was only 2% that didn’t believe but today it’s 40%. The it would be considered a large percent.
“most” is definitive… it has to be a majority.
I agree that his statement is misleading though. But it still proves my point about TBG jumping to the conclusion that he wants… he does it all the time. And so do scientists who are desparate for “big” finds.
kay~ms said
1minion said:
(Bill) “Unless you knew the mature age at the moment God spoke the world into existence, it is IMPOSSIBLE for any
dating methods to be accurate!!!”
Can I pause to laugh at that one? Is he serious? He really believes this? How many other people also believe this? Good grief.
You know what is silly? Scientists stubornly thinking that we are going to figure out (or even more riduculous “have figured out”) how existence began. When our very science proves that our existence is illogical. That is what is silly… insisting that there is a rational explanation for our existence. It’s silly, sad and ignorant.
You have no basis for discounting Bill’s theory. You have no basis for discounting God. But ironically (without scientific evidence to disprove Him)… you do discount God. You cannot know for sure. And logic leans in favor of a Supreme Being as opposed to it just all happened.
“God is simply a non-issue to science because there is no way to objectively test the hypothesis.”
See.. it’s an excuse to avoid God. “oh, we can’t prove Him so we are not interested”.
Well, He is our Creator, and He is the most logical explanation for our existence, and it would also be logical to assume that since He is our Creator, He does have complete control over us now and for all eternity, “but we aren’t interested because we can’t prove Him”. Now who’s stupid?
Enkill_Eridos said
(Bill) “Unless you knew the mature age at the moment God spoke the world into existence, it is IMPOSSIBLE for any dating methods to be accurate!!!”
That is assuming the Carbon Dating Method is going from absolute 0 to the current age. But it does not it dates it from the current age backwards, this method was proven to be accurate, by measuring the naturally occurring radioisotope carbon-14’s half-life. by William Libby. He recieved the Nobel Peace Prize for this. Using this method he dated an ancient Egyptian barge, that already had a documented age, and it was scientifically accurate.
Using this method scientists estimate, that the Earth is about 4.54 billion years old. This is consistent with the oldest known terrestrial and lunar samples.
Now Christianity has theorized many different dates.
Two dominant dates for creation using such models exist, about 5500 BC and about 4000 BC. These were calculated from the genealogies in two versions of the Bible, with most of the difference arising from two versions of Genesis.
Some Traditionalist Catholics use the year 5199 BC, which is taken from Catholic martyrologies, and referred to as the true date of Creation in the “Mystical City of God,” a 17th-century mystical work written by Maria de Agreda concerning creation and the life of the Virgin Mary. This year was used by the church historian Eusebius in 324.[7]
In the English-speaking world, one of the most well known estimates in modern times is that of Archbishop James Ussher (1581–1656), who proposed a date of Sunday, October 23, 4004 BCE; he placed the beginning of this first day of creation, and hence the exact time of creation, at the previous nightfall, exactly 4,000 years before the birth of Christ according the ideas of his time. (See the Ussher chronology).[3]
The majority of classical Rabbis hold that the Earth was created around 6,000 years ago.[9] This view is based on a chronology developed in a midrash, Seder Olam, which was based on a literal reading of the book of Genesis. It is considered to have been written by the Tanna Yose ben Halafta and covers history from the creation of the universe to the construction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem. It is known, however, that a literal approach is not always warranted when interpreting the Torah.[10] Two of the most influential rabbis commenting on the Talmud, Maimonides (Rambam) and Nahmanides (Ramban) held that Genesis should not be taken literally. A minority of classical rabbis believed that the world is older, basing their conclusions on verses in the Talmud the midrash.
Scholars of the Kabbalah taught that the Earth was created over 6,000 years ago. Bahya ben Asher concludes that there were many time systems occurring in the universe long before the spans of history that man is familiar with, and based on the Kabbalah, calculates that the Earth is billions of years old.[9] Isaac ben Samuel of Acre caculated that the universe is actually 15,340,500,000 years old. He arrived at this conclusion by distinguishing between earthly “solar years” and “divine years,” based on a verse from Psalms, which states that “A thousand years in Your sight are but as yesterday” (Psalm 90:4). If each day of a divine year is equal to a thousand earthly “solar years,” then a divine year would be 365,250 years long. Isaac then makes some other calculations based on the Talmud and the Biblical sabbatical year, and arrives at the number 15.3405 billion, which is quite close to the scientific estimation, which places the occurrence of the Big Bang at 13.7 ± 0.2 billion years ago.[12]
I would take the last paragraph as more accurate. It both proves the scientific theory using scriptural evidence, and divine creation. So how can you disagree? I do not understand how science cannot be used with spiritual practices. How can Bill really believe what he believes, when there are scriptural evidence. Is this evidence discounted because this estimation is given by one of Jewish decent and faith? If anything using Issac’s estimation, with information from the scriptures, is it not possible that science is affirming a God exists? There are Christian Scientists that believe that Science is gradually proving that God exists. Through science we know the exact location of an ark, built with the same specifications in the Torah. I mean I do not understand how science has proven the Earth is much older than 5000 bce. How even learned Rabbi’s say the bible is not to be taken literally in all things.
sources:
Radiocarbon Dating
Radiometric Dating
Scientific Estimation of the Age of the Earth
Dating Creation
1minionsopinion said
“Well, He is our Creator, and He is the most logical explanation for our existence, and it would also be logical to assume that since He is our Creator, He does have complete control over us now and for all eternity, “but we aren’t interested because we can’t prove Him”. Now who’s stupid?”
You don’t need to call me stupid. We’ll agree to disagree on the origins of the universe. I’m fine with that.
1minionsopinion said
Unless you meant scientists are stupid because there is no way to measure god so you think they’ve given up on the challenge?
Enkill_Eridos said
Here is my two cents, God cannot be touched, seen, or heard physically. To believe that there is a being that is all things and created all things good and bad is a matter of faith. Faith is believing in something that cannot be proven or disproven through mundane means. The opinion that God doesn’t exist is also something of faith. Because it cannot be proven or disproven. That is to go by the meaning of faith. I mean I have some very plausible explanations, that can tell you my reasons why I think God exists. And 1minion can tell you some very plausible explanations of why 1minion thinks God doesn’t exist. So is either an untruth? No, just because it is written in a book does not make it true. I can write a book and say every word is inspired by God. I can truly believe that and it will be true to me. But that doesn’t mean it has to be true to you, so simmer down on this subject its getting a little too hostile. I mean to assume you are correct in a matter such as this is arrogance in the extreme. Don’t give any explinations, don’t argue about it. Because it will never end, redundant and unproductive debates will get the Betty White. Don’t make me post the Betty White.
Enkill_Eridos said
What I mean about assuming you are correct, is actually lowering yourself to a lower intelligence then you actually are. I mean really Now who’s stupid? That argument didn’t even prove or disprove anything. If you are going to put up a debate on if God exists or not (I will allow up to 400 posts on this debate so everyone can see the redundancy of it) but for goodness sake argue like an adult.
dorian said
oh no we don’t have to repeat ourselves again on the God existence or no existence – here’s one such debate, thread count = 468
http://tothewire.wordpress.com/a-christian-conservatives-view/
1minionsopinion said
I think the trouble I find is how the argument gets phrased. “Scientists don’t know how the universe started so that means God did it.”
You don’t know how my wallpaper got hung, so that means pink elephants did it.
No it doesn’t. It just means you don’t know. You can assume god is the answer, but it can’t be stated as a fact the same way “an orange is round” can be. We all agree on what an orange is. We all know the definition of round. We can agree with the statement as a truth. We can’t all agree with the statement that god made the universe as a truth.
1minionsopinion said
Sorry Dorian. I won’t say more about it.
princessxxx said
let’s debate if satan exists. fair and balanced.
dorian said
kay~ms said
I used the word stupid in response to what 1minion said:
“Can I pause to laugh at that one? Is he serious? He really believes this? How many other people also believe this? Good grief. No wonder atheists can’t compete. We can’t function at that level of ignorance and still breathe in and out. Maybe Kellor can’t either and is suffering from oxygen deprivation.”
She didn’t use the word stupid but I’m pretty sure that is what she meant.
When I used it I was alluding to the scientist who said basically that scientists are not interested in God because He can’t be proven.
But really, and I’ll use ignorant instead, anyone who dismisses God without any evidence to disprove Him, or at least a valid ulternative theory on how we got here… is, well, ignorant. We do not have anything even close to explain how it all began. So, laugh all you want at Bill’s theory but you don’t have anything better or anything that even comes close for that matter. That’s what is silly. That’s what I meant.
That is where I get my laughs from… listening to people (particularly “intelligent” people) try to explain their theory on how it all began.. without God. It’s HILARIOUS!!
1minion said: “I think the trouble I find is how the argument gets phrased. “Scientists don’t know how the universe started so that means God did it.”
You don’t know how my wallpaper got hung, so that means pink elephants did it.
So, it was either pink elephants or you? That makes sense.
Existence is either by accident or by design. What other explantion could there be? So, right there, the odds are 50/50.
The odds that if it wasn’t you that put up the wallpaper but a pink elephant are…. well, I’m guessing it’s a pretty high number.
you said: “We can agree with the statement as a truth. We can’t all agree with the statement that god made the universe as a truth.”
So that is where reason comes in. That is the only other alternative. The scientist said that since God can’t be proven he wasn’t interested. That might be good enough for him but it isn’t good enough for God according to the Bible. And for the very reason that we don’t know for sure, it would seem that the stupidest thing to do is take the stance that he does, that most scientists take.
And EE, again, there can only be one truth. There is your belief and my belief but there can only be one truth.
Enkill_Eridos said
The beauty of it is, that I am not disagreeing with you. Because the way we perceive things is what makes it true to the individual. There are different perspectives on this matter, and nearly all religions have the same core beliefs and messages. Karma, the Three-Fold law, the Golden Rule basically say the same thing. You do good, good will come back to you more than you gave. You wrong people, that will come back to you as well. I mean three ideologies that appeared on the Earth at about the same time, and in summary that is what they talk about. There are other similar teachings that have the same message this has happened throughout history. We can only believe what we perceive as true. Since there is no way to absolutely prove that a spiritual practice, or religion is true, besides through faith, the truth is only what we perceive.
For example, there are those in every religion and spiritual practice (there is a difference between the two, to be religious does not always mean you are spiritual and vice versa.)that believe their religion is the absolute truth, without acknowledging that it could be only a small part of a bigger picture. The fact that Christianity and Islam actually thinks the same in this respect is, to me is kind of funny, the difference is that everyone already fears Christianity. I mean if the Pope said today that God told him that all the followers of Christianity should come together and take up arms against Islam. According to the latest figures there are 1.1 billion Catholics in the world. Rough figures for all of Christianity is 1.6 billion. A rough figure for the amount of Muslims are 1.57 billion. How many Christians do you think would follow what the pope said if the pope called for a papal army? I would say 75%, I don’t fear any governments starting World War 3, I fear that religion may cause World War 3. Based on I am right, this book which I believe is inspired by my God says I am right. Both religions think precisely that.
1minionsopinion said
It’s possible to be ignorant of some things and smart about other things. Stupid just seems to imply overall stupidity and therefore anything that person says can be disregarded on account of lack of functional brain matter. Sorry if I implied Keller was in the same company.
“The scientist said that since God can’t be proven he wasn’t interested. That might be good enough for him but it isn’t good enough for God according to the Bible.”
Which scientist? Source please.
People wrote the bible. I think people decided for themselves what was good enough in God’s eyes because that’s what people tend to do. I think they decided what god would want based on what they’d already decided they’d be doing. I’m not forcing anyone to agree with me, but often when we think we’re making a conscious choice, our brain has already put the choice in motion anyway.
http://mindblog.dericbownds.net/2006/07/free-will-free-wont-or-neither.html
1minionsopinion said
More about the brain thing via New Scientist: http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13658-brain-scanner-predicts-your-future-moves.html
Enkill_Eridos said
That is very true, your body language actually can tell a person your subconscious choice before the choice comes into your consciousness. Don’t believe me? I can show you just stay locked in a room with me for five minuets.
1minionsopinion said
“What a sad existence if you go through this life believing you were an accident and your life has zero meaning or purpose.”
Actually, I think my parents planned me. I wasn’t an accident. But if Keller thinks life can’t have meaning without a god involved somewhere, he is wrong. I get why he thinks this is so, but he’s wrong.
He views purpose through faith and what he thinks god expects of his followers.
I view purpose and meaning through humanity and think it would benefit everyone if more thought went into what we do and say and feel. Not everyone lives with a purpose in mind. Not everyone seeks meaning. That, too, is a choice. It’s not mine, though.
I choose what purpose my life has. I give it meaning by those choices. When I give to charity, I do so because helping is worthwhile and I have more than I need.
When I share my computer skills with my coworkers, they’re grateful for it and I’m glad to have helped with that, too. Considering all the changes going on with our libraries across the province, anyone with half a clue should be giving aid to everyone else. The training we’ve gotten for this new setup is completely unacceptable and useless.
Could I do more? Absolutely. I’d be a hypocrite to sit here claiming otherwise. I shouldn’t be waiting until people ask for help before I say I’ll offer it. Promoting my willingness to assist would help me keep my purpose and meaningful life in order. I should aim to do that more often.
dorian said
e_e’s #42 summed up what i would have said pretty well, so i will just add my two cents to that.
wars have always been the result of beliefs clashing, whether it’s ideology or faith. hubris in those beliefs caused blood to spill all over this earth. the perpetual animosity between muslims and judeo/christians will probably cause a third world war. because america is the most powerful ally of israel and therefore an enemy of the muslim nation, WW111 will come from here. this country will not stop fighting any muslim extemist insurgence or not counter any attacks, so before any other attacks happen, the nations’ leaders must do everything to prevent it.
i’m wondering what the religious leaders are doing to help prevent more violence? i don’t think they’re doing enough. why don’t they get their noses off their sacrosanct books and their booties off their gilded thrones or mats and hold their own united cleric conclaves conferences and see what they can do to help promote peace? what good are their lives dedicated to the study and worship of their divine holy gods up in the heavens if they don’t do squat to promote goodness and light amongst all humans? is it because they perceive their gods to be exclusive towards their own people? what happened to the concept of One God? revelation 9:9 (don’t bother to look this up, i made it on the fly) – God did not create man in his own image. man created God in his own image. therefore, i say, do not worship your God for the sake of worshipping him, for that is nothing but idolatry, and you’re probably worshiping yourself (gasp!!). just go out there and do things that will benefit the well-being of others. the practical, everyday acts of human kindness.
have a good day blessed with love and good timing, all you sinners and saints, gentiles, jews, atheists, heathens, infidels, muslims, buddhists, freemasons, rosicrucians, hare krishnas, zoroastrians, shamans, reikki masters, ghost hunters, etc.., etc…off to work i go!
here’s your cartoon for the day:
kay~ms said
First, I want to start off with these passages written by Paul (for real) that I read last night.
” 18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools . “
Enkill_Eridos said
I do not understand where you are going with this. Well I have an idea, but you will have to explain “wickedness”. They supressed the truth by their “wickedness”, would this be in relation of fabricating doctrines with no biblical evidence? I am sure you can come up with some (even though I have provided biblical evidence.) I can actually give an example of one such doctrine, who Mary Magdalene was. The whore I am referencing is in Luke 7:36-50.
36 And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee’s house, and sat down to meat.
37 And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster box of ointment,
38 And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment.
39 Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him: for she is a sinner.
40 And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith, Master, say on.
41 There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty.
42 And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most?
43 Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged.
44 And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head.
45 Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet.
46 My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment.
47 Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.
48 And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.
49 And they that sat at meat with him began to say within themselves, Who is this that forgiveth sins also?
50 And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace
As you can see her name was never spoken.
There are many theories on who exactly Mary Magdaline is, the bible also mentions Martha’s sister named Mary.
Pope Gregory the Great declared that all three women were the same person and it wasn’t until 1969 that the Catholic Church reversed course.
In noncanonical gospels like Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip and the Acts of Peter, she plays a prominent role — often asking intelligent questions when all the other disciples are confused. Jesus is depicted as loving her more than any of the others because of her understanding.
There is even theories that she was married to Jesus. It is not much more than a stretch, but there is no scriptural evidence. Would supressing the noncanonical gospels be concidered hiding the truth by wickedness?
kay~ms said
Now (after posting those passages from Romans chapter 1) Dorian, EE and 1minion… I acknowledge that doing good is.. good. No one is disagreeing with that. It is what God wants us to do. He is the One who set it up so that when we are not doing good, consequences follow. It’s a brilliant plan/ concept. And I highly doubt you can attribute this to evolution (TBG).
But as per the passages above, God requires slightly more from us than just doing good. He is our Creator and He loves us. And God does more good for us than we could ever do for others even if we lived an eternity and it’s not too much to ask for our acknowledgement and love in return. So, while doing good is, again, good. It’s just part of the big picture. To keep regurgitating that it’s all about kindness and doing good and leaving God out is ignorant of our Creator and the kindness and good that He has done for us. And that is NOT good. So, everytime you all impress how good it is to do good, and how it’s the most important thing, if you don’t also mention the importance of the acknowledgment of the good that was done for you, if you don’t mention God, you are not representing the whole picture, you are leaving out the most important part and the very source of all good. It doesn’t make sense to do that. There is something very wrong when God is left out.
EE said: “For example, there are those in every religion and spiritual practice (there is a difference between the two, to be religious does not always mean you are spiritual and vice versa.)that believe their religion is the absolute truth, without acknowledging that it could be only a small part of a bigger picture.”
But you and Dorian and TBG are not acknowledging that there could be “absolute truth”! It goes both ways. Each of us is entitled to believe either way. I believe there is absolute truth and it is Christianity. You all can believe what ever you want. Please don’t insist that I am wrong for choosing to believe that there is absolute truth because you do not know for sure which it is. And I do not know 100% that my belief is true. But it is my belief and guess what… I am not going to go out and force people to believe my way. I understand that people have a right to believe what they want. As do all Christians (true Christians). We understand that God gave us free will. Dorian, where you are confused is in your understanding that radical muslims do NOT understand the individual rights of others to believe what they want. If WWIII happens between Christians and Muslims… it will not be started by Christians… we will be defending ourselves against their aggressive religion that orders conversion or death. It’s really pretty clear (it’s no secret) what Islam teaches concerning this. Christianity does not promote conversion or death. There are no passages in the New Testament of Jesus stating this… but there are plenty from Muhammed…
Passages from the Koran…
Part 1:
http://nowscape.com/islam/koran_sura.htm#4.89
Part 2:
http://nowscape.com/islam/koran_sura2.htm
kay~ms said
1minion said: “Which scientist? Source please.”
It was in one of your comments where you were quoting someone (a scientist I think).
You said: “People wrote the bible. I think people decided for themselves what was good enough in God’s eyes because that’s what people tend to do. I think they decided what god would want based on what they’d already decided they’d be doing.”
True, people physically wrote the Bible. But they were inspired by God. Every time someone says that, it’s like they can acknowledge the concept of a Supreme Being but not the concept that He would have the capabilities of giving inspiration to His creation. Just like He isn’t capable of understanding/ creating science. He can create things but having control is apparently not possible.
And if it were true that people based what God wanted on what they would be doing… I’m pretty sure they would have written God’s will to be much less restrictive.
dorian said
maybe their image of God was of a restrictive God. so they would write according to that image, yeah?
if i were to write about God’s will, everybody would be encouraged to dance and sing and go fishing and join the peace corps. my version would be a little more jovial than yours, kay. but there will be torture.
Enkill_Eridos said
You wrote: And if it were true that people based what God wanted on what they would be doing… I’m pretty sure they would have written God’s will to be much less restrictive.
Really now? The Old Testament was written in a time when the Jews where nomadic peoples, each tribe worshiped a different God or Goddess. This was before the enslavement of the Jews. The purpose is clear since Moses wrote the four main books of God’s Laws. Along with a few other minor books. Moses wrote down everything God told him up to when he God spoke to him on the Mountain. These books took a lifetime to write. They where written to be restrictive because the Jews were a lawless people, about as brutal as the Persians. The war against the Jews and the people of Islam go back way before either religion was established, by the way. Moses wanted to change that, and he believed God spoken through him so that his people, his nation could be united instead of divided. He achieved this goal by writing the Torah. (Which is Moses writings but not the entire Old Testament.) Moses single handedly saved the Jewish people. He started Judaism. Now let’s fast forward many centuries.
The Jews believed this Messiah would come, a man named Jesus was born. He taught and he had disciples and apostles. He died, and as the story goes he rises from the dead. Jesus had twelve apostles. He also had a number of disciples that followed him. Some of those Apostles’ writings are not apart of the New Testament. And there is debate among theologians whether or not all twelve apostles were men. Now we know a majority of the Christian Doctrines are based off of writings done by someone who obviously hated women.He pushed his views that women and sexual relations, even between married couples, were inherently immoral and were to be regarded lesser than a man, and in the case of the actions it was regarded as a necessary sin.
From day one Christianity has been about control. They didn’t start the “fire and brimstone” message until about 1200 CE. That was when Revelations was moved from the Heretical list to the recognized list.
Rutherford H. Platt, a historian wrote in his book “The Lost Books of the Bible”, which is a translated record of the books that were left out of the bible.
“The compilation of the Bible was not an act of any definite occurrence. It was a matter complicated and abstruse. It was an evolution at the hands of Churchmen of various beliefs and purposes. In the formulation of early church doctrines there was dissension, personal jealousy, intolerance, persecution, bigotry. That out of this welter should have arisen the Bible, with its fine inspiration, would seem to present a plausible basis for belief in its Divine origin.”
Enkill_Eridos said
Oh Kay I am acknowledging there is a single absolute truth. It just seems not to be yours, I believe I have said that all of these truths are apart of a bigger picture. Now the extent of that picture, I believe is vast and we will never see the complete picture, not now in this life or the next. As I believe that there is an Intelligent Design, due to the fact to me for everything to line up just perfectly, for the correct star to form, for the specific formation of the planets that revolve around that sun. (It has been observed there needs to be one gas giant in a solar system for a habitable planet to form.) It’s all apart of something much bigger and much more intricate that we will never be able to fully understand. I understand that I am, but a very small part in this system that makes up the multiverse that is the Galaxy in which we live. I understand and accept that your truth is a part of a much bigger absolute truth. But I do not think that your absolute truth is that. There are a lot of questions that are raised for that to be the case. Even what I have pieced together isn’t even close to this “absolute truth” that all spiritual practices are searching for. (Spirituality and Religion is two different things, in my eyes.)
kay~ms said
EE, you said: ” Even what I have pieced together isn’t even close to this “absolute truth” that all spiritual practices are searching for.”
Well, if no one has found the absolute truth, then apparently it wasn’t meant to be found? Not many will find it that’s for sure. So what are we supposed to get out of that? That our Creator doesn’t want us to know Him? To know His will? That doesn’t seem reasonable to me.
You said: ” I believe I have said that all of these truths are apart of a bigger picture.”
All of these “truths” contradict each other. All of these “truths” worship different gods. Therefore they cannot all be true. Who do you think makes sure our personal wrongs get righted? That if we do bad to others it will come back on us? Is it Allah, Budha, etc etc. or is it just “karma”? Who distributes this “karma”? It doesn’t make sense that our Creator would have such a personal relationship with us but not declare His true identity to us. Or His true will. Does God want us killed if we don’t follow Muhammed? (Islam) Or does God want us to go to hell if we don’t follow Joseph Smith? (Mormonism) Both of these “religions” require devotion to these people or we will parish either here or in the afterlife. They both cannot be right. They both cannot be true. And neither of them agrees with the Christian doctrine that the only way to be saved is thru accepting Jesus Christ as our Savour thru His sacrifice on the cross.
These cannot all be true. If you follow one, you disqualify yourself from the others. This is why your’s and Dorian’s and TBG’s theology is erroneous. It cannot be that all beliefs are true.
And it can’t be that just some of each, all put together is the truth either. Which parts are “true” and which are not?
My belief is that there is one absolute truth and that is Jesus. Those that reject what He has done for them will not receive salvation. If some never hear about Him, that does not mean that they will automatically perish. God is righteous and will judge accordingly. And He has the sovereign right to judge those that reject Him and His gift. That is my belief. And it is also my belief that the Bible is inspired by God. It has a simple message… first, love God with all of our heart, mind and soul and then love one another as we love ourselves. I don’t know how anyone can have a problem with that. And the Bible doesn’t demand death of those who do not follow God. And it does not demand death if we reveal “secrets” of the religion (Mormonism). Those are just some of the many signs that should tell us which religions are false and which is the truth.
Enkill_Eridos said
It seems to me you are thinking I am speaking of religious teachings as “truths”. More often than not religious teachings based not in the spiritual realm. They are usually false. When I speak of “truths” I am speaking of them more from a spiritual stand-point. Almost every religion teaches Not to Kill. But religious doctrines give excuses of when it is acceptable. Every religion teaches that any “good” you do will come back to you thrice. And any “evil” you do will come back to you thrice. These concepts are in the Christian religion are you saying these concepts are false? These are underlying messages, the point of different parables. Most religions do teach these in parables, or fables. An accepted Christian doctrine was for close to a thousand years was if they heard the message and didn’t convert they were to die. This doctrine was followed by many governments until World War II. 1951 was the last time a government gave a capital punishment to someone who did not follow Christianity.
All of these spiritual truths do not contradict each other, they are found in the different religions and they agree with each other. Which makes them true. They are morals of the stories, they are what the parables are supposed to be teaching you. Parables and myths should not be taken word for word. They were presented to man so that man could grasp an understanding of a Supreme Being that everything comes from. It was only supposed to be a stepping stone to the next step. Christianity teaches there is no next step, that going to church and giving the organization money and believing that organization’s teachings. That that’s what God wants. It is not, if it was God wouldn’t have given Moses Kabbalistic teachings to pass on. You speak of God’s word but it is clear you have not heard the true word. Just the words of the men who wrote it. You do not believe that these parables hold a deeper meaning, or the spiritual truth that comes purely from God. I may be wrong because all I have is you writing, and for a year now you have not written anything for me to believe that assumption is false.
Oh and the demanding death if Mormons reveal “secrets” of the Church? How did you come to these conclusions? Since you have been writing about beliefs of a religion that you are not apart of, I decided to ask questions to people that I know are Mormon and people I don’t know. These questions, from the people I do know, came with a snicker. The people I don’t know seemed very confused by these questions. Saying they never heard of such practices and beliefs in Mormonism. The Mormons I do know, wanted me to get an informed answer so they brought me to one of their Elders. Just like if I was saying you believed in something that you didn’t you would take me to your pastor, so that he could clarify. It is the same concept. Now the Elder also got a kick out of that like I told a joke. They told me the only Inner Temple there is, is when a paritioner prostrates before God to make a covenant (promise) so that they will be reunited in Heaven with their families. They in fact believe that the only way to heaven is through Jesus. They believe that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God, and that Joseph Smith created a Church, that they believe, has the teachings and practices God wants the Christian Church to have. According to Christian doctrine anyone claiming to be a prophet is lying. Joan of Arc is one good example of this doctrine. These promises made before God are extremely personal. So most say they can’t say because they don’t feel comfortable. Now to participate in this ritual you must be a Mormon. And to be a Mormon you have to go through like a confirmation of faith course. Much like Catholics, Lutherans, and Episcopalians. They told me what I was describing sounded like free-masonry. (which it is) Mormons believe that even though believing in Jesus is enough to get you into heaven it is only the start on your spiritual growth. The different members have an obligation to help when they can. Like many denominations of Christianity, they believe they are the only true denomination etc. etc. Many Christians believe that Christianity is not supposed to have Denominations, and different doctrines. They call themselves non-denomination Christians.
Spirituality is much different than religion, Spirituality in the most basic sense is more of the search for the spiritual teachings God has tried to teach all men. Spirituality as I see it is practices designed to help your spirit grow. Which is why many Spiritual Organizations do not claim any one God as the Supreme Being. You can be apart of a Spiritual Organization and still be apart of a Religion. When I say no one can understand the absolute truth, it does not mean that God never wanted us to have a relationship with him. It means to see and understand the absolute truth of life, the multiverse, and everything within, we would have to be the Supreme Being which is impossible from my stand point. So we will never get the absolute truth and if we do I assure you it will not be in the form we are in now.
Also in Buddhism, Buddah is not a God but a man that is spiritually enlightened. The belief is once this enlightenment is attained you leave the cycle of life. One could easily interpret, and many do, that to achieve this is to become apart of God.
See we have the same absolute religious truth. The only difference is that I do not think God wants us to just end with that. I think he wants us to grow more spiritually, and for me Christianity just wasn’t doing it. I felt God wanted me to learn more, to grow more, and in doing so reaching an understanding of what he was trying to tell mankind as a whole.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Kay the village idiot claims that “…cannot all be true. If you follow one, you disqualify yourself from the others. This is why your’s and Dorian’s and TBG’s theology is erroneous. It cannot be that all beliefs are true.”
In the big picture, Kay, the core message of all faiths is the same, thus no contradictions. It is only from your perspective that these differing faiths appear to contradict each other. This is because of the cultural baggage that starts attaching to spiritual messages as soon as anyone tries to communicate them using words, which are not adequate to do the job.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
I agree that they appear to contradict each other, and if you interpret things literally they in fact DO contradict each other. Literal interpretation is only one way to do it though, and considering the nature of words perhaps not the best way. These stories point to the same reality. If you want to be like Jesus, become a Buddhist.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
My last two posts in this thread are talking about spiritual matters. It is possible to experience different states of being directly but it isn’t possible to truly share such experiences, at least not using words.
On the other hand, the original subject of this post is evolution and the age of the earth. Now that DOES have ways in which different people different places can observe part of reality the same way and come up with the same results every time. In other words, physical proof that can be cross-checked with other proofs. Observed and verified. Done. The earth is about 4.6 billion years old and humans came from apes. Those are FACTS of the physical world.
Again I say, why should I trust anything someone like Bill Keller says about spiritual matters that cannot be measured when he is SO WRONG about something as obvious as evolution that has SO MUCH proof it happens? Christian fundies come off looking like total retards in denial of reality because of dullvotionals like this.
princessxxx said
kay says,
“All of these “truths” contradict each other. All of these “truths” worship different gods. Therefore they cannot all be true. Who do you think makes sure our personal wrongs get righted? That if we do bad to others it will come back on us? Is it Allah, Budha, etc etc. or is it just “karma”? Who distributes this “karma”?”
bill keller says,
“Karma originated from the false Hindu religion and has been adopted by other false religions like Buddhism and the various New Age philosophies. It literally means deed or act, and more broadly names the universal principle of cause and effect that governs all life. The basic teaching of karma is that for every event that occurs, there will follow another event whose existence was caused by the first, and this second event will be pleasant or unpleasant depending on whether the first event was pleasant or unpleasant. Karma is a philosophy that has NO basis in truth and to be perfectly blunt, is a load of cow manure.”
obviously keller has never heard of “you reap what you sow” or ” do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” that ‘is’ KARMA.
kay~ms said
EE said: “Christianity teaches there is no next step, that going to church and giving the organization money and believing that organization’s teachings. That that’s what God wants.”
Could you tell me where in the Bible does it teach this?
You said: “An accepted Christian doctrine was for close to a thousand years was if they heard the message and didn’t convert they were to die. This doctrine was followed by many governments until World War II. 1951 was the last time a government gave a capital punishment to someone who did not follow Christianity.”
And also this.. where in the Bible does it say to convert to Christianity or die?
And could you be more specific about the capital punishment that was given for those that didn’t follow Christianity in the 1900s? In 1951?
You said: “It was only supposed to be a stepping stone to the next step.”
That’s not what Muhammed said or Joseph Smith. Those “religions” are pretty clear about their doctrine..
EE, this modern doctrine that liberals subscibe to sounds great… it even makes sense in some ways, but that doesn’t then make it the truth. What exactly are you basing this “truth” of YOURS on?? The only basis you have is your own reasoning. And you are then espousing it as “the” truth. Where did God say that all faiths are the truth? Or lead to the truth. Where? Which “religion”? And why would that one then be true but Christianity that says there is only one way be false? Because you or TBG or Dorian or any other liberal decided it to be true? Because it sounds better? Yeah… sign me up for that.
You said: “Oh and the demanding death if Mormons reveal “secrets” of the Church? How did you come to these conclusions? Since you have been writing about beliefs of a religion that you are not apart of, I decided to ask questions to people that I know are Mormon and people I don’t know. These questions, from the people I do know, came with a snicker. The people I don’t know seemed very confused by these questions. Saying they never heard of such practices and beliefs in Mormonism. ”
“came with a snicker” (and denial)… Gee.. could it be because of the harsh punishment for revealing these things??? You seem to be very gulible to the fact that cults like this exist and that these things do exist. I didn’t necessarily say that Mormons act on this doctrine literaly… I don’t know. But those that do go thru a ceremony to become a temple mormon as mitt romney did, must acknowledge that revealing any of the “precious” secrets of the ceremony will result in death. This information has been given by ex Mormons who have gone thru a temple ceremony. Possibly now they have made changes? I dont’ know. And those people that you asked most likely are not temple mormons. So they dont’ know. They really don’t have a clue what their actual “religion” is really about unfortunately.
You ask your Mormon friends about the “secret” “sacred” underwear… they are not supposed to talk about that either… see what they say. This is why William had to exit our debate… he knew I would eventually ask him about these things and he would either have to lie or leave under a ridiculous excuse like I “went to far”.
princessxxx said
william left the dabate just like everyone else does,
they get tired of your ridiculous arguments.
and your lies.
kay~ms said
TBG…. no, if you want to be like Jesus, become a Christian. It’s not rocket science. Buddists do not love God and put Him first. They are all about “enlightenment”. It’s all about themselves becomming “enlightened”. Knowledge is power right? So it seems to me that it’s all about ego and power. What a bunch of crap. And I might be a “village idiot” to the liberals here (because they don’t get the concept of humility; submission to God) but at least I’m not a village idiot on a bicycle playing a guitar… you got me on that one.
princessxxx said
oh kay, that was not nice. where in the bible does it say to return insults?
nowhere.
kay~ms said
You are a liar for saying that P. You KNOW that is not true. If you dont’ know it, you are not as smart as I thought you were.
kay~ms said
comment 65 was referrng to comment 62.
as to comment 64… you are right… but he deserved it. How would you like to be called the “village idiot”? By someone who rides around on a bicycle playing a guitar? God doesn’t like hypocrisy either.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
No Kay, your comments show you totally misunderstand Buddhism. Not surprising, considering you seem to misunderstand many other things as well. What the heck do you think enlightenment is anyway? It’s the exact OPPOSITE of what you seem to think it is. It is not all about the self of the ego. It is all about the big mind, the big Self with a capital “S”, a.k.a. God (except Buddhists don’t use that name). Buddhists don’t label God not from disrespect but because they recognize that any label is incomplete and leads to confusion and distraction.
Speaking of labels, the content (or lack thereof) of your posts demonstrate that Village idiot and Black Knight both fit you, Kay. Ignorance, arrogance, intolerance and an extra big helping of hypocrisy. My, what a model you present for non-Christians to get a taste of your religion. Try following Jesus sometime instead of Bill Keller, or become a Buddhist.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
It IS all about putting God first. That’s where you and I should be able to be in agreement, except that you insist your way is the ONLY way and everybody should believe not just the Bible but your interpretation of the Bible, or the interpretation of people you follow such as Bill Keller. Oh well. I apologize for calling you names. It’s still a couple weeks until December. Is the truce still on between you and Princess, or has war broken out again?
Enkill_Eridos said
Kay doctrine is teachings made by Christianity a lot of Christian doctrine is not in the bible, or doesn’t have solid scriptural proof beyond conjecture. The same thing can be said about religion. God created the earth, he separated the water from the land, he created the atmosphere, he created the trees and rocks and animals. Then he created man. So where in the bible does it say God created Temples or religion? Both was created to honor him. But God didn’t create them, man created religion and the Temples. Man saw that religion is a good way to get people to do as they are told. Religion has gone from honoring God, to a way to control others. Islam is an excellent example of how a Religious Leader can influence those that believe that religion into making something THEY want done. And the believers of that religion follow without question. The same thing with Christianity. Christianity teaches that those that question the Christian Church, they are heretics. That’s not in the bible, but they do. Don’t believe me? Look at you defending the Church.
Also William left the topic because you were throwing a lot of propaganda back at him. The last thing he said was for you “to tell the truth about his religion before spewing your lies.” He left that discussion not because there was secrets he didn’t want to tell. He left because you wouldn’t listen and you kept pushing Bill’s Propaganda.
tolerance = agreeing? no tolerance = allowing one to speak, even if there is knowledge that he or she will piss someone off.
WTF(W=who in this case) is these liberals you keep talking about? Definitely not talking about me since I am not a Liberal. Or is that your blanket term for those that are NOT close-minded and don’t ask questions that should be asked? Just like the phrase that a lot of Conservatives like to say before delivering their Conservative Poison “Everyone knows…” Who is Everyone? And any comments on how usually when a phrase that starts out with Everyone knows is usually wrong?
I’m not posting on this subject anymore, and I will tell you why. It’s not because I am wrong. It’s because I really want to lay down the Ban Hammer, and it is against policy to do that just because someone is being annoying, judgmental, pig-headed, and just generally unpleasant. I’ve said my peace on this subject (more than once did I repeat the same thing over and over again.) If you refuse to accept that this is my view, it is how I see the truth. That it isn’t going to change, that’s fine. I’ve already accepted that this is how you see the truth, and that you will continue to antagonize everyone. I know that because that’s just how you are. You can’t help it I know, so I am deciding this debate is no longer worth my time. That is the reason I am ignoring this debate from this point on. So then when someone says E_E left because of you. You cannot call them a liar, when I didn’t leave for any other reason. The Temple Mormon does not exist, there is no secret underwear, no decoder ring. It’s just like saying that the North American Union exists, or that 9/11 is a huge government conspiracy. It is something not based on fact.
kay~ms said
TBG said: “No Kay, your comments show you totally misunderstand Buddhism. Not surprising, considering you seem to misunderstand many other things as well. What the heck do you think enlightenment is anyway? It’s the exact OPPOSITE of what you seem to think it is. It is not all about the self of the ego. It is all about the big mind, the big Self with a capital “S”, a.k.a. God ”
So, in other words… Buddhism teaches that we are “god”? And you don’t see ego in that? What is enlightment? Isn’t it knowledge? You can say all you want that it’s not about self but that won’t change that it is about the self growing in “knowledge”. I don’t find any focus on God except as you just described… the divinity in ourselves. Did I get it right that time? If not please explain how it’s not about self. Is there a Supreme Being to be worshipped that is not the “big” “self”? This theology makes no sense to me. And I don’t see any humility anywhere… oh, you say there is but that is no different that the Mormons saying that they do beleive that Jesus saves us “completely”… but then also insist that good works are required. The words and actions / beliefs contradict each other. But they think that if they say it’s not the case then it is not the case. (No, that is not the case.)
When you get right down to it, these cults are all the same.
YOu said: “Speaking of labels, the content (or lack thereof) of your posts demonstrate that Village idiot and Black Knight both fit you, Kay. Ignorance, arrogance, intolerance and an extra big helping of hypocrisy.”
I would really love it if you could elaborate on my ignorance, arrogance and intolerance (especially that one) and hypocrisy… I prefer accusations about me to be backed up because otherwise they hold no weight.
And also, I could say the same about you AND back it up…. right after you back up your accusations.
YOu continued: “My, what a model you present for non-Christians to get a taste of your religion. ”
Please, this too, what exactly are you refering to? That I returned an insult? Oh, you would like that wouldn’t you? You are not a Christian so you should be able to insult me but I’m not allowed to return the gesture. I’m holding to the Bible and so is Bill. Exactly what are our faults that dishonor Christianity? Again, I require specifics.. it’s really easy to make smug accusations as liberals like to do so much but they mean nothing if you can’t back them up.
That we don’t act like Buddhists? Again, you are confused.
kay~ms said
TBG, you said: “Oh well. I apologize for calling you names. It’s still a couple weeks until December. Is the truce still on between you and Princess, or has war broken out again?”
Thank you for the apology, I apologize also.
Now don’t try to put the focus on P and me… we are getting along just fine right now… Dorian likes to instigate things to get the focus of off her sometimes… I hate those tactics that liberals seem to use so much when they are losing debates.
Enkill_Eridos said
Dorian does not do those things to get the focus off Dorian. Again there’s that blanket term again. Where exactly are you winning? I don’t see it, hate to break it to you but you’re not winning. Actually hate to break it to you, but there is nothing to win. Unless by winning it means you get the last word, or someone doesn’t say something so profound that it shakes your beliefs. Which if that happens you didn’t truly believe in that did you. And just saying the words I WIN. Does not mean you won. Debates are about presenting your opinions to the audience. The audience actually decides if you win, not the participants. Because if that was the case, in your mind you would always win. But hey if it makes you feel better about yourself than go for it.
Enkill_Eridos said
So who is a fan of Hockey?
1minionsopinion said
“people physically wrote the Bible. But they were inspired by God.”
Or they were inspired by their belief in god and what they thought this god they made up would want of them. They would want this god to let them do what they planned to do anyway, so they believed in a god that was like that. They wanted to be vindictive and petty and mean and full of violence and the only way to get away with it is to say god wants it for some reason.
It’s the same justification people use now for praying to their ill children instead of getting them pills, or molesting them when they know full well they shouldn’t be doing such things. When people let their belief talk them into doing all kinds of things.
But it’s not all bad. People can be inspired to do great things because they believe a god cares about great things getting done. They build the temples, they provide for the poor, they shelter the homeless, they support the arts (did in the past anyway, never seem to hear much about it now) and many demonstrate a willingness to seek out the worst places in the world and bring along a Light.
I might disagree with missionary motives but at least they’re willing to take that step into an unknown situation and trust those they meet as people not only worth dragging into the flock, but helping with food or water or schools or whatever, too. It’s more than most of us manage. Atheists have nothing of the kind. Humanists and secular groups might be working on it though. I hope so. Not that I’d be willing to go along on a trip, but I’d applaud their efforts and consider helping to fund raise at least.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Oh Kay, the ignorant part is easy. You were unaware of the evidence for evolution. I showed you some, and you are STILL unaware of it. That is impressive. It takes ignorance to a whole new level. Arrogance? How about the assumption that YOUR WAY is the ONLY WAY and YOU ARE RIGHT because it says so in the Bible right here… Intolerance? What about the way you bash anyone who doesn’t believe exactly the same way you do?
By way of contrast, I have debated many threads over on Pastor Jeff’s blog. He is smart and polite. If I were younger and less informed than I am someone like him would have very good prospects of “winning” me to Christianity. He makes even fundie Christianity sound reasonable and fun, compared to you who make it look so ignorant and hateful. Well, you asked for me to back up my assertions. There you are. They are of course my opinions only, and I could be wrong. I hope so.
1minionsopinion said
“All of these “truths” contradict each other. All of these “truths” worship different gods. Therefore they cannot all be true. Who do you think makes sure our personal wrongs get righted? That if we do bad to others it will come back on us?”
It doesn’t seem like a very fair system if karma exists, or even if gods are supposed to sort it out. Why does someone or something bigger than us have to be behind any of it?
Why is it assumed there is a payback plan based on what we do? How does it benefit us to believe that the people who do us wrong will get their comeuppance at some point?
If it makes you feel better to think so, think so. Divine justice, karma, however you want to think of it. Is it necessary to hope and pray for such a thing?
Weigh its importance, of course. Some stuff shouldn’t be shrugged off. But a guy cuts you off while driving – you gonna scream about how you hope the cops will catch him sometime today, or damn him to hell for all of eternity or just be glad the pair of you didn’t wind up in the ditch because he misjudged his skill or road conditions?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Kay asks: “So, in other words… Buddhism teaches that we are “god”? And you don’t see ego in that? What is enlightment? Isn’t it knowledge? You can say all you want that it’s not about self but that won’t change that it is about the self growing in “knowledge””
No, Buddhism doesn’t teach anything at all. It gives hints on how to experience spiritual truth oneself instead of taking anyone else’s word for it. Enlightenment is not knowledge. It’s deeper than thoughts, words or feelings. It is getting in touch with the ground of being. To put it into Christian terms, it is answering Jesus’ knock at the door of your heart. You let go the ego self, realize that the image one has of being separate trapped inside a bag of skin is a hallucination, let go and let God (except Buddhists don’t use that term because they realize the limitations of all concepts.)
Zen has often described itself as a finger pointing at the moon. But some people (especially those for whom the fundie interpretation suits their level) don’t look where the finger points and end up sucking the finger for comfort. They confuse the map with the territory. It’s self awareness feeding back on itself and becoming anxious and confused. Zen helps you see clearly. It is spiritual opthalmology. One can be a zen Buddhist AND be a Bible-believing Christian.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
There’s a difference between letting God be your ego (surrendering to His will to put it into Christian terms) compared to making your ego God. Kay’s comments show that she thinks Buddhism is about making your ego God. It isn’t and that comment shows a profound complete lack of understanding of what Buddhism is about.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Hey minion, as I understand it, karma is no more confusing than density. Think of it as spiritual density of a sort, you rise or fall and end up at a certain place that is right for where you should be because of who you are.
If egos reincarnate through several lifetimes, then what happened before could end up where you are now. It still is fair, because they were all your choices. If one makes a leap and decides spontaneously (that’s the trick, spontaneity) to project good vibes, it does affect what’s around you to some degree.
1minionsopinion said
No, I get the concept of karma. I just wonder why the concept exists or needs to.
I prefer karma to heaven and hell. I’d like another go round, even if I have no way to remember it. I’d rather not come back a cockroach or something like that, though. But maybe cockroaches have quite a good quality of life and I’m discounting them because they horrify me…
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Karma might exist just because of the way the universe is structured. Ever see those dessert drinks that have liquids of different densities? Even if you shake them up, if you let them sit the liquids will find their own levels again. It’s just the way they’re structured. So Karma isn’t a type of judgement handed down from above. Your spirit finds its level based on an “spiritual density gradient” and wherever you end up is exactly where you’re supposed to be. Totally fair and logical to boot.
Reincarnation may not necessarily mean you come back after you die into another form or another body. T.S. Eliot wrote a poem about how a guy sitting on a subway train is not the same person as he was before getting on the train. Heraclitus wrote that one never steps in the same stream twice. If however, you THINK you are the same person you were five minutes ago, you are reincarnating.
It may be that our ego selves can last through several lifetimes though, if they’re particularly stubborn or don’t want to stop playing in the field of time and space. It may even be that groups of ego selves may travel together. Your wife this lifetime may have been your grandpa last time, or your pet dog. Eventually though even the most hardened of egos has to recognize that the game is up.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Btw, based on this post Keller apparently doesn’t understand karma (not surprising considering how wrong he is about evolution, age of the earth, and other subjects).
Karma is part of maya that tricks the ego (that is so willing to be deceived in order to play the game). A Buddha, by realizing the now, frees himself/herself from the wheel of becoming.
A lot of people don’t realize that time works backward. It is now that determines the past, not vice versa. Many things about Buddhism seem at first to go against common sense, but sometimes one is taught extremes of one sort or another to correct errors of the opposite extreme. The truth is the middle way, transcending categories of thought such as good and evil, hot and cold, black and white, even being and non-being.
I like it when students are told to stop desire. They try, but then the master tells them they are still desiring not to desire! If you try to do something, you get in your own way.
What Buddha discovered is that it is actually impossible to be truly unselfish as long as one thinks one is a separate ego. The motive gets in the way and contaminates the results. I really like Buddhism, and it is my sincere belief that Jesus was a Buddhist and taught Buddhism as his main message, but obviously a lot of people disagree with me about that! I am neither the first nor the only person to realize this though. I read the same Bible Kay does, and I get a way different message from it apparently.
1minionsopinion said
They tend to be subjective ideas anyway – I know hot and cold can be, at least. Put one hand in water hotter than room temp and one in icy water then put both in bowl of room temp water. You get a mixed up sense of the actual temperature.
I don’t think there’s an absolute good, nor an absolute evil. Just varying levels of value that can only be compared by other values. Lesser of two evils, rock and hard place, frying pan, fire. Interesting how the choices are always between two poor choices. No one’s ever told to choose between the soft or the squishy unless some funky food play is involved…
Jesus doesn’t get mentioned as identifying as one, though. Would they have known about Buddhists back then?
Are there any Buddhist texts from bygone days that could reasonably claim he was? I get how you get to this conclusion and I’m not arguing with it. I just wonder if proof exists or if it’s all just pipedreams and inferences and unverifiable theories.
I like the idea though. That his style and manner is similar enough to Buddhism to suggest he may have actually been one. It’s unfortunate that Christianity still maintains much in the way of Old Testament thought, then, if Christ himself was bold enough to turn from it.
And before I get jumped on, I mean OT in terms of the commandments and the stories of Arks and creation and David and Goliath and other bible stories told to little kiddies before bed to give them sweet thoughts of bygone (and wholly sanitized) days.
How much about the world was known then, though? How many countries would they have been aware of? How much land did they know for certain existed? By “know for certain” I mean locations their very ancestors would have traveled to and from, or where visitors may have originated.
Enkill_Eridos said
TBG read what is called the “apocrypha” is is a collection of writings that diciples and apostiles of Jesus wrote. They all were inspired, but because they dealt with spirituality they all got cut out. Jesus taught about spirituality. We just never heard that message because Christianity decided to burn books. Let’s look at who else burned books that went against a leader or organization’s view point. Nazi Germany, Stalin, Communist China (A lot of historical writings on religion is now gone forever.), the USSR, and the list goes on…..So I guess the Conservative Christian Mentality is I WIN! Naysayer says: How? Conservative Christian picks up a rock and bashes the Naysayer in the head. Again we look at the torture devices of the different Inquisitions, Laws that were founded on accepted Christian Doctrine, of the time, that persecuted other religions. The fact that this nation was not founded under Christianity, but by those who believed similar to Christianity. Some of them where Gnostic Christians, others belonged to esoteric societies. Ben Franklin, and John Handcock are two who belonged to the Freemasons and other esoteric societies. They were very open about this as well.
kay~ms said
1minion said: “Or they were inspired by their belief in god and what they thought this god they made up would want of them. They would want this god to let them do what they planned to do anyway, so they believed in a god that was like that. They wanted to be vindictive and petty and mean and full of violence and the only way to get away with it is to say god wants it for some reason.”
So God was made up so people could be vindictive, petty and mean and full of violence? Maybe it was people who were vindictive, petty, mean and full of violence who twisted the truth of God to allow them to behave that way. If the Bible is a made up book it would require a lot of co-operation from a lot of different people over hundreds (or thousands?) of years. Those books were written by many different people. It is true to history and archeology but the meaning was made up? It is all bunch of stories by people looking for an excuse to be mean? There is so much positive meaning and truth in the Bible. It doesn’t make sense that it would be made up by people who wanted to be mean and vindictive and looking for an excuse to cause harm to others. That seems like such a biased one sided view to me.
You said: “It’s the same justification people use now for praying to their ill children instead of getting them pills, or molesting them when they know full well they shouldn’t be doing such things. When people let their belief talk them into doing all kinds of things. ”
What?? Once again the “bad” minority Christians are singled out to represent Christianity. And as for molesting children… since when was that exclusive of Christians? I can pretty much guarantee that atheists do it to and every other group of people. And there is nothing in Christianity that “talks” people into doing these things.
You said: “Why is it assumed there is a payback plan based on what we do? How does it benefit us to believe that the people who do us wrong will get their comeuppance at some point?
If it makes you feel better to think so, think so. Divine justice, karma, however you want to think of it. Is it necessary to hope and pray for such a thing?”
I don’t believe in “karma”. I believe in God. It is up to Him to right all wrongs. So I dont’ pray for any justice.. I just leave it up to Him. If He decides to never right the wrong then it didn’t need to be righted. I don’t worry about it.
TBG, you said: “A lot of people don’t realize that time works backward. It is now that determines the past, not vice versa. ”
To me, that pretty says it all about Buddhism. And that’s all I have to say about that.
EE you said: “Kay doctrine is teachings made by Christianity a lot of Christian doctrine is not in the bible, or doesn’t have solid scriptural proof beyond conjecture.”
That is exactly my point… if it’s not in the Bible then it doesn’t represent Christianity. And if it’s interpreted incorrectly, it’s not Christianity. And how do we know if it’s not intepreted correctly? When it goes against Jesus’ words. Jesus states His divinity. So “Christian” doctrine that states otherwise is incorrect and not true Christianity.
YOu said: “tolerance = agreeing? no tolerance = allowing one to speak, even if there is knowledge that he or she will piss someone off.”
I agree with you there… but I don’t get mad when I hear someone else state their beliefs with the exception of when they make things up concerning my faith and state them in factual form… that kind of irks me.
It’s the liberals who believe that tolerance = agreeing. Contrary to what TBG accuses me of.. I don’t have a tolerance problem.. he’s just another typical liberal who erroneously thinks that disagreeing is the same as not having tolerance.
You said: “Christianity teaches that those that question the Christian Church, they are heretics. That’s not in the bible, but they do. Don’t believe me? Look at you defending the Church.”
I’m not defending the “church”, I’m defending Biblical Christianity. It sounds like you are describing the Catholic church and I’ve already stated my views concerning it.
You said: “Also William left the topic because you were throwing a lot of propaganda back at him. The last thing he said was for you “to tell the truth about his religion before spewing your lies.” He left that discussion not because there was secrets he didn’t want to tell. He left because you wouldn’t listen and you kept pushing Bill’s Propaganda.”
I’m just loving the way you all are defending William. It’s so obvious that you all will lie (to yourselves I guess) before you’ll acknowledge that I was successful in showing major faults in Mormonism theology and the dishonesty that was displayed with William. That needs to be displayed in order for them to follow Smith’s doctrine. It was obvious who won that “debate”. And it wasn’t me that won, it was true Christianity winning against a satanic cult.
And EE, you cannot be serious… you said: “The Temple Mormon does not exist, there is no secret underwear, no decoder ring.”
Then what was Bill Keller wearing in one of his shows? I guess you think he had it made… made all of it up. The symbols and everything. For someone who seems to be so knowledgable about so many things… I am shocked to hear you say that. I am perplexed.
You said: “The last thing he said was for you “to tell the truth about his religion before spewing your lies.” ”
Uh, first, I couldn’t tell the truth…all I knew was what I read, I was asking him for the truth… I wanted to ask him about that list that he claimed was all lies… but HE LEFT! So, I still don’t know the truth. He had a perfect opportunity and he didn’t take it… he had a perfect opportunity to “set me straight” why didn’t he????
And second they are not “my lies”. You got that wrong too.
And 3rd, that is not what he said, those are your words. He was more polite than that.
“if you want to know the truth, ask a Mormon”… That’s what he said… that’s what all Mormons say… And that is what I did. And he got mad and left.
Enkill_Eridos said
and 1minion at the projected time of Jesus, between 36 BCE and 0 CE, the Roman Empire just discovered India. So it’s not too much of a stretch that Buddhism could have came to the Roman Empire.
Enkill_Eridos said
And I John saw these things, and heard them. And when I had heard and seen, I fell down to worship before the feet of the angel which shewed me these things. ~Revelation 22:8
Then saith he unto me, See thou do it not: for I am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren the prophets, and of them which keep the sayings of this book: worship God. ~Revelation 22:9
James 1
1:20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.
1:21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.
1:22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
1:23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
1:24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
1:25 But who so looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.
1:26 If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man’s religion is vain.
1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
Just some Random bible verses that I thought I should share.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Hello E_E. I like the Gospel of Thomas.
Hey 1minion and E_E. Whether or not people in Palestine knew of India or Buddha is beside the point if Jesus had the same type of awakening as Buddha. Buddha wasn’t the first or only person to experience what some call Christ-consciousness either.
On the other hand, there was much more communication and sharing of cultures in ancient times than some people realize. Humans get around and love to talk.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Interesting that you bring up the subject of ancient texts regarding Buddha, 1minion. The oldest known texts of Buddhism are written in the Pali language and form the basis for the southern Buddhist school of Theravada, which is mainly a path for priests. Because it is a dialectic instead of dogma, Buddhism is like a seed though. It has grown and developed much since the time of Buddha, especially in the Mahayana schools that include Zen.
Now the mahayana folks claim that Buddha taught at different levels to different people, and that the Pali writings were those intended for the dumbest people who could only understand a fundamentalist style of interpretation.
The Mahayana folk claim that even though their writings were the last to be written, that they actually represent the first teachings of the Buddha, what he shared with his most intimate disciples. It is similar to the idea that the Gospel of John has more of the mystical teachings of Jesus meant for his disciples than the other three Gospels that were more for the general public.
According to western standards of scholarship, since the Pali writings are the oldest known texts of Buddhism, some western scholars assert that they are closest to the original teachings of the Buddha. However, that is making several assumptions that may not be warranted. The Mahayana claim that their teachings came first makes sense when one realizes that these teachings were passed down orally and expanded upon for centuries before being written down, and also that one of the principles of Indian philosophies is that people are at different levels and one size may not fit all in terms of spiritual paths.
princessxxx said
kay says,
“I’m just loving the way you all are defending William. It’s so obvious that you all will lie (to yourselves I guess) before you’ll acknowledge that I was successful in showing major faults in Mormonism theology and the dishonesty that was displayed with William. That needs to be displayed in order for them to follow Smith’s doctrine. It was obvious who won that “debate”. And it wasn’t me that won, it was true Christianity winning against a satanic cult. ”
kay you couldn’t be more wrong.
you weren’t successful showing major faults in mormanism and william wasn’t being dishonest.
i read all of that.
william wanted a serious discussion not a “debate”, he made that clear from the start.
you just couldn’t hold back on your bashing. i.e. regurgitating that,”what mormons won’t tell you crap.
by the way, who did you steal that from?
1minionsopinion said
Thanks for clarification E_E, and TBG. To paraphrase, it’s not that Christ _was_ Buddhist, but he may have achieved the same enlightenment a Buddhist seeks, which amounts to the same thing in the end. Yes?
As to me asking about ancient writing, I just appreciate the need to track down sources and find the records that indicate various beliefs and doctrines. It’s a holdover from my sociology courses, I suppose.
Burning anything to promote a religious or political point bothers me. I hate to think of what got lost at Alexandria, let alone what Savonarola forced people to set on the pyre in Italy. All that knowledge, all that art.
And the fact that the Greeks were largely forgotten for the longest time, only rediscovered and embraced after conquests and trade in areas that never tried to ignore the wisdom of the ancients.
So much lost and disregarded because it didn’t fit the times or politics of the times. Truly terrible.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
yep minion. Your paraphrase is correct. I also see Buddhism in the teachings of Jesus, a bit muddled because of the way He had to phrase things to attempt to communicate to the people of his time, place and culture, but there nonetheless.
Some Native Americans were sad that their elders were killed by disease or bullets, losing some of their oral tradition. However, I have heard some other Native Americans not too worried because as they say, if they need it, they will dream it again.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
The Oglala holy man Black Elk illustrates the depth of spiritual understanding some Native Americans have. For example, when talking about a certain mountain he referred to it as the center of the universe, but then he added that anywhere can be the center. Now if he had been a fundie like Kay, he would have insisted that particular mountain IS the center and everybody else is wrong!
Enkill_Eridos said
Actually no kay that was a cut and paste from that particular discussion in Glenn Beck (The Mormon Deception) which in reality is not they are the same as Christians pushing thier version of God. Which where in that discussion were you actually receptive?. Every comment that was made against your argument you responded quite venomously it seemed. And where did Bill show this so-called secret mormon ring? The video you posted only showed Bill ranting, and an old Evengelical Cartoon that “explained” mormonism, but he never showed any secret ring. And is there a way that you can direct me to a video where I can enhance this ring, to verify its not just a freemasonry ring? Because his videos look like to was done with a $5 Kmart webcam.
Since obviously Conservative Protestant Christians are the only true Christians, as demonstrated by kay’s actions, tell me why wasn’t Moses’ writings on the 7 earths and 7 heavens ever incorporated into the theology. And also why wasn’t the Talmud (Also another God Inspired set of writings that explains a lot) not incorporated into the theology and doctrine, but content was. And why was Kabalistic references and teachings in the bible but Christian Kabalah is frowned upon? I mean the teachings of Kabalah, also a part of the Jewish Religion that was inspired by God and further explains God’s want for spiritual growth, taken out of Christianity? (Oh and I am not talking about that weird celeb fad thing that people didn’t understand what it was but believed it anyway. But real Kabalah, the divine numbers show up in Revalations.)
kay~ms said
EE, you know I’m not talking about the ficticuos ring that you made up to further your point. I’ve never heard of a Mormon ring. But maybe you have? I’m talking about the magical underwear that Mitt Romney is no doubt wearing as we speak because he believes it will protect him from harm. Bill wore this underwear and described in detail the meaning of the symbols sewn in.
http://www.votingforsatan.com/ Right column 2nd down is the show where Bill wears the “sacred magical” underwear. And for which he received death threats for doing so.
Enkill_Eridos said
I assumed you were talking about a secret mormon ring, there is a popular Urban Legend about the LDS Church was created by the free-masons, and the story of Joseph Smith is a lie. As for the secret underwear it is no secret.
To millions of Mormons around the world, garments are a special piece of clothing worn as a symbolic gesture of the promises that they have made to God. The garment is always worn under other clothing, next to the skin. For most people who wear it, the garment takes the place of regular underwear. (For this reason, some people refer to the garment as Mormon undergarments or as Mormon underwear. Most LDS prefer simply using the term “garment” instead.)
The garment is directly related to Mormon temples. It is there that faithful members first receive the garment after individual instruction on what it stands for and how it should be cared for. The garment is worn as part of a special ceremony called the temple endowment. The garment is worn at all times (day and night) by members as a constant reminder of the promises they have made to God in the Temple to be honest and faithful to the commandments of the Lord.
Other religious figures throughout history have also worn special clothing as they performed their religious duties. For instance, Moses was commanded by the Lord (as recorded in Exodus 28:1-3) to place holy garments and priestly vestments upon Aaron and others in preparation for officiating in the tabernacle.
These building, different from the thousands of regular Church houses of worship scattered over the earth, are unique in purpose and function from all other religious edifices. It is not the size of these buildings or their architectural beauty that make them so. It is the work that goes on within their walls.
The Designation of certain buildings for special ordinances, as distinguished from regular places of worship, is not new. This was the practice in ancient Israel, where the people worshipped regularly in the synagogues. Their more sacred place was, first, the tabernacle in the wilderness with its Holy of Holies, and then a succession of temples, where special ordinances were performed and where only those who met the required qualifications could participate in these ordinances.
So it is today. Prior to the dedication of a temple, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints invited the public to go through the building and inspect its various facilities. But when it is dedicated it becomes the house of the Lord, vested with a character so sacred that only members of the Church in good standing are permitted to enter. It is not a matter of secrecy. It is a matter of sanctity.
The work that goes on in these buildings sets forth God’s eternal purposes with reference to man– God’s child and creation. For the most part, temple work is concerned with the family, with each of us as members of God’s eternal family and with each of us as members of earthly families. It is concerned with the sanctity and eternal nature of the marriage covenant and family relationships.
I apologize for this confusion, my fault. A ring in most religions actually does the same thing. The wedding ring for example is to remind the Husband and Wife of the sacred vows made before God, and to each other. Other initiatory orders award rings for the same purpose. When attaining Priesthood for example, the priest is given a ring to symbolize his devotion to God and the oaths of Priesthood. So you can understand my confusion. The fact is, it’s not like one of those super secret things only a select few mormons know about. Its just private. I mean you don’t tell people the color of your panties do you? (Please don’t, I cringe at the thought) I mean I googled mormon underwear and got some very funny things from mormons.
I mean it’s the same concept as wearing a cross on your neck, so you can be reminded of your faith.
http://www.ldschurchtemples.com/mormon/underwear/
I have to apologize and recend my statement that there is no underwear. But it’s not a secret if I can find information on it.
Enkill_Eridos said
As for “Christian Doctrines” not directly in the bible? The trinity doctrine is a good example of one. Hell already exists is another, (I can provide examples of how some fallen angels are held in the different Earths and Heavens.) there are some Doctrines that have been recended that were way out left field. The Doctrine that Satan is a physical entity(It is a doctrine that is misunderstood. The concept of Satan is different from Lucifer.) Just for example.
Enkill_Eridos said
1. Mark of the Square (right breast): represents “exactness and honor” in keeping the commandments and covenants of God.
2. Mark of the Compass (left breast): symbolizes “an undeviating course leading to eternal life; a constant reminder that desires, appetites, and passions are to be kept within the bounds the Lord has set; and that all truth may be circumscribed into one great whole.”
3. Navel Mark: represents “the need of constant nourishment to body and spirit.”
4. Knee Mark: suggests “that every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess that Jesus is the Christ”.
(these are the words of former Church President David O. McKay)
I don’t feel like listening to Bill. Or seeing his hair.
kayms99 said
EE, you said: “Which where in that discussion were you actually receptive?. Every comment that was made against your argument you responded quite venomously it seemed. ”
First, our discussion (mine and William’s) was in the Two Wolves post. And in response to you stating that I wasn’t receptive..
Willliam said: “Dear Friend (Kay):
Thanks for your kind remarks and for your apology about past comments. They are forgotten.”
And here is a response from me to William…
“William, thank you very much for your thoughtful reply, I do appreciate it and sorry it took so long to reply back. I understand the point you are making here. But I don’t see how it is compatible with your initial answer:”
Where’s the “venom”?
You are way off (and so is P) in your perception of how our discussions went and it’s because you don’t want to see (acknowledge) that I was successful in proving my points. Really, you guys need to analyze this… I don’t think you are purposefully trying to be deceitful.. I think you are not letting yourselves see the truth.. why? Because you do not want me to be right? What can I do differently to make you see and admit the truth? Be more humble about it? I am trying. Again, it’s not me that “won” it is true Christianity that wins against a cult of lies by Joseph Smith.
It is unfortunate for ourselves when we let our emotions (ego and pride) get in the way of understanding and acknowledging the truth.
Here is the link to our entire discussion…
http://tothewire.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/two-wolves-a-cherokee-parable/
I tried to abide by William’s rules… I didn’t bring up any of “my lies” (the list) until William referenced it first. He made the following comments…
William, you said: “She has just been sucked in by people who twist the truth about Mormons. ”
William, you said: “I think Kay has come to realize that passing on these types of comments without investigating on her own was a mistake.” (and btw.. would asking a Mormon qualify as investigating? which is what I did and never got any direct specific answers or explanations.)
William’s response to Princess about the list… that P brought up btw… not me.
Thanks for these links. Actually, I have already looked at these items, which is why I set the ground rules before I was willing to have discussion with Kay and why I have demanded that she engage in an intelligent conversation rather than a debate of name calling and unfounded accusations. So far, she has at least attempted to follow these guidelines, for which I congratulate her. She has also apologized for her past comments, which is a huge step toward civilized dialogue. We have agreed to forget the past and move forward. I agree with The Bicycling Guitarist in my belief that Kay is sincere. She has just been sucked in by people who twist the truth about Mormons.
Now to briefly address the “Mormon’s won’t tell you” comments. I don’t have time to address all of the points one by one, but let’s suffice it to say that each of these statements is either a boldface lie, or they have taken a true Mormon belief and twisted it to present it in the worst possible light. The truth is that most of these militant types don’t want to engage in a civilized conversation. They just want to spew hate. ”
Now… William addressed this list, making a statement that it was all lies and that I was “sucked in by people who twist the truth about Mormons.” But I’m not allowed to defend myself? To argue his claim that it is all lies? To ask him about these things so he can convince me that it is all lies? I posted the list so each point could be addressed and that is where I “crossed” the line according to him… he can critisize it and call it lies and I can’t address it at all? We were to just take his word for it?? That is not how it works.
I had not brought up any of the things on that list except for the Mormon beliefe that works are required to receive salvation. And that (our first point) was a clear victory for true Christianity and a loss for Mormon doctrine. William had to backtrack when I pressed him for a direct answer. Read it.
Mormons say that good works are not required for salvation and then he (after being pressed) ACKNOWLEDGED that good works must occur in order to receive salvation.. his first answer was MISLEADING and did not directly answser my question (the point). This is a deception. That was William trying to manipulate Mormon theology to be acceptable to main stream Christians. That was a vivid and accurate display of the deceptiveness required in order to promote Mormonism to non Mormons.
Enkill_Eridos said
I was refering to a completly different post, and person. I made a mistake and thought you was referring to your post Glenn Beck (The Mormon Deception). That whole debate was filled with the venom I referred to. So please accept my sincere apologies. I thought Bot refered to himself as William in his blog.
kay~ms said
It’s an honest mistake EE. So I guess I need to take back much of what I said in response? What are your thoughts about the debate/ discussion with William? Do you still align with P’s oppinion?
And also, did you see Bill’s show where he is wearing the Mormon magical underwear?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Any moment in the past at one time was “now.” That is one meaning of my statement that the present causes the past. Even further though, it is at the present that we put values on the past and even change it. For example, when I say “I love you”, when you hear the first word “I” you don’t know what’s coming next until I say it and you hear it. I could say “I hate you” instead, so the second word actually changes the context of the “I” that came before it.
I don’t know why Kay associates my statement about time with Buddhism, unless she is saying that it is just one more thing too difficult for her to understand.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
You never did answer directly Kay, about what the evidence indicates regarding macroevolution. I say it is perhaps the most well-proven FACT known to man, and you said otherwise at first, then seemed open to the idea that the evidence might actually exist, then posted a dullvotional of stupidity from Bill Keller. Does Keller voice your opinion?
That reminds me of the book Sarah Palin just put out where she apparently says she really does believe humans walked with dinosaurs. In other words, she thinks the Flintstones were a reality show! Does anyone besides me get nervous at the idea of somebody so ignorant of science and so out of touch with reality being in any position of power or authority anywhere?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
A comment from an hour ago is still in moderation, and I regret being so insulting to Kay in the last sentence of it. Sometimes you show signs of having an open mind, Kay, which is rare for those of the fundie persuasion, and while you sometimes seem hateful I’m pretty sure that for the most part you mean well.
If you could explain my views to me to my satisfaction, and I you to yours, then if we still disagree at least we’d be sure what we’re disagreeing about. As the exchange with E_E just showed though, sometimes people make mistakes and then other people react to it.
I get the idea that you frequently don’t understand what I’m trying to say, especially when you quote it back to me and make a comment that indicates you THINK I said the exact OPPOSITE of what I actually said. This has happened more than once, and fyi, it is annoying. Still I’m glad to have the opportunity to share views with you here and have you share yours with me. Thanks Kay!
1minionsopinion said
I spent most of my afternoon with Freethinkers (how atheists deal with death and dying – interesting meeting) but I just wanted to say that I like the Australian Aboriginal concept of the dreamtime, that everything got dreamed up and everything has a song, including the future and the past, I think. It’s all quite mystical but beautiful, too. It’s pretty nifty.
Sarah Palin probably wanted a dinosaur when she was growing up. I did. I wanted a Stegosaurus. It was in the Sears catalogue and it was a giant thing and to this day I have no idea what I would have done with it had the folks gotten it for me. That year instead they got me a little fox (i named him Tod after “Fox and the Hound) and a little yellow dinosaur that wound up named Dino, of course. I slept with them for years.
I think what I find most intriguing about the Mormons is .. well, okay, more than one thing intrigues me. But for the point of this comment, I’ll focus on their baptism set up, and how they’ll do it by proxy to ensure all ancestors of a potential converts can be considered Mormon. It’s the only way a new person can be a Mormon. Okay, whatever they want to believe, they can do. But what if the people they are baptising by proxy were Orthodox Jews who died in the holocaust? They didn’t die because they were Mormons and altering their religious affiliation after death like this has caused consternation in the past.
http://1minionsopinion.wordpress.com/2008/11/10/all-i-know-about-mormons-i-got-from-chick-tracts/
I think the Mormons later agreed to abide by their wishes and not automatically do that kind of stuff in some situations. I should have checked back to see if more ever got said about it.
Enkill_Eridos said
You did post the Lies Mormons won’t tell you list. He left on that basis.
Kay he did not backrack he was very clear both times. It was hard for him to explain it in terms you would truly understand. That is because he did not have the same background as you. I know Bill’s Background (He puts Evengelical Christianity to shame. But thats my opinion.) Now many pastors have talked about this. That salvation by works is impossible. That salvation through faith in Jesus Christ is. Now how does God know you are truly faithful and you have repented? By your actions. This does not mean that if you don’t go out and spread the message of Jesus Christ you are not faithful. It means that if you keep sinning the same sin over and over again you cannot have believed in this first place.
Matthew 7:15-27 NIV
15″Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.
21″Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
The Wise and Foolish Builders
24″Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock. 25The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house; yet it did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock. 26But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand. 27The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell with a great crash.”
The fruit of your actions is apparent to God. You can decieve man, but not God. You have to prove your faith to God, when you repent you have to truly repent and stop what you are doing. When you sin, you pray to God and ask for forgiveness and try not to do it again. This is what William was talking about. Anyone can easily say I believe, and then go kill someone. That does not mean they are saved. When the Bible is talking about actions or works when it talks about these kinds of things, it is not talking about feeding the homeless, or donating money to a cancer foundation, or even going to church. What it is talking about is how you repent and try to the best of your ability to never do that sin again. What the Apostles talk about when they speak of affirming your faith through works, is recognizing a test of faith and humbling yourself before God. And God does not say “Hey this is a test, you are wrong and I want to show you the right way.” That is the reason God puts the bad in your life. Alchoholics and Addicts call it rock bottom but everyone’s faith gets tested. These are the works Jesus and the Apostles are talking about. The show of your faith to God. That’s what it means to me anyway. I do think the Mormon’s put too much into proving thier faith, but thier hearts are in the right place. Besides the salvation through Grace and Faith is the only real doctrine a Christian should follow anyway. But you need to know God is going to test your faith, and keep testing until you finally lose the ego, and let go and let God. But that’s how I see it anyway, from personal experience.
kay~ms said
EE, I never denied posting the list… Princess brought it up first (posting the link) and then William commented on it, faulting me (my judgment concerning it).. I had a right to then bring it up so the individual points could be addressed to determine if I was using “bad” judgment.
I can tell that you haven’t read our entire discussion. Or if you did it didn’t change your biased view.
In our discussion I pointed out the fault of Mormon theology of requiring works in order to receive Christ’s “gift” of Salvation (as William explained it). I understand what William is saying… he insists that Salvation is soley from Christ. But that cannot be if we cannot get into heaven without doing good works. I’m not going to go into detail (again) please read all of our discussions, there are not that many. What you explained is something else, (is our faith true or not and that doing good works proves our faith). God does not need us to do good works in order for Him to know if our hearts are true as you said (“Now how does God know you are truly faithful and you have repented? By your actions.”) . He can see what is in our hearts.
The problem with Mormon theology on this is that it gives no hope to the person who has a change of heart (an honest change of heart) and then dies before having a chance to do good works… they cannot receive Christ’s gift of Salvation, they cannot be forgiven for their sins (according to William) because they did not do good works in their life. William acknowledged this (please read our discussions). So, you see… Jesus’ sacrifice is not enough to get this man into heaven even though he has truly repented, loves God and realizes how wrong he was. And would have done good works had he lived. And this is the Mormon theology even though William denies it…that Jesus’ work on the cross is not enough.. good works are also necessary. This devalues His work and His sacrifice… the very same way you do by claiming Christ is not God.
The other problem with Smith’s theology that works are required is that then we would be able to take some of the credit for our Salvation. And it then would not be fully a GIFT from God and it again, DEVALUES Christ’s work and God’s gift.. When we work, we get paid. We expect something in return, we are “owed” something.. in this case, we are “owed” our Salvation. Do you think it is right for God to be indebted to us? That is what Mormon theology does… puts God in our debt. This is just one of several ways in which Mormonism is extremely lacking in humility. “God owes us and someday we will become gods equal with our Creator”.
Mormons will state over and over that Jesus saves us 100% but if you press them, like I did in my discussions with William, they will admit that good works are also necessary and we cannot receive salvation without them… that means that some of our salvation can be credited to us for the good works that we did.
I understand Mormon theology perfectly.
kay~ms said
And also, our MOTIVATION for doing good works should NOT be for what we will receive in return. Good works should be done from our hearts. Mormon theology (joseph smith’s theology) tricks followers into doing good works for what they will receive… and to prove that refer to William’s comment #73 on the Two Wolves post where he said:
“” If nothing more was required to apply the power of Grace to our lives than saying “I believe,” then why go to church, or study the Bible, or do anything else that is expected of a Christian? Good question.””
God cares about what is in our hearts. Good works do not always display what is in our hearts. Even satanists or Islamic terrorists can do good works.
As Mormons are busy doing good works because they believe they can’t get into Heaven otherwise, they will find themselves doing good works to benefit themselves instead of out of love for others and God. And William proved my point perfectly in his own words. Joseph Smith’s theology is destructive and against God. And as I’ve said many times.. devaluing Christ’s work on the Cross is the most destructive damage that can be done. And that is what Mormonism does.
We go to Church, study the Bible and do good works for God… out of love for Him. That is the reason God wants us to do these things… Not as William explained.. to receive Salvation.
kay~ms said
TBG, you said: “You never did answer directly Kay, about what the evidence indicates regarding macroevolution.”
You commented earlier that Bill’s belief was ridiculous, as others did also… the thing is that as I explained already, his theory is just as plausible as any other and more plausible for Believers. God can do anything He wants. That is pretty much clear by the world that we live in. There is no reason to think that He could not have created the earth in the way Bill described… it requires faith to believe what Bill does.. and you guys knock him for it. He’s an intelligent man, do you think he doesn’t know people will laugh at that theory… just as you and 1minion and others did? Do you think I didn’t know that also when I posted that devotional?
I admire the faith that Bill is displaying. And his dedication. And also his capability to understand the fact that our very existence isn’t exlplainable in logical terms. And that gives very good cause to believe that God is able to create any way He wants to. Just as soon as you can come up with Any kind of logical explanation or theory as to how existence started then you can laugh at creationism.. until then… it is you and others who are being ignorant.
Enkill_Eridos said
William said: First, let’s define “good works.” Perhaps you have a different definition in mind, but for now, I’ll define good works as: faith, repentance, baptism, and striving to keep the commandments of God.
Now how exactly are these things against God? If a Mormon defines “good works” not as physical works (as James, John, Matthew, and Paul does indicates when they talk about salvation by grace combined with “good works”) but works of faith that in most cases are only to be seen by God, how is that wrong? Like praying for God’s guidance on a regular basis, or studying scripture, or doing something that is supposed to symbolize their faith to God. How exactly is this against the bible? You are completely misconstruing what I said. You are talking about doing good things. I repent for the wrongs I do when I do wrongs, but I don’t repent in a church or in front of a congregation. I do it in my home in private, in prayer with God. Or does my faith in God and Jesus as the Son of God therefore his death, where he paid the price for my sins, but not any religion in their name disqualify me? What is your definition of “Good Works” as it pertains to the gospels and epistles when it talks about combining good works with salvation. And how that is needed in a Christians life? They are not talking about literal works in that sense. It is one of those things that I believe is mistranslated. It happens, even a Godly man can and will be wrong. You say my view is clouded? I don’t think so, because I don’t do any good in my community. But I still do good works of faith in private. I still recognize lessons God wants to teach me, and I now see when I am straying off the path that God has determined is best for me. God shows me these things, but he doesn’t speak in my head, there is no lightning bolt, no burning bush. But the ordeals in my life that test my faith, when you just have to step back and think, does God have anything to do with this? What does he want to teach me? Maybe you don’t understand these concepts, most Christians don’t. Most Christians just believe what the Church tells them. Most Christians believe the lies, and misconceptions. Most Christians do not want to actually see if these lies and misconception are true.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
So Kay, your God IS a trickster then, right? in other words God could create man out of dust and breathe life into him, but for some reason God would plant fossils in rocks AND genes to make it look like man evolved from apes when he didn’t, make the earth look billions of years old when it isn’t, and hide all evidence of the flood and plant evidence that the flood didn’t happen. Uh huh. Okay.
No kidding. To believe that DOES take faith, a helluva lot more faith than I am capable of. NO KAY, BILL’S EXPLANATION IS NOT JUST AS PLAUSIBLE AS ANY OTHER EXPLANATION. Bill’s explanation comes off as the ravings of a lunatic completely in denial of what is real.
As soon as Bill’s or your explanation can account for the EVIDENCE of evolution without making God out to be a trickster, then we can stop laughing at creationism. Until then, listening to you or Bill make such ridiculous claims is just as silly as listening to someone argue passionately that the earth is flat.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
And like I said, Kay, evolution does NOT address how the universe started OR how life began, but once life did begin by whatever means evolution neatly and logically accounts for the physical evidence in ways that creationism cannot match.
SINCE YOU SAY GOD COULD CREATE ANYWAY HE WANTS, WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM WITH ACCEPTING THE POSSIBILITY THAT GOD USES EVOLUTION AS A TOOL OF CREATION? To say He can’t presumes to limit God’s powers. It is you and Bill who are being disrespectful to God on this matter.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
I wrote two comments. The first one awaits moderation. The second one posted right away. Sigh. I wish I knew what triggers this…
The Bicycling Guitarist said
The Gospel according to Kay (who is “aping” Bill Keller):
I the Lord your God, will write some things in this here book that are flat out contradicted by the evidence of the world I created, but do not be deceived, little ones. I will plant fossils in the rocks AND in the genes to make it look like humans evolved from apes, but that is because I am trying to trick you and fool some people into using the reasoning powers I gave them. Isn’t that funny? They’re going to hell because they dared to THINK!
I also will write an allegory that uses a flood myth to illustrate spiritual truths, but I want you and all my other sheep to take it literally even though the evidence of the world I created indicates such a global flood never happened. Another joke on people who dare to THINK! Don’t you DARE think and claim to be a Christian!
And to top it off, I will plant many types of evidence to make it look like the world is billions of years old even though you and I know it is only six thousand years old. Ha Ha. What a joker I am! Ho ho. I will also tell Bill Keller to dye his hair blond, and have Kay worship him and think he speaks for me. I am SO FUNNY!
Enkill_Eridos said
I know what triggers it. If you submit two comments within I think it was 45-60 seconds the second one is put into moderation. This is to limit the spam on a wordpress blog. People were actually posting 10-15 comments when there should have been just one, not on this blog but others, WordPress got wise and added the sending things directly to pending if it is posted so often. Also if anyone have flagged you as an abusive user that will happen as well.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Well Kay, you completely illustrate the point I’m trying to make. Since fundie Christians are so clearly and obviously WRONG about a subject that has as much proof as macroevolution, how can anyone trust anything fundie Christians say on spiritual matters that are not so easily verified?
If on the other hand the fundies are right about evolution, then why would anyone even want to believe in a God that apparently tries so hard to trick us when our eternal souls are at stake?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Oh, btw, I WIN!!! Lol. Well, not me personally, but the science of evolution versus the “science” of creationism. It isn’t just my opinion here. EVERY court case the past forty years or so where evolution is challenged by creationism in a fair fight ends up with creationists being called fools and liars by the judge.
The truth or falsity of evolution isn’t dependent on court cases though. Millions of people have checked the observations and interpretations of millions of other people to see if they’re right, and everything checks out that it happens. If it didn’t happen, it is the biggest hoax of all time and God is the biggest prankster of all time. Makes sense that if God is going to be a prankster, He would be the best. Still, if accepting the fact of evolution means you’re going to hell, then that is just wrong.
kay~ms said
EE, you quoted William: “William said: First, let’s define “good works.” Perhaps you have a different definition in mind, but for now, I’ll define good works as: faith, repentance, baptism, and striving to keep the commandments of God.”
Key words “for now”. Good works (physical works) are required as an extension of repentance and faith.
And also William said: ” If nothing more was required to apply the power of Grace to our lives than saying “I believe,” then why go to church, or study the Bible, or do anything else that is expected of a Christian? Good question.””
This is pretty clear… certain things are REQUIRED in order to receive Salvation. Which then means that Christ’s work on the cross IS NOT ENOUGH.
According to William, along with faith and repentance, baptism is required. So, the man that is on his deathbed and has truly become repentant and believes in God and what He has done for him, cannot be saved… because he didn’t get batised before he passed away. So, Christ’s sacrifice is not enough.. it cannot save him because he didn’t get baptised (part of the works required).
You said: “Now how exactly are these things against God? ” I didn’t say these things were against God… I said if you put your faith in these things to save you then it is against God and His sacrifice. AND THAT IS WHAT MORMON THEOLOGY DOES.
You said: “Maybe you don’t understand these concepts, most Christians don’t.”
Christians understand very well the relationship we have with God and how He works in our lives.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Hey E_E, it was the FIRST comment that went into moderation, NOT the second one! That is what confused me, and your explanation doesn’t account for that happening. I’m waiting to see if Kay is going to respond to any of these last three or four messages. She has finally clearly expressed her opinion, “aping” that of Bill Keller, that even if the evidence DOES exist we can’t trust it because God made the world LOOK old when he created it six thousand years ago. Um, Okay. Yeah, whatever.
kay~ms said
TBG… how are fundamental Christians wrong? Prove that God didn’t speak everything into existance in an advanced state.
You said: “Still, if accepting the fact of evolution means you’re going to hell, then that is just wrong.”
That is the whole point (for me anyway)… it doesn’t mean we are going to hell for not believing in a literal translation of Genesis. We can only go to hell for rejecting Jesus.
I don’t care that much about what happened a million years ago… it doesn’t matter that much. God is not a “prankster”. He is giving people exactly what they are serching for. If they are not searching for Christ and instead focusing more on the history of the earth then they are not going to be benefited very much (spiritually). They are missing THE point.
Genesis could be a literal truth as to how the earth began. Or it could be a simplified way of looking at how creation started. Believing in one way or the other is not going to determine where our souls spend eternity. The problem with focusing so much on the science is that it can lead us away from God. Not focusing on God and His love for us will not benefit us. Science focuses on the hows but none of the whys. It’s the whys that will affect our souls for eternity after we leave this earth. Science ignores the soul.. the unseen, but we know that it exists. There are so many things (phenomenom) that we know exists that can not be explained scientifically. To ignore this is a tragedy.
As one example, the phenomonom of knowing or seeing things before they happen. This has happened to me on more than one occasion. I know this phenomonom exists. And I also know that it is not logical. How can there be any scientific explanation for knowing what someone else is thinking or something that is going to happen before it happens? It’s not logical. But I am convinced that this happens.
Putting faith in science alone is a pitfall that happens when we do not focus on God. Keep yourself grounded in God first and foremost and then explore all you want, use the brain that He gave you, learn and investigate, but never forget the ultimate Truth.
kay~ms said
I have a comment in moderation… I know that this comment won’t post because I just posted my comment to TBG…
The reason I sometimes comment on other posts that I have a comment in moderation is because it will not let me comment again in the same post. I’ve tried changing my name, at first it worked but now it doesn’t, I’ve tried not having a name at all.. at first it worked and now doesn’t…. it’s frustrating.
kay~ms said
Well, it posted, go figure… I KNOW this one will not post…
kay~ms said
Ok.. this one will not post…
kay~ms said
I am at a loss.. I give up…
1minionsopinion said
Chew on this, kids: evolution of the god gene: http://bit.ly/3bN7ta
Atheists are apparently a genetic anomaly? Religious belief evolved because groups with the tendancy to create gods, or at least come to the conclusion that gods must exist may have bested groups that had no such brain/community arrangement.
dorian said
good to see that some of the non deity-worshiping types of the anomalous genes are still with us today bringing interesting links. oh, and it’s a good thing you’re not on the banning thread because you could’ve been banned for that misspelled a word!
Enkill_Eridos said
TBG: I only saw one comment in moderation. I have been going back and forth on this with WordPress. They are looking into it, since it is thier servers. This is not the first time this has happened. it may be a glitch somewhere. It is being looked at by WordPress admins.
Also there have been a number of posts not going to either approved, pending, or spam they just disappear. I have also informed wordpress of this.
Enkill_Eridos said
The comment I gave was the last answer wordpress gave me. Thank you for keeping me up to date, but just stay patient while its out of my control.
dorian said
kay – we just can’t figure out the exact wordpress moderation criteria. maybe it’s a trickster program. just keep ‘em coming, we’ll keep an eye out. it gets you and TBG and hors in the queue most often.
Enkill_Eridos said
I have a suggestion. Log-in the same as you would if you were going to make a new post, then click blog info and subscribe to blog. That may or may not help.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Kay, nobody can prove that God didn’t poof everything into existence in an advanced state. For that matter, God could have poofed everything into existence TWO SECONDS AGO with fake memories of lives never actually lived. But what is your scriptural authority to take such an interpretation?
Why not take the evidence of God’s creation into account when describing his creation instead of just waving your hands in the air and saying since Goddidit we poor dumb humans can never understand.
I agree that it doesn’t matter how we got here so far as salvation goes. Here and now is all that is real. However, evolution is good solid science, and that humans evolved from apes has more than enough evidence to teach it as FACT! That is why evolution belongs in science classrooms and creationism doesn’t. That isn’t being rude or disrespectful to God. It’s keeping things in their proper place. Now IF there were ANY scientific evidence to support a literal reading of Genesis, THEN you’d have a legitimate argument for including that account as an alternate explanation in science classrooms. However, THERE ISN’T ANY such evidence! That’s the bottom line, and that’s why evolution IS a scientific FACT and should be taught as such. For spiritual teachings, go to church, not public school science classrooms. For alternate explanations of the origin and diversity of life in public schools, teach those in mythology or comparative religion courses. Unless there is scientific evidence, such stories have no place in science classrooms. That’s my only beef. You can believe the moon is made of cheese if you want. Just don’t try to dumb down other people’s kids because your INTERPRETATION of the Bible is NOT supported by the evidence of the world God created.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
If you really are concerned about spreading the Gospel of Christ, then anything that destroys your credibility should concern you. You and your guru Bill have a strange take on the evidence for evolution, that it may exist but even if it does we can’t understand it or measure it accurately. That is not the usual take of fundies on this subject. Most fundies just say the evidence ain’t there, or that evolution is an atheist conspiracy, or the fossils are planted by Satan, etc.
Again I ask, what is your scriptural authority such that it makes more sense to you that God would plant false evidence rather than accept that the earth is old and evolution happens? if you’re going to insist on literal interpretation as a guiding principle, then why oh why aren’t you screaming about the earth not being flat when the Bible clearly teaches it is (IF you insist on literal fundamentalist-style interpretation).
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Kay the Black Knight said: “He [God] is giving people exactly what they are serching for.”
Okay, since I have been searching for truth my whole life, then evolution must be TRUTH! cool! Glad you agree! Thanks, Kay!
Most scientists also are motivated by a sincere desire to understand what is real and how it works. That is why they become scientists. They have the curiosity of a child, always asking questions and seeking answers.
I must confess you throw me for a loop when you say that perhaps God created the earth already old. Nope, can’t argue with that. Last night I dreamed I was a butterfly, but now I wonder if last night I was a man dreaming I’m a butterfly or today I’m a butterfly dreaming I’m a man.
It’d be interesting to see a convention of solipsists arguing about which one of them is really there.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Okay, I just posted three comments (not counting this one). The FIRST ONE went into moderation. The second and third comments posted right away.
Kay, doesn’t your argument seem just a little retarded, even to you, that maybe everything was poofed into existence a split second ago and we never even existed until then, never had a childhood, etc.? I know that isn’t exactly what you claim, but it is a logical extension from it.
1minionsopinion said
“…misspelled a word!” Yeah, I love Firefox because it alerts me of the boo boos. I.E. is the only choice at work but I’ve been Skinnerized into red-line stimulus and correction response. Heh. I have a “tendency” to assume it’s an -ancy by how it sounds when I say it, I think. Hooked on Phonics claims another victim! Kersplash kaboom!
I’ve seen the butterfly thing before. I like that. The Aztecs believed they would reincarnate into butterflies after their sacrifices. Pretty thought considering the rituals required to get you there…
From the article I linked to above:
“For atheists, it is not a particularly welcome thought that religion evolved because it conferred essential benefits on early human societies and their successors. If religion is a lifebelt, it is hard to portray it as useless.”
I disagree with the author of the piece insofar as this goes. I think it makes perfect sense that religion evolved because beliefs about the world are something we naturally cling to anyway, whether it’s a provable thing (as revolution around the sun became) or it isn’t (Atlantis existed and there are people today who are reincarnated Atlantians). I can totally get behind religion as necessary for earlier people who didn’t have the science we do. We don’t have to blindly believe. We can choose to explore ideas, try new things, view our beliefs from a less centralized part of ourselves and weigh them against what’s likely and what’s ludicrous.
I used to think my town had the only McDonald’s. I used to think every show on television was filmed at the local station. When I was ill as a kid they put me under an oxygen tent for a few days. I went back to school and told people I had been in a coma because I honestly believed that’s what the tent was called. People believed the world was flat. People believe in the Secret. People believe water crystals are capable of love. There is no end to what people are willing to believe without weighing the rationale ahead of time.
Enkill_Eridos said
I have already provided scriptural evidence from the Talmud that may say science could be right. Also from psalms a thousand years is but a day to God. So who is to say God just didn’t start the evolution process because he wanted to see what would happen? I mean even the Jews know enough not to take every word literal in the Bible. The Jews taught long before Christ that the true Word of God are not the literal words of the Bible. I know its a difficult concept for you to grasp. God may have just poofed everything into existance 7000 years ago and tricked everyone by placing evidence of cultures, cities, and early tools that would be dated later.
Of course, to me, that is just as believable as saying you have to believe that poof everything was there in a literal 7 days as we tell time.
My thoughts, it is obvious in scripture we are not the first creation of God. (Again this is explained in writings that are accepted as inspired by God, just not recognized by the Christian Church. *Sarcasticaly*And we all know the Christian Church was not created by man, who can be wrong and is often faulty and wrong, so the Christian Church and all the pastors therein cannot be wrong.) The angels as we like to call them, before the fall (which scripturally happened BEFORE the creation of man.) are messengers, and executors of God’s Will. When it was pleasant news God usually did it himself. But scripturally very rarely did an angel appear, that did not carry a warning, or make an example of someone, or when he needed to kill someone or a country. Angels were usually involved. A creation God created to be completely subservient to him. A perfect creation that did have free will. This is relevant just bear with me. Now according to scripture, God cast down the angels that rebelled. He cast them away from his holiness, not to Hell, but Earth. Scripture says the Earth was there BEFORE the creation of man. It was formless and void. For the temptation of Eve to make sense this has to be true. Because it was not Lucifer that tempted Eve, it was a different Fallen angel that took the form of the Serpent, and it was very clear his name was not Lucifer. All according to scripture. According to scripture the word Satan, actually is not attributed to an outside force like the Christian Church likes to teach, it is in reference to the inner part, the little doubt that faintly whispers in your mind. You would be a fool to say you never had doubts about your faith. Those doubts are there there is a little part, usually people don’t give it a second thought. But it’s there usually when things are good you don’t hear it. But during times of great adversity it screams. But the point is scripturally the Earth existed before the creation of man. Scripturally it is possible for science to be correct.
Enkill_Eridos said
dorian said
this is funnny!!
dorian said
too bad i can’t contribute to your interesting discourse here. i’m very shallow and inarticulate today. most days, actually, with short attention span on top. that’s why i try my best to get good minds and prolific posters here!
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Why do MOST Christian denominations accept the fact of evolution, but the perception of the general public is that one can’t accept evolution and be a “real” Christian? This is Christianity shooting itself in the foot, creating a stereotype of braindead retards out of touch with reality.
It will be interesting to see how this discussion plays out nationwide the next few decades, as more and more people grow up knowing that evolution is just as much a fact of nature as gravity is. I wonder how soon before the Southern Baptists or other fundie churches own up to being wrong on this subject, or if they ever will.
dorian said
they believe in their hearts and minds that they are following God’s Word. and they will teach their children to believe the same thing. the earth is flat.
well, TBG, to each his own reality, huh?
Enkill_Eridos said
I doubt it, they rarely own up to the Salem Witch Trials being wrong. Not all of them are fundies though. The minority always gets news coverage because the minority only does the stupid stuff. I know a lot of Christians that accept evolution, since the evidence is clear that there is a progression from homo-erectus to homo-sapian. Some of the stuff,on evolution, I have said is from a pastor, who’s church I used to go to. I noticed whenever Kay thinks she is losing a topic she will say something she knows will cause it to switch topics. Or she will deflect the question. And I honestly hope she reads the entire Talmud to try to prove me wrong. (It is a great collection of books, very spiritual in nature.)But if you notice, last year she used to do that and changed the subject to Obama being the Muslim messiah. This year its Mormonism. Next year its going to be something else.
Enkill_Eridos said
I also know other Christians that believe, God should be taught by the parents and the Church, and school should teach the science. This also makes sense because as we can show on this blog, everyone has a different point of view on the subject. That and the really Conservatives, that would disown their Children if they started thinking liberally, probably do not want a Liberal teacher to teach about God. But its those very few fundamentalists, that believe we shouldn’t talk about evolution blah blah blah. They band together with other conservatives and cause a stink. That’s what we see. The media is pushing the view only Conservatives can be Christian, with Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Huckabee. These same people that push this animosity that truly does not exist.
dorian said
well she does follow her guru’s lead. and no matter what it is, it’s always the “liberals” who distort the truth and are ignorant and hypocrites. that message is omnipresent.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Yeah Dorian. The earth is flat; it’s only six thousand years old; humans walked with dinosaurs; there was a global flood, etc. I don’t mind them teaching their own kids whatever. Well actually I do, because that is basically child abuse, but the main problem is these retards want everybody else’s children to be just as retarded as they are by legislating ignorance in public school science classrooms. It’s as stupid as when a state legislature allegedly tried to make the value of pi exactly equal to three. Good thing it didn’t pass, or all the circles in the state would have instantly changed shape!
A few weeks ago you were cheering on the debate between Kay and me and said something to the effect that when she debates creationism she is at her best. Really? How sad. I am still incredulous that she posted that dullvotional of her guru saying that God poofed the earth in such a way to make it look old. What a copout! Why not accept things as they are instead of making lame excuses to try to justify a literal interpretation that is falsified by the evidence?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
You know, I actually wouldn’t mind giving time to creationism in science classrooms, as long as it is done honestly! It would be an excellent way to demonstrate that science is based on evidence and logic, not superstition.
Do the Christians REALLY want that if it is done HONESTLY? Do they really want their children exposed to the truth, that their parents and pastors have LIED to them about evolution and are either ignorant of the evidence or too stupid to understand it?
It ain’t gonna happen. State run public schools are not going to expose the lies of anyone’s religion because it goes against our Constitution to do that. It would be funny though to see the Creationists get their wish and then have it totally blow up in their faces. “Mommy, Daddy, why did you and the pastor LIE to me?”
dorian said
yes, kay is at her best when debating creationism. she gives her best kay relentlessness. she is most resourceful with use of gospel and scripture, giving her own point of view and interpretation. i don’t agree with her but can appreciate her passion.
i should check out what they’re teaching in catechism now. i wonder if there are any changes at all to the story of adam and eve and the serpent in the garden of eden??
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Well, if that’s Kay’s best, I am not too impressed. I didn’t have any scripture quoted at me, but even if I had, that is not relevant to whether or not there is evidence humans evolved from apes which was the main topic of our debate.
Apparently Kay still thinks that should not be taught as fact in school, even though I shared much information and many links with her to demonstrate that it is one of the most well-proven FACTS known to man. There is at least as much evidence we are related to apes as there is that the earth goes around the sun.
Her “best Kay relentlessness” seems nothing more than deliberate ignorance. And the last exchange, where she quotes her guru Bill about God poofing the world so it LOOKS old to scientists, that is really lame. Come on!
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Also, sometimes on this subject but even more when I discussed Hinduism and Buddhism, Kay would quote something I said back at me and then make a comment that shows she thinks I said the exact OPPOSITE of what I actually said. So what’s up with that?
Like it or not Kay, fundies ARE the village idiots of society, not just our society but worldwide. The suicide bombers of 9/11 were fundies. It doesn’t matter if you’re a fundie Christian, Muslim, Jew, even Buddhist…it ain’t the religion, it’s the mindset that’s the problem.
Words are maps. Myths are metaphors, not lies but also not meant to be taken as science and history. If you read myths as science or history, you are missing the whole point of what they are trying to communicate.
Enkill_Eridos said
See but not all pastors explain the creation story as Keller does. Not all Christians do either. How I mixed both is about how many Christians and pastors explain it. (See way up there not my talmud post but like one of my first comments back when this was a debate about evolution.) I mean I do not understand how it is impossible for God to just let it run its course, things to develop. I do not understand how it is impossible to think that God would want to take his time. I also do not understand how it is impossible to think that a year for us is how God views a year. It is very possible a year is just as quick as a blink of an eye. Why does there have to be a distinction? Why can’t God just be attributed to creating the world like this, since for the most part humanity is able to understand a part of the process? I don’t understand how Kay never answers these questions. I mean saying that it is not possible for God to create the universe and the Earth slowly and painstakingly paying attention to every detail. A time that could have been 7 days for him, may have been thousands, ten thousands, millions, billions of years. How is this explination of how God could have done it wrong? I mean the creation story, is obviously not ment to be literal. Just a way to explain to kids how there are 7 days in a week and how God was apart of it. You could do the same for evolution, it wouldn’t be changing the word of God. Just understanding that somethings are just parables, something telling of a deeper meaning. I think the deeper meaning to the parable of the creation of earth, is God created the Earth. How is evolution changing that? I mean you can easily explain that God was creating man very slowly in the ways of how we percieve time, to make us how he wanted us. Its very plausible and makes more sense.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
The problem believers have is that they THINK evolution denies the existence of God, when of course it no more denies God than gravity does, or electricity. Evolution is a fact of nature.
Pastor Jeff on his blog told me he knows many Christians who accept evolution, but what many Christians don’t like about science is the idea that evolution might be presented as unguided, that is, without God being involved at all.
I told him as I tried to tell Kay that once you include God in any scientific concept, it is no longer science. That is not from disrespect or disbelief. If you’re a believer, add God to any equation. If not, leave Him out. If the equation is an accurate description of reality, either form will work.
Also, while mutation and genetic drift may be more or less random, once genes are expressed in a population then natural selection takes place and that is NOT random. So evolution is not “blind chance” as some anti-evolution people claim.
Enkill_Eridos said
But you understand my point? That there is another way than just saying it goes against my belief so its wrong. There is another way of being able to logically put God into the equasion for a believer. I am just trying to illustrate a way that it can be accepted and end this silly debate.
I understand it ceases to be science, until God can be identified scientifically. I mean multiple dimensions, there is a scientific theory Albert Eienstein wrote about right? TBG: I would also like your thoughts on the Water on the Moon discussion I am trying to start. (This debate is getting frivolous it is obvious by the frequency hopping going on. Going from how evolution does not have to be shunned by Christians, and how Bill is wrong. To how the Mormons are wrong, back to evolution being not shunned by Christians.)
The Bicycling Guitarist said
I think I get your point E_E. There can be a scriptural basis for accepting the fact of evolution, or at least the possibility. However, there are some who insist that if Genesis isn’t literal then no Adam, no Fall, no need for salvation, and the whole Bible is meaningless. That is more or less what Bogus Bill is trying to say in this dullvotional, that if you concede anything in the Bible as possibly not literal then it leads to a slippery slope where nobody knows where to draw the line.
Einstein spoke of the continuum of time-space, a field of four dimensions but didn’t get into the alternate universe ideas so far as I know. That came from the quantum physicists of the late 1920s who met at Copenhagen around that time.
While the time between two events OR the space between two events can be measured differently by two observers depending upon their relative positions to the events, there is a quantity called interval that is constant for all observers in Special Relativity. You take the square of the distance between the two events and the square of the distance traveled by light in the time between the two events, take the absolute value of the difference, and the result is the square of the interval.
Einstein explained Brownian motion too. That was the random movement of pollen grains under a microscope. Hey, I wrote a song about that. Don’t have a recording, but the lyrics are on the link of my name to this comment.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Jesus taught using parables. I agree with you E_E that the message of Genesis is that God created man. The details don’t matter as long as you get that God did it. Evolution does NOT deny that.
Enkill_Eridos said
hehehe.
I always wondered why someone takes things into extremes. Maybe you cannot answer this, but I will ask it anyway. Hopefully a meaningful discussion comes from it. I think the Bible has mixtures of passages that are to be taken figuratively and literally. I know from reading the Talmud, that if Eve was never seduced we would have gone on oblivious to the Day of Judgement. But since Eve was seduced, we became integrated into his plan of salvation. It would be very arrogant to say that God would not allow his other creations that fell from grace the same opportunity. It would be very arrogant to think that the plan of salvation was originally concieved for us. You do speak of a connundrum, but the symbolism in the eating from the tree story can be seen as well. According to the scriptures, we were created in the image of God perfect, and without knowing right from wrong. God created the Angels, obviously not in his image and they knew from the begining right from wrong. Mankind was seduced by a Fallen Angel to obtain knowlege from right and wrong. The symbolism of fruit is used throughout the bible. It is very possible this is just a story to teach how we learned right from wrong. But the symbolism of eating the fruit, it could mean that the snake (whom is revealed as a fallen angel in the Talmud.) taught Eve the difference between Good and Evil. Fallen Angels taught man how to summon spirits and all kinds of other things. I mean it can be explained that just because it is a parable, not to be taken literal, does not mean that there is no reason for salvation etc. I mean the law is to be taken literal, there is a balance. I can bring a rebuttle for the not literal no need for salvation thing. I mean the Jews explained quite nicely. It’s not hard to spot what is supposed to be follwed literally. For instance the ten commandments.
I mean just because it is not meant to be interpreted literally does not mean the plan of salvation etc. Does not need to exist. It just means that person did not get the point that God wanted them to learn. You have to realize through these stories, it is easy to explain complex concepts that mankind didn’t even have the capacity to understand at the time. There is a moral to every story in the Bible, in some stories its not apparant in others it is. The moral in the Adam and Eve story, or the point would be how mankind needed to be put into the plan of salvation in the first place. I don’t want to go through every story, but if you read these passages with your mind open to the fact that there may be a deeper meaning to it, you may be able to discern what God’s Word really is. It is uncorruptable, infalible. That doesn’t mean it is literally uncorruptable, and infaliable. The Jehova’s Witness bible should make that apparent. But concepts the things God wanted us to know, the deeper meaning. That is God’s Word and you can change what ever you want but you cannot really change what he wants to teach.
but since this is going to be enough for kay to rant and me to ignore her…TBG you still haven’t posted your thoughts on if it is scientifically plausible for us to colonize the moon in the post Water on the Moon!
kay~ms said
TBG said: “Kay, nobody can prove that God didn’t poof everything into existence in an advanced state. For that matter, God could have poofed everything into existence TWO SECONDS AGO with fake memories of lives never actually lived. But what is your scriptural authority to take such an interpretation?”
When did I ever “take” this interpretation? I’m saying, what I’ve said all along is that we don’t know for sure what happened. To say that Bill’s belief is false is ignorant since you don’t know for sure. And yes, the world could have poofed into existence 2 seconds ago for all we know. Are you going to say that is impossible? Our existance is impossible from a logical perspective.
If God did decide to create the earth in an advanced state that does not make him a “prankser”. He could have had very good reasons for doing so. Are you going to now presume to know why God does what He does?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
But think about it. I know that’s hard for a fundie, but try.
WHY would there be SO MUCH evidence to indicate evolution happens if it doesn’t? And yes, that DOES make God a prankster. God gave us minds, curiousity and reasoning powers.
You say you don’t know whether or not we evolved but it is your contention that nobody else can know either. The fact is that there are many pieces of evidence that all indicate the earth is old and evolution happens, and much of this evidence corroborates other pieces even though each piece also stands alone on its own merits.
Now whether or not God poofed the earth into existence in an advanced state, the pieces of the puzzle do indicate what they do, and since science is in the business of observing and describing reality, then it is quite proper to teach evolution as scientific fact. The kids can learn philosophical questions such as “is anything real?” and such in philosophy classes, but evolution is good solid science and children should be taught science in science classes.
What a lame argument you have though, not much removed from the solipsist insisting everyone else is a figment of his imagination. Sure, you might be right, but there’s no way to prove it and all the evidence of our senses says otherwise.
Also, If we really can’t trust anything we can observe and measure, THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE BIBLE TOO! It might not really be real, Kay, because God might have his motives for not making it real. Are you going to presume to tell God what He can or can’t do?
This shows the weakness of the creationist argument. The weight of evidence is finally becoming known enough where the only argument they have left is to say that maybe everything is an illusion and we should trust THEIR INTERPRETATION of a Bronze Age text on scientific matters. Don’t you think we’ve learned more science than we knew about four thousand years ago? I do. The fact you’re reading this on a computer says a lot you know.
WEIGH IN FOLKS, WHAT DO YOU THINK OF KAY’S ARGUMENT THAT WE CAN’T KNOW FOR SURE WHETHER OR NOT GOD POOFED US INTO REALITY TWO SECONDS AGO SO WE SHOULDN’T TEACH EVOLUTION AS FACT TO KIDS?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
I will grant that Kay is as ignorant as most fundies, but she doesn’t debate as well as many others I’ve encountered, at least not on this subject. She repeats the same lame arguments that don’t have any facts backing them up and has to resort to a God that would trick us for reasons of his own to justify her INTERPRETATION that is not supported by the evidence of the world God created.
Creationists give Christianity a bad name. Even other Christians are ashamed of and bash Creationists. Why should I trust fundies about ANYTHING spiritual when they are so clearly wrong regarding something that can be observed and measured, especially when the best answer they have is they think God might have reasons of His own to plant false evidence?
1minionsopinion said
“Myths are metaphors, not lies but also not meant to be taken as science and history.”
How about Heinrich Schliemann? Granted, his methods proved to be questionable since he stole bits from every dig he was on probably, but he started with the premise that Troy could have been a real place and they ultimately found it. The god related reasons for why Trojans were defeated remain mythical but history proved Homer wasn’t making the whole of it up.
1minionsopinion said
“A time that could have been 7 days for him, may have been thousands, ten thousands, millions, billions of years. How is this explination of how God could have done it wrong? I mean the creation story, is obviously not ment to be literal. Just a way to explain to kids how there are 7 days in a week and how God was apart of it. You could do the same for evolution, it wouldn’t be changing the word of God.”
I’ve heard this argument about time and god before, which I kind of like. But a year is only a year to us based on how we measure it, solar or lunar. And a week is only 7 days because it’s been decided to have a seven day week and lopsided months. Earlier calendars were flawed by their counts of days (not knowing earth revolves around the sun 264.25 times to complete a full circuit x however many years repeating the flaw…), and calendars earlier than that had 30 day months and a five day party at the end of the year. A seven day week is entirely an arbitrary decision. We use it because it works, not just because people believe some god somewhere rested after six of them.
Calendar history is incredibly interesting. The Babylonians were really cool but also mean. I think it’s their fault we count time in base sixty and base 24.
1minionsopinion said
oops – 364.25 stupid early morning brain.
Enkill_Eridos said
Yes, but in the time of moses they didn’t understand that. They didn’t understand that day and night happened because of the Earth’s rotational axis. Nor did they have a concept of time zone and the like. Its another example of how not everything in the Bible should be taken literally, but I used this example to illustrate my point. As our understanding grows about how solar systems work and life sustaining planets form, we have can understand that the story in the Bible is just to simplify a process that is very complex. National Geographic did an article on how they look for life sustaining planets. And from observations of relatively new solar systems (less than 1 billion earth years) are forming, how we can find these planets using high powered telescopes.There is a lunar mission slotted to put into place a telescope much more powerful than hubble in orbit around the moon so we can get a closer look and broaden our search spectrum. I am suprised no one mentioned how planets or solar systems are formed.
Its a process that is being observed and studied, it also further strengthens that planets and solar systems do not just poof appear.
1minionsopinion said
And looking at stars and planets that far away is really us looking back in time, if one considers light speed and just how far away these things are from us. We see today something that happened so many years ago. We never see what’s happening there now, this instant. If light from Sol takes 8 or so minutes to reach Earth, how many years behind are we going to be when we finally spot a supernova in the night sky?
kay~ms said
TBG said: “Creationists give Christianity a bad name. Even other Christians are ashamed of and bash Creationists. Why should I trust fundies about ANYTHING spiritual when they are so clearly wrong regarding something that can be observed and measured, especially when the best answer they have is they think God might have reasons of His own to plant false evidence?”
First, look.. if you believe in God then you are a Creationist ok? That means you (IF you believe in God as you claim you do)! And please quite aligning my beliefs with your warped and biased views of “fundies”. You keep making statements about me that do not represent my beliefs.
2nd… you have a confused sense of who to put your trust in… your trust belongs in God ok?
God doesn’t want us to follow our pastors like sheep.. He wants us to follow Him.
3rd, I have said over and over that I don’t know for sure what happened in our history. But I will NOT denounce the Bible. I don’t know if it is a literal truth or not. And again, it DOESN’T MATTER that much. It seems to be your whole world.
Yes.. teach children about scientific findings and research… Say, ” evidence points to this conclusion”… but do not teach it as solid fact when there are still questions left unanswered and so much still in contention. I am not a scientist.. I am not even equiped to judge on the evidence that you’ve given me… and I have no desire to learn enough to where I can evaluate it. And because of that I cannot and will not agree with you that it is fact…. OKAY?? I am in no position to agree with you…and I will NOT put my faith in YOU and your opinions and research, especially since you’ve proven over and over your tendency to biasness.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
The commmonly understood meaning of the term Creationist is one who denies the fact of evolution. Sure I believe God created us, BUT according to the clues left He did it using evolution so it should be taught as the FACT it is.
Are you saying we should tell kids gravity is not a fact but is just something that the evidence seems to indicate? That is the same with evolution. It is JUST AS MUCH A FACT AS GRAVITY IS.
Apparently, according to your standards Kay there are no such things as facts.
Yes I have a bias. I have a bias towards having an open mind to truth, even if it conflicts with what I want to believe. Can you honestly say the same thing Kay? It doesn’t seem so based on your responses here.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
btw, there are questions still unanswered about gravity. We actually understand more about how evolution works than we do about how gravity works.
So according to Kay, children should be told gravity is NOT a fact. Uh huh. Sure.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
See Kay, we can acknowledge some things as facts, such as gravity and evolution, even if we don’t completely understand them. I think that’s the issue you and I are stuck on. We don’t completely understand ANYTHING, but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t facts.
Enkill_Eridos said
Enkill_Eridos said
This is the direction this debate is starting to go.
1minionsopinion said
Quoting bits off Kay:
“I have said over and over that I don’t know for sure what happened in our history. But I will NOT denounce the Bible. I don’t know if it is a literal truth or not. And again, it DOESN’T MATTER that much.”
Read some history. Read some biblical history. Read some history of Israel and the time of Christ. Read about what was going on in other countries when the bible stories were being told. Or don’t.
“I am not even equiped to judge on the evidence that you’ve given me… and I have no desire to learn enough to where I can evaluate it.”
That’s sad is what that is. So if I suggested you try Richard Dawkins’ “The Greatest Show on Earth” as an easy in to the ideas of evolution, you’d never bother finding a copy to see what’s in it?
TBG – #23 is my comment about the theory of air pressure being a better explanation to gravity. Teach the controversy!
1minionsopinion said
I think it’d do everyone a world of good (me included) to get a better view of history. School classes couldn’t go into detail on much and what they did go into didn’t interest me. I regret not caring enough then. At least on my blog I can explore those little funky things about moments in history and get a better idea of where we are based on where we were and how much we’ve grown as a society. It’s incredibly amusing to see how different things can be, and the fact that we’d look today at something and never dream it was the root of riots or blasphemy or uneducated, unsubstantiated fears.
dorian said
minion – feel free to cross-post those history posts of yours, all of us and our readers here could use history reviews plus we could always use good discussion topics!
currents news events get boring at times…
1minionsopinion said
I admit to not reading half of what you lot write about that, and since I’m not commenting on the banning post about this, you can’t ban me. Har har!
Current events was even less interesting than history (we called both of them Social Studies back in the day). I still fight the compulsion to be self-centered (and I don’t mean in the egotistical way) rather than worldly. I should be reading my local news more often, though. I never know what’s going on and likely miss cool shows and concert listings besides.
Anywhoo, can do on the cross post.
kay~ms said
TBG.. you keep calling it “false evidence” that God is responsible for if Bill’s belief is true. What if God used a world that once was and died out to start /create man? That would then not make it “false” evidence to “trick” us… God just recycled an old “void” world that once was. That would then make the history of man according to the literal teaching of the Bible TRUE. And it would NOT make God a “prankster”. This is just one example.
And this version, if true, just happens to weed out the ones who prefer to put their trust in science INSTEAD of God. Thisis an example of man finding exaclty what he is looking for. If he’s not looking for God but something else instead, then that is what he is going to find.
dorian said
thank you o minion of the ms. nottootanned orange raspberry sorbet avatar!
hi kay! i look for science all the time because it’s something you have to look for, to learn. i don’t look for God, i just find God everywhere – in you, in TBG,OTA, E-E, Princess,Minion, in everyone here. i trust God is everywhere because well, he’s omnipresent. this presence has different names for different people, though. but i trust there’s only one God. sometimes i misspell the word God and make it “Good”. God doesn’t mind. it’s my grandma that smacks me on the head from mt. heaven.
kay~ms said
1minion said: “Quoting bits off Kay:
““I have said over and over that I don’t know for sure what happened in our history. But I will NOT denounce the Bible. I don’t know if it is a literal truth or not. And again, it DOESN’T MATTER that much.”
Read some history. Read some biblical history. Read some history of Israel and the time of Christ. Read about what was going on in other countries when the bible stories were being told. Or don’t.”
…I didn’t mean to come off as having a desire to be ignorant and not interested in learning. I say it doesn’t matter that much (in the big picture) and that is true but that doesn’t mean that I’m not interested in learning about it.
If you suggested that I read Dawkin’s book, I’d be interested as it pertains to this discussion. But I most likely at this point won’t look into it because I have so many other things on my list that are not getting done right now. If it were more important (in the big picture) I’d find the time to read it.
I feel that I understand enough already to determine my beliefs on the why’s and how’s of our existance. You may not think so because you have a different view. I have to say that I am glad that I can look at the big picture on things.. it really makes things much simpler. Instead of the long elaborate routes taken by Buddhists (TBG) or EE’s route of making his own truth. Or the atheist’s view that requires so much knowledge of science but then STILL doesn’t answer the most fundamental basic scientfic question. Believing in a “logical scientific” view of the world that is based on a complete lack of logic is so amusing to me.
And again, if I had more time, I would read his book among many many other things I’d like to read and explore… such as the artists on this blog… I have never really taken the time to appreciate art.. and I would love to start now but I just can’t seem to find the time to do it.
You said: “Read some history. Read some biblical history. Read some history of Israel and the time of Christ. Read about what was going on in other countries when the bible stories were being told. Or don’t.”
Again, I would if I had more time… but I have to say that I LOVE the NIV Bible… when I first discovered it, I bought one for all of my family and friends. It gives lots of added information including the authors of the books, times of writings, it gives archeological discoveries, history of the outside world at the time of the writings, their cultures, etc etc. as it all relates to the Bible. It also states the contested beliefs and views of some translations. Alternate translations etc. I just came across (in Romans) where it points out how Martin Luther had added the word “alone” in a passage (after the word faith) about being justified by faith and not works. The NIV did not inlcude the word but noted that he did include it. And it explains and points out, for example, where the writings use “Father” “Son” and “Holy Spirit” interchangably and how that supports the belief of the Trinity. I love the NIV.
kay said
Hi Dorian… I agree that God shows Himself everywhere.. but do you desire to know God on a personal level? Because He does offer that to us. Do you want to know Him (the person) and His will for us? And His love for us?
And, I have a comment in moderation… thanks..
dorian said
i must admit i don’t read all of the current news posts myself, either. even the ones i post. except for posts about the pirates. i like pirates. another pirate post coming up.
i also read news posts abt anne coulter and palin and i watch all the videos.
i still post news items because it’s adkob tradition.
but you know what our bread and butter posts are? our top 3 traffic generators are 1) salvador dali 2) swastika 3) heroin (i don’t recall a heroin post).
dorian said
hello again, kay!
what are your questions leading to? an invitation to a conversion? you’re sounding like the mormons and jehova’s witnesses at my door, kay! bake me a cake, sweeten the deal! devil’s food cake with lots of chocolate icing is my favorite!
kay said
I know, you are right… it’s a fine line to not sound like just another person trying to convert someone. It is truly what I believe. I just noticed that aspect missing from your earlier response.
dorian said
that’s perfectly fine – you’re just showing your enthusiasm for what you believe. i try and convert people to playing musical instruments because i find joy in making music and i just want to share that with others.
1minionsopinion said
Did I mention my top searches:
Michaelle Jean, the Canadian Governer General (various spellings)
Zeus
Satan (often in the same search with Zeus)
What rhymes with Jesus (get a rhyming dictionary, people)
eating babies (there was some artist dude who made some art, plus the funny idea that atheists eat babies, which atheists now use as a running joke)
and Shocked By The Bible, which is a book by Joe Kovacs and one of World Net Daily’s favourite books last year. I didn’t read the book but for every Did you know!? WND listed, I did the research to find the answers. That was fun.
I like that kay is so open about her beliefs, too. No need to wonder what she thinks about something, she’ll let us know soon enough. It’s a good trait. Better to be straightforward than sly and conniving, I think. Honesty is usually the best policy.
Princessxxx said
honesty “is” usually the best policy….
and then we have kay.
dorian said
baby-eating atheists? hmm. send them to http://tothewire.wordpress.com/2009/11/18/this-kid-is-sooo-cute-d/ for a feast they’ll never forget.
kay~ms said
I said: “I feel that I understand enough already to determine my beliefs on the why’s and how’s of our existance. You may not think so because you have a different view. I have to say that I am glad that I can look at the big picture on things.. it really makes things much simpler. Instead of the long elaborate routes taken by Buddhists (TBG) or EE’s route of making his own truth. Or the atheist’s view that requires so much knowledge of science but then STILL doesn’t answer the most fundamental basic scientfic question. Believing in a “logical scientific” view of the world that is based on a complete lack of logic is so amusing to me.”
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Well Kay, are you willing to let kids be told gravity is a fact even though we don’t completely understand how it works and there are unanswered questions about it? Those were reasons you gave for not teaching evolution as fact. We understand more about how evolution works than how gravity works.
Don’t you understand that even if we don’t completely understand something doesn’t mean it’s not real, that it isn’t a fact?
Since you’re not willing to take the time to educate yourself, are you willing to let teachers teach what scientists have discovered to be facts? Or do you really want to have them tell kids that a particular fact of nature may be what all the evidence indicates, but it might all be a trick of God for whatever Divine purpose He has?
The Bicycling Guitarist said
Logic has built in flaws and limitations. No formal system can be proven to be consistent within itself. Self-reference invites paradox.
I like the quotation from the original Star Trek series about logic. Spock says: “Logic is a little tweeting bird chirping in a meadow. Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers that smell bad.”
That’s very zen.
Enkill_Eridos said
I don’t make my own truth. Again you are putting words into my mouth. There are teachings in almost every religion that coincide with the word of God. (as described below.)
Also the contesting of a doctrine, I feel comes from misinterpretation. Does not mean I reject everything. Contesting that the organized religion of Christianity (including Mormonism) is being led astray, does not mean I reject Jesus or God. For me all of these truths I talk about are in the True Old Testament (Includes the Torah, and all the Talmud.) As well as the True New Testament (Including the books that the Christian Church says should not be in there.) I have given my reasons, not to convince everyone that it should be this way. I really don’t care if someone’s views and religious beliefs are different from my own. But I like to share my viewpoint, I can debate it but I know that it will end in a stalemate. I like to debate mainly politics, debating politics is easy because there can be a victor. In Religious Debate, it can go on and on. With neither side letting up, and neither side can win. It’s called a stalemate and without using physical violence a stalemate can never come to a true victory.
Oh and I would like to add one thing. Salvation is made through Grace, not faith. Works affirms faith, Grace is given by God.
James 2:22 You see that his [Abraham's] faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did.
James 2:26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
You can be saved without having faith in any organized religion. Because it is a gift, from God. It doesn’t matter if you consider me a “True Christian” or not. I believe that Jesus is my savior from sin, I believe that the only way to get to heaven is to believe Jesus died for my sins. That is good enough for God.
Enkill_Eridos said
Matthew 16:27 For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done.
Revelation 20:12 And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13 The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done.
How we treated others will be critical.
Matthew 25:41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ 44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ 45 “He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’
Some other things to think about.
1minionsopinion said
—I like the quotation from the original Star Trek series about logic. Spock says: “Logic is a little tweeting bird chirping in a meadow. Logic is a wreath of pretty flowers that smell bad.” —
When did Spock ever say that!? I find it highly illogical that this quote could be attributed to him.
Enkill_Eridos said
It was in the episode I,Mudd. It was the episode where they had to all act illogically to escape the planet. Easily one of the funniest episodes ever.
princessxxx said
my favorite, all those logical glam dolls
princessxxx said
***As we are 10 days before the end of our 123rd month of Liveprayer , we still have to cover $30,000 of our November operational budget and make up the $80,000 we have fallen behind since January .” – BILL KELLER
1minionsopinion said
Ohhh. Mudd’s women. Right. The robot girls. I forgot about that one. I don’t have many memories of that one for some reason. I’ll have to see what season that was in. My library has all of them, but the discs themselves are in poor shape from so much use and disuse. And we ordered the complete TNG recently. That’s a bit of geeky joy coming my way. I haven’t seen it since it was on air new.
The Bicycling Guitarist said
No, not “Mudd’s women.” That was the FIRST episode he was in. “I, Mudd” was the second episode with Harry Mudd in it. It is “I, Mudd” that has the robot girls. “Mudd’s women” is the one where they take a drug to be beautiful to lonely rich miners. Harry Mudd was also featured in an animated series episode “Mudd’s Passion.”
princessxxx said
you can watch the entire episode here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hc54OERosps
or just a taste: