NationStates Jolt Archive

That's it! I've had it. Almost every time I check the general forum there's something on evolution that says that christianity and evolution are mutually exclusive. THIS IS NOT TRUE!!!

Christianity and evolution are not mutually exclusive, and what's more, belief in both IS NOT UNUSUAL. On the contrary, as most people SHOULD KNOW, the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, which is THE SINGLE BIGGEST CHRISTIAN DENOMINATION IN THE WORLD, making up OVER HALF OF THE 2 BILLION CHRISTIANS IN THE WORLD, OFFICIALLY ENDORSES THE EVOLUTION AND BIG-BANG THEORIES OF CREATION!!!

Now that I have that firmly out in the open, feel free to go ahead and discuss the topic.

This thread kind of collapsed pretty quickly

probably because there isnt anything to discuss...


its like saying " i like cheese and so do most people! discuss!"

Well, not all people like cheese, and I really don't think you can assert that most people like cheese without some kind of poll, so you should make a thread with a cheese liking poll to find out if you can back up your claims.

Personally I find cheese the perfect thing to eat while sitting on the forums at 1:07am and it's been so long since dinner that the hunger is setting in. Cheese makes the crackers taste so much better.

What are your thoughts?

cheese feels nice on your crotch.

All cheese? or just the soft stuff?

it all isnt soft?

I like double gloucester, myself. Some say you can use it anywhere you'd use cheddar. I don't know, but if I had Iron Chef levels of this cheese, I'd make a pizza. Otherwise, it would seem like a waste. I also like cheddar, but swiss is boring to me.

I've always liked the idea that the god and goddess, in their manner of percieving, are aware of evolution and had it in mind when the great genesis of life began on this planet under their guidance. Maybe they even have a hand in it, which might explain any discrepancies in the otherwise evidence-saturated theory of evolution and natural selection.

go down to your local dairy/market/grocer/corner store/cheese maker/equivalent and buy a pound of edam, leave it out in the sun, uncovered for a week. Then see how soft it is.

You could make houses from that stuff.

"damn you smelly house!"

You're backing is that because this belief is popular, it is right?

Sir/Madam, There you are mistaken!

You say Roman Cathlosism endorses the big bang theory, and evolution. And because they are the biggest domination, then they are obviously right?

Thier success is probably because of them supporting evolution. Just because something is popular, does not mean it is correct.

Have you read genisis? It clearly says "In the beggining God created the heaven and the ersth" NOT "In the beggining God made a large explosion from which spilled many rocks, water, gasses and seeds."

God commanded there to be a mass of land. If he commanded a large explosion, it would say so, wouldn't it? THe people of then may not have been as scientific as we are now, but they weren't stupid.

Also, if God created us in his image, why would he have us evolve into his image, and make himself wait four to five hundred thousand years? He may be paitient, but I doubt he'd make himself wait that long. If he wanted us in his image, he would have created us like that first. Which he did, as he states in the Bible. :)

Is this the kind of thing you were looking for?

Peace, brother :)

The Farmers Union should get together with an air freshener company. They would make a fortune.

Yehaaaw, lets ride thiswhipped topic like a hooker in july! YEEEHAAAW~!

we have completely morphed the topic


cheese on your crotch stinks but is goodfeeling... and good eatin

You're backing is that because this belief is popular, it is right?

Sir/Madam, There you are mistaken!

You say Roman Cathlosism endorses the big bang theory, and evolution. And because they are the biggest domination, then they are obviously right?

Thier success is probably because of them supporting evolution. Just because something is popular, does not mean it is correct.

Have you read genisis? It clearly says "In the beggining God created the heaven and the ersth" NOT "In the beggining God made a large explosion from which spilled many rocks, water, gasses and seeds."

God commanded there to be a mass of land. If he commanded a large explosion, it would say so, wouldn't it? THe people of then may not have been as scientific as we are now, but they weren't stupid.

Also, if God created us in his image, why would he have us evolve into his image, and make himself wait four to five hundred thousand years? He may be paitient, but I doubt he'd make himself wait that long. If he wanted us in his image, he would have created us like that first. Which he did, as he states in the Bible. :)

Is this the kind of thing you were looking for?

Peace, brother :)
So basically, you've chosen to ignore every peice of scientific evidence backing these theories. OK, education time, people!
No, I'm not going to lecture you on the theories themselves. I am going to tell you however how the scientific community uses the word theory. The word is used to refer to hypothoses that have evidence supporting them plus have been tested positive in experiments. Hence the Theory of Reletavity, and the Big Bang Theory. This is why they call them theories, because they have scientific proof backing them up.

God created all that exists. Man has attempted to explain all things from a scientific perspective and that is comforting to people who lack faith. As for the specific manner in which God chose to create existence, including time, space, and the various dimensions believed to exist via the string theory (which relates both to the general theory of relativity and quantum physics), the words of Genesis are the words God shared with humanity to help people understand as best as they could at that time.

As for evolution, like all other aspects of life, God created this process. Therefore, there is no need for exclusion of the theory by God-fearing humans. It is not impossible for humans to believe in God and to believe in the existence of scientific processes.

Some people can cry and complain that "creationism" excludes the existence of evolution. So what? They are just narrow-minded crybabies. God loves them, and we should love everyone too.

If we can't bring them into an awareness of reality that fits ours, it is no big deal.

Have you read genisis? It clearly says "In the beggining God created the heaven and the ersth" NOT "In the beggining God made a large explosion from which spilled many rocks, water, gasses and seeds."


So you reject the possibility of the idea that God choose to commence creation with a big bang?

BTW I don't think any bigbang theory advocates it as being the origin of grasses, seeds, water or rocks, but rather their building stones.

As for cheeses, I quite like bree with pepper crackers. However there's a spicy capsicup dip I really enjoy, but there's never enough in the container! If I buy two it's too much, if I buy one it's not enough. It's a conspiracy to get us to buy more I say! ;)

God created all that exists. Man has attempted to explain all things from a scientific perspective and that is comforting to people who lack faith. As for the specific manner in which God chose to create existence, including time, space, and the various dimensions believed to exist via the string theory (which relates both to the general theory of relativity and quantum physics), the words of Genesis are the words God shared with humanity to help people understand as best as they could at that time.

As for evolution, like all other aspects of life, God created this process. Therefore, there is no need for exclusion of the theory by God-fearing humans. It is not impossible for humans to believe in God and to believe in the existence of scientific processes.

Some people can cry and complain that "creationism" excludes the existence of evolution. So what? They are just narrow-minded crybabies. God loves them, and we should love everyone too.

If we can't bring them into an awareness of reality that fits ours, it is no big deal.
Look, unlike your God, we have proof of these occurrances. Now, if you can prove to me that God exists, I'll believe in him. And don't give me the "bible was written by God" line; you cannot prove that.

Look, unlike your God, we have proof of these occurrances. Now, if you can prove to me that God exists, I'll believe in him. And don't give me the "bible was written by God" line; you cannot prove that.

That's the thing about beliefs, they're just that, what people believe, not what they know. ;)

So you reject the possibility of the idea that God choose to commence creation with a big bang?

BTW I don't think any bigbang theory advocates it as being the origin of grasses, seeds, water or rocks, but rather their building stones.

As for cheeses, I quite like bree with pepper crackers. However there's a spicy capsicup dip I really enjoy, but there's never enough in the container! If I buy two it's too much, if I buy one it's not enough. It's a conspiracy to get us to buy more I say! ;)

Actually, there is no beginning of creation. God has existed forever and will exist forever. He created the things we can now perceive when He did, but considering that He created time itself, it does not matter too much on the clock of zillions of years and the like.

In any event, as I noted partially in my previous post, some people feel a need for comfort from science, in relation to their existence, because they lack faith. In quantum physics, one sees that something that exists now can exist simultaneously before and after and in the same space.

As far as I understand everything, and God only knows how close I am to understanding anything, at some point, Christian souls will understand the whole scene.

In the meantime, I recommend living in peace and helping our fellow humans.

As for cheeses, I like each cheese to a varying degree. There is a time and a purpose for each cheese, just as there is a season for all things.

Look, unlike your God, we have proof of these occurrances. Now, if you can prove to me that God exists, I'll believe in him. And don't give me the "bible was written by God" line; you cannot prove that.

My God is your God. He gave you free will to choose to believe in Him and to worship Him. As for proving that He exists, look in the mirror. Ask yourself how the food in your belly changes into the blood, skin cells, bone cells, etc., that allow you to live and to perceive.

It is God. All of the science in the universe cannot bring into being itself. God alone brought your soul and your ability to comprehend into being.

It is your choice to believe in God. Your soul is your essence of being. You decide where it will spend eternity, after you finish with this brief sojourn in this dimension of all existence.

Evidence, not proof. Sorry, I'm a definition maven at heart.

The writer of this post did not specify that said writer actually believed in what the bible said, although said writer was arguing from the angle of one who believed the bible's interpretation, right or wrong, is very literal. Thus, the only assumption I was able to find and believe questionable in that post was the assertion that the bible is, in fact, a literal document, regardless of its history or the accountability of its translators.

Mind you, you're probably right about Naara's beliefs, Picard, but you gotta give the benefit of the doubt for a logical conversation to occur. Argue the points that are presented and try not to make too many assumptions yourself. :) At least, that's the way I prefer to argue. Truth is, you can do anything you darn well please. I just find my method creates a minimum of misunderstanding.

Look, unlike your God, we have proof of these occurrances. Now, if you can prove to me that God exists, I'll believe in him. And don't give me the "bible was written by God" line; you cannot prove that.
No, The Bible wasn't written by God physicly, rather than through angels etc. (angles actually meaning "Messenger of God")


I am going to tell you however how the scientific community uses the word theory. The word is used to refer to hypothoses that have evidence supporting them plus have been tested positive in experiments.

And therefore, the Creationtheory has supporting evidence as well. May I say (even though I admit to not having a scientific mind) that there are Christian scientists who research creationism.


BTW I don't think any bigbang theory advocates it as being the origin of grasses, seeds, water or rocks, but rather their building stones.

May you then, please explain to me how they came to be through the evolution theory? I'd like to hear that (in laymans terms). (no, I'm serious, it is a confusing point of the Big Bang theory)

Oh, and please don't take me the wrong way. I don't wish any harm from my posting. But we are constantly taught at my church to accept the Bible as Gosplel, and not be swayed by other teachings. Which is what I'm doing. :)

Peace.

I hate cheese.

I don't believe in god, even if the whole "YOU WILL SPEND ETERNITY IN HELL AND BURN! and hairy deamons will spank you!"
is kind of kinky...

And realy, the whole "people get wings and live on fluffy clouds is soooo out-dated :rolleyes:
Now, if I got a a bubble-bathtub I would consider the christian religion ;)

I hate cheese.

I don't believe in god, even if the whole "YOU WILL SPEND ETERNITY IN HELL AND BURN! and hairy deamons will spank you!"
is kind of kinky...

And realy, the whole "people get wings and live on fluffy clouds is soooo out-dated :rolleyes:
Now, if I got a a bubble-bathtub I would consider the christian religion ;)

You, my friend are obviously misinformed then. :) Hell is defined as an existance without God. If God is Life, and Love, then Hell is Death and Hate. :)

As for heaven, If angels lived on clouds, then we would see them. :)

I hate cheese.

I don't believe in god, even if the whole "YOU WILL SPEND ETERNITY IN HELL AND BURN! and hairy deamons will spank you!"
is kind of kinky...

And realy, the whole "people get wings and live on fluffy clouds is soooo out-dated :rolleyes:
Now, if I got a a bubble-bathtub I would consider the christian religion ;)

Perhaps, hell for you will be some period of time of being forced to eat cheese and then your essence of being will simply no longer exist. Poof! Darkness and nothingness. Then again, perhaps the eternal frustration of never being able to escape a cheese-filled existence will be hell for you. I don't know.

There is no way to frighten any person into choosing Christianity. God gave each person free will. Otherwise, our choice to love and worship Him would have no meaning.

You choose to be an atheist. I will pray for you.

As for hating any food type, I don't have hatred in me. I prefer not to eat liver -- even with onions and all of the other methods for cooking it. That stuff just does not taste good to me. Again, we see freedom of choice coming to play...

While I can honestly, truly respect following one's personal beliefs if they are thought through and considered, I would like to point out that some base assumptions, when applied to logical conversations, serve to make the argument very pointless. One of these is the assumption that the bible is infallible. If this is true, which who knows it may be, then cool. Not much need be said beyond that. If it's false, than the logic gets fuzzy and questionable every time you quote from it. If the two people arguing do not share that base assumption, the argument becomes a deadlock which probably shouldn't have begun.
One must have common ground to come to a common conclusion. Argument is the means by which two people are meant to come to a common, logical conclusion. Logic is built from base assumptions which form a common ground. Missing any part of this is oftimes fatal to a good, fun argument.

I'm sure you can see the problem.

As to where grasses came from, we've come remarkably close to creating viable life forms by taking what we assume primordial goo was like, and zapping it for significant periods of time with electricity. Sounds like anything from natural phenomena to an act of divinity, so take that as you will. It may not be where life came from in the first place.

According to a Christian standpoint which has been educated in its own literature, angels were never human; humans are never angels. Whether they get wings or not is another question.

there is as much proof fopr the existence of god in science as there is in religion even scientifically its a 50/50 toss up wether u believe in him or not

While I can honestly, truly respect following one's personal beliefs if they are thought through and considered, I would like to point out that some base assumptions, when applied to logical conversations, serve to make the argument very pointless. One of these is the assumption that the bible is infallible. If this is true, which who knows it may be, then cool. Not much need be said beyond that. If it's false, than the logic gets fuzzy and questionable every time you quote from it. If the two people arguing do not share that base assumption, the argument becomes a deadlock which probably shouldn't have begun.
One must have common ground to come to a common conclusion. Argument is the means by which two people are meant to come to a common, logical conclusion. Logic is built from base assumptions which form a common ground. Missing any part of this is oftimes fatal to a good, fun argument.

I'm sure you can see the problem.

As to where grasses came from, we've come remarkably close to creating viable life forms by taking what we assume primordial goo was like, and zapping it for significant periods of time with electricity. Sounds like anything from natural phenomena to an act of divinity, so take that as you will. It may not be where life came from in the first place.

Do you believe in God? Do you believe that He gave humans a choice to reconcile themselves with Him through the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus?

From a "logical" point, please explain how one chooses one way or the other in relation to these questions. I have faith. There is one God, and there is a Trinity. Logic says one cannot exist as three, while only existing as one. Of course, that logic is from a time before we saw the matter and energy that exist at a very sub-atomic level.

According to a Christian standpoint which has been educated in its own literature, angels were never human; humans are never angels. Whether they get wings or not is another question.

This is true. Angels are a separate form of being from humans.

According to a Christian standpoint which has been educated in its own literature, angels were never human; humans are never angels. Whether they get wings or not is another question.

According to the Book of Enoch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch), that can happen, as Enoch, gread-grandfather of Noah, became the angel Metatron. That's a special case, though. And the Book of Enoch isn't found in the Bible and most people don't consider it divinely inspired (of course many people don't consider the whole Bible to be divinely inspired).

According to [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Enoch]the Book of Enoch, that can happen, as Enoch, gread-grandfather of Noah, became the angel Metatron.[/QUOTE]

God made Enoch into an angel. God took Enoch to be with Him before Enoch died. This is the only man who is recorded in the Holy Bible to have had that experience. Since God rules all things, He can choose to change a human into an angel. As for us Christians, we have a choice that was not available in the time of Enoch.

Will we become angels? I don't know. I know that God has cared, cares and will care for my soul. He loves us all. We can choose to be with Him, after we depart our mortal bodies. Or, we can choose not to be with Him.

Logically, I believe religion serves a purpose in the human psyche and its stability, and whether one holds to a religion or not, one should not ignore the possibility of divine entities. I think that would be illogical, and the illogic would be compounded by the fact that one who does that against one's personal feelings may color one's logic with upset and emotion from an unfulfilled need.
As to choosing a religion, I don't ask one to choose a religion. I ask one to not bring clearly religious assumptions into a logical argument unless it is with someone who shares those same assumptions. Otherwise, using them to make a point comes across as bad logic. To me, the logical courses of action is either to argue with the opponent's base assumptions first (which would require logical argument), to tailor one's arguments to be logical on the topic without bringing your unshared base assumptions into the argument (whether this is to temporarily suspend disbelief on a differing assumption or to simply not engage on that level), or to avoid the argument and choose somebody with the same base assumptions with which to argue or converse.

Philosophically, I ask if a divine entity might have instilled within us the capacity, by various chemical reactions and architectural predispositions, to appreciate divinity and strive toward it.

There is no such thing as a god. It is just an easy explaination for why we are here. God created everything. That is not true. God did not create everything hence there is no God. Religions once said God was in the sky. So there was the development of telescopes and planes. Then it was said god was in space. Well we went out in space and no one is there. So finally the religions came up with the best answer. You will see god when your dead. They knew then they would never get caught with that one. So see they just lie and lie. They have no idea on how anything started at all. Except for evolution. Evolution is a theory but accepted by most people as fact. Just as they will with the relativity theory and very very soon after that the big bang theory. From there on we will have to keep on pushing for the truth and hopefully before I die or any of you do we will know truthfully that is no god.

My God is your God. He gave you free will to choose to believe in Him and to worship Him. As for proving that He exists, look in the mirror. Ask yourself how the food in your belly changes into the blood, skin cells, bone cells, etc., that allow you to live and to perceive.

It is God. All of the science in the universe cannot bring into being itself. God alone brought your soul and your ability to comprehend into being.

It is your choice to believe in God. Your soul is your essence of being. You decide where it will spend eternity, after you finish with this brief sojourn in this dimension of all existence.


The Recurring Bang theory? Mulitverse theories? The time juxapostion theory? The big crunch? Heard of any of those? Ever?

Now the belief that god created the universe CAN be coupled with a belief in evolution - just like athiesm can be coupled with the belief that the world is run by invisable aliens. Evolution stands alone and deos not require God to work - just as god does not need evalution.


May you then, please explain to me how they came to be through the evolution theory? I'd like to hear that (in laymans terms). (no, I'm serious, it is a confusing point of the Big Bang theory)


Thats a very good question. I was half way through an explaination of the process when I came to the conclusion that I myself cannot explain how living orgainisms where formed via evolution and the big bang in laymans terms - and I can only just manage it in psychobable. I'll have to look up a lay explaination of how a cell is formed. The best I can do is that In the Begining all the energy and matter of the universe was concentrated in one place, this expanded out in the form of subatomic particles and hydrogen atoms, these condensed to form 'stars' which formed all the other elements, remaining material and materail freed by the 'death' of stars forms planets, how-we-jump-from-inorganic-elements-to-a-living-cell-I-don't-know (but one assumes that elements in close proximity condense to for nulicitides which replicate to from psedo-living 'organels' which intergrate to form living cells which make up 'primordial ooze', from there adaptation, mutation and natural selection to form all existing orgainisms.



As to where grasses came from, we've come remarkably close to creating viable life forms by taking what we assume primordial goo was like, and zapping it for significant periods of time with electricity. Sounds like anything from natural phenomena to an act of divinity, so take that as you will. It may not be where life came from in the first place.

...

Do you read scientific journals? Under labortory conditions we've been able to create viable living orgainisms from base matter since the last millenium. And don't double post.


You, my friend are obviously misinformed then. Hell is defined as an existance without God. If God is Life, and Love, then Hell is Death and Hate.

As for heaven, If angels lived on clouds, then we would see them.

Surely if God, the Unbegotten Cause, created the Universe and everything in it then God is death and hate. Also how come God says to love thy enemy and names wrath as one of the seven deadly sins but in the Revaltions to John God unleashes the 7 Bowls of His Wrath? And why did God create the world if he knows everything? If he knows that mankind will screw up and that the Devil (and later Judas) will betray him why make us suffer and found the new heaven and earth without hate and death after the End Times? Why not just create those who would have choose to enter Paradise with Him and saved himslef the agro? The only logical answer is that God is a Sadist and Hypocrite.


As for cheese - normal people but crisps and chocolate bars, I buy mild cheddar.

Erm, I'd like to say Sorry if I was ever misuderstood... I respect the beliefs of others. If they have thought things through, and not just been swayed by heavy media imput, political correctness favouring Science, and the education boards favouring evolutionism, then sure. But I believe that people should make up thier own minds.

To me, evolution is logical. But so is creationism. When people say I'm a fool, or ignorant by my favouring pure creationism, then those statements work in my favour as well. Sure, I dissagree with evolution. Yet they are choosing to ignore the pure creationism.

So to clear things up, what do I have against evolution?

Pure form: It seems improbable to me that suddenly, from two atoms colliding or not, a huge explosion happens, from which come gasses and rock.

It seems improbable to me that, a few million years ago, a group of single cell organisms (which just so happen to be there...) Decide they need another cell. Then, a few million years later, these two cell organisms suddenly grow another few cells. Then, eventually these cells acidentally become limbs, and organs, which somehow fit together perfectly. So what we have today, complex brains, and body functions, are the result of societies rejects.

Christian: God decides to create the universe. So he creates a huge explosion, which spills all the rocks etc. yadda yadda yadda, and the earth is here.
Now, instead of waving his hands, and simply saying 'Let there be a mass of dry land', 'let there be animals, and seeds planted.'etc. He decides to take the long run, and 'control' the evolution. He takes the senic route.
I'm not saying that God isn't able to use evolution, because God is, after all, all powerful. What I'm saying is, Why take the long route, when you can enjoy your creation at once? When you can say: I created each living creature seperate, and unique' rather than: 'I created many one cell creatures, letting them change under my supervision, so that ultimately, in time, they all become different.'

Both: I also don't like the idea of being a decendent of an ape... It's quite unsettling knowing that one of my distant relitives were a dirty ape...

Also, Charles Darwin, on his death bed, converted to christianity, and admitted that he was wrong. :)

Love.

Nag I agree with you.

Logically, I believe religion serves a purpose in the human psyche and its stability, and whether one holds to a religion or not, one should not ignore the possibility of divine entities. I think that would be illogical, and the illogic would be compounded by the fact that one who does that against one's personal feelings may color one's logic with upset and emotion from an unfulfilled need.
As to choosing a religion, I don't ask one to choose a religion. I ask one to not bring clearly religious assumptions into a logical argument unless it is with someone who shares those same assumptions. Otherwise, using them to make a point comes across as bad logic. To me, the logical courses of action is either to argue with the opponent's base assumptions first (which would require logical argument), to tailor one's arguments to be logical on the topic without bringing your unshared base assumptions into the argument (whether this is to temporarily suspend disbelief on a differing assumption or to simply not engage on that level), or to avoid the argument and choose somebody with the same base assumptions with which to argue or converse.

Philosophically, I ask if a divine entity might have instilled within us the capacity, by various chemical reactions and architectural predispositions, to appreciate divinity and strive toward it.

Logic is simply mathematics. One must go beyond the simple "if-then" and related formulas to find truth. Faith overcomes logic. I choose faith. I choose God. I choose Jesus as my Savior, as my intercessor between God and me.

For all I know, and for all I see that I "know more" than others, I understand the limits of my comprehension. Hence, even though I "see" the tiny vibrating strings of unnamed pieces of energy at the center of all that exists in this dimension that we can now perceive, I "know" that God is within and without all that is now (and I say now and then, because I am limited in my comprehension of time being a necessary part of any equation) and all that will ever be, or which ever has been.

Yes, thinking about it, I feel much better with having my faith than with having any "logic," which may contradict it.

And "Nag" noted, in part, "Surely if God, the Unbegotten Cause, created the Universe and everything in it then God is death and hate. Also how come God says to love thy enemy and names wrath as one of the seven deadly sins but in the Revaltions to John God unleashes the 7 Bowls of His Wrath? And why did God create the world if he knows everything? If he knows that mankind will screw up and that the Devil (and later Judas) will betray him why make us suffer and found the new heaven and earth without hate and death after the End Times? Why not just create those who would have choose to enter Paradise with Him and saved himslef the agro? The only logical answer is that God is a Sadist and Hypocrite."

As I noted, faith in God goes beyond simple human logic. I am not one to question God. May His grace and mercy be on all humans, even those who have no faith.

Likewise, I will not tempt Him nor will I tempt Satan.

My recommendation is to learn about what comprises sin. Choose to fight temptations to sin. Repent, and sin no more.

Thanks for explaining that to me. :)

Though to explain Judas, Judas was supposed to berey Jesus... otherwise the guards wouldn't come and arrest Jesus. This was, of course God's primary plan, to send Jesus to take our sins, and save us from Hell. Although the only way that is to happen is if we accept him... If we don't believe, and admit our sins, he can hardly 'steal' them from us, after all, theft is a sin.

Physical death is Gods creation. But eternal death is our choice.

16 For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him. 18 He who believes in him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. 19 And this is the judgment, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one who does evil hates the light, and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does what is true comes to the light, that it may be clearly seen that his deeds have been wrought in God. http://www.bibleontheweb.com/Bible.asp

:)

Okay, sorry to leave, but Dad wants on. Gotta let him have his euchre :P

Anyway, Peace.

Good for you. For my part, I believe your viewpoint is odd and perhaps somewhat silly; that faith is overrated; and that logic is pretty darned kickass. It's also a method of thought which, while sometimes poorly applied in my hands, is nevertheless the great communicator by which we can overcome cultural (if not personal) differences on a grand scale.
I also think there will always be people who cry foul and think I'm wrong, and that this reflects the variety of human nature, a variety I hold as close to sacred as I do anything.

So basically, I think your dislike for if-then statements over faith is pretty weird. My apologies if that offends you. I do think my viewpoint is more conducive to communication, though.


Pardon, this is surely based more on if/then statements than on faith, but my viewpoint on that is pretty set. Is there a line between divine inspiration and free will? Naara just stated, as far as I can tell, that Judas was divinely inspired to betray Jesus, God's only son. Does this mean he was not acting willfully?
I mean no offense, but I seem to recall (can't imagine what verse, I know not the bible) that Judas hanged himself. Was that in God's plan? Was that left up to Judas? Was all of this Judas's idea? Or have I watched too many movies?
What role does Lucifer play in the corrupting of others? Does God allow people to be tested by Lucifer? What role does he play in determining whether or not they give in to temptation? Or have I read too much Silver Surfer?

Good for you. For my part, I believe your viewpoint is odd and perhaps somewhat silly; that faith is overrated; and that logic is pretty darned kickass. It's also a method of thought which, while sometimes poorly applied in my hands, is nevertheless the great communicator by which we can overcome cultural (if not personal) differences on a grand scale.
I also think there will always be people who cry foul and think I'm wrong, and that this reflects the variety of human nature, a variety I hold as close to sacred as I do anything.

So basically, I think your dislike for if-then statements over faith is pretty weird. My apologies if that offends you. I do think my viewpoint is more conducive to communication, though.

That's nice. Nothing offends me. I can't understand how one could believe misapplied rules of logic are more conducive to communication. As I noted, logic is just math.

Also, I did not say I dislike if-then statements (and you have forgotten to mention the other rules of logic). I noted, however, that faith trumps logic. You have not reached the mental maturity to grasp that. Some people never do reach that point.

As for me, I must leave this little discussion to prepare to go to church. God be with you until we meet again. Peace.

It seems improbable to me that, a few million years ago, a group of single cell organisms (which just so happen to be there...) Decide they need another cell. Then, a few million years later, these two cell organisms suddenly grow another few cells. Then, eventually these cells acidentally become limbs, and organs, which somehow fit together perfectly. So what we have today, complex brains, and body functions, are the result of societies rejects.
This is, quite possibly, the most biased description of evolution that I have ever heard. First, we understand. Then, we judge.

Fare thee well, Jeff. Vaya con su dios.

Edit: Sorry for the double post earlier. I'm new here and didn't know where the Edit button was, if it existed. Which obviously it did. *blush*
Anyway, I know better now, and can reply to new posts in edits as well as... um, posts. The place moves awfully fast.

This is, quite possibly, the most biased description of evolution that I have ever heard. First, we understand. Then, we judge.

did u try 2 understand Christianity b4 u judged it? just a question... or did u just assume it was wrong?

Oh yeah and EBH well done on creating a thread that actually has ppl arguing on it...

That's it! I've had it. Almost every time I check the general forum there's something on evolution that says that christianity and evolution are mutually exclusive. THIS IS NOT TRUE!!!

Christianity and evolution are not mutually exclusive, and what's more, belief in both IS NOT UNUSUAL. On the contrary, as most people SHOULD KNOW, the ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, which is THE SINGLE BIGGEST CHRISTIAN DENOMINATION IN THE WORLD, making up OVER HALF OF THE 2 BILLION CHRISTIANS IN THE WORLD, OFFICIALLY ENDORSES THE EVOLUTION AND BIG-BANG THEORIES OF CREATION!!!

Now that I have that firmly out in the open, feel free to go ahead and discuss the topic.

Christianity claims that Christ came to get rid of sin and death, because they are abnormal. With God creating the world perfectly, death did not originally exist. Evolution states that death has always been around and is normal. Evolution cannot work without death. So whichever you believe in, it is impossible to believe in both.