NFB: The Passion

[N20LT4Bird]

Originally posted by Sean 94z28
Bird-
What is very illogical to me is this; We don't have a partial or full understanding of something, so it must be God. There is not 100% evidence (technically no such thing exsists) for evolution in its current form, so the only other alternative is a God, OUR one and only God (as opposed to all the other guys wrong false Gods). Why don't you just claim that your God created everything with a Big Bang? Admit we don't have all the answers, and your God gave us the tools to slowly discover how amazing his creations really are. Seems more intelligent than denying our best efforts to explain such matters. Another thing; we are willing as a society to legally take a life based on an extremely complex and technical science (DNA for example - no OJ jokes!). But other sciences with similar origins are "unproven", "agenda driven", or just "lies", when they question religous beliefs. They are derived from the same scientific methods, the only ones we know that brought us where we are today with medicine and technologies.

I enjoy others perspectives and the points brought out here. I do understand the "sensative" nature of the topic, so feel free to junp in and say "enough already, this is a f-body baord". If you want to continue to better understand each other, I am willing.

Sincerely
Sean

Sean, I agree. Sensative issue, but I am not easily offended and i enjoy talking on these issue, otherwise I wouldnt have started the thread.

As far as the origins debate goes - I agree, a very compex issue. At one time, I studied this in depth. I have taken many college level biology, anthropology and sociology course in an effort to understand the humanistic side of the arguement. I have attended many lectures, and read many books from the biblical perpective as well.

I dont presume to know all there is to know about the topic (not even close), but the one problem that I have with the humanistic side fo the arguement is that they BEGIN with the supposition that there is no God and that life arose from random chance processes. If they start with this supposition, all evidence is interpreted in this light. Thats the flaw. I cannot agree with a study that has its basis in the opposite of what I believe. Conversely, the biblical point of view BEGINS with the supposition that there is a God, so interpretations are slanted that way as well. The problem is that there can be no true science in either camp - science is a search for truth. You cant begin that search with presuppositions. However, I find it impossible to believe that this happened by chance. The compexity of the human eye, or brain, or nervous system is so OBVIOUSLY DESIGNED to me.

Oh... one more thing, before you say that the Good Book is full of inconsistancies - back it up. Can you name a few? - we'll talk, before you judge them as inconsistancies. Its funny you say this, because thats one of the things that impresses me about the Bible - 66 Books, written over thousands of years, in different parts of the world - they all fit together and point either forward or backeard to ONE - the Christ. To me, when I read, it seems so inspired.

[fastTa]

This is indeed a very interesting thread. I think this thread will survive from being locked as long as we can keep from resorting to any personal attacks of character. This hasn't happened so far and I don't think it will. I think there is a significant amount of intellect as well as maturity present on this thread.

To the point. The believers and the non-believers will always resort to making the basis of their religious argument the solution to a proposed question. Trying to prove absolute soutions to questions are never the way to understand that which involves spirutuality.

The Bible does not at all seek to prove the existence of God. The fact that there is a God is assumed throughout the Scriptures. Before anything came into being, He was “In the beginning God.” The first verse of the Bible begins with the assumption of His pre-existence. "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." God's existence is presented as a statement of fact that needs no proof. The man who says that there is no God is called a fool in Psalm 14:1. We also need to connect this verse with John 1:1-5 which clearly states that Jesus was also there at the beginning of creation with God, therefore validating His eternal Sonship. The Holy Spirit also took part in creation. “The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” Genesis 1:2. The triune God created the heaven and the earth.

Sean you asked a very good and very fair question:
"If God created everything, then who created God?"

I will attempt to explain my POV on this and just to note one thing it is not my intent to direct this solely at you Sean.

This can also be referenced to in a comparitive analogy. When school kids read a book in class, let's just Biology, Physics, or something of a scientific nature. The student's automatically assume what has been written is to be accepted as a truthful account of the source's knowledge and/or studies. For example let's say a student is reading a chapter in Biology textbook concerned with inheritive characteristics of genetics. Gregor Johann Mendel had great influence in the sudies and understanding of this particular subject. The students or teachers for that matter did not question who taught Mendel or who taught the person who taught Mendel. They simplyt accepted that what was written on Mendel's account was a legitimate and accurate representation of the truth.

Haven't you guys ever been so sad or so happy that you felt the overwhelmingly compelling urge to ask why or to give thanks to that which you tilt your head to up in the sky? I personally have all the proof I need by just simply looking around at the infinitely complex yet still not completely understood biological wonder called Earth! Too many "coincidental perfections" exist within the cellular level of our two kingdom's of biology. (Plant,Animal)

The greatest ones always have stirred controversy. Hence George W. Bush. OK that was a little off subject but I had too!

[Sean 94z28]

Bird,

Very well written reply and a lot of common ground believe it or not. Agreed there are so many complex chicken-egg scenarios that it defies full understanding at any level.

My compliments to you, for pursuing your desire to gain related knowledge so vigorously. It is far more than I can claim to back up my positions.

I think it is a poor group of scientists (and I also agree there are probably too many) that start with any pre-supposition of knowing anything to be absolutely factual. It is definately very human to incorporate personal bias to skew the facts.

On many occasions in my lifetime (mostly out in remote wilderness), I am awe struck, without understanding, baffled by any explanation of the way things are. Beyond words should I say. Could it be intelligently designed? Sure, I'll give ya that. Exactly the way it was documented? Now I am losing ya. The wonders of nature are indeed wonderous and far from fully explainable at our current level of knowledge. To you this verifies your belief (intelligent design) and excludes all other options. To me, and to your belief system's benefit, it actually allows me to consider all posibilities. Then my rational side takes over and once again requires more than just faith to believe the un-believable.

I knew I was gonna get called out on this eventually and almost addressed it earlier. It may only be fully fair take such a strong stance if I were to re-read the bible, since it has been more than 20 years. The inconsistancies I mention are based on a literal interpretation of the bible (i.e. 7 real days or seven "periods of time" for story telling purposes). Seven real days kinda messes with the whole dinosaur thing, which I am pretty sure really exsisted. They have actual fosilized bones.Was the design SO complex that the bones needed to be there for some still unknown reason (this is a position of some literalists, correct?)? Without the need for the actual animals to have existed?

I will not deny the historical impact and outright quality of the literature itslef. It is also refined and interpreted by people who could have also been prone to human error (bias). But again my thought process stalls when I try to accept it as factual record of the way that things actually happened.

One thing is undeniable, your FAITH will always be better/stronger than my evidence. It is yet the last chicken-egg. Your religion requires it, while simutaneously depending on it. If but even one part is not the TRUTH, does it not bring the entirity of it into question? That is the standard by which religion judges science right? If it is not 100% right, than it is wrong.

I reserve the right to change my positions in light of what my brain determines to be better evidence gathered by historically proven methods That's the real beauty I see in my belief system.

Sorry, reading time with the young'n now. May not be back to reply til AM or late

Peace
Sean

[Cade93TA]

Sean, You will love this

Here is a link to a John Ankerberg show they did last month about creation and evolution. He brought in astrophysicists, chemists and theologians to help explain how the new scientific evidence correlates side by side with the biblical version of creation. I believe there are several parts (7) 30 min shows. Very interesting. He invites skeptics to listen and come up with their own decision.
I have never seen biblical evidence and scientific evidence complement each other so much.



Link to "Journey Toward Creation" Video Page

Direct link to start downloading Video (windows Media player)

[fastTa]

Wow very good video. VERY GOOD BRAIN FOOD! Although there perogative, how can one not believe!

[MN6WS6]

I have heard somebody explain this to me, but it's been a long time ago so I may not get it all right.

There has to be a God, there has to be something or someone who created all the things that we see. The Big Bang theory states that all matter was composed into one "thing", and something caused it to explode into what we have today. Regardless of whether or not this theory is accurate, there still had to be something or someone who created that "thing" that exploded. That would be God.

God's word is the Bible. And like was said before, there is no possible way that over thousands of years all of the prophets could get everything in the bible to flow like it does, go back and exactly state what a prophet thousands of years before had said, it would be just entirely too much to be called coincidence. The Bible has been proven, I don't know how all this was done, but there are other records that show who the rulers were, where certain people in the bible were when these things that are spoken of in the bible actually happened, etc. So the bible has historical proof outside of the bible itself.

Every religion recognizes Jesus and the miracles he perfromed. Even the devil himself knows who Jesus is. Some call him a prophet, or a magician, or what have you, but if they would read their bible they would see he was much more than that. You do not die on a cross, rise from a grave 3 days later witnessed by several people, and be called "just a man" or "just a prophet". You do not make the blind see by the touch of your hand, you do not make the lame walk by voice, you do not make dead people come alive by saying "rise up". No man can do that.

I'm no preacher, and I'm not a bible scholar, I'm just a sinner who has been saved and am trying to walk a path guided by the Lord. I don't have all the answers, and the bible says that of us will until we get to heaven. So no matter how much scientific proof something has, no matter how many people believe in evolution or whatever, we will never know the real truth until we die and go to heaven.

I have faith. I hope you can find yours too. And like others have said, if I'm wrong, I've still lead a good life fellowshipping with others and helping those who I can. But if I'm right, then I'll walk streets of gold and praise the Lord for eternity while those who don't believe burn in an eternal fire. I have faith that I'm right, and a Bible recognized the world over as truth as my proof.

[fastTa]

I was never aware of how many Christians were members of this forum. I am now pleasantly aware of all who believe and have faith here in this forum. I just wonder how many other internet forums have a religiously heavy thread going on right now that is bringing together Christians because of this movie. Tell me this is not a devinely planned occurence!

[Joe 1320]

Originally posted by fastTA
This is indeed a very interesting thread. I think this thread will survive from being locked as long as we can keep from resorting to any personal attacks of character. This hasn't happened so far and I don't think it will. I think there is a significant amount of intellect as well as maturity present on this thread.

That is why this thread continues....... well done, folks.

[N20LT4Bird]

Originally posted by Sean 94z28
Bird,

The inconsistancies I mention are based on a literal interpretation of the bible (i.e. 7 real days or seven "periods of time" for story telling purposes). Seven real days kinda messes with the whole dinosaur thing, which I am pretty sure really exsisted. They have actual fosilized bones.Was the design SO complex that the bones needed to be there for some still unknown reason (this is a position of some literalists, correct?)? Without the need for the actual animals to have existed?

Sean

Sean, you bring good points and I am glad to see you have some thought into this. Most shrug these things off without thinking.

In regards to your point on the dinos. I will start by saying that many do not interpret the beginning as 7 literal days, leaving a lot of room for, well.....a lot. I am undecided on this issue, but in the original Hebrew that this was written, He uses the word "yom", followed by a numerical designation, indicating a literal 24 hour day. So, I tend to interpret it in this light. This does indeed bring up an issue with regard to the dinosaurs, unless they lived amongst man in the begining. I encourage you to read the Job CH. 40 and 41 (one of the oldest books of the Bible).

Job is talking of the wonders of God's creation. He cites examples. Now remember, this is long before fossil evidence.

"Look at Behemoth, which I have made with you......what strength in his loins, what power in the muscles of his belly.......his tail sways like a CEDAR.......he ranks FIRST among the works of God."

"Can you pull leviathon in with a fish hook?....any hope of subduing him is false, the mere sight of him is overwhelming.....his back has rows of shields tightly sealed together.....when he rises up, the mighty are terrified, the sword that reaches him has no effect."

Now, these are only parts of the scripture. Read them all for yourself. Some interpret these creatures as elephants or alligators. But, please, an elephant doesnt even have much of a tail at all, much less like a cedar tree. The alligator can caught, and definately not first among the ranks of God. I cant think of many creatures that fit these descriptions.

All I am eluding to here is that perhaps history is much different than we presume to know. How would Job have knowledge of these creatures without first hand experience? I believe there is much we have to learn, and the Bible has many of the answers.

[N20LT4Bird]

Originally posted by fastTA
I was never aware of how many Christians were members of this forum. I am now pleasantly aware of all who believe and have faith here in this forum. I just wonder how many other internet forums have a religiously heavy thread going on right now that is bringing together Christians because of this movie. Tell me this is not a devinely planned occurence!

I think that is because most boards do not keep the family atmosphere that we have here. There are good folks on this board (Christian and other faiths), so many Christians are naturally drawn to it.

[Christopherrr]

Amen, my pastor always told me to surround myself with other Christians...honestly, I do it in the outside world...but never expected to be surrounded in this forum too. My Pastor always told me this too "there is no such thing as coincidence, it's only God's doing; everything happens for a reason."

[Sean 94z28]

Solid agreement on the quality and civility of discussion here. I have always liked that about this board.

Thanks for the links Cade, as always, it will be given fair time and consideration. BTW, any dinosaur info discussed? Plan to watch tommorow. I would be very interested to see a non-vague Biblical reference to their existance.

FastTA - The biology analogy is interesting. Same question though, science good enough for death penalty (which I support BTW) evidence, but not up to par for begining to explain our origins? Hmmm.

And yes, of course I (and I imagine most humans) have that feeling you describe. Everyday, when I loook into the eyes of my child. But why the all or nothing propostion? I would want to give thanks for what I have, the life I am given, surely not for an opportunity to the big party. Actually seems kinda selfish to me to desire more, why can't life itself be the big reward? Instead, it's all about AFTER your life. I feel again we're hung up in interpretation, Does heaven=dying at peace with yourself, or are we really that thrilled at the thought of streets of gold and being re-united with all the people you knew? Now we could start to get into what heaven would be for different people too.

MN6- The difference between Big Bang and Seven Days is wider than the Grand Canyon itself. Though I respect your flexibilty in your belief that your creator is responsible regardless- definately a step in the right direction for a modern religon (opinion of course).

And then you repeat what I started my first reply with, only with a different outlook. If your right you get your heaven (whatever that is), and if your wrong you claim my perspective (that you lived a good life basically). But what of another possibility (which your unyielding truth will never allow of course), that another religion was right and you're headed for their eternal hell. You are willing to take that chance based on your faith. I am willing to take the chance that of you are completely right. That is, after-all, what you are claiming is the fate of every non-believer. What if an innocent child, raised under another religion and equally convinced of the validity of their religion, were to be killed by an imperfect Christian (drunk driver for example). The driver can seek forgiveness, but what of the victim? Heaven or hell? And why?

Bird- Interesting quotes, more than I knew previously. Much like the rest of the high quality writing in the Bible, it is both vague and specific enough to serve its purpose. That is, leaves the window of any possibilty open, without coming anywhere close to real proof. The problem then becomes this; these first beasts of God, which can't be tamed or caught by man, with tails the size of Cedars, and scales. Where did they go today? Surely the Bible would have recognized an event powerful enough to take down the most hearty of Gods creatures. Was it the flood? Was Noah asked not take dinos? If they co-exsisted 6000 years ago, why are we here and they aren't? There would have to be a story why the first and most "behemoth" of God's creature were not allowed to survive.

I agree, we are far from knowing what really happened. Maybe it was some of both. I am willing to keep an open mind. My problem is with closed minded religions (and closed minded scientists for that matter) that don't allow for us to discover what we desire to know.

And finally, at the risk of being accused of standing for nothing at all (wouldn't be the first time);
let me debunk some of the assumptions you probably now have (between my stated belief and my location) about me.
I did and will vote for Bush again. Although his religous motivations/invocations are for me his most serious flaw. His economic plan and stance on terrorism are correct. I too am very disturbed by the gay marriage thing here in my neck of the woods(if you want to here my unusual non-religous basis for this feel free to ask).

How does the selfless and self sacraficing nature of Christianty, reconcile itself with the materialistic agenda of a capitalist society. How rich can Mel get while millions suffer worlwide. Im sure he donates many times more than I make in a year, but also has millions more than any humble Christian would require for a fullfilling life. BTW, has he stated how much profit will go to charity and how much over his initial investment he will keep?

Sean

[N20LT4Bird]

Sean, you write alot!

There is a lot of science and speculation that goes into the study of the flood and catastrophism. The scenario I will give you has scientific background in it, but I dont pretend to know it all, and what I do know would take to long write. If your seriously interested, take a look at Henry Morris's work. There are a number of other creation scientists that have done extensive research in this area as well. Creation scientist explain the flood as an extremely catastrophic event. Before the flood there was no rain. This is why people really thought Noah was crazy, because they had never seen rain before. Water was held in a large vapor canopy and the earth was like a large greenhouse. When God summoned the flood, he collapsed the vapor canopy and fell in the form of rain - a lot of it. The Bible describes the catastophism of the whole event and the "fountains of the deep" erupting etc. The point to all of this that the earth was a different place after the flood, and could have very well lead to the extinction of the dinosaurs. There was probably only 2 of each kind on the Ark. It makes sense that many creatures became extinct.

As far as your question regarding capitolism and Christianity. I agree, its not a perfect match. Communism would be a better match, but the problem is that we live in a sinful world and you know as well as I that communism doesnt work - but it would if people were sinless. I think the Bible stands behind rewards for hard work and I dont think there is anything wrong with being rich as long as your heart (and priorities) are in the right place. So, I dont think the Bible condemns capitolism.

WOW, there are a lot of topics oing on here all at once!

[Jay 02 TA ws6]

WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH, guys!!!!

Where did this capitalism/Christianity thing come about? Oh no, lol...

Well, one thing is for sure. As a fourth-year economics and business management double major at a private Christian college, this topic has been discussed over, and over, and over, and over and... you get the picture...

First thing's first. Capitalism and Christianity ABSOLUTELY fit together.

Several Biblical references point to the virtue in working hard, to sustain yourself, and not rely on anyone. True enough, there are also plenty of verses which command you to give. The key here is give. We are not commanded to have a government that takes our money and re-distributes it as it sees fit.

Take a look at capitalism and socialism and their applications in the world today. Not more than 50 years ago, Hong Kong was a dump the likes of which could be mentioned in comparison to Calcutta. When it was under British rule, the economy was left in a state best described as "benevolent neglect". That is to say, the market was left alone. The tax rate was flat -- 15%. The barriers to entry were shockingly minimized. Good businesses succeeded, bad businesses failed. Hong Kong has demonstrated economic growth so aggressive, that what was once 50 years ago a poverty-stricken slum, is now an exploding center of economic growth and wealth. Even the United States of America is not as Capitalistic as Hong Kong was during these times that it was transformed into the amazing society it is today.

No matter which way you slice it, any time that a tax is levied on any good or service, the demand for it will be artificially reduced, and a dead-weight loss on society will be incurred. There are no if, ands, or buts about this. Now... what may happen is that the money collected from said taxes is distributed in a way amongst society which it deems to be more virtuous, but there is no escaping the truth that the total money present was lost.

You may find it interesting to know that the 1960's demonstrated the highest rates of aid given to the poor in the United States's history. The same decade also represents the time that the most Americans were stuck in poverty.

The bottom line is that you must look at the real-world results of the two systems in order to have any sort of valid judgment on them. Socialism leads to stripping its citizens of their individuality, creates complacency among the unemployed, creates stagnation which will inevitably result in poverty, takes away incentive, creates black markets (which are much more cut-throat and unscroupulous than fair markets), and does not allow freedom. Capitalism allows for freedom of choice (how closely this parallels our God-given free will), it allows for striving to meet goals, competition to improve one's self, allows for a chance to escape poverty, and rewards hard work. The end result is a society far more well-off. Ever hear the saying "a rising tide raises all ships"? Even the poor in America are far better than the poor in a Socialistic country. Did you know that about 2/3 of the total population of the USA that is below the poverty line turns over (just like inventory in a warehouse) every four years? The majority of people who are poor do not remain poor for substantial amounts of time.

If it is greed you want to talk about then you need to cosider short versus long run. Any company who runs cut-throat hardcore profit maximization does so with nothing but the short term bottom line in mind. In the long run, many instances have proven Capitalism's ability to reward the virtuous who treat consumers and employees well. The companies who focus on the humanness of business are the ones that remain for long periods of time.

There is no question that there is not a perfect system. Just like everything else created by human beings who are fallible - we cannot design a system free from corruption, greed, or injustice.

For further reading, I encourage you all to pick up Poverty and Wealth -- The Christian Debate Over Capitalism by Ronald Nash.

One thing is for sure... capitalism results in a society which is much more conducive to Christian beliefs than Socialism ever could.

[Jay 02 TA ws6]

Originally posted by Sean 94z28
Does heaven=dying at peace with yourself, or are we really that thrilled at the thought of streets of gold and being re-united with all the people you knew?

Heaven is not about being re-united with people you knew. It is being united with God. That is all -- I have had it explained to me that God's love in heaven is all we need. A concept which I certainly cannot grasp. I would love to see my dad again, but that is not the way the concept of Heaven goes. It says that once we are with God, we will understand why NOTHING else matters... hard to understand, I know...