Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-26-2019 1:03 AM
24 online now:
A Certain Cyborg, DrJones* (2 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 852,045 Year: 7,081/19,786 Month: 1,622/1,581 Week: 1/443 Day: 1/34 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23Next
Author Topic:   Why'd you do it that way, God?
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 30 of 137 (528747)
10-06-2009 8:23 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by slevesque
10-03-2009 4:22 PM


" Finally, a 6000 year old universe is just as vast, and just as beautiful as 14billion year old universe."

I doubt that the earth was real soft and mushy on day 8. Any planet 8 days old would be real soft and mushy. Likewise, Adam wasn't sucking milk from anyone's breast. Nor were the animals still wobbly on their legs. Why would they be? They were not born....they were made.

So, assuming that the beginning started as it is written, then the earth has all the "scientific" attributes of a well aged planet. Not to say that it is.....just that, in order to avoid being soft and mushy and unsuitable to life, it was created "Ready to go".

Fast food style.

Jesus is credited with a number of "miracles". A "miracle" is a direct result of God touching mankind and delivering results that are "Ready to go". Blind seeing, lame walking, Wine drinking....all kinds of RTG events. Things that seem to have taken place out of our normal time frame. When God has revealed Himself to me, it was just this type of thing that happened. Things were RTG when there was no way for it to have happened in real time. Not mushy. Firm.


- Sky-
This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by slevesque, posted 10-03-2009 4:22 PM slevesque has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by Izanagi, posted 10-06-2009 8:36 PM Sky-Writing has responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 32 of 137 (528764)
10-06-2009 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by kbertsche
10-06-2009 5:18 PM


"False. Nearly all conservative Bible scholars from the early to mid-1800s thru the mid-1900s believed that the earth was old and that animals had died before man was here. These scholars included Scofield, Spurgeon, Barnhouse, Ironside, Unger, J Vernon McGee, and many, many others who did not accept the ToE as "fact." "

There is nothing wrong with that. Adam wasn't "young". Nor was "the garden" a square of germinating sprouts. The earth has all the characteristics of something old. As does the rest of the cosmos.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by kbertsche, posted 10-06-2009 5:18 PM kbertsche has acknowledged this reply

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 33 of 137 (528767)
10-06-2009 10:21 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by Izanagi
10-06-2009 8:36 PM


"Why did God do it that way?"

There are no isotopes with a 4.5 billion yo 1/2 life, to start with. The age number is scientifical historism. Not science.

True science being a reproducible testable event.

When a guy in a lab coat, or on Nova, spews yarns of ancient planet history ... don't fall to your knees and kiss the ring. I've been around Scientists all my life. They have agendas like everyone else. Worse actually.

Anyway, earth may well have endured a massive amount of prep time. Just so we could drive fast cars on smooth roads.

Edited by -Sky-, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Izanagi, posted 10-06-2009 8:36 PM Izanagi has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Coyote, posted 10-06-2009 10:28 PM Sky-Writing has responded
 Message 44 by greyseal, posted 01-03-2010 1:00 PM Sky-Writing has not yet responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 35 of 137 (528773)
10-06-2009 10:38 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Coyote
10-06-2009 10:28 PM


Re: True science nonsense again
"And try telling the scientists who practice it that cosmology is not a "true" science."

As if I care how they think about themselves. The fact remains, even their peers, who they bed with, can't be sure of historical events. Besides, you failed to produce even the smallest token of support other than your, and their, belief system. Again it falls out of pure science because...well....because it's always wrong. Each new discovery throws away days or years worth of previous speculation.

Take our moon for example. All of the brightest minds in the world have reached no conclusion on how it was formed. And that's after hand delivery of 100's of pounds of surface and core samples. No, if the group you call "Science" can't reach agreement on how our moon was formed with samples in their hands, I'm not going to give them ANY credit for theories on how anything else came into being.

Read about the moons of Saturn. You'll note that the moons are "Surprisingly active". I'll say. Not a single sentence has been written to try to explain how a moon that out-gasses material into space could exist for a billion years. I've not seen one. And I follow it pretty close.

According to Jesus, the scriptures are written correctly. His opinion trumps theirs any day, and is reconfirmed each day.

Edited by -Sky-, : Defining.

Edited by -Sky-, : Commentary


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Coyote, posted 10-06-2009 10:28 PM Coyote has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by jasonlang, posted 01-03-2010 8:34 PM Sky-Writing has responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 46 of 137 (541457)
01-03-2010 6:35 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by greyseal
01-03-2010 1:11 PM


Re: stolen with glee
"According to science, the universe is HUGE, and we are but a mere speck."

But then "Science" is no less biased or based on hope and faith than the Pope. Science has "Faith" that a majority of "lab coats" will agree that they have followed a good process and that all these white coats will agree with the conclusions drawn from the data. But valid conclusions can be swept under the rug and ignored if they don't fit the biases of the majority.

To suggest we are a "mere speck" is not accurate and shows a huge ego. According to "Science" the universe is infinite. That means we are so small that we don't actually exist in the grand scheme of things. In fact, "Science" is nothing and knows nothing about nothing compared to the infinite amount of universe outside of what we know.

Ahh, but that would be going too far. Science isn't ready to admit that we know nothing. That doesn't leave room for the man-ego to boast that science knows just about all that there is to know.

Yet, I just illustrated that we know less than nothing. Especially about the infinite that we don't know. That's why there must be a Creator. Because if there isn't, then we know nothing at all.

But if there is, then we aren't just less than a speck. Then we are actually the reason for the rest to exist. And clearly we still don't know everything there is to know.

But at least we can relax and look forward to being with The One who does.

Carl Sagan seems like such a pleasant fellow. I wonder if his three wives have the same opinion? They didn't seem too happy. Being a Pot-smoking Stoner, I would think he'd be easier to get along with. What a great drug-induced smile....eh?

Edited by -Sky-, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by greyseal, posted 01-03-2010 1:11 PM greyseal has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-03-2010 7:19 PM Sky-Writing has responded
 Message 56 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-03-2010 10:19 PM Sky-Writing has responded
 Message 110 by greyseal, posted 01-06-2010 2:49 PM Sky-Writing has not yet responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 49 of 137 (541473)
01-03-2010 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by Thugpreacha
01-03-2010 7:19 PM


Re: stolen with glee
" Is it any less egotistical to believe in a Creator who lifts humanity up as His "special" creation over every other single known and unknown lifeform in the known universe? Going even further, is it not egotistical to believe that only certain folks are saved and the rest are forever lost?? "

- When cornered - change the subject
- Putting something or somebody in charge is common. Anything with a brain has appreciation for the value of having a brain in charge. Or should.
- The lost can always count on Reincarnation to pull them from the lost soul pile and stick them into a bug or something.

Why would non-believers want to spend all eternity worshiping God? No fun for them. THAT would be Hell, right?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by Thugpreacha, posted 01-03-2010 7:19 PM Thugpreacha has not yet responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 52 of 137 (541482)
01-03-2010 9:11 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by jasonlang
01-03-2010 8:34 PM


Re: True science nonsense again
(maybe I'm wrong though)

Correct. The subject is avoided not because of consensus but because all the current theories have about the same amount of support and about the same amount of contradictory evidence. It's really quite an embarrassment (for "Science") to have so much hard data and no solid conclusions.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by jasonlang, posted 01-03-2010 8:34 PM jasonlang has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by Coyote, posted 01-03-2010 9:35 PM Sky-Writing has not yet responded
 Message 55 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-03-2010 10:10 PM Sky-Writing has responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 53 of 137 (541486)
01-03-2010 9:28 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by jasonlang
01-03-2010 7:47 PM


Re: God is Lawful Good
"An omnipotent and omniscient God could have created the universe as-is 5 minutes ago with all memories etc intact."

No, that would have bypassed the option for man to choose Sin....which he did choose.

You know the old saying ... If you love something, set it free.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by jasonlang, posted 01-03-2010 7:47 PM jasonlang has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-03-2010 10:20 PM Sky-Writing has responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 58 of 137 (541514)
01-04-2010 5:26 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by Dr Adequate
01-03-2010 10:10 PM


Re: True science nonsense again
"Scientists are not embarrassed by behaving rationally. "

LOL! You've not been around Scientists! I've seen them escorted by security out of the building after throwing chairs. I've seem them escorted out for lieing, cheating, and even stealing. Just like the rest of the population. Rational thought is very far from the scientific method.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-03-2010 10:10 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-04-2010 8:19 AM Sky-Writing has responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 59 of 137 (541515)
01-04-2010 5:35 AM
Reply to: Message 57 by Dr Adequate
01-03-2010 10:20 PM


Re: God is Lawful Good
"....since your capacity to exercise your free will has nothing to do with the age of the Earth."

Yes it does. Not that I care about our observed age of the earth, just that history, as told in the scriptures, is important in that it tells what has taken place. At a certain time in the past, we chose sin, so God had to do something to make up for our choice. We chose Death. So God had to fix that problem. That's actually when time started. The clock didn't start ticking till we choose not to be in fellowship with God. Before that, time didn't exist... As we know it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-03-2010 10:20 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Parasomnium, posted 01-04-2010 6:17 AM Sky-Writing has responded
 Message 64 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-04-2010 8:29 AM Sky-Writing has responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 60 of 137 (541517)
01-04-2010 5:46 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by Dr Adequate
01-03-2010 10:19 PM


Re: stolen with glee
"Well,thatwasincoherent.Butyoseemtobetaking the assurance of scientists that they don't know everything as meaning that you know "less than nothing".You mayindeed,knowlessthan nothing-indeed, your post appears to confirm this hypothesis.But this disability does not follow from the fact that scientists say that they don't know everything.It seems, in fact, to follow from you swallowing a load of half-baked tripe. "

Well you cleared that up. Anyway, I'll restate:

If the REST of the universe is INFINITE,
then the SPECK of information that we know is INFINITELY SMALL.

(Ego's have a hard time with this idea.)

.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-03-2010 10:19 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-04-2010 8:20 AM Sky-Writing has responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 65 of 137 (541529)
01-04-2010 10:02 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Parasomnium
01-04-2010 6:17 AM


Re: God is Lawful Good
"And how do we know which scriptures to believe? There are many different stories, you know, and most of them contradict each other."

Rather than having done any such research, you're simply repeating what others (who have done no such research) have said. Given that God is infinite, we can expect more than one point of view regarding the same truth. And that's what we find. We can explore my twisted "multi-viewpoint" logic, if only you would reference your references for us.

In fact we even find other, older cultures telling different versions of the same Biblical History story. As you know.

Edited by -Sky-, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Parasomnium, posted 01-04-2010 6:17 AM Parasomnium has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Parasomnium, posted 01-04-2010 10:56 AM Sky-Writing has responded
 Message 71 by Coyote, posted 01-04-2010 11:13 AM Sky-Writing has responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 66 of 137 (541530)
01-04-2010 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by Dr Adequate
01-04-2010 8:29 AM


Re: God is Lawful Good
"And now you're making up your own theology. For a man who claims to know "less than nothing", you sometimes seem awfully self-assured. "

I do tend to internalize the truth based on other observations.
God forgive me for taking Him to heart.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-04-2010 8:29 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 67 of 137 (541532)
01-04-2010 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Dr Adequate
01-04-2010 8:20 AM


Re: stolen with glee
"So you failed math too?"

Is that considered a suitable math challenge in your world?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-04-2010 8:20 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Sky-Writing
Member (Idle past 3293 days)
Posts: 162
From: Milwaukee, WI, United States
Joined: 03-12-2009


Message 68 of 137 (541533)
01-04-2010 10:26 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by Dr Adequate
01-04-2010 8:19 AM


Re: True science nonsense again
"In the second place, you seem to be conflating the scientific method with what scientists do in their private lives. "

They are thoroughly entwined. And I can prove that science is driven by the desires of man rather than the interest in scientific discovery.

Where is Scientific research money spent?
And where should it be spent?

If you can answer those questions in a scientific way you get a Christmas cookie.

Edited by -Sky-, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Dr Adequate, posted 01-04-2010 8:19 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by hooah212002, posted 01-04-2010 10:34 AM Sky-Writing has responded

  
1
23Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019