Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9057 total)
56 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, jar, nwr, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Theodoric, xongsmith (8 members, 48 visitors)
Newest Member: drlove
Post Volume: Total: 889,818 Year: 930/6,534 Month: 930/682 Week: 165/445 Day: 10/48 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Created in the image of God
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 91 of 105 (3547)
02-06-2002 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by LudvanB
02-06-2002 12:20 AM


"I dont respond in the context of your Biblical quotations because A: I dont believe they come from God and B: I dont agree with them,period."
--Great, then I think we can move on and leave it at the door that says they are not contredictory or erroneous in the least.

"To me,anyone who views a medium as an instrument of demonic activity is a superstitious fool and deserves to be pitied."
--Don't argue with me, argue with the bible, but wait, we've already done that and seen the majority of the outcome havent we.

"Mediums,like everyone on earth receive their gifts from God...not the God of your Bible,which doesn't exist but from the God which gave birth to life and who may or may not have created the universe per say."
--Sounds like the God of the bible, but this God of the bible doesn't like the practices of mediums, and as I explained before, the way they think about their beliefs is expected if the bible is true.

"Mediums have a gift."
--Technically yes, but who sustains that gift? Sertainly not any entity that agrees with the bible.

"If they use it to do good,they are good and if they use it to do harm,they are evil,same as anyone."
--Mediums in the bible used their 'gift' to do 'good' but it does not substantiate what they are doing.

"If you dont think your God and your Bible agrees with mediums,than dont be one but for the record,there is nothing inerantly ungodly about mediums."
--Considering the bible, it is directly ungodly.

"Even Kind Solomon,from your Bible,sought the help of a witch at one time."
--Yes but you forgot what happend afterword did you not?

--Its unfortunate to be unable to get direct comments out of you towards my arguments, I should hope to discuss with you on any implication in such a way so we can come to conclusions and not drift off into other implications when one of them is wrongly attributed.

------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by LudvanB, posted 02-06-2002 12:20 AM LudvanB has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by LudvanB, posted 02-07-2002 11:10 AM TrueCreation has not yet responded

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 105 (3548)
02-06-2002 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by joz
02-06-2002 9:38 AM


"Why the hell do you think we have to share genes with our food in order to digest it?"
--Our bodies are designed to break up and use different sources of energy to sustain us, we have various specialized enzymes to break down various compounds such as proteins, carbohydrates, etc. At what level is cytochrome C? Is it an acid or a protein, that kind of thing, as I don't know too much about it I must admit. And about the Sunflower, that was what popped into my mind, so I thought I would suggest it, it wasn't that much of a belly laugh.

------------------

[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 02-06-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by joz, posted 02-06-2002 9:38 AM joz has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by mark24, posted 02-07-2002 12:15 PM TrueCreation has not yet responded

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 6997 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 93 of 105 (3556)
02-06-2002 6:27 PM


id love to seem some good explanations as well.

------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi


  
LudvanB
Inactive Member


Message 94 of 105 (3663)
02-07-2002 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by TrueCreation
02-06-2002 5:53 PM


quote:
Originally posted by TrueCreation:
"I dont respond in the context of your Biblical quotations because A: I dont believe they come from God and B: I dont agree with them,period."
--Great, then I think we can move on and leave it at the door that says they are not contredictory or erroneous in the least.

"To me,anyone who views a medium as an instrument of demonic activity is a superstitious fool and deserves to be pitied."
--Don't argue with me, argue with the bible, but wait, we've already done that and seen the majority of the outcome havent we.

LUD:we keep having this argument and it always ends the same...i do not convince you that its MAN's opinion thats writen in there and you do not convince me that its GOD's own.

"Mediums,like everyone on earth receive their gifts from God...not the God of your Bible,which doesn't exist but from the God which gave birth to life and who may or may not have created the universe per say."
--Sounds like the God of the bible, but this God of the bible doesn't like the practices of mediums, and as I explained before, the way they think about their beliefs is expected if the bible is true.

LUD: always with the "if the Bible is true",which,again,i see no more reason to believe than the Talmut,the Quoran or the books of budism.

"Mediums have a gift."
--Technically yes, but who sustains that gift? Sertainly not any entity that agrees with the bible.

LUD:having a natural ability to sing well is also a gift. Who gives and sustain that Gift? outside the bible,is there evidence to suggest that medium's gifts are more demonic in nature than signing? You see,thats my whole problem with your arguments...aside from your unyelding belief in the inerant nature of the Bible,you usually have none.

"If they use it to do good,they are good and if they use it to do harm,they are evil,same as anyone."
--Mediums in the bible used their 'gift' to do 'good' but it does not substantiate what they are doing.

LUD:not sure i got that last one...care to explain?

"If you dont think your God and your Bible agrees with mediums,than dont be one but for the record,there is nothing inerantly ungodly about mediums."
--Considering the bible, it is directly ungodly.

LUD:again,the likelyhood is that its merely an opinion stated by the autors of the bible and a possible explanation for it is that they were jalous of the gifts of mediums.

"Even Kind Solomon,from your Bible,sought the help of a witch at one time."
--Yes but you forgot what happend afterword did you not?

LUD:IF you are refering to the witch hunt,it happened BEFORE he sought the aid of a witch.

--Its unfortunate to be unable to get direct comments out of you towards my arguments, I should hope to discuss with you on any implication in such a way so we can come to conclusions and not drift off into other implications when one of them is wrongly attributed.

LUD:i dont always have time to comment directly on your posts,what with running a business and all(i make video games for a living so that probably makes me a devil worshipper,right?)



This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by TrueCreation, posted 02-06-2002 5:53 PM TrueCreation has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by KingPenguin, posted 02-07-2002 5:57 PM LudvanB has responded

  
mark24
Member (Idle past 4309 days)
Posts: 3857
From: UK
Joined: 12-01-2001


Message 95 of 105 (3678)
02-07-2002 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by TrueCreation
02-06-2002 5:58 PM


quote:
Originally posted by TrueCreation:
"Why the hell do you think we have to share genes with our food in order to digest it?"
--Our bodies are designed to break up and use different sources of energy to sustain us, we have various specialized enzymes to break down various compounds such as proteins, carbohydrates, etc. At what level is cytochrome C? Is it an acid or a protein, that kind of thing, as I don't know too much about it I must admit. And about the Sunflower, that was what popped into my mind, so I thought I would suggest it, it wasn't that much of a belly laugh.


Sorry, Hovinds sunflower lie is a belly laugh. I don't blame you, it's easy to believe what you read, but I do urge caution when reading Hovind, though.

Cytochrome c is a protein, involved in Krebbs cycle, a metabolic process that forms Adenosene Triphosphate from oxygen & sugars.

It consists of 103-112 amino acids (this may well have changed, as the source I'm quoting is 10 years+ old), but most vertebrates have 104.

Mark

------------------
Occam's razor is not for shaving with.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by TrueCreation, posted 02-06-2002 5:58 PM TrueCreation has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 1283 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 96 of 105 (3691)
02-07-2002 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by TrueCreation
02-02-2002 6:02 PM


quote:
"TC, how can you say that the Bible is "correct" when there are so many different versions of it, and it has been translated so many times (often for political reasons rather than theological accuracy), there is no original version, and there have been entire chapters left out it?"
--Sure there is an original version, unfortunately most of the population can't read hebrew. Hebrew words can be translated into a veriety of english words, this is one reason alot of debate pops up, so we most of the time need to go to the original hebrew or a literal translation. Many of the translations also simply take what the bible says, and putting it into an 'every day like' grammer so it is easier to comprehend.

Um, TC, there is no original version of the Bible. There does not exist any first copy of any of it. I believe that it would have been written in Arameic and Greek, anyway, not Hebrew. Hebrew versions don't come till many generations of versions later.

Do you know nothing at all of the history of the Bible? Why do you think that the King James version of the Bible is named that? King James did a translation that helped him politically. Martin Luther did the same thing. So did the Catholics.

Here is a timeline of when all of this happened with the Bible.

http://www.greatsite.com/timeline/main.html

quote:
"You are always speaking about your Bible is if its was somehow special and unique...there are dozens of different "holy" books across dozens of different cultures. Why should yours be any truer."
--Because it has not been falsified, it is completely true,
(as long as it is falsifiable, as some parts in the bible require complete faith, that is, there is no evidence for or against it, this would require faith) front to back cover, from everything that we find that can be tested, it comes up positive, if you would like to list anything else you think is eroneously proclaimed in the bible, I'd like to discuss it's feasability, unless you fear it is all accurate.

There are contradictory accounts of when Jesus was crucified, depending upon which Gospel you read. Matthew, Mark, and Luke all have him being crucified after passover, while John has him being crucified BEFORE Passover.

I quote many passages and link to each of the gospels' versions of the crucifiction in message #127 in the thread "Is the Bible the word of God". It is crystal clear in the scriptures.

You did not address this obvious contradiction in your reply.

"67.Jesus said that his true followers will routinely perform the following tricks: 1) cast out devils, 2)speak in tongues, 3) take up serpents, 4) drink poisons without harm, and 5) cure the sick by touching them. Mk.16:17-18"
--Yup, I have yet to see the drinking poisons without harm and cure the sick by touching them, but the rest is evident it happens.

So, you admit that IT IS NOT TRUE that Jesus' followers can drink poison without harm? Doesn't that mean that, in this case, that the Bible is WRONG?

All you do in your reply to my list of biblical contradictions is handwave and interpret out the wazoo so you can't be wrong.

...which is fine, of course, but then you can't turn around and say that ANYTHING in the Bible has any "true" meaning, so therefore you cannot assume that any of it reflects what we see in nature.

Jesus most certainly did very directly say that he would be back very soon, and that the people who were listening to him right then would see him. You have to twist and change the obvious, straightforward meaning of the scripture to make it mean anything else.

What you obviously HAVEN'T done is notice that the farther away in time after Jesus dies that we go in the Bible, the less the apostles mention that Jesus will be coming back within their listeners' lifetimes, and they start talking about some far-distsnt time that he will bring the "Kingdom of Heaven" back to Earth to the faithful.

Why don't you try looking at a book that presents all four Gospels at the same time, so you can see how they are quite different from each other in many details, with John being REALLY different from the other three. The following is a good one:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0826705006/ref=pd_sim_books/002-3934984-7943267

The Bible DOES call bats, birds. It actually calles them a "fowl":

11:13
And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls ; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the
ossifrage, and the ospray,
11:14
And the vulture, and the kite after his kind;
11:15
Every raven after his kind;
11:16
And the owl, and the night hawk, and the cuckow, and the hawk after his kind,
11:17
And the little owl, and the cormorant, and the great owl,
11:18
And the swan, and the pelican, and the gier eagle,
11:19
And the stork, the heron after her kind, and the lapwing, and the bat.

quote:
"and how we dress(Bible says no cloth weaved with more than one thread,its a sin)? Come on,TC...even you cant be that gullible."
--Assuming it requires gullibility, but where did you get the 'no cloth weaved with more than one thread' being a sin in the bible?

Leviticus 19:19
Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by TrueCreation, posted 02-02-2002 6:02 PM TrueCreation has not yet responded

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 6997 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 97 of 105 (3735)
02-07-2002 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by LudvanB
02-07-2002 11:10 AM


quote:
Originally posted by LudvanB:
LUD:i dont always have time to comment directly on your posts,what with running a business and all(i make video games for a living so that probably makes me a devil worshipper,right?)

then why do you have time for sarcasm. if you yell at creationists for not being open then try to be open yourself.

------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi


This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by LudvanB, posted 02-07-2002 11:10 AM LudvanB has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by LudvanB, posted 02-07-2002 6:38 PM KingPenguin has responded

  
LudvanB
Inactive Member


Message 98 of 105 (3743)
02-07-2002 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by KingPenguin
02-07-2002 5:57 PM


quote:
Originally posted by KingPenguin:
then why do you have time for sarcasm. if you yell at creationists for not being open then try to be open yourself.


Sense of humor KP...please look it up...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by KingPenguin, posted 02-07-2002 5:57 PM KingPenguin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by KingPenguin, posted 02-07-2002 9:13 PM LudvanB has not yet responded

  
KingPenguin
Member (Idle past 6997 days)
Posts: 286
From: Freeland, Mi USA
Joined: 02-04-2002


Message 99 of 105 (3754)
02-07-2002 9:13 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by LudvanB
02-07-2002 6:38 PM


quote:
Originally posted by LudvanB:
Sense of humor KP...please look it up...


hehehe sorry its kinda hard to tell unless you say.

------------------
"Overspecialize and you breed in weakness" -"Major" Motoko Kusanagi

[This message has been edited by KingPenguin, 02-07-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by LudvanB, posted 02-07-2002 6:38 PM LudvanB has not yet responded

  
like god
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 105 (99158)
04-10-2004 11:01 PM


It looked like a change was needed in the current direction of this thread. I read some in the beginning and then skipped to the end to see how it would turn out.

If we are made in the image of God, it is probably so we will know how to use our glorified bodies and not to trip on his looks when we meet him in the dimension of heaven. It is scary enough to think that there are creatures with eyes everywhere like in revelation that includes the eyes under their wings, so it will be a comfort to see someone who looks like us. And the Bible says his flock will recognize him.

While we are on eyes, my physiology teacher always had issue with the divine plan. It doesn't make a lot of sense to "see" things based on receptors which are pointed backwards and have to distinquish between the stimuli and the receptor next to them as well as the blood vessels, blood, water and gunk floating through the humor in the eye. Oh yea, that is right He said that we are in His image and when Christ comes to make final judgement the blood will separate us from our sins much as we have to look through the blood to read the pages of this forum and forgive those for their trespasses.


Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Andya Primanda, posted 04-11-2004 10:58 AM like god has not yet responded

  
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3946
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 101 of 105 (99180)
04-11-2004 3:04 AM


Thread moved here from the The Great Debate forum.

  
Andya Primanda
Inactive Member


Message 102 of 105 (99209)
04-11-2004 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by like god
04-10-2004 11:01 PM


I don't believe that we are made in the image of God. Is God humanlike? I don't think God is Michelangelo's bearded old man.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by like god, posted 04-10-2004 11:01 PM like god has not yet responded

  
rockin_rob
Inactive Member


Message 103 of 105 (180052)
01-23-2005 9:44 PM


well, i'm not sure if anyone has brought this up in this thread, but here goes:

" mortals belive that the Gods are born and have human clothing, voice and form "
-Xenophanes

It rasies an interesting point eh?

if we stop and think: a question comes to mind: are we really created in the image of god, or are trying to create god in our own image?

This message has been edited by rockin_rob, 01-23-2005 21:45 AM


  
rockin_rob
Inactive Member


Message 104 of 105 (180059)
01-23-2005 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by LudvanB
01-26-2002 5:32 PM


the flood epic of mesopotamia/ babylon is about a man named atrahasis a king who is warned by Enki of a flood, not gilgamesh, but if memory serves correct, part of " atrahasis" is contained within the epic of gilgamesh.

just so you know...

;)

This message has been edited by rockin_rob, 01-23-2005 22:02 AM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by LudvanB, posted 01-26-2002 5:32 PM LudvanB has not yet responded

  
ohnhai
Member (Idle past 4276 days)
Posts: 649
From: Melbourne, Australia
Joined: 11-17-2004


Message 105 of 105 (180065)
01-23-2005 10:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Lorenzo7
01-16-2002 8:30 AM


DNA is GOD??
In God’s image.. DNA is god.

This is normally taken (literally) to mean God looks human and made us look like him. This view has caused no end of problems. But when an artist paints an image there is nothing to say that that image has to look like the artist, but you will find that a lot of that artist will end up in that image. So when you think on the term “in God’s image” it should be realised that the image is not a physical interpretation of what god looks like, but the result of the will of god. Put another way, ‘how God defines us to be’.

We have come to understand the importance of DNA to life on this planet and to us as humans. DNA is indeed the driving force of existence and life. DNA is what makes us what we are. It defines us as humans, cats as cats, grass as grass and so on. In a very real sense we are made in the image of our DNA. A gene for red hair, a gene for height, a gene for all physical attributes and many mental ones too. DNA has a definition, design, image of what each of us are, and though each one of us is different we are the same. We are what the DNA makes us. Also as our DNA is the same stuff, simple base pairs in pattered sequences, all DNA sequences are essentially the same thing, just in slightly differing configurations.

So if we are made in God’s image and DNA is the painter that defines what we are DNA must be god

:P


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Lorenzo7, posted 01-16-2002 8:30 AM Lorenzo7 has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022