Tyrion Posted May 9, 2004 Author Share Posted May 9, 2004 Originally posted by CapNColostomy I thought that's what we were doing here. Discussing things. But now you're telling me I gotta leave? Maybe you need to haul ass. I never said I "don't like it" here. Or that anyone is "forcing" me to read this thread. In fact, I don't even know what brings that up. Are you angry at someone or something? And on what authority do you tell me to leave? If you want to discuss things here, then I apologize. I don't think however, saying: Wow. I never thought of that before. You've convinced me. I no longer believe in God. Instead, I'll worship the trees and the wind, listen to Godsmack, and be totally gay. Way to completely tear the myth that is creation down, Mr. Darwin. is really participating. From my point of view, it looked like you're angry at me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapNColostomy Posted May 9, 2004 Share Posted May 9, 2004 Originally posted by Tyrion If you want to discuss things here, then I apologize. I don't think however, saying: is really participating. From my point of view, it looked like you're angry at me. Appology accepted. And point taken. Perhaps a little more tact could've been execised in my original post. So allow me to appologize as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinWalker Posted May 9, 2004 Share Posted May 9, 2004 MODERATOR COMMENT: At first I was getting a little irked at the tone you two were taking and trying to decide whether to edit or delete anything, but I see you guys worked it out. Let's keep a couple of things in mind, everyone.... no flames, no insults. Discussion can be heated and polar without being ad hominem. Also, try not to quote more text than you write... not a firm rule, but one that is a good norm to follow if just to keep the threads neat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CapNColostomy Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 Something else I'd like to add. It's said that he used the sabbath or seventh day to rest. It doesn't say he used it to "regain his strength" or collect health and power ups. Maybe he just wanted a day where he had nothing at all to do? A blow-off day of sorts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Jones Posted May 10, 2004 Share Posted May 10, 2004 who would deny "him" that..? anyways.. i think there could be some good explanation why god, if existing, could not do it within a *poof*. time is one of the basic components in the universe as we know it. it would be only logical if time is needed to "create" it. other theories support this thought too.. how long this process lasts is another thing. fact is, we can say, because of our experiences and our actual state of knowledge, how long it can last or could have lasted. regardless of how long "creation" lasted, maybe the "six days of work, one day 'let it hang, bro'" story just wants to say "hey, do it like this and you can achieve anything!" well.. we mostly did it like this, and err.. here we are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 surely, before he created the sun there weren't any days? Still, i guess he would want to sit back and admire his creation. And it is a "him", because it says in the bible that he created man in "his" image. And we are taking the bible to be the literal, unaltered truth. Still no answer about whythe bible says the moon is a source of light? What i don't get though is why we need to rest too! Just cos god had a rest on the seventh day, that is no reason why man shouldn't do any work on the seventh day. That logic doesn't follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Jones Posted May 11, 2004 Share Posted May 11, 2004 Originally posted by toms surely, before he created the sun there weren't any days? one day is the time the earth needs to rotate 360°. so the sun is no very much involved here. also this certain interval of time (ca. 24 hours) exists without the earth needing 24 hours to rotate 360°. and surely the sun was there before any planet of our solar system was. What i don't get though is why we need to rest too! Just cos god had a rest on the seventh day, that is no reason why man shouldn't do any work on the seventh day. That logic doesn't follow. i have no problem with working on the seventh day. from a certain point of view, cooking a meal is already work. i usually cook meals every day of the week. so from that point of view i work every day. ok it's not the work i earn my money with, but its work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted May 16, 2004 Share Posted May 16, 2004 One thing that I am really, gobsmackingly tired of is Christians (and Muslims, and Hindus, and [blank]) complaining how they're being discriminated against. Take a shallow look at the history of humanity, and if you still want to discuss discrimination, let's talk about the Middle Ages/Taleban/Shatila/Kashmir/whatever. As for this whole six-day creation thingy, well, you've got two different versions in Gen1. And if you look at them from the POV of an anthropologist/historian, you'll notice that they are written at two different times by two different people in two radically different environments and cultures. Also, what we know as OT only came into being during the 1st cent. AD. Before that a plethora of different stories and myths existed within the Jewish faith. But because Christianity had the Book, and because of the exile from Palestine, the Jewish Diaspora needed a Book too; hence the need to establish a canon. But that involved cutting out a lot and probably editing a whole lot more. So what we know as OT really is a patchwork of different myths and legends from the tribes of Palestine/Saudi Arabia, chosen by a bunch of (very fallible) priests (who were very suceptible to the all-too-human desire to tweak the story to their own shortterm political advantage). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurgan Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 Originally posted by toms there's the whole mel gibson quote about his wife being a much better person than him, but she is going to hell because she is the wrong sort of christian. sigh. Don't get that sort of thing at all. Gibson explained his belief that he is simply accepting a teaching "from the chair." Meaning, a Pope 40+ years ago said it and that's how he interprets it (ie: non Catholics don't go to heaven). However he (Gibson) contradicted himself in public earlier when he agreed with Dianne Sawyer that Muslims, Jews, everyone can get to heaven. Though the quote with his wife makes me think he doesn't personally believe it, but he "submits to the authority" because he trusts that the Pope is right. Where most Catholics would disagree with Gibson's minority sect is that since then, this teaching has been interpreted differently by subsequent popes including the current one, so really it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. In Gibson's sect the "real" Catholic church has been outside Rome for the last 40 years. We haven't had a real Pope since Pius XII (1960's). My question for them would be who do they think the real Pope is, and why isn't he doing anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toms Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 it seems strange that the bible has become this "untouchable" tome that is the "undisputed word of god". It appears that it wasn't always this way, and it might even have not been its intended purpose. It used to be debated and interpreted, and it seems to me it might even have been intended to be a "compilation of thoughts and knowledge" to be passed down and added to, rather than an inviolate rulebook. At some point the church seems to have picked one of these interpretations and decided that that is the correct one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted May 26, 2004 Share Posted May 26, 2004 And you can almost put a date on it: AD 400, where Christianity usurped power in Rome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RpTheHotrod Posted June 13, 2004 Share Posted June 13, 2004 Didnt read through it all...but just FYI.....to whoever said He can't control time...according to the scriptures, he pro-longed a day during a battle...I believe with Gideon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dbl90 Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 I see absolutely no point in debating this. In terms of religion there is no right or wrong. Obviously some people will take this thread as correct, and other will disagree or even regard it as blasphemous. It all boils down to religion, and this is one of people's core religous and personal beliefs...it isn't going to be changed by some thread on the internet. Everyone interprets scripture differantly, and between christians, other christians, and jews the old testament can be interpreted in totaly differant ways. And who is to say either of those religions are correct? There are plenty of other religions out there. Plenty, from atheism to zoroastrianism they all have differant beliefs. ...nothing can be proven. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET Warrior Posted June 19, 2004 Share Posted June 19, 2004 In the end there really isn't a point to debating anything on this forum if you look at things your way. Very few of us here will ever have our opinions swayed by the arguments on the other side, but what we CAN do is refine our arguments, weed out the useless drivel that we sometimes spout, and learn more about our OWN beliefs. And besides, everyone knows that the people wasting their time in church donate to charity all the time. Even if all they do is give money at collection time. NOTE: I do not care if you are religious or not, I have no personal vendetta against religion, and I do not believe I've taken part in this thread, and typically steer clear of religious debate. That being said, if an Atheist HAS taken it upon themselves to try and get christians to see things the way that they do, then those people who are donating money to the collection plate are, in their minds, wasting that money that could be sent to starving children in third world countries, but instead is being used to help perpetuate the church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShadowTemplar Posted June 24, 2004 Share Posted June 24, 2004 Originally posted by ET Warrior That being said, if an Atheist HAS taken it upon themselves to try and get christians to see things the way that they do, then those people who are donating money to the collection plate are, in their minds, wasting that money that could be sent to starving children in third world countries, but instead is being used to help perpetuate the church. "ET makes a great point, as he so frequently does" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.