This guy starts at 12 minutes, and pretty well nails it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECNYsmne5js&feature=youtu.be

The problem is that the guy needs to research his statistics. Divorce rate is about 11% for churched folks. Much higher for unchurched folks.

The statistic that says that "christians" have a 50% divorce rate, the same as non-christians, is a lie.

Probably in line with how many Americans call themselves Christians vs. true believers. Did you listen all the way through or were you eager to get back here and criticize?

I listened to enough of it. The guy needs to learn facts before he gets up there and preaches. 72% of people are still married to their first spouse. Attending a worship service drops your "chances" of getting divorced by 25-50%. The numbers are so fuzzy it's hard to tell though.

That dude is real,,, none of that fake mess. I like him. we all have our struggles and I noticed a looong time ago that I am my own worst enemy.

Fireball2,

I watched the sermon. The problem with the church is, generally, the people attending don't believe God's Word. If you would like me to document this, I will post support for this.

"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." -
Mahatma Gandhi

Anyone who is like Christ doesn't need Him.

It's my observation that religion is a money making business, selling salvation. I seldom see church leaders living humbly and in poverty.
The major religions, Baptist, Catholic, Lutheran. Methodist, etc are major tax exept corporations with the local churchs as franchises.

Jim

I'm sorry you feel that way. Unfortunately that is true in some instances but it is not in our church. Our pastor is a good man who routinely donates up to half his salary to charity and the needy. If you were closer I'd invite you to come worship with us and see what a good church experience is like. We aren't perfect but we have some good folks with their hearts in the right place.

Calvin is correct, I've known a few Christains that would never consider the sin of divorce and they stayed married. Sure some lived apart or took regular beatings from their husband, but they were good Christians that never divorced.

Hell, I knew one Christian that stayed with her husband, even though he knocked up one of their daughters.

It's good to see them staying faithful to the sanctity of marriage.

I knew another, deacon of his church, that started banging is step-daughter when she was 14. After his wife found out 5 years later she still stayed with him and he stayed with the church.

Good to see that kind of commitment in people.

I've also known a few law abiding citizens that speed as well. Calling oneself a Christian does not make it so. Lots of hypocrites in every so called groups of people.

Interesting.

An interesting take on marriage and Buddhism.

He's right that the Church to concentrate on a symptom.

He's also right about how the Church can fire up good intentions and/or guilt in people. I've been to enough Bible thumping revival meetings to see that first hand. My wife and I often wonder once the euphoria of the Bible thumping revival is over how many stay committed. Sort of like marriage once the euphoria is gone the marriage is gone.

I think the biggest problem with Christianity is it's based on a book of legends and mythologies. That's okay as long as one ignores reality but once reality kicks in the book of legends and mythologies kind of falls by the way side so doesn't just about everything else.

Takes a lickin' an' keeps on tickin'.

He was simply trying to avoid the possibility of the dreaded clap.

STDs are such a bummer.

People often say that as though they are surprised, or as though it discredits those who truly do believe in Christ. But Jesus himself said, "Not everyone who says to me, �Lord, Lord,� will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven" (Matthew 7:21).

Look closely at Jim's statement. He says, "I seldom see church leaders living humbly...." That actually confirms what Jesus said earlier in that same context, "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few. Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves" (Matthew 7:13-15).

The fact that there are false prophets is no surprise to Jesus, and it shouldn't be to us. But to us, it should motivate us to be faithful, and to be found among the "few." Jesus is either everything, or he is nothing. Take your pick as though your life depends on it.

Steve.

Is this gonna be the battle of the thumpers.

Quite a few lately.

We actually made it more then 10 posts on a religion thread before one the thumpers rolled out the threats.

That's got to be some kind of a record.

Flag waving thumpers are thin skinned.

Hypo-christians. I know more of these than true examples.

Took less for the atheists to roll in with their thoughts. Words like "Jesus", "Church" or "Christians" do draw em in don't they?

Please point out the "atheists" who posted.

Please point out the "thumpers" who posted

You for one.

Well that was easy. Thanks for playing.

Don't know if I'm a thumper or not. Do I have to threaten to qualify?

Hey guys, you owe it to yourself to hear that guy out, he has some real good things to say about the christians and why so many of us fail while trying, and why we look bad to non-believers. He truly gets it. I think this message will probably resonate with most of you. Give him a chance.

I can address one or a few points at a time, but already there is so much wrong posted already, I can't even begin to address it all. You either believe or you don't. Just keep in mind that scandal is a sin, not only for the scandalous, but the scandalized as well.

Just FYI, the incidence of divorce among religious couples who pray together every day and practice Natural Family Planning is less than 1%. Faith works.

There's really not much wrong with church. However, there is a lot wrong with people. Church is like a hospital - it's for the sick (all of us). If you think you are too good for church, you're probably wrong.

Well in my experience we get church and Christianity confused to a large degree. Church as in congregational organizations of various denominations that we generally know is largely a human organization and is fraught with human failings, i.e. big business, petty jealousy etc. Christianity on the other hand is a completely different thing which is a belief that Jesus was the true son of God , that he gave his life on Calvary for the remission of our sins and that he arose on the 3rd day in victory over death. He provided us with tenants of how we should strive to live our lives but in the end given our human frailty to measure up to these tenants it is through his sacrifice and resurrection that ultimately reconciles us with God.

Pointing out that Jesus would agree with a critic of Christianity makes one a "thumper"?
Threats? Where? Is saying "Take your pick as though your life depends on it" a threat? You could say the same about buying a car, or choosing a physician. People make such choices all the time.

Someone has a thin skin.

Steve.

Apologies to all if necessary. It seems to me that the people who quote their bible here on the forums with a fair degree of regularity are more sensitive than most of us her that don't quote the good book as much.

Also if you don't walk the walk you are damned forever and Catholics have taken a real beating here at times by those godlike people.

That's just plain wrong.

In our rural area clustered with many small churches they just don't play well with each other.

What makes you think God wants his children to live in poverty?

Money doesn't equal sin. As long is the pride of life, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, isn't a motivating factor in your life, God wants to bless you abundantly.

Something about the "sweat of his brow"

Some jobs pay better than others and ye reap what you sow.

So she came back as a cow.

Quoting Ghandi???

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/irene-monroe/the-gandhi-none-of-us-kne_b_842941.html

I have heard this quote many times spoken by smug concieted Hindus. But if you ever travel amidst the Hindu people you will see that Christian missionaries built all the good schools and hospitals and health clinics.

The original 13 colonies at the time of the Revolution were overwhelmingly descendants of persecuted Protestants from England, Scotland and France. They were the ones who put forth the Declaration of Independence in committee and later drafted the Constitution. If you hate Christians why not move to Bombay or Delhi or Calcutta and immerse yourself in the culture of Ghandi?

Based on my research I would say you have right.

Yes but "sweat of his brow" is part of the curse. We have been redeemed from the curse. Gal.3:13

Thank God sowing and reaping is still in effect though. I enjoy harvest time!

Ahh so now you paint over the Plymouth witch hunts , hangings for blasphemy, and burning at the stake all in the name of God. How quaint.
By the way, why is it that Christians need a tax free 2 million dollar house of god, when according to your bible the entire outdoors is the house of God. Greed and false Idols perhaps?

You are too classy for that, and you've learned along time ago that Pascals Wager is not a convincing argument.

as a christian she shoulda beat him to death with a frying pan while he slept and sent him on to the promise land.

Man! I never saw it that way before...

Lets move away from Christian Western Civilization! It is so horrible! Where do you suggest?

But as a Christian, so long as the vile abuser accept Christ and repents before he dies, he's still going to Heaven.

If however, the abuse caused the child to not believe, she's headed to hell.

'Christians' are the biggest detriment to the mission of Christianity.

Thou shalt not kill

How many thousands of years has the catholic and protestant Christians violated this commandment in the name of God and Christianity?

If a person is looking for a clear-cut example - some cookie cutter format - as a basis for explaining, supporting or critiquing Christians and their organizations, it will be a fruitless search. The very nature of Christianity makes it uber easy for critics of Christians to do their thing, and they experience abundant stimulus.

The matter of Christianity is personal - a decision to accept a precious gift and, in turn, to do one's very best to live and serve accoring to commandments and principles laid out in the Word. Attending or being a member of a given organized church is not required, and doing so does not assure that one will be a Christian and/or live according to those tenets.

Church membership and endeavors can be very helpful to those who strive to live as Christians - helpful in both the indiviual and collective senses. But, such outcomes are not a given and it seems clear that some religious-based organizations (churches) not only do not always engender such Christian lives among the members, but that they sometimes espouse and do things that appear to be much the opposite.

No Christian is perfect - all humans are sinners. No church is perfect - churches are composed of sinners. Many people have a difficult time seeing and understanding the difference between a committed Christian life and the life of a church organization.

Many Christians take very seriously their charge to witness to non-believers - to present God's Word and Salvation to people of the world - and they do this in many ways. Some people do not take kindly to such Christian evangelistic efforts - they are offended, insulted, bothered, disinterested, etc. (long list) and many of them react with criticism. This has been foretold - it is to be expected - it comes with the differences.

So, from its beginning Christianity has been the target of critics - a BIG target. Due to the nature of the personal Christian relationship, I find it very difficult to understand how such critics are able to look into the hearts and souls of every Christian in order to find a basis for their broad critiques of Christians en masse. That explanation is left to the critics.

Some Christians seem to relish - feel compelled or commanded - to reply to critics in efforts to prove them wrong or put them down. That may be a worthhwile effort, but in ways that I do not yet understand. Then again, I still have much to learn.

We all have our struggles and failures, and some successes. For those who have not tried it in earnest, it might be helpful to know that the life of a Christian often is a life of constant struggle to live as directed, and it can be very difficult some days. But, it never is difficult because of the work of the critics. It is difficult because of the personal challenges inherent with that solo decision. The gift is free - the journey is not.

What an ignoramus.

CCCC ; Thank you! Well said.

There's a lot of messed up people in this world. It just so happens that both father and mother claimed to be Christian in this case.

Coming from you, that is a compliment. That must put me one step above you.

Truer words have never been spoken.

I don't know of anybody like that. All the christians I know are upstanding people, with a few flaws, but in general upstanding people. You must keep far different company than I do.

The reality is that if you get divorced and you go to church, you are in the far minority, despite the lies told that "50% of christians get divorced". It is far from normal. Most people, even unchurched, stay together with their original spouse.

Not limited to catholics & protestants. Add many other faiths to the list as well.

God and real estate has been the impetus for killing each other for thousands of years.

I should have figured you were a fan of Ghandi, Antlers.
http://www.gandhism.net/gandhiandblacks.php

Interestingly, what M.Ghandi liked and did not like is not one whit more important - or noteworthy - than what even the lowest type of human likes or dislikes. It may be the case that what Satan likes/dislikes is much more important than Ghandi's preferences.

No, it puts you at the level of a gullible college freshman retard who's swallowed a twisted lie foisted off on his young skull full of mush. If you didn't feel stupid after you typed that original post you might just be too stupid to live.

Hey Antlers, I'm honest about what I say and I take full responsibility. You've never seen me back down from that, have you, azzhole? And I'm not going to because it is the truth - Islam is the enemy of God and everyone else.

But at every turn you reveal yourself to be at best an ignoramus, at worst a hypocritical liar. I think you lie about what you believe because to admit the truth would make you look bad to the retarded friends that you worship.

Give Haywood your best for me.

I think his point is that those who feel self-righteous over the self-righteousness of others don't know anyone stuck in a crappy & abusive marriage, which makes them EVEN MORE BETTER than the self-righteous who do know such people.

Because, ya know, self-righteousness is the ultimate sin, even to those who think that the idea of sin is only for the self-righteous.

"Your Christians are so unlike your Christ." -
Mahatma Gandhi

You are a prime example.

Unlike you, azzhole, I value the truth.

You know how I know I'm on the right path?

I have your disdain.

Men who rewrote Gods word said that. HE said thou shalt not commit murder. HE is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. HE had His people to kill.

We get Christians and those who say they are mixed up

That's all right. We can all sit right here. Obama is going to cure the illness of Western Civilization.

Mt 5 You have heard that it was said, �You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.� But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. ...

Nope doesn't seem to me to be room for slaying infidels there. Which, it seems to me, is the sin which is most glaring about Islam... Slaying others for their religious beliefs.

I don't think anyone with any degree of intellectual honesty can claim we haven't fallen miserably short of our Lord's ideal.

As for OT examples of Israel's practice... I'll assume someone has received God's express command in two regrards for that analogy to apply:

1) We (the USA) are His holy nation by oath & covenant

2) He has audibly spoken a command to our leader(s) to kill everyone who is Islamic

Those two would have to be demonstrably true for the comparison w/ OT Israel to fit.

I'm not very well educated, but have always tried to live my life to serve those around me. The Lord's Prayer says "and do unto others as they would have done to you". I have tried to live my life by that one, simple principle. I haven't probably been the best Christian in all times. But, I couldn't think of the horrible acts that Scott mentions here. I hope there is a special place in hell for those. I don't think ones worth is measured by his church attendance or participation. I think, rather, that it is measured by how he lives his life. How he interacts with people. How he determines right from wrong, and how he rights the wrongs that he sees. Or, at least, tries to right those wrongs.

My only real problem with church is the idea that we need to build million dollar buildings, and then pay some guy(s) a salary to do nothing but tell us things about a book we all have already. I just don't see the point.

All this talk about Ghandi reminds me that Ghandi never won the Nobel Peace Prize, except posthumously. Anyone know why? (Hint: A certain viewpoint on a certain topic of his day.)

Ghandi was a better man than most, but he was a man, and as fallible as any.

Steve.

You re-state my case. And, as for your "some importance is placed", you have absolutely no way to demonstrate that what Ghandi may have said there (context?) is at all wise or important - except, possibly, to you. Wisdom, like beauty, takes shape only in the mind of the person who sees it as such. It could be interesting to run by you a few things that some historical figures have "said" and to hear your assessment of the possible wisdom of their words.

So you don't go to hell, you stupid bastard.



Travis

Nothing wrong with church, problem is us sinners that attend.
Nothing wrong with the campfire, just us idiots that that put our foot in mouth. GW

Are you "clear"?

Travis you crack me up! God bless you!

They are wise words...they are also very true words. If you choose not to see them as such, that's your business. Doesn't change the fact that they are what they are. I didn't make it the truth...it just 'is'. It would still be the truth if I never even mentioned it.

So in other words, if I go to the Christian Church of my choice I'm saved from Hell. Okay.

Hope, Charity and Love.

Never did see anything in there about "winning" an arguement, not being open minded or hearted. There is some mention of pride and vanity but those seem to be in the minus column.

Church is a place with potential, just like a cartridge - to do anything with it, the guy pulling the trigger has to do his job.

Why would that be a mystery to anyone...

I didn't say that. I was just amused at Travis. Salvation is based only on your accepting the sacrifice of Jesus as payment four your sins. First you have to acknowledge you need saving, then that you can't save yourself, and finally give up and ask for the free gift of salvation. That's it. It has nothing to do with what you can do on your own or what any Church can do for you. No one can save you except Jesus, because no one has paid the price for your sins except Jesus.

You and all the other transvestites will be roastin' like pigs.

'slave and I will be big pimpin'.



Travis

Sorry RH I wasn't necessarily directing anything at you personally. I have Travis on ignore and only knew what he said because someone quoted him. I was being sarcastic.

xxclaro;
Good evening to you sir, I trust this finds you and yours doing well this warm July evening.

I was going to bypass this topic/thread as it's been my experience here and for that matter in life in general that most folks won't be swayed into believing one thing or another by mere words. This is exponentially more so on this communication medium as we're more or less anonymous.

Now if someone gets to know an individual, sees how they live day to day and in so doing sees something of value - THEN and only then might a person be able to speak into another's life with something of value.

That said, the value of church as an entity is something that is debated within the community of believers as well.

Church, if done well anyway, should be able to pool the resources and skills of a group of people and enact more positive change into other's lives than they'd be able to as individuals. These resources and skills should encompass of course a spiritual component - it is a church after all - but also a practical, tangible component as well. Both facets are required to enact meaningful change in people's lives.

So for instance in the church that we attend, we've helped organize and sponsor folks who've gone to various spots around the globe to build homes, schools, hospitals and orphanages to name a few. I've had friends and family working on projects like that in Haiti, Cambodia, Russia, Romania, Mexico, Guatemala, Kenya, here in Canada and even recently in New Orleans.

Most of us wouldn't have the financial wherewithal or physical time and energy to do that single handed, but can affect positive change as part of a like minded group. Again - when resources and life skills are pooled together.

The building that these like minded individuals meet in does not need to be elaborate to cost a million either these days - especially if one wants things like a kitchen large enough to feed folks in the community who might need a good meal now and then or a gym for local youth to meet safely at.

The people who run these churches should ideally be doing much, much more than telling the attendees what they think about a passage they've read lately.

Ideally their job description will look more like someone directing a small company that's working to benefit their community. These leaders need to have a finger on the pulse of the community needs - whatever they might be - and should be directing the resources of the group towards meeting those needs.

So then IF that's what is going on at THAT church, then it would be my position that not really very much is wrong - with that church.

The other side of the coin is of course that there are a million and two examples of what has happened when it's done wrong.

Anyway sir, that's just one guy's thoughts on the matter and not much more. Hopefully it made some sense or provided a modicum of insight for you or someone out there tonight.

All the best to you and yours this week sir - do try to stay cool.

Dwayne

Well thanks BC, that was well said. Between you and 'Flave, perhaps I can start to see some value there after all!

If you don't like one, just move on down the list until one suits your situation.

xxclaro;
Thanks for the reply sir and for taking my post in the spirit I intended.

As I mentioned, what church should look like is truly in a state of flux among believers these days too.

For instance I've got friends and family who were once involved in ministry who have gone to meeting with small groups in each other's houses - much like the early church did.

They've found it to be a more meaningful experience for them on several levels - in part because of some of the ground I tilled in my first post.

As I say, there's pros and cons to large and small gatherings for sure and as I mature I'm surely more open to other ways of "doing church" as it's put.

Again all the best to you and yours xxclaro and if you're in the heat wave like we are - then do try to stay cool.

Dwayne

tommyd53,



Here's a little heads up on your thought. In Matthew 6:9-13 using the New American Standard Bible (NASB) we find "The Lord's Prayer". Jesus teaches,

"'Pray, then, in this way:

�Our Father who is in heaven, hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.�"

In the next chapter we find this: Matthew 7:12,
"'Therefore what ever you want others to do for you, do so for them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.'"

No problems here. I will preach at the drop of a hat , and even throw down my own hat. Always hoping someone will read and see the love and good will in it, rather than the condemnation that has turned away many.

I think the rednecks prayer is something about , do unto others as they would do unto you, just do it unto them first.

Not to say that something that we may call ''God'' does not exist, but what is the evidence that supports a justified belief in any form or version of God?

You wouldn't have to ask that question if you would honestly open your heart and seek God. the evidence is in the knowing and experiencing which will never be seen by an unbeliever. Billions of believers over the past 6000 years should at least give you enough evidence to seek and find out for yourself.

I know God. I talk to him daily and he talks to me. He has often told me things and later confirmed it to me just so I would know I was hearing correctly. I'm not some nut case either. I am more normal than many here if that says anything. LOL

God is real and evidence abounds if someone is so inclined to find it.

It's called faith and it's not easy for many to understand.

BTDT.

I'm asking the question from the point of view of logic and philosophy. Countless versions of 'God' have been accepted/believed throughout our history, but as there is hardly one version of God that is compatible with another, they can't logically all be true.

Most, if not all,these beliefs in this god or that god must be wrong. So if a belief in the existence of God is a matter of faith, faith alone does not appear to be a reliable foundation for a justified belief. That requires verifiable evidence.

Again, this is not to say there is no God, but it raises the question: why do we believe in the existence of a God?

So the question: what is the evidence that clearly points to the existence of God?

Man has looked to the skies in awe of a supreme being since our creation. Pardon me while I go consult some cave drawings.

It's the best I can do. Sorry.

One could have guessed that a self professed Christian would be the first to sling mud and insults. I can see you are the typical church goer. Profess your faith on Sunday but don't live it the rest of the week.
Typical that when faced with the truth of the nasty things done in the name of the church through out history, you cant take it. LMAO a bury my head in the sand, closet Christian.

Swifty52,

TAK is a few fries short of a happy meal.

I love when Atheists preach the Bible!
Keep it up, I always enjoy the entertainment.

The world is a bit different than a little island in Alaska. What you don't know would fill VOLUMES. I only hope I'm around to see the fall, cuzz I will laugh and laugh.

Self-righteously mocking perceived ignorance in others who you feel superior to based upon their self-righteousness.

Just goes to show that the church, nor any religion, has a corner on hypocrisy. Those without professed faith got it in spades, too.

What is the self-righteously principled stand someone who won't worship takes when he realizes that by associating himself as a non-worshipper he has been self-righteous and thereby committed hypocrisy himself?

Is he more of a hypocrite if, faced with that ironic reality, he continues course and takes no pause for self-reflection and correction?

Dumb sperm are strong swimmers in your family pool.

Denial? That's fair; I've certainly been there. The important thing is that you're convinced in your own mind of your superiority to those who so foolishly think themselves superior to others.

Humph... "Those people"...

It is exactly that, and nothing more.

Didn't read the whole thread and will not. I can tell you the quote is not true with respect to Baptists. It would be impossible to get a group of Baptist churches to agree on a mission statement for ANY corporate umbrella. There simply is no Baptist "tax exempt corporation" and no "franchises". The Baptist churches I am personally experienced with are independent PERIOD. There are local and regional Baptist associations (i.e. Southern Baptist Convention) that cooperate on various projects and initiatives but no hard and fast international Baptist constitution that is followed.

I can also tell you Baptists are not perfect; just take a look at me. However, acts that are tolerated, even accepted as 'normal' in certain other 'religions', are reason to be kicked out the back door of the churches I have been a part of with no waiting period, no counselling. That's one thing that made me just shake my head when the pope made his remark about 2% of Catholic clerics being pedophiles. He didn't say how many are KNOWN practicing homosexuals. How many of these pedophiles has he personally and publicly excommunicated?? How many of the known practicing homosexuals has he removed from authority??

But I digress, and not being Catholic, Methodist or Lutheran will stick to my personal experiences with the Baptist church.

laffin'

Based on the hate that exemplifies your posts on this forum, it's likely that you "enjoy" much of anything Barry.

laffin' some more

Don't they have double rainbows in Australia?

What more proof do you need?

Have fun in hell.



Travis

If I were a woman trapped in a man's body and lived in an alternate reality, I'd ignore me too.



Travis

How do you know you aren't?

Maybe if you'd stayed up there, and found a Bible-believing church, you wouldn't be a bitter, self-loathing alky.

Preach on.

As an earlier poster said, if you honestly seek and pray to know God, He promises to reveal Himself to you. That is pretty darn simple, and very non-threatening. If there's no God, you wouldn't experience any change whatsoever, and life goes on. No worries right? It's not like you signed for a car loan you can't make the payments on or had an arm taken off at the socket.

He made a promise in the Bible, ask and you will receive, seek and you will find, knock and the door will be opened to you. That's actually a guarantee.

Our way on this earth is to understand everything with our mind. God's way is to be known through your heart. He speaks to your heart. Similar to your conscience saying, "Don't steal that!", or "Pull over and help those people". God does reveal Himself, it's a guarantee to those who really want to know.

That time in my life came about 15 years ago. I had a thriving business, 10-20 employees, lots of money, was healthy, and by most worldly criteria happy. What I didn't know then is that I had people praying for my life. People that knew my life in God wasn't about all that.
I felt in my heart that there was something missing, that this was not my best life. Keep in mind, I had success as we call it here.
Long story, ended up selling most everything and traveling around some, praying for God to reveal Himself to me, if He was real. A year later I was baptised and sealed for life.
There's no explaining it, but there is living it. Usually fairly poorly in my case, but undeniably I will never be the same man I was. I am different from the inside out, not because I am strong and made my mind up to "do better" or "be different", but because God threw my old man out, and gave me new life inside. NOT perfected!! Just changed. Anybody that knew me then and knows me now, knows I'm not the same man I was.
For people that need a nudge, there are books that may help. Lee Strobles "the Case for Christ" might be one. He examines all evidence from a non-believers point of view.
Also, perhaps the biggest case can be made, if billions of changed lives aren't enough, in the written and fulfilled prophesies in the Bible. I'm pretty sure if you or I made 6 predictions we stand a pretty small chance they'd come true, even with intimate knowledge of the situation. However, I believe there's about 330 written predictions about Jesus that were fulfilled in his coming. Scholars, is that number right? Anyway, very hard to predict much of anything and be right often, but to predict hundreds and not miss one, some made hundreds of years before Jesus was alive. The description of his crucifixion was made before crucifixion was even invented.

Impossible odds, unless the Bible is true and God is who the Bible says He is.

So study if you want, ask if you want to know, but why bother with insincerity in your heart? You'll hear nothing (in my opinion). God has the final word on whether He responds to you or not if you ask with no sincerity in your asking.

I can only tell you that I am not the same, as I said, not PERFECTED, just changed. It's easy for me to believe, it takes no effort the further along you get. The mysteries of why and how unfold countless times on scenarios that you couldn't make sense of before.

The Bible does say that spiritual matters are spiritually discerned, and that the gospel is foolishness to those that are perishing. In other words, it is perfectly normal and expected for the gospel to sound like garbage, until that blessed day when you receive your sight for the first time. Like I said, for me, it's been about 15 years ago.

Don't ask absurd questions.



Travis

G'morning Dave. I always smile when I know you're around.

The idea of the opposite of God is nothing. What faith it takes to believe everything came from nothing. The very fact you can ask the question is evidence for the God of the Bible.

How so you know he's around? It could be his female trapped in his body from a parallel universe self typing right now.

Why else would he have to go back and review what he said last night?

Hmmmm.... Where's Gus when we REALLY need him?

The female Dave is the bitchy one.

More properly translated murder. There is a time to kill as it plainly states. I think it was proper and good for the Waldensians to take up the sword to defend themselves from slaughter. Many other examples could be put forth including the good Covenenters of Scotland.

The greatest murderer of all time would be that good socialist Stalin, atheist that he was.

Atheist, anti-Christian societies have sprouted up from time to time; the Communist block societies and France at the time of the French revolution. I cannot imagine why the Christian haters are not beating down the doors to live in such places.

Call me lame if you wish... But I think you owe a tip of the hat to the better aspects of Christianity that added to what became America... and an America that you enjoy residing in. It is concieted hypocrisy to quote Ghandi and not want to live over there in that land literally covered in human and animal dung, without reliable clean potable water and demon idols on every corner.

You just hate Christians because you enjoy hating them. Like most folks. You don't have an argument when you consider the broad sweep of world history in the last 2000 years.

The land of human beings is a broken sinful fallen mess everywhere you go. Those places where Christian grace has affected some of the folks are the better places in the world. No one can deny it.

Moslems and Hindus don't have a Salvation Army that will come along and pull a drunk out of the gutter, clean him up, regenerate his soul and set him free.

They'll set a soul free, but it comes at the end of a sword or through a car bomb.

There is no solid proof. If there was there would be no need for faith.

The Greeks, some sects of Muslims, Jews and Christians have all gone round and round about that for 4,000 years. Some try to prove philosophically that God exists, some try to prove it rationally but they eventually all give up and just say oh well, he exists so don't worry, be happy. Or some of them conclude that he doesn't exist, life is short, harsh and pointless so tough sh*t.

Then a few hundred years later some other folks try to do it all over again.

And so it goes...

Salvation Army only pulls drunk out of the gutter; God does the rest.

One of the interesting and extremely compelling evidences for the veracity of the gospel is the 12 disciples lives. Take a bunch of riff raff, show them God, watch them die trying to tell everyone they know about it.

As much as I like a person, to give up my profession, preach his message, and ultimately die swearing to the truth of his message and identity?!! There must have been some VERY compelling things happening for them to make this stand. They weren't simply mocked and laughed at, like happens here if you're a christian, they were murdered, slowly and as painfully as possible.

If Jesus was a liar and a lunatic, why did they give their life for him? Would you have? Why would anyone give even a second glance or a snide comment to a fool?

Right on. Tis the post-Fall situation.

It is near impossible to rationally prove God's existence, but completely impossible to prove his non-existence.

Of course that doesn't stop an awful lot of (otherwise logical) people from trying either endeavor.

It is interesting to me that nowhere in the Bible is there an instruction manual for proving God's existence.

Well, maybe not per se, or better yet not en masse, but the individual certainly has proof.

That's some of the least compelling evidence that Christ was the son of God.

Look at modern day cults, the [bleep]' whack jobs that lead them, and the born losers that follow.

Peter couldn't even fish worth a schit.



Travis

WTF do you not understand about rainbows?



Travis

The Bible assumes the existence of God.

Just like I don't need to prove to you that air exists even though you can't see it. Paul makes it pretty clear in Romans 1 that His existence is plenty clear to all, but the evidence is suppressed; in other places the Apostle says that natural man is blind to it. I think that is absolutely true, therefore I've never considered it worthwhile to argue the point.

Sure, that's a knee jerk thought I can relate to.

The big problem is, when the leader of these cults dies or gets whacked, the following dies then or soon thereafter.
The gospel truly has a life of it's own, or should I say the life of God in it. Otherwise, it would have died out like the cults you mention.
You have to consider that this is still very serious business, and is ongoing, 2000 years after Jesus Christ walked the earth! What lasts 2000 years my friend?
Not even a fine Sako rifle in 221 Fireball will make it 200 years. At least not with it's original barrel.

I believe that the explanation for the longevity of Islam (and others as well) is that it is fueled by another supernatural being we know as the enemy of man and God.
The path leading to salvation and God is narrow, the path to destruction is wide, and many will pass through it. Sounds like it doesn't matter to Satan if you're a Hindu, a Buddhist, an atheist, or an orange peel as long as you're not a believer in Jesus Christ.

Ever wonder why rockstars sing about Satanic things? Why does everyone have a rabid hatred for Jews, God's chosen people?

Listen to the lyrics of this song by Alice in Chains and ask yourself why the need to say the "Jesus Christ, deny your maker" lyrics? Why inject those particular lyrics in a popular rock song?



It's a spiritual battle, and we are on the battlefield. The blind need sight, so ask, and it will be given to you.

Or how about the lyrics in this perennial favorite? Most people can sing the lyrics and not even be cognisant of the words they're singing, and what they're actually saying. That's the spiritual blindness that keeps men from receiving the saving message of Jesus Christ.

Faith is a belief despite very poor, or a total lack of evidence.
Once someone resorts to the faith card they are admitting there is not reasonable evidence for their position.

I rest my case, or should I say case in point?

We are not "superior". It's just that on this one issue, the evidence is with our side, and not yours.

I also think that's the banker's prayer too.

I understand that rainbows are the result of light refracted through raindrops. There is not need for a god to explain this phenomenon.

Well for a Deist the evidence is natural theology.

I agree that you're not superior. I obviously don't agree on the evidence peace but that's fine by me. You're free to believe what you like.

All that is quite beside the point of my post though. If you follow it back you'll see that Scott was berating (stereotypical) "church people" for their self-righteous hypocrisy which IMHO is a no-brainer and cannot be denied. I was pointing to the ironic predicament such accusations make for him. As he is criticizing people for hypocrisy & self-righteousness he is being self-righteous and therefore hypocritical.

It always seems odd to me how so many who criticize "church people" for self-righteousness are so quick to lord it over them in every thread that pops up.

No.

That's God reminding us that big [bleep] floods are a thing of the past.




Travis

Man seems to have an inherent desire to worship something greater than himself. By man I mean mankind. All religions or spiritual paths spring from the same source. I based this opinion on having study many different pagan religions and Christianity. All theologies have a single source. The only difference is the differences we human have attributed to them.

Your Baptist Church pays federal and state income taxes? If so, that would be a first.

I've never viewed it as an explanation; there are many Christians who recognize the Bible is not a science textbook.

On the other hand if the Creator wants to assign a particular meaning to a phenomenon which occurs as a result of nature's abiding by His laws, He can do that.

As a matter of fact, He did do just that.

Again, just a matter of perspective.

History does not bear this out. As an example William Miller died in 1849, however today we have over half million Adventist and 7th day Adventist following a modified version of his teachings.

The reason Christianity and Islam continued so long is each was useful to a evolving State. Christianity was adopted as the official religion of Roman Empire under Constantine, and Islam as the official religion of the Arab Empire that took over the middle east, north Africa, and half of Spain.

It was their utility to secular powers, not supernatural powers that lead to their long term success.

Catholicism ended in England when it was no longer of use to the reigning monarch, Henry VIII.

Your statement presupposes the existence of a creator. As a result it's of no evidentiary value.

Just as lightning is not evidence for the existence of Zeus, rainbows are not evidence for the existence of the Christian God.

Sadly this is partially true.

I tend to believe that Christianity lost an awful lot when it gained worldly prominence, as is well illustrated by the historically correct accusations hurled in this thread against the church. Power does indeed corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. No where have we seen this truth illustrated more powerfully than in the church for many reasons but chiefly that our Savior repudiated and refused such power even as He hung on a cross.

Of course your theory on Christianity's survival falls apart in areas of the world where the state has suppressed its message and oppressed its adherents. The Church thrives where the blood of saints is spilled.

So you believe in the literal interpretation of the story of Noah?

Just because we think you are wrong on this single proposition does not mean we hate you.

Why would you equate disagreement with hate?

I never offered it as such. I know someone else did, but I did not. As a matter of fact AI said earlier that the Bible never seeks to prove the existence of God. On the rainbow, I was simply pointing out that all Christians aren't the pre-enlightenment knuckle-dragging superstitious dullards many who don't believe in God make them out to be.

You do understand (I recognize you don't agree) the difference between what you said implying Christians "need a god to explain a rainbow" and what I said do you not?

Why is "Jesus F'n Christ" a knee jerk swear phrase?

Why not the others? Why only JFC? Because the god of this earthly world, Satan, has blinded the eyes of man. He seeks to draw as many away from a saving knowledge of and commitment to Jesus Christ as he possibly can. He doesn't care if he uses popular music, the arrogance and vanity of man, false religions, false prophets within Christianity, love of money, idols worship, comfort, complacency, pride...

Does not matter, as long as you are not a believer in Jesus Christ!!!

I didn't imply that at all. I just demonstrated why, in the light of post enlightenment science, the rainbow story is not evidence for God. I did leave the door open for member to further expound on their understanding of this story, and they can go with it where they may.

Ok let me rephrase the question.

You do recognize the difference between an explanation & an assigned meaning do you not?

Yes. That's why I'm going to heaven.

You don't, so you're going to hell.



Travis

The reason that there is no evidence that can be scientifically examined is because it takes faith for a man to be born again. Salvation is through grace by faith. Where there is irrefutable evidence, there can be no faith.

At the return of Jesus every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is Lord. This includes all who have rejected Jesus. They will not however be born again because with irrefutable proof, there will be no faith in their confession.

Not at all. Take a look at Russian and China. Russia is 15%-20% practicing Orthodox Christian, where China is just over 5% practicing Christians.

As for Great Briton, it used to be effectively 100% Catholic. Today it's down around 10%.

EFW, if you look at Travis's quote, you will observe how some believers do a good job of portraying themselves as "pre-enlightenment knuckle-dragging superstitious dullards" all by themselves....

No that demonstrates that Christians aren't the only ones who don't know how to read sarcasm.

He is being facetious.

Travis is just sniping the same way some on the other side are doing. I honestly think that if he thought anyone he was responding to was seriously and honestly wanting to learn something, his response would be different. I've been wrong before though.LOL

He needs no defending after all he is Travis.

You have been here and should know by now.
One day if i can do it i would like to meet him and watch him drink a free beer.

3 things killing Christianity today

Intellectualism
Feminism
Homosexuality

True, but you forgot a few. Among them, cultural accommodation.

Steve.

Then you've reduced your position to one of circular reasoning.

As for air, i don't have to assume it exists. I can put an upside down cut into the water and see something is displacing the water. For there we can do more complex experiments until we can determine the atomic break down etc.

You can also add science.

Yep and the presence of those laws (and your certainty that they may be relied upon) all point to the existence of some author; perhaps not directly to the God of Christianity, but at least to some uncaused first cause.

The truth is the truth. You can kick against it and deny it all you want; it really is of no concern to me. I find it enlightening to note that there are several here who will predictably show up to any thread about Christianity and point out their own lack of belief.

Why bother? You don't have to believe anything. If it's so foolish why waste your time?

Fixed it for you. It's not science that is opposed to Christianity. It's dogmatic science that considers something settled when it's not proven. Funny how virtually all the pioneers in science were Christian believers. That's why theology was once viewed as "queen of the sciences." They viewed science as faith seeking understanding. The Swiss theologian Karl Barth borrowed that idea and defined theology that way. I actually can't think of any Christians I know who are afraid of science.

Steve.

Not at all. By presupposing a creator, all you've done is fall into the infinite regression of creator creators, and in the process you have explained nothing.

It is Science that's pushed the God of the Gaps into a smaller and smaller space.

As for Scientist being Christian, The Enlightenment stood on the shoulders of Muslims, who'd translated and studies the ancient Greek Polytheist Philosophers. In addition when you live in the world of the Inquisition, to be other then Christian is to risk death.

To assert a Christian root for science during a time when Heretics were burned at the stake is not very convincing. As for Christians not being afraid of Science, then why, according to a 2005 Gallop poll are 30% of Americans upset that evolution is taught in school?

That's all you've got left?
An attempt to discourage and get rid of the opposing point of view?
It's OK for proselytizing to be worth your while, but because my view point is different, it shouldn't be worth my time to express an opposing view point?

Really?

Honest question.

I have done no proselytizing. I've offered the facts as I see them just as you have to me. This is a question I have for you.

If you can't answer that is fine, I really was just asking. Just seems weird to me. When someone brings up some absurd point that I think is self-evidently false I don't bother arguing. I just let it stand for what it is.

Are you avoiding the question? Why not answer?

Just to be clear I have no illusions of converting you or anything. I am genuinely interested in the conversation. Not trying to change your mind, but to open you up to different possible answers to your objections. I can see that you're well entrenched in your conclusions on the matter just as you can see I am in mine. This isn't a contest or show of one upsmanship. At least not from me.

Let me ask you this , and I'm being sincere. What is your motivation to win the argument? It's obvious that Christians would like to see others saved. I'll concede that some are judgmental and self righteous, but let's set that aside for a moment and assume that the Christian honestly wants to help someone to be saved and live a better life while at the same time avoiding eternal damnation in Hell.

So that leavs us with why it matters to you. The Christians are happy and aren't hurting anyone , so why argue against them? If as you say there is no God, then what does it matter if they hold a belief that says to love other people and do good toward them, even if it is in the name of God?

Now I'm not trying to pick on you personally, because I think you are sincere in your doubt, but from a Christian viewpoint, there can only be one reason for your vehement desire to try your best to undermine any and all Christian threads. Whether you know it or acknowledge it, you have become a tool of the enemy.

Now that doesn't make me hate you, many have been tools of the enemy, even wearing the name of Christian. I just want you to honestly examine yourself and find the root of your desire to undermine Christian views. Why rail against someone that does not exist? The very importance of God in your life should be proof of his existence. Now, don't tell me God isn't important to you, because any Christian thread is irresistible to you.

There is NO proof, non whatsoever. As a Christian I am fine with that and understand it. God did not leave clear cut proof because He wanted people to come to Him by faith. This is my belief. You are entitled to disagree. It does not bother me one bit if you believe I am wrong just as it should not bother you that I believe you are wrong. There is no way to settle this in this life.

I would like to point out that if you are right and I am wrong neither us us has been hurt. I have just lived my life trying to live by a creed that was false. I did not hurt one single person by my beliefs. If however I am right and you are wrong the consequences would be different.

You will never change my mind and I will never attempt to beat my beliefs into you. I am willing to let go and chalk it up as something we may never agree on and get on with living life. Are you willing to do the same?

BC30cal, well put, and lovingly so as usual.

To those here who do not believe or scorn the church:

Christians are not only not perfect; some that are, are not. Even for those who truly are, in Romans 7, the Apostle Paul teaches us about the original,sinful nature we have to deal with once we come to Christ. We do this with varying degrees of success even though "born again." So you may see what you say is the hypocrite on occasion and perhaps he/she is; but perhaps not. I struggle with sinful patterns of behavior though I fight against them daily, but believe and trust in the redeeming blood of Christ and His spirit in me. People like me make the church imperfect--the spiritual hospital it was meant to be.

But to BC's point, The Church is the body of all believers, crossing denominations, cultures, languages, and socioeconomic groups-all who believe in and trust Christ for their redemption.

As a group, and organized, we can do things beyond the reach of the individual's resources, as Dwayne said, to bring the hand of Jesus and his healing words to the needy.

For example, here I am, in-country, in Ghana, Africa under the auspices of the Lukes Society, a Christian Medical Mission outreach involved in bringing medical care to some thirty Third World countries. In Ghana, a surgeon believer and friend and his two sons, and I, went to a small country hospital and though in archaic and difficult conditions performed about twenty surgeries in a two week period.



Did you know universities (the Ivy Leagues in our country), hospitals, and women's rights were initially brought to the light of day by Christians?

The Church, here on earth, will never be perfect because of it's members, but that does not render false the message of it's Cornerstone, Jesus Christ. It only proves that His message concerning us two millennia ago was needed and exactly right.

Well said, bro.

Yep, the Jews will not regain their homeland, they will not be carried to safety as if by the wings of an eagle, and treaties will prevent their enemies from trying to drive them into the sea, and they will lose their homeland.

Yep, easily explained by the laws of physics God ordained or by the luck of a molecular alignment by happenstance a trillion times less likely than drawing the lucky lotto power ball number, but that's where the educated place their bet, huh?

I would like to point out that in any discussion put downs, name calling, and extreme sarcasm do nothing for your cause.

Not directed at anyone but rather to all.

EFW, Thanks for your clarification. Usually when a theist asks this question it's an attempt to sidetrack the discussion because they've realized they cannot make progress discussion the evidence.

I engage in these conversations for several reason. I do not debate to change your mind, but rather to offer a counter perspective to the many undecided lurkers who read these discussions. Although many are not ready to breach this subject in the open, I do enjoy the PM's I receive from these members.

Next I am concerned about the potential damage dogmatic theism (and dogmatic leftism) can cause to our great nation. How many times have I posted the video on "Naming Rights" and how Al-Ghazali's pronouncement's against science crippled progress within the Muslim civilization relegating what were the most enlightened people in the world to a 5th rate has been status? We see pronouncements of this nature today. Pope John Paul II said scientist could examine the mechanics of nature, but forbid them from examining the beginnings of the universe because "that was the domain of God". As I mentioned above a significant percentage of Americans do not want evolution, the basis of modern biology, taught in our schools. This matches with the 42% of Americans who believe the earth in no more then 10k years old. 2014 Gallop Poll

We complain our nation is falling behind in math and science, while teaching our children to abandon reason, and just "have faith" in a collection 2000-2500 year old stories, and take these stories as literal truth, or risk an eternity of punishment?

I debate because I love my nation, the evidence does not support your position, and your position is potentially harmful to this nation, and consequently it can affect me and my children.

DITTOS on religion.

Are you being facetious or serious?

If you are being serious, let me point out that you advocating for Armageddon, and the end of the world.

Not for me.

George, you make a good argument for the utility of the Christian Faith, but utility does not equate with truth. But in claiming the good, you must also claim the bad. It was Christians women who ushered in Prohibition in 1918 while our boys were away fighting WWI. This lead to the Gangster era, and the corruption of local governments in places Chicago. It's this corrupt machine that gave us Barrack Obama, so by extension, good intentioned Christians own the election of Barrack Obama to the Presidency.

Further more, the missionaries in Africa are notorious for the opposition to birth control, specifically in the form of condoms. Do we really need to spread more over population and Aids and poverty across the Dark Continent?"

Yes, for you too, for no misguided belief will allow you to escape the consequence of a Arab/Israeli nuclear exchange.

Not so bud, I have seen hundreds of double and single rainbows. Haven't seen the winning power ball number yet. So your algorithim must be flawed.

Antelope Sniper, you do debate well. My compliments Sir.

Yes, and add organized "religion."

To the OP's original question; What's wrong with the Church?
What's wrong is that the church (many of the mainline churches) has moved away from the people, not vice/versa. They have begun preaching and publically acting for political correctness and have drifted far from The Word. The, so called, Peacemakers and Compromisers abound.

Lots of loose use of the word "Christians" here, in the thread. I'd submit there are Christians and then there are Chrinos, much like RINOs. We all fall short of the glory.

Yep, the same science which pushes global warming.

Swifty, I thank God for and take solace in the fact you don't agree with me.

http://www.theignorantfishermen.com/2009/06/few-quotes-from-george-washington.html

Without God, there is no reason for truth, honesty, justice, family, sportsmanship, decency, or humanity. What use is there for one animal to feel superior to another. We would all be but flesh, and the only law would be that of the jungle.

I've heard it presented that the odds of one complex organism evolving by the process of natural selection as currently described by "science" as one in one billion trillion. That seems fairly unlikely to me but I is just a hick.

I have also in my life seen a lot of scientific "facts" be later exposed as BS. I have also seen brilliant people be stunningly, astoundingly wrong about real important stuff. But they have probably got this evolution thing nailed.

You're right:

Yet research found in Christians Are Hate-Filled Hypocrites... and Other Lies You've Been Told, shows that couples who are active in their faith are much less likely to divorce. Catholic couples were 31% less likely to divorce; Protestant couples 35% less likely; and Jewish couples 97% less likely, which in itself is quite impressive, I must say.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ed...-what-do-stats-say-and-c.html?paging=off

Not ifin u seen two wrainbows.

I choose to believe in God and therefore I am am potentially harmful to this nation. How? It did not harm the nation I served for 24 years and am permanently disabled because of that service. I prayed with my wife today in the privacy of my home and I did not notice it harming any other person or the nation.

If I choose to tithe some of my money to a food bank how does that harm the nation.

Your views on faith do not offend me in any way but your statement above does.

How can I appreciate the joy of Paradise without having experienced being there? So those of the flesh can not know the pleasure of having passed to live in the spirit without having experienced it.

It's like there is no way to know the feeling of having made love to a love while one is still a virgin.

Scott, I enjoy the pursuit of truth and, if I have the time available, will not shrink from these debates when offered. Despite the fact that we disagree on this one proposition, there is probably very little else where we significantly disagree. I respect how you live by your principle and use your land to teach and benefit other.

I've always considered you well intentioned, however, I find it interesting that you inadvertently quoted the Church's justification for burning Heretics at the stake. Yours is an interesting twist on Pascals Wager. Instead of threatening the eternal soul of the non-believer, you beg them to self-sensor out of fear they may cause someone to become an apostate and serve an eternity in Hell. It was for this theological reason the Catholic Church burned Heretics. So are you sure your belief that non-believers speaking their mind is harmful has never harmed anyone?

Scott, I do not believe you fall into my category of Dogmatic Theologist. I don't recall you ever arguing in favor of any of the specific items I find objectionable such as young earth creationism and teaching theology in place of science in our schools. As I mentioned above, your actions appear to speak loudly, and I've harbored nothing but respect for you.

Seems to me, if anything, an argument could be made that after God got kicked out of the public schools, the kids got dumber....not the other way around. Don't know if reason got abandoned but math sure did.

Just because one part of science dominated by Liberal Dogmatic Theocrats is wrong, doesn't mean the whole of science is wrong.

Scott, I do not choose to believe in God. I have no choice. I asked Him to come into my heart and the Truth has set me free of the curse of the flesh and the belief of only that which I see. I can not go back to where I was, no more than you can not see that which you have seen. HE said HE does not exist for those who do not believe, so for those, they are also correct in that there is no God. Small wonder Hitler chose the path he did.

Nothing is killing Christianity. Those things you listed are just making it easier to spot the frauds. "Christianity" has always been full of those who are just full of it, as it's not an exclusive club.

RJY, I'm familiar that presentation, and it's fallacys. Here's the list:

The calculation of odds assumes that the protein molecule formed by chance. However, biochemistry is not chance, making the calculated odds meaningless. Biochemistry produces complex products, and the products themselves interact in complex ways. For example, complex organic molecules are observed to form in the conditions that exist in space, and it is possible that they played a role in the formation of the first life (Spotts 2001).

The calculation of odds assumes that the protein molecule must take one certain form. However, there are innumerable possible proteins that promote biological activity. Any calculation of odds must take into account all possible molecules (not just proteins) that might function to promote life.

The calculation of odds assumes the creation of life in its present form. The first life would have been very much simpler.

The calculation of odds ignores the fact that innumerable trials would have been occurring simultaneously.

As a result the reported "odds" are invalid.

As for scientific ideas being proven false, we have a name for that. It's Progress. And who proves these ideas wrong anyway? Is it the priest, or another scientist?

In my experience in an Assembly Of God church for 31 yrs I know of three marriages that have failed. I;m sure there are more. They have problems and start going somewhere else so noone finds out. I know of hundreds of families from 2 churches I've attended. Very few get divorced. It seems funny the people most critical of christians aren't any better themselves and don't go to church but know all about their messed up lives and never bring up all the good things some churches do.

Hitler was raised Catholic. He speaks of it in Mein Kampf. In addition, all members of the SS were required to be Christian.

Sorry, but that dog just won't hunt.

What you're missing is that "christian" is a very generic term, used throughout the ages for a very wide variety of beliefs and actions that come from those beliefs.

If God/theology in the Class room made kids smarter, Muslims would be the worlds leader in science.

Threats??? Ha!

How can something you don't believe in threaten you?

Sounds like Nancy Pelosi logic.

So what if he was raised Catholic? That does not follow the teachings of The Bible. Did hitler accept their tenants even? No. He rejected the most basic requirements.

You're confusing God with satan. No worries. Typical atheist misnomer.

He's right ya know. School today is not what it once was or needs to be. Coincidence? Yeah, sure.

The respect is mutual.

No Sir, I do not defend the atrocities that went on in the name of any religion and especially not Christianity. The dark ages were dark and the leaders during those times were... well as a Christian I do not use that language.

Neither do I believe in any of the end justifies the means kinds of trickery to try to force others to believe as I do. I refuse to follow any religion and the harsh dogmas that go along with religions. I just follow Christ as best as I can and no, I am a hell of a long way from perfect or even especially good.

As I stated in the quoted post I makes no difference to me what you believe. I disagree with you but will fight to the end for your right to freely believe as you choose and your right to state those beliefs.

You will not find me on a soap box shouting fire and brimstone. That is just not me. Nor will you find me supporting those who do.

I have a personal faith as does my wife. If you want to know about it you can ask and I will answer your questions to the best of my ability. But, if you were here right now I would probably light a campfire and pull up a couple of chairs. There would be refreshments. The subject of my beliefs in God would not come up unless you brought it up. I am pretty sure we would have a good time.

That said you aren't going to change my mind. I have my personal proof that God answers prayers in the form of a beautiful daughter born with Down syndrome. She was supposed to live for a month. I think she was four when she was Called to the Vancouver BC Children's Hosp. for tests. Positive for Down syndrome again. Around eleven years old the asked her to return for further testing. No Down syndrome. The tissue samples are still on file and they still have no explanation. She received no treatment, only prayer. I am convinced that a power much higher than any other had His hand in this. I find no other scientific explanation. I call Him God.

Hes had a hard tome in school, she worked extra hard for her As and Bs through high school and collage. Today she manages food services and housekeeping for five care facilities and is next in line for a regional management position. She is buying her own home and has done it all without government help.

Scott, why do REAL Christians even give a crap about whether folks like AS are told the Truth? (Granted, pretend Christians don't give a crap, Steel, as you have experienced).

Real Christians give a crap because HE told us to love our neighbor as ourselves. HE told us to pray for our enemies. We have no choice but to want all to know the Truth (Jesus Christ) that even AS said he searched for in an earlier post.

Antelope-, there is no doubt true Christians are faulty and have done foolish, thoughtless, and unconscionable things down through the ages and still do in the name of their faith but two things: 1) "we" could give a historical laundry list of positive and very constructive things as well so you have to be even-handed in your honest appraisal. 2). The fact that Christians have done bad things is irrespective of their having The Truth. Rather, it's a matter of living it out with our human weakness that are so often at odds with living "the Christian life."

But my friend, I am anything but dogmatic. I believe in a loving, forgiving God who is most likely appalled and sickened by most of what the church (note the lower case c in the word church) has become as well as what it was in the time of heretic burning and the crusades. Love thy neighbor as you lop off his head just doesn't sit well.

FWIW I an not a young earth believer either and find nothing in my Bible that stater young earth. As for teaching theology in public schools, that is not their job.

I was given a choice and I chose the path but no, I cannot go back.

Hitler was taught in a Catholic school but just like my friend DD that did not make him a Christian just and it did not make the SS Christians. They may have been christians, that is lip service without true faith but Christians throughout time do not engage in the atrocities Hitler and the SS did.

There is a wide gap between christians and Christians. Just as every self made hero who brags about being A SEAL was never a SEAL.

Thanks Scott for the Truth, but actually, that is not what those who wish to denigrate The Truth are seeking. Some wish to use any excuse to stick a spear in Him, again, and are not truthful about the bone they use as an excuse to persecute Him, which is not really surprising, with respect to the excuses used to justify crucifying Him.

I do have to admit, I don't like most christians. I would rather sit around a fire with Mr Sniper than a christian any day of the week. Real is important to me.

Stop taking everything Richard Dawkins says as gospel. Sitting in a church no more makes you a Christian than sitting in a garage makes you a Buick.

Hitler and the Nazis pretended to be Christian to gain power because most Germans were Christians in those days. He was no more Christian than you are. The Swastika is a Hindu symbol that Hitler co-opted. Is he a Hindu too? I don't think so.

Hitler was not an idiot. He did not come out and tell the German people that he was evil and would destroy their country. Its pretty common knowledge that the Nazis were occultist....or at least I thought it was. Plenty of Nazi quotes exits about stamping out Christianity....Boorman said they were going to "stamp it out root and branch" and I believe Hitler said you could not be a Christian and a national socialist.

I will hand it to you....you are one prepared SOB and are damn good at pushing your agenda.

Strange isn't it, how so many have a hard on for Jesus Christ not making things here on earth perfect in their life, even though He said He was leaving us to be with The Father and saying that Satan and his minions would roam to and fro.

They are pissed that their Creator left them to go through but a taste of the misery He suffered for them and it all in vain.

Well, He should have made it easier on them to have everlasting life than having to ask for Him to come into their heart and make them spirit filled. I mean, no more valuable than everlasting life is He should have probably sent His son to die for their sorry asses.

AS,

Well, I think RJY is correct with the conclusion. As, you disagree with the methodology but you seemingly do not disagree with the conclusion?

It seems to me that the conclusion is correct. I wonder how many biologists have tried and failed to "produce life" in the lab. This seems to show that the odds are very long indeed.

Now, one could conclude that it must have happened or life would not be here now...right? That of course is a statement of great faith.

TF

I like the "Buick" idea. Correct. I dealt with this issue one time with a man I knew very well.

He told me he was a "Christian." I said ok, is Jesus your Lord and Savior? No answer....

I followed up with another question: Can you look me in the eye and tell me that Jesus is Lord? Again, I rec'd no answer.

There seems to be a huge difference between being a generic "christian" and a Follower of Jesus.

Those who do not recognize this difference simply do not understand ... or do not accept....the concept of being born again.

TF

btw... I am not sure there is anything "wrong" with church. We are surely flawed and limited and we are certainly guilty of our own sinning and hypocritical lifestyles. But that's why we need Jesus in the first place. As long as we are in this "body" of sin, we will fall short. God knows that. He expected that. He sees our sin and faults and loves us as His own. God expects us to fall short. He also expects us to strive to become more Christ like.

Do any of you really think that God did not "see this coming" when he looked into the future? Sure he did. The church of today is no surprise to Him.

Scott, thank-you for your kind reply.
A campfire and refreshments and a good conversation sounds really good right now. I also severed 7 years defending the Constitutional rights of all Americans, and seldom bring up personal philosophies in person unless asked. I enjoy these debates online, but in person I'd rather hear a good fishing story.

When a believer has experienced an apparent miracle such as your, there is no changing their mind. Period. You and I could still have an interesting comparative discussion, but no minds would be changed. I will say I've had my doubts about some of the Down syndrome testing. One of the girls I went to High School with was supposedly diagnosed with Downs syndrome, but to my eye, she never exhibited a single symptom. One of my Statistics Professors sued one of the local hospitals over their prenatal Downs testing. Some downs test can be difficult to interpret, and he discovered they were misinterpreting the data causing some parent to abort what were in all probably healthy babies. As part of the settlement the hospital was required to hire proper bio-statistician to read the results, after which their positive results dropped significantly.

Regardless, I'm glad to hear your daughter is doing well. As for her hard work, well, that builds character, something that's lacking in much of today's youth.

Amen. He also saw those who would choose to follow the world (science) and reject Him, and He sent His Son to die for them anyway.

Your arguement displays a major leap of blind faith. You equivocate on life. The problem with your post is you are starting with the assumption God was not involved. Therefore you have to start with nothing. Then you want us to accept the huge amount of pre-biotic combinations were never toxic, but benificial to acomplishing life.

The reason the odds against life arising by chance is proven every year in laboratories. The toxic combinations out number any "good" combiniations by a magnitude. Then to top that off the toxic combinations will absorb or combine with any favorable chemicals causing their benificial "evolution" to come to an immediate halt.

The number of attempts by extremely intelegent and educated scientist proves year after year the correct life combinations need more than the correct mixture. The chemicals need the spark of life. Since nothing can produce even the pre-biotic mixture, then nothing can produce life. When John Lachuck didn't wake up Saturday morning February 15, 2014, after going to bed quite alive, everything was present for a living human; except he was dead!

Scientific information confirms year after year that life comes from life.

It's not fair to use science to disprove science.

eyeball,


The "science" of the world is not science. It is a philosophical escape mechinism foisted on unsuspecting children until they are adults. That's why the movie Expelled: No intelegence allowed is rejected by them. It demonstrates their lack of tolerance of even questioning evolution.

George, IMO you last post applies near universally. You can replace the Christian with any other faith or philosophy, and it would still apply. We all have a duty to live the best life we can within our chosen faith/philosophy, and we all think we have the Truth...

Some fail to make a distinction between the brainwashing of public education with real science.

She still has the physical signs, slanted eyes, wide hands and chest, and the webbing on the back of her neck but the testing is now negative. The big hole in her heart is gone too.

And yes, time spent around a real fire telling tales of big fish and enchanted hunts would be fun.

If there is no creator with laws of right and wrong separating us from animals, then we are animals, which the libs claim we are anyway.

Priceless.

We are not plants nor minerals....so, yea.....we are animals. An animal, more specifically a primate, called Homo Sapien.

AS, you are as full of horse wind as ever. Just sayin. ;-{>8

TF, I disagree with the argument that based purely on statistic early life could not evolve on earth. You are correct to note that at this time, no scientist has created life in a lab, and we do not know the exact mechanism that created life of earth, however, you cannot logically jump from "we don't know" to "God did it". We don't know, just means, we don't know. At present there are at least a half dozen different hypothesis (nothing that qualifies as a theory) regarding abiogenesis. Where in science we are comfortable saying we don't know something, why is it the theologist feel they must instantly plug these holes with God?

Thanks OT.

I hope I'm keeping you entertained.

No, I just said he made erroneous assumptions regarding how the probabilities should be calculated.

But regarding your arguments about toxins, that's a 10 year old argument from the Discover Institute. What they are missing is that context matters.

Cyanide and formaldehyde are necessary building blocks for important biochemical compounds, including amino acids (Abelson 1996). They are not toxins in this context.

Miller-Urey experiments produce amino acids among other chemical compounds (Kawamoto and Akaboshi 1982; Schlesinger and Miller 1983).

Sure, and the only one with a three segmented brain? Sure, and as Ronald Reagan said to the reporter Sam Donaldson, your predecessors may have been apes, but mine weren't.

What animal contemplates a life after death? None. What animal contemplates the purpose of its own existence, or humility, or developing meds to protect its progeny, or the solar system, or immigration?

You sell yourself too short.

It's a good excuse to justify a life of self gratification.

No animal contemplates it's own contemplation.

So, you agree that life being created in the lab is difficult .....but ....that a method must exist and there are many theories regarding abiogenesis. So, it seems you are indeed agreeing with the long odds.

Also, are these same scientists trying to seek answers by plugging in their theories because they cannot conceive that God did it?

Plugging the holes of understanding with the latest and most popular "scientific theory" is the same error as a theologist would make if he attributed everything unexplained or even hard to understand, to God.

TF

No, you are the one selling non-believers short. Just because non-believers do not believe in an invisible spirit that will punish bad behavior (or just a lack of faith, depending on the mythos) for all eternity, that in no way justifies bad behavior. If anything, they serve to an opposite belief. After all, there is not preordained plan, supervised by a supernatural being to make sure everything is going to work out. If, because of your actions, things go poorly, there is no one to pray to to make things better. Further more, this is your one and only life. If you screw it up, you don't get another one in the "after life". One shot, with no reset button. Consequently this means we have more, not less responsibility then the believer to make the most of this life and not screw things up for everyone else.

You are the one who doesn't believe in forgiveness and that you are no more than a dog.

TF, lets not confuse speculation with Scientific Theories. Speculation, so long as it is testable, is part of the scientific process. But until that speculation is turned into a large body of confirmed hypothesis that construct a large, explanatory body of knowledge that can be used to make predictions, it not a theory. The current body of knowledge on abiogenesis does not meet this definition, which is why there is no "Theory of Abiogenesis". Still, we've made some progress on the subject such as developing an understanding of the development of long proteins, and the development of complex molecules in various atmospheres, oceans, and even in space. Sure will still don't know, but that doesn't not justify the insertion of God, or any other mechanism for which we have no evidence.

A few thousand years ago some winos sat around with chisel, hammer and stone and pecked out that Israel would be surrounded by enemies dedicated to driving them into the sea and then sat around laughing about confounding suckers like me.

I said we are animals. I never said all animals are equal.

As for forgiveness, I don't believe in the doctrine of Original Sin either. So I don't need God to forgive me for a catch 22 he created. A forgiveness that involves vicarious redemption through the human sacrifice of a scapegoat loaded with all the original sins inflicted upon all of mankind.

Yes, you are right. I find that idea untenable.

Well, we are maybe close to being in agreement here. However, the scientific community is rife with pure old speculation masquerading as what may be called a disciplined theory.

And, as I have said before, I am all for scientific endeavor and discovery. Great benefits for mankind as a result.



Gotta check out...

TF

Just want to point out that just because one part (or several parts) of "Christian" society is dominated by self-serving impostors and/or misinformed followers, doesn't mean the whole of Christianity is wrong.

Carry on...

Well, as much as life is a mystery, the quantum physicists seem to be getting a handle on what may be happening. I must couch my comments as an accidental mystic, one who has experienced many existential visions that defy explanation in linear sequential though or language, so forgive me if I seem incoherent. What these scientists are talking about is the theory that matter does not produce consciousness, but that consciousness produces matter and all life. Not just any consciousness, but a conscious awareness of self that is transcendent, existing outside of time and space. Even more startling is the proposition that this consciousness is all that there is - the entire universe, and whatever it arises from, is aware of itself. It is the observations of this consciousness that collapses the field of probability to create matter, and is the basis of choice or free will we believe to be our own. Our brain/mind interfaces with this consciousness indirectly creating our individual sense of self.

Now that pretty much comports with my experiences wherein everything cascades from the first cause, the primal realization, awareness of self-existence. This realization takes place beyond time, space, dimension and conditions. everything exists at once, as potentia (from the Latin potens, the present active participle of possum (I am able), so that with the realization of self existence, all things become possible because I AM able to create them from myself (here we refer to God, not Wrangler John). So that what we have is God looking back at the universe through our eyes at itself. Hence it is God contemplating it's own contemplations in the guise of humanity. That is why Man can comprehend that that God exists and yet at the same time also deny that God exists. What compound of elemental matter can be said to be alive or conscious of itself? While at the transcendent level all matter is the conscious manifestation of mind necessary to create a material world of exploratory forms and express the psychological implications of conscious deliberate actions that affect itself or others.

Because thought must proceed action, the archetype, Jesus Christ, preexisted Man as the design motif. We are the process of becoming matter transfigured as the ideal consciously aware potent being in both material and transcendent realms. We can no more separate ourselves from God's intent than the turtle can castoff his shell. As we are, warts and all, we are God becoming something beyond our understanding through our judgement of moral and ethical principles of behavior. The realization of the fact that we can, through concerted action, change the course of human development and attainment is the actual purpose of religion. Yet we find that religion went astray as best described in Matthew 23, and again in the Gospel of Thomas:

39 Jesus said, "The Pharisees and the scholars have taken the keys of knowledge and have hidden them. They have not entered nor have they allowed those who want to enter to do so.

102 Jesus said, "Damn the Pharisees! They are like a dog sleeping in the cattle manger: the dog neither eats nor [lets] the cattle eat."

Getting back on track towards enlightenment and our potential will require setting aside the the things worshiped in this world, can we do it?

Yes indeed.

nothing wrong with a Church until you let people inside it.

Absolutely the opposite. True Christian faith is based on overwhelming evidence; it is a full persuasion of the mind and heart based upon examining credible evidence. John Locke explains this in "The Reasonableness of Christianity"

Can anybody point me to a Hindu who was a wise as John Locke? Ghandi was no John Locke...
John Locke is the brains and thinking behind the American Revolution; he is the inspiration, some word for word, for the Declaration of Independence. There was no greater political science writer, understanding of course he was building on those gone before.

As has been pointed out it is important to remember that Christianity is no more monolithic than is Atheism. If you view things that way, as it appears you may, you ignore the history that George mentions above.

Similarly you ignore the historical devotion to education that Christians have had. Our ivy league universities on the East coast all have Christian roots.



As is usually the case it seems to me you over simplify and mischaracterize the situation here. Clearly there are groups within the Christian community who conform to some degree but for the vast majority the question of faith related in acceptance of the accuracy of God's word is not at all mutually exclusive to a academic excellence in math or free exploration in science. As a matter of fact in my tradition both have been highly encouraged. I don't believe in a new earth and don't believe it a necessary point toward belief in the reliability of Scritpure.

One could easily make the identical claim about Atheism, for it claims to be capable of proving a negative, which is altogether contrary to reason.



Again, ignorance of history. In this country Christianity has done the opposite of what you posit. While this does not prove whether or not it is true, it does prove that it has been on the whole positive.

Given that the spectrum of those anti-Science Christians is so narrow, it would seem to me logical to ask you what good Atheism has done historically?

Communism is ideologically atheistic, and while many Totalitarians have used the Church in an attempt to further their evil ends they themselves have been atheistic. They posit themselves as the supreme power, setting aside the restraints that submission to a transcendent power create for power of their own.

Based upon the exchange above it appears to me that you have many of the same blind spots that Christians have. Your "concerns" are overly broad and overlook evidence that doesn't suit your pre-determined conclusion.

I for one am a hard core supporter of the separation of Church & State. I believe that concept to be as good for the Church & her congregants as it is for the State & her citizens. I have no more problem with teaching the theory of evolution in school than I do of the Gospel being preached in Churches. I don't want prayer in public schools at all, for whatever we could come up with to please everyone would bear no resemblance to the prayer I want for my children that it'd be senseless. I don't send my kids to Christian school because they need the educational experience of being forced to deal with others who think differently than them in a civil manner.

I have no interest in forcing my beliefs on anyone. I do get concerned when speech is censored whether that censorship serves me or not. Your accusation of proselysing is one I've found serves the same purpose in the lexicon of the Atheist as you suggested my question does Christians. It shuts down free interaction and begs the question... Do you believe as I do, that everyone has equal rights to speak freely in public of what they believe whether they agree with me or not? The assertion & use of that word suggest to me that perhaps you have different standards for religious speech than other forms, but based upon your overall attitude in this conversation I'd be surprised if that we so. You seem like a free speech advocate.

Good conversation/exchange. I'd gladly sit around a campfire and snipe antelope with you, and share Scott's general lack of enjoyment of many Christians. I came to the Church from your position, so I can appreciate it.

Take care,

Efw

Like being a libertarian and being a Libertarian.

True religious faith is always based on overwhelming evidence of the believer. Christians don't hold the patent on this.

The arguement is still valid even if it is 100 years old. There are more toxic chemcals than desired chemicals. The desired bond with the toxic just as quickly as they bond with other desired. Since there are more toxic the chance of getting even pre-biotic substances is still zero.




You are either intentially or unintentially leaving out the fact experiments like this use a trap to get the "evolving" biohemicals away from the energy source. Otherwise evolution will not take place; even this controled inviroment.

Mr Sniper. Good morning to you.

Upon awakening this morning I remembered the opening to a story I am writing, maybe it is a book, but either way it expresses my view on the beginning of the earth and life.

Interesting view. Sounds like a mix of Taoism, Descarte, Berkeley, and particle physics.

They wouldn't have time. Too busy teaching islam and witchcraft.

Citation please.

Your forgot Marxism, and every history in the world except Western Civilization.

What's witchcraft?

I returned those books so you will have to give me a couple of days. However, originally I said all, I think it's probably more accurate to say early SS officers.

Some of this stemmed from the requirement that SS officers prove the Aryan linage back to 1800. However the whole of Germany didn't begin issuing birth certificates until 1876. The only other record the SS would accept was baptismal records, creating a defacto requirement that SS officers be Christian.

I don't know about being required to be Christians but Himmler was a Catholic did use Christian ritual and theology to form SS ritual and theology.

And good Morning to you Sir.

I must agree, the story of the earth is one wild ride. The shooting gallery we call the Early Bombardment, the collision with a Mercury sized planet that lead to the creation of the moon, the billion+ years it took for our atmosphere to evolve. If you take it back to the Big bang, the story becomes even more amazing, with large short lived stars creating the heavy elements needed for the surface we stand on. Yes, it's a great story.

Regarding the authors view of the time frames, at several points he quotes specific timer frames:

Genesis
1:13 And the evening and the morning were the third day.
1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
1:23 And the evening and the morning were the fifth day.
1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

2:2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.

It's widely believed a second writer picks up at Genesis 2:4 (The Second Creation Account), and this second writer contradicts the above time frame:
Gen.2:4
These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.

Now I do not know your target audience so these differences may not be relevant to your message. Your apparent figurative approach to the text provides you great lea way. As I've said before, the less literal, and more allegorical you message, so long as it conforms to your readers sense of morality, the more difficult it becomes to argue against the message.

Book aimed at general audiences. It is a work of fiction.

Who knows how long a day was, 24 hours, a week, a hundred years, a thousand years.

PM me an e-mail and I will send you what I have written so far.

Then it sounds to me like you are not a Dogmatic Theocrat.




EFW, thanks for the kinds words.
You are correct. I'm an advocate for Capitalism, Free Thought, Free Speech, and the Constitution. IMO the Constitution guarantees the freedom of, not the freedom from, religion. Free speech means we should each expect exposure to idea's and religion we disagree with. When we disagree, we have the right to attempt to alter the other persons opinion with our powers of reason, and persuasion, so long as both are employed honestly, an nothing more. I have no right to use force to change your mind , nor should any government (unless you ways involve causing direct harm to others, such at murder of innocents, even them we must be careful it is not abused.). Time and time again, history shows the massive human tragedy that results when governments use force to alter the will of their people, be it religious or secular, it doesn't matter for most of the greatest tortures abuses and genocides in history were propagated under a doctrine that justified the ill treatment of those with different beliefs.

Will do. I appreciate the opportunity to review it.

Just believe.

much of the Church's history like Government in general is very authoritarian. what it says, goes.

therefore don't ask any questions, or at least keep them to a minimum.

said another way, we're well into the age of science and technology. as such, questions are eseential. even question authority as necessary.

so, mankind needs to find a balance or a common ground, lest the whole thing blow up in our faces.

Gus said: "said another way, we're well into the age of science and technology. as such, questions are eseential. even question authority as necessary."

So, does that make you a protestant?

TF

I grew up with the Baptists. they didn't claim to be protestants, but maybe they were.

You are hitching the horse by the ass.
The requirement was that they not be Jews. which basically left every other ethnic German. Who's families were what was left (Christian). That's a huge leap from saying that SS were REQUIRED TO BE CHRISTIAN.
And what about those SS officers born after 1876? They weren't required to have baptismal records, now were they? Doing the math, that is 64 year olds in 1940.

Now, on to your misquote of the Pope.
Pope John Paul never said what Hawking purported. Hawking misheard/misunderstood/lied. The Pope never said anything even close to "Don't study the beginnings of the Universe because that is only for God" or whatever. Nothing even close. Here's what he DID say - http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/j...e_19850706_conferenza-cosmologia_en.html

I'll just end here as always, 'cause in this format one can always go so just far, and you have chosen thus far to refuse to objectively reflect on real truth and I will not argue it on a website.

What's REAL truth concerning religion?

That his religion is true. Same as everybody else.

DD, thanks for asking. John 3:16 to be succinct,..and then more.

Sounds very similar to the question posed to Jesus himself!

Since athiests don't have the God of the Bible as an absolute standard, what criteria is used to live the best life?

Billions of people on this earth don't have the God of the Bible (and they're not all atheists). Do you think none of them are living the best life 'they' can...? Do you think they have no other criteria for living the best life 'they' can...?

atlers,



God says they do. He goes on to say they refuse to acknowledge Him.



I have no idea what they are doing. There is no other than God's absolute standard. Arbitrarily choosing a standard is the epitimy of arrogance.

Sidestep; the difference between adherents of other religions & atheists is that other religions have some version of an objective "best". Atheists at their very core do not. Indeed they cannot; for they and their judgement is the only standard.

Got an answer to the question? Genuinely interested.

Citation please.

There are many people who live in areas on this planet that have never been exposed to the God of the Bible, or the message of salvation through Jesus.

So is the notion that if others don't see things exactly the way that you see them, they are all wrong and only you are right.

Quick reply, so equal opportunity offender here. Is not the epitome of arrogance and ignorance both, the idea that without some form of god, especially mine, that some one can not live a life of morals or good will to their neighbors?

Can you not make an informed decision on your own? Can you not see that screwing your neighbors wife or murdering his children is wrong?

I can't believe this coat hanger abortion of a discussion has gone on this long. Although they always do.

laffin'

I realize it's not as edifying as 'what kind of razor do you use' or 'which woman Ellen is lickin''...but the subject does interest some, as do the aforementioned threads.

Point taken, and well stated.

Glad your laffin', that was pretty much the point. I don't care what people want to discuss, why should I, but these threads seem to go on and on with the same arguments year after year. Guess we all are getting a little itchy for a change of season and a sunrise with the woods, a cup of coffee, and a rifle close by.

Jesus said all the law and teachings of the Bible hang on two commandments: Love the Lord with your all and your neighbor as yourself.
Simple, Pure, and impossible for many and hard for the rest. This is Christianity.
Everything else is dogma.

Psalm 19: 1-4
�The heavens are telling of the glory of God;
And their expanse is declaring the work of His hands.
Day to day pours forth speech,
And night to night reveals knowledge.
There is no speech, nor are there words;
Their voice is not heard.
Their line has gone out through all the earth,
And their utterances to the end of the world.�

Titus 2:11-12
�For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age,�

Romans 1: 18-23
�For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.

For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.�

In addition to Truth of God's Word I have heard many stories of Jesus appearing to people we would perhaps call natives; even Muslims. I guess He still gives personal attention.

Okay, I'm not trying be an ass here. So the only truth is a number of books collected in a bible written by dead guys who re-wrote the legends and myths they heard from the pagans of ancient Egypt, Persia, and Babylon. So that's the truth?

Romans 15:5-6

�Now may the God who gives perseverance and encouragement grant you to be of the same mind with one another according to Christ Jesus, so that with one accord you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.�

1 Corinthians 1:10

�Now I exhort you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be made complete in the same mind and in the same judgment.�

Philippians 1:27, 2:1-2

�Only conduct yourselves in a manner worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or remain absent, I will hear of you that you are standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel;�

�Therefore if there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, 2 make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose.�

Do you think the radical Muslims live a moral life? They would say, "Yes," if you ask them. Do you think the youths who play the knock out game are living moral lives?

One needs an absolute standard in order to live a moral life.

That makes perfect sense. Christianity is an exclusivistic religion.

So it's your premise that, according to 'your' interpretation of these scriptures, that every single person on earth...since Jesus came...has been made aware of the Gospel of Jesus...?

Christianity is an exclusivistic religion. Therefore, there can only be one God their God, there can only be one moral code their moral code. All other moral code are false and wrong and if you don't accept their God as the one and only true God you are an atheist.

That'd suit me right down to the ground.

And of course the absolute standard for a moral life is the Christian code.

Paul, encouraging the churches at Rome, Corinth, and Phillipi to each 'get along' with other members within their church doesn't at all disprove the arrogance that, to you...if others don't see things as you see them...then they are all wrong and only you are right.

Well said.

Baloney! A book of fairly tales from the sand dwellers has no more impact on your life than that which you let it.
If it makes you a great person, great. If you do wrong though, is it the books fault or yours?
Nobody is perfect, duh, but saying you can't live right without it is pretty ignorant or arrogant. Pick one.

I think if more people lived like this, that would be all that is needed in the bible.

I also think that if people just loved or respected their neighbor as they do themselves, life could be pretty good for any one in any corner of the world.
But, some people are just jerks! We can all recognize it in our cats and dogs, the mirror, not so much.

How do you know you are right?

You're starting with the idea the Bible is not God's Word. You are either ignorant of the history supporting God's Word or arrogantly rejecting It.



If evolution is what makes this better than the Muslim's beliefs? They are convinced if they kill infedels they are doing well. They are allowed to beat their wives and cut off their heads in "honor" killing.

The truth of Gods word is self evident. To reject it shows either ignorance of it or rebellion against it.

I am starting from the position that you don't need the bible or gods word, or any of it, to know right from wrong.

How hard is that to digest?

And BTW, I am not looking for some pissing match or trying to be antagonistic. I just don't understand how you guys can go on for four or five days arguing a point that you know the other person will never agree upon. Same goes for queers and abortion. Nobody ever changes the others mind or opinion, but they always fall just short of Bricktop making a cross country trip to kick Larry Roots ass.

And this is not about Muslims. That whole point of contention is a dead end.

Morality is simply what it takes for a given population to get along in a given geographical area in a given time frame. It's an evolutionary construct based on empathy. Try living buy the literal interpretation of morality laws in any of the ancient holy books and see how long you stay out of prison. Times change and so does morality.

Without an agreement on what is absolute truth, you and I may have a completely different world view and set of morals. I may think it's completely fine to rape and pillage, and you may not. Now, who is right?

If you don't believe that your religion is correct, why do you bother with it?

Isn't a lack of a solid religion or moral code just as valid?

If your religion is correct, how can other religions also be correct?

Nobody is really without a religion, what they look to for guidance just varies.

religion of one kind, type or another gives us, the common man, something to hold on to in the face of the unknown.

THE LAW!

I believe my spiritual path is right for me but it may not be right for everyone. I don't deny other spiritual paths or call them atheists because they believe differently.

I do draw the line with any spiritual path that deliberately seeks to harm others with malicious and spiteful intent as do most Pagans.

I've done pretty well staying out of jail so far for going on 50 years following Christ. But I don't take for granted that it will always be that way. If I live as long as my Dad, I've got about 30 more years. Given the current rate of degeneration in the U.S. things could get interesting before I check out. I suspect the direction we as a nation take after the next economic collapse will be telling.

If they had the power, Richard Dawkins and his disciples would probably lock me up (or worse) today. Some atheists apparently are getting pretty militant these days. Over my lifetime, I've only really known a couple very well and their attitude was if you wanna believe your crap fine, knock yourself out, I ain't buying it. One was perfectly fine with her kids investigating and choosing faith on their own...I guess you could say she was "pro-choice'. I never got the feeling from them that they perceived me or people like me as a "threat to their nation and their children" otherwise friendship would likely have been impossible. When you get to that point, the next logical step is to eliminate the threat....so like I said, I guess we will see.

You think you are be neutral and aluff. Jesus doesn't give that option. He says you are either for Him or against Him.



You are assumeing you know everyone's thoughts who read these threads.

The direction of this thread includes all who have an opinion that they, apart from God of the Bible, establish right and wrong.

Ok, say I rape, pillage, and plunder at your house, any opinion of what is right and wrong now?


Ringman. If sky daddy doesn't exist, how can you be for or against him?
How does that still keep a reasonable person from not recognizing right from wrong? (hint, see above )

How predictably logical, however, I will not lean on your own understanding. So, explain how Hinduism or Islam predicts the Jews will regain their homeland and not lose it, or how we will control the gates of our enemies as the strongest nation to ever exist and Great Britain would be the largest with the sun not setting on its shores, that is until we turn from Him and lean on our own understanding? Who predicted that Israel would be carried to safety as if on the wings of the eagle when their enemies would try to force them into the sea in the six day war?

A law tailored to each of us and to thus save each of us from our own various proclivities and vises sounds really nice. Yes, I think I shall attempt salvation by proclaiming innocence based on my particular situation.

Yep, I can be a god like ze ro, making and abiding by my own laws. Whew, I now feel so much better.

Eyeball, I don't have a bit of a problem with us humans having a God. we had to hav started somewhere, and starting with God is as good of a place, condition, actuality as any. no one has come up with a better idea, unless it's the Hindu's. they say there's no beginning and no end. I don't know if they are right or wrong in that regard.

I'm not much into prophecy of Israel. the Conservative Rabbi I studied under back in the day didn't give it much credence, and he was well-versed in the subject, having been raised Orthodox and all.

anyhow, a lot of people like the idea or concept of God, since it gives them a "out" when they breathe their last down here on the Urthen. for that, God does seem to play an important role for many people, no matter what their current religion is.

Well, if you aren't in to prophecy it probably doesn't exist. Surely, if we ignore the stories meant for our enlightenment we will be no less enlightened.

FWIW, we don't have a god. One made us in His image and He has us, if we are so blessed. One can be so blessed if only they ask.

Agreemet by a group does not establish morality. Consider the inner city or parents sending their children across the Mexican desert.



Times change. Morality is immutable.

Wearing socks woven of wool and Lycra is a sin. True when Leviticus 19:19 was written so still true now.

Nah....if one understands the difference in "the law" and Jesus being the fulfillment of the law, one would not make that statement.

Tf

Do humans "have God?" Or does the Creator "have humans?" To think w
That humans have or create god is downright baffling to me.

Tf

Understood.

Jesus bled out so that I can wear blended fabric clothing and still go to Heaven.

Yep, pretty close. But "Christianity" is open to all so it is not exclusive of all, but not all choose to join. Also, it seems to me that the atheist does not believe in God but a muslim does so not all non-Christians are atheists. Right?

Tf

That's the crux of the problem right there. I'm a human being living in the natural world under natural law and I don't need salvation. When I pass I'll merely pass into the Other World, a parallel universe to this one. A fairy tale, sure but no different than your fairy tale.

You have that back wards. We humans have made God in our image. It's tough if not impossible to worship a Deity we have no concept of so we build a image of God and personalize it, every religion does it.

That's not what makes Christianity an exclusivistic religion. What makes Christianity exclusivistic religion is the 1st Commandment of the Ten Commandments.

You may not but most Christians consider anyone who does not believe in God (Jesus) is an atheist.

DD said: "That's not what makes Christianity an exclusivistic religion. What makes Christianity exclusivistic religion is the 1st Commandment of the Ten Commandments.

You may not but most Christians consider anyone who does not believe in God (Jesus) is an atheist."

"You shall not have any other god before me."

Ok, I see what you are saying. God wants us to worship ONLY Him. NO other "gods" and no other idols etc. Yep, that's exclusive alright.

TF


btw, I heard that Oprah one time said that she could not worship a god that was jealous. Kinda accusing God of being a "jealous" god. Well, I am so glad that he is. He is possessive of his own. He loves that which is rightfully his. He protects us from the deceiver and guards us. Yep, exclusive as you say and also, in my opinion, jealous.

Humans would have made a god who didnt care if you said g d, raped, pillaged, lied or stole, that being the nature of the flesh.

lol.

we're creeping up on, ever so slowly, the necessity to more fully define the human being.

at this point we can all agree upon the following: 1. we don't know where we came from, 2. we don't know where we are, and 3. we certainly don't know where we're headed next.

the High Priests at NASA are working overtime on the problem.

the definition of a human being is:

So, who or rather what, made us?

I reckon most on here were made by a mistake. Uh, does that count?

That's probably about as good an answer as you'll get, I fear.

I'll answer later I have to go right now.

A super natural intelligent life force made us what we may call God or a Deity but we can have no concept of what that God or Deity might look like.

The Bible says God prevented the Jews from building idols to represent God. God punished the Jews when they made the golden calf as a representation of God. The reason the Jews hold the Torah in such high reverence is because the Torah is the closes thing they can have to represent God.

The Celts were amazed when they saw the Roman and Greek temples and how the Romans and Greeks had made statues of the Roman and Greek Gods and Goddesses and had personified the Gods and Goddesses. The Celts believed in one supreme creator but said nothing can be known about the creator, it just is.

The Christians have personified God through Jesus and named God Jesus. I did the same thing with the Goddess that is my icon. Praying, speaking with, or doing much of anything else is tough without a personified Deity personified in the human image.

All religions I've studied do this. Buddha spent twenty years supposedly staring at wall to become enlighten. Today most Buddhists have the Buddha icon in their temples and homes for worship and enlightenment.

We are not made in the image of God but rather He is made in our image. Even if one were to say but our soul is made in the image of God and that maybe true but we have no concept of what the soul looks like or even is.

I know you're not; just speaking out of not knowing. Your premise is wrong. Get back to me if interested.

What's wrong with church,

real simple, people run it

In your opinion. Your opinion however is very different from my Bible. I'll stick with my Bible.

Actually, my premise is dead on. When comparing the legends and myths of the Bible with the above mentioned places and let's also throw in the Roman and Greek legends and myths and it becomes very uncanny.

I know for people who believe the Bible is the true Word of a God it's impossible to come to grips that the Judeo Christian legends and myths actually came from earlier religions but unfortunately for Christians it's true.

I would expect nothing less but my opinion is fact and your Bible even says so.

The Bible says God prevented the Jews from building idols to represent God. God punished the Jews when they made the golden calf as a representation of God. The reason the Jews hold the Torah in such high reverence is because the Torah is the closes thing they can have to represent God.


We are not made in the image of God but rather He is made in our image. Even if one were to say but our soul is made in the image of God and that maybe true but we have no concept of what the soul looks like or even is. [/quote]

In your opinion. Your opinion however is very different from my Bible. I'll stick with my Bible.[/quote]

I would expect nothing less but my opinion is fact and your Bible even says so. [/quote]


DD,

Aw 'cmon... your opinion is fact? That needs some explanation or I will think you're just joshing us.

But, back to the golden calf. It was not made as a "representation" of God. It is with great interest that I note that the golden calf was made BY the people to BE A GOD that goes BEFORE us. Simply, a god of their own creation. They wanted a god to serve them and that might be able to control. Your opinion on this may be "fact" but few Bible interpreters would agree with you.

You did say something that is quite interesting. You said that
He, God, has been made in our image. Most false religions in the world have a "god" that is made up by man. There, we have a few points of agreement.

Anyway, gotta go... packing for a trip...

Keep it up!

TF

I would expect nothing less but my opinion is fact and your Bible even says so. [/quote]

No Sir, my Bible says that God created man in his own image, and Jesus said " If you've seen me, you've seen the father". Jesus Christ is Lord and always has been. It's called the Trinity. Though Trinity isn't a Bible word, the Father Son and Holy Spirit as one is biblical.

Man has tried to pervert the image of God and worship the creation rather than the creator but God made us in his image to have many sons and daughters.

In your opinion. Your opinion however is very different from my Bible. I'll stick with my Bible.[/quote]

I would expect nothing less but my opinion is fact and your Bible even says so. [/quote]


DD,

Aw 'cmon... your opinion is fact? That needs some explanation or I will think you're just joshing us.

But, back to the golden calf. It was not made as a "representation" of God. It is with great interest that I note that the golden calf was made BY the people to BE A GOD that goes BEFORE us. Simply, a god of their own creation. They wanted a god to serve them and that might be able to control. Your opinion on this may be "fact" but few Bible interpreters would agree with you.

You did say something that is quite interesting. You said that
He, God, has been made in our image. Most false religions in the world have a "god" that is made up by man. There, we have a few points of agreement.

Anyway, gotta go... packing for a trip...

Keep it up!

TF[/quote]

I said nothing about "false" religions you are putting that word in my mouth. We have no idea of what any God looks like or even a concept of God so it's obvious that man personifies God and makes that God in man's image.

Well it's been fun but I must go to bed as tomorrow is a busy day. I have man putting some siding on my old mobile home. I have some bad siding. I also have to do some painting. So you all play nice.

Interesting to me, is that God's law is written on our hearts, yet so many here war against it. Is it really that hard to know right from wrong, good from bad, showing that in fact something is guiding us from within?

That sums it up just fine. Not that hard to figure out.

Does it take 30 pages of lawyer discussion to figure out that truth is self-evident? When a Muslim man kills a child in rage, and the mother mourns, he thinks he's right or justified, but isn't it obvious to even a Muslim mother that it's wrong? Just because the Muslim man may be insane/not of his right mind, that doesn't mean the truth of a childs murder isn't known to all objective people. That's because Gods written his law in our hearts. Literally, according to the Bible.
We all should know it, including some here, they just choose to rebel against it.

Yes, and that there is no right or wrong for animals, only for those made in the image of Him. Maybe that's why we refer to some deviants as animals, meaning they have no resemblance to Him by their actions.

DD, maybe you're not the animal you profess to be.

Always makes me laugh that the people who rarely darken the doors of a church have the most to say about what's wrong with churches.

Carry on.

I'm a pretty nice animal or is it a Faerie Dwarf.

The Monotheism of the Bible was the first belief system; all others that came down the chronological line were aberrations or corruptions of it. This includes all mythologies and is why many cultures have some sort of god or gods, "a flood story", and other reminiscences of what were originally Biblical occurrences/stories in them.

As ancient populations diverged and the original truths and faith were lost there were still remnants of Biblical truth, though corrupted, retained in their storied pasts, because all people groups had this common origin.

And what standard(s) are you using to declare the Bible myth and legend? If you use the usual, contemporary culture of unbelief, you are guilty of circular reasoning, starting with unbelief and thereby declaring it untrue. In your post above, you have historical chronology all mixed up in regards to religion, myths and legends.

On the other hand, Just two examples verifying scriptural personages and places include the secular, Jewish historian Josephus who has mentioned many Biblical Characters including Jesus in his histories. The second would be Middle East archeology which has not uncovered or discovered any ancient fact or artifact that has disproved any Biblical location, person or event; in fact, the opposite is true, verifying Biblical occurrences and locations. I'll add a third--the Dead Sea Scrolls--which when discovered showed our contemporary Biblical versions to be 99% accurate to the books discovered, and the miscues were in punctuation, not doctrinal statements.

I could go on from science and philosophy from an apologetic approach (here "apologetic" means a "defense" or argument "for").

No, those who refute the Bible as God's word do so not after carefully examining all the evidence objectively, but only because they've decided to not believe first.

Lee Strobel, The Case for Christ.

I see a bunch you dipschits are still going to hell.




Travis

Show us the way brother Dave, show us the way!

And because they're dead in their trespasses & sins & blind apart from the saving work of the HS...

The Sumerians will be shocked.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/sumerians-look-on-in-confusion-as-god-creates-worl,2879/

I hate to be barer of bad news but the other legends and mythologies came before the Old Testament and even the New Testament. Monotheism came from one of the earlier Pharaoh's of ancient Egypt who's name escapes me at the moment but you can look it up if you are interested but of courser you are not. Judaism is an ancient Egypt religion. After all the Jews were a tribe of Egypt.

You remind me of a friend who suggested after reading The Clan of The Cave Bear that 50,000 years ago that religion was the best they could do.

I suggsted to him there was no 50,000 years ago. Just as I suggest to you that the Sumerians did not come into existance until about 4,000 years ago.

I suggest to you that some people bend science to fit the bible while others bend the bible to fit the science. You fall into the first category. Both are wrong.

DD, I think you are a nice guy . But I know you are wrong.

If you don't mind post a scientific fact accepted by Ph.D scientists of both creationists and evolutionists that show science is bent to fit the Bible to support a belief.

Evololutionists don't bend science to fit the Bible to support a belief. Literal creationists (those who demand that the earth is only 6,000 years old) do bend science to fit the Bible to support a belief.



laffin'

I am never wrong because like Mary Poppins I'm practically prefect.

You're laffin'?

Evolutionists bend science to fit their philosophical escape from reality. What scientific evidence do you have, that all Ph.D scientists agree on, showing creationists bend science?

Yep, except for one flaw, which was fatal.

Like many marriages that die from just one little bitty teeny tiny fatal flaw.

It's remarkable that in this day and age, with all of the technological advancements that affect our lives on a daily basis...due to science...that some continue to castigate science as a whole because it threatens their belief system.

antlers,

You didn't say anything in your post. Perhaps you will mention a few Ph.D creationists by name who don't accept gravity of relativity or nuclear fission. Elephant hurling does not work.

I agree. It's really sad. Watch the movie Expelled! No Intelegence Allowed and see it happen. Don't give me the excuse you won't watch it because the reviews said this or that.

Not to start an argument with you , but the witch trials were in one small town, Salem, by a group of cult like people. Religion like many human organizations are flawed.

Christianity is a direct relationship with God, not a series of rules , practices and rituals. I believe in the Almighty and excepted His gift of salvation, but there are many short comings in most religious groups. Humans are all flawed with Greed ,selfishness, lust etc. It is impossible to get a group of even "Good People" together with out basic human flaws(sin) entering the picture. As far as science goes most people believe in gravity, relativity and such. but science has a way of being influenced by who pays for the research being done and the results they expect. Also corrupted by the same things that corrupt "Religion"

The 'theories' of gravity, relativity, or nuclear fission don't threaten their belief system. Evolution does threaten their belief system, as it does yours. Evolution is as much of a 'theory' as is gravity, relativity, or nuclear fission are. It is a scientific fact that the earth is billions of years old, and to blatantly deny facts because they threaten your belief system doesn't lend much credence to 'your' belief system.

Then why do you insist that the earth is only 6,000 years old...?

Probably not god to send this thread off onto evolution again, but I do not agree that "evolution" is proven like "gravity."

There is "speciation" or genetic changes within a species. You know, fruit flies, dogs, horses and the like. When I was young, these types of changes were generally in the filed of "genetics." My view is that there were no examples of "proof" of evolution of one species or genus to another, so to keep the "evolution" game alive, this "genetic speciation" was given a new name: "micro evolution" and then held out as "proof" of evolution. This is bad science.

Gravity can be demonstrated. Evolution, other than "micro-evolution" which is nothing more than genetic variation has not been demonstrated. Not in the lab and not in the fossil record. The fossil record ought to be filled with transitional changes. It is not.

Evolution is a dog that will not hunt. I expect that science will eventually expose this myth.

It is a mystery to me why the majority of scientists will not study this with open eyes. Same goes for global warming. Part of the answer is that a departure from "accepted" mainline beliefs is a career killer and certainly stops government grants.

I am thankful that we do have some bold thinkers in the scientific community that call out media stars like Hawkings and Krauss and successfully challenge "bad science."

The age of the earth is really interesting, but that is another subject.

So, the end of my expounding.

Carry on,

TF

I don't know if evolution is the correct word, but it's amazing the life changes that have occurred on Planet Earth.

remember the dinosours, and their cold-blooded life. then they died off for whatever reason we conjure up. the little furry animals that were warm-blooded inhabited the Earth. did we humans have as a basis the warm, furry animals? I mean, live-bearing, warm-blooded, got a "new brain?"

it sounds like some kind of giant schema was evolving, or developing? the base case was egg laying, cold-blooded & scaly. then warm-blooded, furry, live bearing & a different way of thinking? it's almost like Life is unfolding down here on the Planet.

I know a lot of PH.D's that accept gravity, relativity, nuclear fusion but still have a faith based religion of climate change or global warming. Your statement proves nothing.

Right on!

Right on!

Yes Gus, kind of like what this below says, huh?



1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

3 And God said, �Let there be light,� and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light �day,� and the darkness he called �night.� And there was evening, and there was morning�the first day.

6 And God said, �Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.� 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault �sky.� And there was evening, and there was morning�the second day.

9 And God said, �Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.� And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground �land,� and the gathered waters he called �seas.� And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, �Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.� And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning�the third day.

14 And God said, �Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.� And it was so. 16 God made two great lights�the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning�the fourth day.

20 And God said, �Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.� 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, �Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.� 23 And there was evening, and there was morning�the fifth day.

24 And God said, �Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.� And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, �Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.�

27 So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, �Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.�

29 Then God said, �I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground�everything that has the breath of life in it�I give every green plant for food.� And it was so.

31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning�the sixth day.



Maybe a day to God was the different ages (to us) in which He created the different things. Is there one thing we experience more than what is not listed in the above?