Why hasn't the world come to an end and where is Jesus?

apoppin · Jan 3, 2001

Again, you insist I am "name-calling" when I said you have no knowledge of the Bible. Do you? Or are you just repeating what you heard or read. All of your posts regarding the Bible display no first-hand or accurate knowledge about it.

You say life has ALWAYS existed somewhere in the universe. Yet you speak of a beginning to the universe - a "big bang". Where and how did life originate from non-living matter?

The hints I was referring to was the "why" regarding the purpose of the other stars, galaxies, etc.. I am not doubting the Creator's purpose regarding the earth as stated in the Bible. The Bible is very clear regarding the creation of the universe (Genesis 1:1) "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

The definition of fossil is pretty well established as a remnant of an organism of a past age which has been preserved. It can be for example, an entire skeleton or an imprint left in the earth's crust.

Your theory, rahvin is the one you are defending - evolution.

Now please give your definition of evolution.

EDIT: I'd love to wait around for your answer and further discuss this but I'm late (again) for work. If the topic is still going, I rejoin tonight. Aloha.

MrPALCO · Jan 3, 2001

<< Again I will tell you that this isn't always true and in most cases the costs are prohibitive. In a world with proper engineering and knowledge there is no need for bedrock in any structure. >>

When dealing with resources that come from the Physical world alone, costs must always be considered. Proper engineering can temporarily compensate for a poor beginning.

I know a Man that has paid the exorbitant and "prohibitive" cost the build on Bed Rock. Now, any man can begin on Bed Rock.

Bed Rock is the best place to begin the Structure.

Athanasius · Jan 3, 2001

Czar Quote:

<< Tell me then one thing, if god created men in his own image and created earth so men could live there, then why the hell did he bother to create other solar systems, other galaxies and everything else? >>

Why? is a fun question but a hard one to answer. There could be, and probably are, many reasons that the universe was created that have little or nothing to do with man. Why does the artist create works of art that will never be publicly displayed for human eyes? Does the artist not take joy in the art of creating itself? Must it always be merely for human consumption?

Still, just from earth's perspectives, current scientific theory suggests that the universe would have to have been expanding for the apparent 14.5 billion years that it has been for the elements to "cook" properly and for earth to have achieved its currently stable state.

Even if earth is the "focus point", the current size of the universe does not prevent such a concept. The mechanics of the universe would require the length of time currently theorized by science. Since the universe is expanding, it would therefore also require the postulated size of the universe.

Czar · Jan 3, 2001

apoppin

Ehen you called me ignorant, I called that name calling, what else is it? . Did I mention anything about the big bang? no I didnt, to me the big bang is just a theory, and I have my own theory about this but that doenst matter.

Then there is this thing about religion in general. People created (my way of putting it) religions in all courners of the world, everywhere religion has allways been with us humans. Each religion is different, some belive in heaven, some belive in hell, and some belive in absolutely nothing. Many of those religions have some sort of a holy book, where their god or gods wrote their meanings or influenced the writer in writing their meanings. This is well known. Some religions have one god, some have 10 gods and some even have gods for nearly everything. Religions are just as different as people are. Some rational people even belive that there is just one god and he/she is all these other gods in all those religions. If you belive in one religion, then how come your religion is any more right than the other religions? If you belive in "one" god over all religions then how can you quote anything from the "bible" when its just a document conserned with one religion.

Religion is not science, the bible is not science, those two are there to build up morals and etique. They are not supposed to tell you if one thing is right or wrong, they are to tell you if you are doing the right or wrong thing. Science is the everlasting quest for knowledge, religion is the everlasting quest for society. You can not base society on science and you can not base knowledge to religion.

Elledan · Jan 3, 2001

What if someone asked you to trace back the history of the bible, who wrote it, for what reasons and how long it really took them. No way you can do this.
If all bibles on earth would disappear suddenly, then it would be gone forever, just like Christianity. Nobody could ever again quote out of those writings and suddenly they might see the light.

Not science has to be proven, because it is doing that constantly for itself, since finding prove for its theories is essential to exist. On the contrary, it is religion that has to prove itself.

Just how fantastic it would be to brainwash everybody to erase every trace of our existing religions out of people's mind and with them the buildings, writings and everything else.

Funny fact: If you would start all religions all over again, they would develop themselves totally different from their current form. Science, however, will always develop itself about the same way, not only on earth, but on all planets in this Universe.

rahvin · Jan 3, 2001

<<The definition of fossil is pretty well established as a remnant of an organism of a past age which has been preserved. It can be for example, an entire skeleton or an imprint left in the earth's crust.>>

Actually none of the original orgainism survives in a fossil. A fossil is made of rock. What would compose a transition fossil that you claim does not exist?

<<Your theory, rahvin is the one you are defending - evolution.

Now please give your definition of evolution.>>

I have no theory of evolution, just as I have no definition of it. If you wish to have an explanation of the theory of evolution please consult the experts, mainly a textbook in evolutionary biology. These can be purchased at your local university bookstore or ordered online. If costs are prohibitive please consult:

http://www.talkorigins.org/

As this is an excellent online (read free) source that distills current knowledge and fact on evolutionary biology, anthropology and the many diverse fields evolution relates to. But as always a college textbook will present more actual science.

Education is the solution to all mans problems...

~zonker~ · Jan 3, 2001

Elledan
What if someone asked you to trace back the history of the bible, who wrote it, for what reasons and how long it really took them. No way you can do this.

You make me laugh....

New Testament History

Old Testament History

Theologists, Archeologists and Organized Religions have been doing the very thing you claim can not be done for over 1700 years..

Elledan · Jan 3, 2001

zonker > the site you linked to contains no more evidence of the history of the bible than a comparable resource about fossils. And anyway, you've now proven sufficiently that only Humans wrote the bible, while there's not a shred of evidence that they did it because some supernatural being contacted them.

Question: Is heaven perfect? (think about it for some time before you answer it, since it's a tricky one!)

Athanasius · Jan 3, 2001

Elledan:

There is war in "heaven." When that war ceases, war on earth will cease. Then both heaven and earth will be "perfect" - they will fulfill the purpose for which they exist.

BTW - do you have a brother named Elrohir?

Or a sister named Arwen?

Czar · Jan 3, 2001

Athanasius

If Heavin is just like earth, then whats the point of it?

Athanasius · Jan 3, 2001

Czar:

Heaven isn't just like earth. The Unseen Element of Faith is replaced by Genuine Sight. (Of course, the "Trust" Element of Faith still remains.)

There is war in both places. But earth is like being dropped behind enemy lines. It's harder to see the Big Picture when the territory you are in is often (not always) so dark.

When the war ceases in heaven, the Presence of God will be regained on earth.

Most people mean by "heaven" something like "eternal bliss." Scripture uses the word in a broader sense, as in "the spirit realm" or "the spirit-dimension". There is conflict in that realm. See Ephesians 6:12, Revelation 12:7-17.

Moonbeam · Jan 3, 2001

I put some related thoughts on how I see this here.

Czar · Jan 3, 2001

Athanasius

Ok, seems nice, its good that if you belive in it that there is something better at the other end, though its not that better, but better

Electric Amish · Jan 3, 2001

".....Hello? Jesus??? He hung up!" - Kent, Real Genius

amish

~zonker~ · Jan 3, 2001

Elledan

Regardless of your postulate concerning the "divine origin" and the factuallity of the Bible in comparison to fossil science, the links do answer the question which you stated was impossible to answer..

Athanasius · Jan 3, 2001

The problem in debating this question is that neither side can agree on what constitutes existence.

Naturalists assume that there is nothing but the physical realm and that this realm can best be understood by reason and scientific inquiry, but only inquiry that can be measured physically. Call this the country of "Reason."

Supernaturalists assume that there are at least two realms. Call these two countries "Reason" and "Revelation."

Supernaturalists generally believe that "Revelation" borders the country of "Reason" and makes impressions on it. Hence you find much common ground in myth and religion because the same country (Revelation) impresses these facets upon the human mind. The variances occur because each mind has its own cultural perceptions and blindspots. But what a supernaturalist calls "an impression from the country of Revelation" a naturalist calls "Nothing but an indentation in the country of Reason."

But the hard core naturalist says, "No other country exists." The supernaturalist says, "Yes, it does." The Naturalist then says, "Prove it to me by the standards that I have determined to have merit."

Hence, the best a supernaturalist can do is point to areas that border the two countries: areas that can be observed by science without invoking Revelation. But that border is very thin; one has to invoke the paranormal: Out of Body Experiences, Dissociative Identity Disorder. . .

. . . Unless one examines the Process of Thought itself. If Thought is simply chemical reactions, then arguing about anything is pointless.

One has a Choice:

"In the Beginning was the Word." (John 1:1)

-OR-

"In the Beginning was the Deed." (Faust)

Reason alone cannot make this Choice for you. But the Choice will effect how you view everything else.

Perhaps Thought itself is an impression from Revelation on the country of Reason?

Moonbeam · Jan 3, 2001

Athanasius, I suppose it could be said that arguing about anything is pointless. I am one who agrees with your on your two modes approach. Dno't know if you looked at the link in my last post or not. I touched on a similar point I think. Anyway, what I perhaps disagree with is the notion that no argument can be advanced to those who need to measure. There is, of course the need for an open mind and a desire to know, not I fear, your everyday Joe, but who can say who is who. My feeling is that the evidence for a revolutionary psychological experience is overwhealming and pervasive. The problem is that the absurdity of most who get caught up worshiping the bridge and failing to cross turns off others who may be earlier have been open to the potential of such a bridge. That is why I feel it is important to bring to light this process so that seeing it, the doubters may wish to take a nother look.

What I don't see is why it makes any real difference if thought or revelation is just chemical. The effect on the person is the same. Does it really matter if there is a God, or only a true self that creates God. I see no possible way to distinguish. The one important difference, in my opinion, is that the possibility I describe implies a path that excludes no one. It does not require faith nor does it preclude it.

Jalapeno · Jan 3, 2001

There's war in heaven, hhmmm...?

What a fun place that must be all you Christians are looking forward to be "transferred" to after ceasing your Earthly existences.

The Bible? A long line of interpretations, apologies, excuses, and clinging to unfounded, unreal expectations. Well, cling on to your all hopes - it just baffles me how people living in the 21st century can STILL be so darn ignorant.

MrPALCO · Jan 4, 2001

<< it just baffles me how people living in the 21st century can STILL be so darn ignorant. >>

There is nothing new under the sun.

Athanasius · Jan 4, 2001

Jalapeno:

Did you read my posts about "war in heaven" or have you already made an a priori decision to ridicule anything coming from a spiritual perspective?

Here it is again:

<< Most people mean by "heaven" something like "eternal bliss." Scripture uses the word in a broader sense, as in "the spirit realm" or "the spirit-dimension". There is conflict in that realm. See Ephesians 6:12, Revelation 12:7-17. >>

Moonbeam:

Of course I read your link to the other thread. I always appreciate what you have to say

I don't think it is pointless to discuss/argue. If I did, I wouldn't be posting on these threads

The reason I think it is important as to whether the thought is simply chemical or not is because I believe that the "Country of Revelation" has a positive, abundant, character and life that is uniquely real and uniquely objective whether a human experiences it or not. Your emphasis seems to be on the initial encounter itself, and on the immediate psychological ramifications. I believe such an is important, but only the beginning of the journey.

If the country of Revelation has its own character and standards, perhaps I need to learn its customs so that I can become a citizen there someday. If "Revelation" is objective, it is Mindful. If it is mindful, it has its own opinions about behavior and belief.

Dedpuhl · Jan 4, 2001

Athanasius

<<..You never responded to my previous post(1/2/01, 12:19 p.m.). I'm hurt (j/k)..>>

I honestly missed your response. Since my ranting mode is off for now, I am sure we will bring up the subject in another religious post

.

MrPalco

<<..Those were not the words I used...I will repeat them accurately..>>

I know what you said. Your bedrock or foundation is blind faith. Your STRUCTURE is based on blind faith. If you would post one message that makes sense, then we probably would not have any problems in communication...

MrPALCO · Jan 4, 2001

<< I know what you said. Your bedrock or foundation is blind faith. Your STRUCTURE is based on blind faith. If you would post one message that makes sense, then we probably would not have any problems in communication... >>

"Bed Rock" is ....... Words that originate in God.
The "Structure" is...... every word a man speaks, from his Beginning.

Bed Rock is the best place to begin the Structure.

Why hasn't the world come to an end and where is Jesus?

Lifer

Banned

Senior member

Lifer

Banned

Elite Member

Golden Member

Banned

Senior member

Lifer

Senior member

Elite Member

Lifer

Elite Member

Golden Member

Senior member

Elite Member

Senior member

Banned

Senior member

Lifer

Banned