Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire More fun for creationists!

Ain't but three Entities in the world.... You, Me, and God.

The One who is the center of your thoughts is the one you are worshipping at that time.

I have 2 to 1 odds at any given time to be thinking of someone other than myself.

You are at even odds.

Ringman,

No, I am not the Kevin Sorbo strawman construction from the movie "God's Not Dead". You cannot not believe something exists and hate it at the sametime.

Now I am bothered by the negative effects on the well being caused actions that resulted from false beliefs. If someone wants to entertain themselves with their false beliefs at home, on debate them on the internet, I have not objections. However, if their false beliefs lead them to murder people for having different beliefs, or setback science education 2000 years, then yes, I have an objection to the effects of their false beliefs on others.

Fundamentalism can be harmful, and it's important to contain the harm and mitigate the risks.

Gene,

Now you are just being ridiculous. There's over seven billion people on this earth, so my your silly calculation changes are billions against that I would be thinking about myself. Maybe I wasn't thinking about a person. Maybe I was thinking about pork stirfry and/or a vanilla porter. So if I'm thinking about a beer, I'm WORSHIPING beer at that time?

Let's look at the definition of "worship":

Reverent honor and homage paid to God or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.

Thinking about stirfry doesn't mean I consider it sacred, not that I consider it a god. Heck I might not even like pork stirfry, which would exclude "Reverent honor" and "homage".

Have a good night Gene, hopefully in the morning you will have some more cogent thoughts to share with us.

Heck, it's not even limited to the wrong god.

How many forms of Christianity are there, and how many belief their sect are the only "True Christians" and all other "Christians" are going to Hell?

I like fermented soy products as much as anyone but elevating it to deity status is crossing the line over to weird.

Ya got me there but you don't have something like that running around in yo casa do you?

So who then should decide:
1./ how much evidence is enough?..and
2./ what the required criteria should be for determining the credibility of any submitted proof of God?



Well christians who believe in God are not necessarily going to get a pass either.
MY understanding of scripture indicates theres more to it than just 'believing'.



Evidence?...so far the Christians on this thread refuse to present their proof, ok well so be it,
but just saying evidence exists is not evidence in itself.


I dont see AS as attempting to do that, He like myself come from mainstream christian environment backgrounds,
but have since learnt to be open minded, while wisely circumspect & scrutinising of what many( for one reason or another)
attempt to push and peddle from their God cart. I was about 9 when I got that instinctual gut feeling that something just
didn't sit right in me, with all the crapola nosensical forms of God talk you get bombarded with. Then as you go through life,
you discover theres much than you first realised, veritable oceans of it infecting the world.



That can certainly be the case, as children many wholehearted believed in the tooth fairy based on the evidence of money appearing
time and time again under their pillow. Same goes with their whole hearted belief in Santa, based on the repeated evidence of gifts
appearing under the pangan symbol tree.

I purposely used the wrong terminology in my post to prove a point.

Change " world" to "Spiritual Realm" and see what happens.

You have become something of an expert on the world's religions, but you know nothing of spiritualality because it must be experienced and does not lend itself to explanation.

Kent and I post about spirituality and you respond about religion.

It's been going on for years.

You are well matched against Ringman since he preaches religion.

Nope, it's just between you and Jesus. You don't get to "pick."

You have a relationship with and in Him or you don't. Further, the absence of that relationship is your choice.

There was a animated black preacher back here named "Audie Murphy." He was talking about death and was locally famous for the line; "When you die, it's not important who you know, IT'S WHO KNOW YOU!"

Starman,

Quite a bit in your post. To one issue about who decides, it is YOU that decides based on the belief that you have at the time.

Yep, not all who call "Lord, Lord" are going to heaven. It is more than simple words. This is the great fallacy in Pascal's Wager. You have a relationship with Jesus or you do not.

My father was quite critical of me when I "converted." We had a number of lively discussions before he died. During one discussion he told me that he was indeed a Christian but did not have to be born again. I asked him if he could tell me that Jesus was his Lord and Savior. He could not. That was the end of him telling me he was a Christian.

One can call himself a rock, or Captain America, or a loving soul or whatever, that does not MAKE himself one. Like Audie Murphy said: "It's who know YOU!"


TF

Starman,

As you correctly point out, simply "believing in something" is perhaps worthless. Be it the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, the muslim allah, the Flying Spaghetti Monster,some kindly grandfather in the sky, whatever.

It is only Jesus that talks back and has a righteous two dialogue/conversation/relationship with you.

TF

I agree that arguing on the internet that the world created itself through a random series of events or that man descended from a bug, rock, monkey or porpoise is fairly innocuous.

But I am very concerned about Atheist fundamentalists. Its all fun and games until someone gets sent to a camp.

If you don't believe in evolution, just watch the video of the momma ape that crashed into the gas station, running chasing screaming, then watch a wildlife series of orantangs chasing in the jungle, and see evolution a couple thousand years to catch up!!!! all she lacks is the tail!!!!!!!

Science as well as religion starts with an assumption, something that the Anti-Creationists deny!

Creationism:
God Created everything.
Assumed on Faith in God - Omnipotent God existed.

Science:
Everything popped into existence as a singularity which expanded, creating all forms of energy and matter in the process.
Assumed on Faith in Science: Anything can "pop" into existence out of nothingness.

Uh, how is that more reasonable?????????
Yes you are Anti-Creationists, not pro Scientists. Otherwise, you wouldn't' invest so much time in trying to convince someone you are correct about an equally unproveable assumption.

f

THAT should lay this matter to rest for all time.

Anybody want to bet that it does?

Nope. It'll go on as long as the Pot Head thread.

Yep. There is also the problem with the initial "origin of life" situation. Here is a quote from an avowed evolutionist:

“The complexity of the simplest known type of cell is so great that it is impossible to accept that such an object could have been thrown together suddenly by some kind of freakish, vastly improbable, event. Such an occurrence would be indistinguishable from a miracle.”

― Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory In Crisis


Dawkins said pretty much the same thing. I suspect there is no model for explaining this origin of life thing.

But like Dawkins says; paraphrased: There is no God and the universe just is here, maybe forever, with no cause and although it is very, very unlikely, life just happened. So, the universe is just here and life is just here but I am sure that there is no God that had anything to do with it.

Sad joke played out before our eyes.

TF

Well I wouldnt automatically assume the use of the word 'miracle' is automatic reference to
it being due to divinity or God, like some do.

Origin and Etymology of miracle:

Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin miraculum , from Latin, object of wonder, marvel, from mirari to wonder at.

People will use the term miracle in the context of something being a mystery or much admired surprise, a rare lucky or fortunate outcome,
or an out of the norm amazing or wonderful result/occurrence.... further; a result/occurrence that surpasses all currently known human powers
or natural forces.....and they can do that without attributing it to any form of divinity or God.

Stress ' all currently known'...just because it is still unknown, doesnt automatically made it an act of divine plan and intervention.
It may well be explicable by advances in science in time to come....as has happened with things before.

Unfortunately Judeo-christian mythology has the earths volcanic activity attributed to an angry God rather than what science does explain today.
With the ancient minded type, when a volcano erupts and misses the town and spares the people, its a miracle and the mercy of God, or otherwise
its Gods intended form of punishment.

I'm glad you can read Dr. Denton's mind. Gosh, I hope I'm as smart as you one day. No, not really because I'd have to give up my Phd and learn to pump septic tanks.

SM,

I don't think that Denton was referring to a divine intervention, but I can see how you might interpret his comment that way. I think he is just referring to the great improbability of the spontaneous cell event.

Of course you are right about science not yet having an explanation. Science as yet seems to lack any sort of model to explain that cell. The latest I read about is this "heterotrophic" theory but folks on both sides of the fence are not supportive of it.

Perhaps it takes a "faith in science" to believe that which there is no current explanation for.

TF