CHURCH

[Guest Ray Park]

Uh, I was in kind of a bad mood when I wrote that. You're not a moron Darth Justin, you just need to take a closer look at things.

 

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

 

Eat me!

[Jedi Calypso]

MMMMmmm....

 

Dibs on the fish in RayPark's sig!

 

(oh, i hope i beat Porkins to it)

 

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

 

<font color = "gold">Say "hi" to Bango, my sidekick, he helps me bounty hunt.</font>

 

The Un-Council's Disgruntled Bounty Hunter

-Calypso

 

[This message has been edited by Jedi Calypso (edited July 05, 2000).]

 

[This message has been edited by Jedi Calypso (edited July 05, 2000).]

[Guest Ray Park]

This is to Darth Simpson.

You mentioned believing is something someone wrote 1000 years ago is wierd, and you might as well believe in Star Wars or Robert Lordan (personaly I think Robert Jordan is full of crap and his books are boring).

 

Have you read the Bible? If you haven't then why do you haves such set opinions on christianity?

 

The Bible is much more than jsut "something somebody wrote 1000 years ago". The Bible was written by over 40 different people over a period of time about that long.

Under such circumstances, it would be impossible for a normal book to have a strongly coherant and harmonious theme.

But the Bible's not a normal book.

If you read it you'll find that the theme of the Bible remains pure and flowing throught it's entirety (you'll also know what the hell you're talking about for once!), and that no single human, and really no group humans could have on their own written such a magnificent record of history, such an accurate prophesy of the future (the prophesies in it are really amazing, it messes with your head to read "something somebody wrote a thousand years ago" and see accurate, detailed predictions of what would happen in modern times), really you discover that the Bible is not like any other written work in it's completeness, profoundness, simplicity, complexity, it's wholly an unearthly creation.

 

Again you have to read it yourself to realize this.

 

I understand why it might seem weird to you, if you haven't read the Bible.

 

If you are an intelligent person, then you'll be aware that there is an extraterrestrial prescence surrounding us. If you are an intellegent person, then you make efforts to understand that prescence. If you are an intellegent person, you will be curious about the Bible simply for the fact that it has been around for so long and is so widely revered (by those who've read it of course, it's really only ridiculed by ignorant geeks that haven't read it), and if you're intelligent you'll realize that there is truth and there are lies, that it doesn't matter wheather something is "for me" or not, that reality will continue wheather it's for you or not.

 

I've always found athiesm a small minded way to look at things. It's such a narrow minded and self centered point of view. It's also incredibly illogical to think that life just randomly appeared out of nothing, instead of the complex and delicate universe we live in being created by a highly intellegent and powerful being.

 

Just because you can't see something doesn't mean it isn't there. "Why believe in something you can't see?" is the most feeble minded argument I have ever heard and I'm really getting tired of it.

 

Can you see air? Can you see China from where you are? (assuming you're not in China right now) Can you see your internal organs? Can you see water pressure? Oxygen? Can you see thoughts?

 

You can see the evidence of air, and water pressure etc. You can also see the eveidence of a higher power (unless you're really, and I mean REALLY, dumb).

 

I just have no regard for athiests. Agnostics I respect, because they're not blind and stupid, buit athiesm is a mental and spiritual dead end.

 

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

 

Yeah, no one created it, it all just kinda popped up when we weren't looking.

[Guest Weasel]

Well, this thread seems so long that no one will read anything on it anyways. I only reached the 5th page but thought I'd clear up some of the mathematical questions so here are some points:

 

1. Evolution on such a large scale directly goes against the second law of thermal dynamics which states that all things go from order to disorder - take a car for example buy it brand new let it sit and it does not become a better car it just becomes a pile of junk.

 

2. Someone mentioned the world used to be believed to be flat, in fact you can still mathematically prove that it is, but scientists tend to prefer a round world as it makes more intuitive sense. (the other option is an inverted world where the universe is within the earth but this is even more difficult to understand then the flat world)

 

3. A ray and a line are different lengths due to different levels of infinity (mainly between countable and absolute) you can study this in further depth but please note that almost all mathematicians who studied infinity at any great depth ended up in mental institutions.

 

You can double check these but my degree is in mathematics and the above issues are discussed in great depth if you manage to reach a forth year level of mathematics in any university.

 

4. Einsteins theory is now in question as well as there is new evidence that the universe is rectangular not spherical.

 

5. The big bang theory is largely thought to be impossible as there does not seem to be enough energy in the universe to support such a theory.

 

---------Religious---------

I will not put my current belief as it would rather force someone to prebias me. I am open to opinions though. I am not an atheist and for those who are I would suggest C.S. Lewis as a good philosopher to read (not the chronicles of Narnia but his other books) He was an atheist who became a Christian through logic and self-reflection - no bible stories or door to door witnesses. One other religion I have trouble having any belief in is that of bhuda and confucionism as both of these were based on very wise men who actually had no wish to be worshipped.

 

Evolution though plausible has some basic problems for my logical system - where are the half ape half man creatures now or anything for that matter. If evolution was a constant process my logic would suggest that somewhere in the world I would be able to find a being that was in mid-process. Sure you may say evolution takes billions of years but here we are in one of those billions of year but nothing drastic is happening - just the occasional whale who thinks he has legs and jumps up on a beach only to find he can't get back to the water.

 

As for Noah well maybe he didn't exist and yes people use myths to explain things they don't understand but wouldn't the fact that there are at least four major "myths" indicating a flood in that region be a good indication that hey there was a flood.

 

If you are a Christian there should be no trouble with dinosaurs as there is no mention of whether there was a world before ours or not - personally I find it hard to believe that if God exists and is infinite that he would just sit around twiddling his thumbs waiting for a moment to create the world. Oh yeah, and those who argue profusely for creation might just realize that the Bible only has one chapter dedicated to it - was that an oversight - not if you believe it was the word of God, Christians were meant to be doing the work of God not beating their heads trying to find proof for creation.

 

For those who are believers in science you may wish to study history as almost all science was originally based in the church (see Galileo, Copernicus, Newton ((he was a little nuts though))) but separated due to the unfortuante traditionalism of the church who rejected Copernicus because of his eliptical solar system rather then spherical and galileo because they refused to believe that geocentricity was false.

 

-- there you are just some thoughts, reply as you wish.

 

 

[Guest Weasel]

To: wizzywig

Just sort of skimmed through your posts so you might have this already.

 

- Take a look at the first landing on the moon, they built huge pads on the landing module because due to the age of the universe there would have been something like 15 feet of dust (you'll have to find the actual stat) when landing though they were shocked to find only a few inches supporting a young universe viewpoint.

- also if you are doing any work on evolution it may be interesting to note that it along with dating methods etc. are based on uniformitarianism which in turn actually promote dismissal of evolution, carbon 14 dating, radioactive dating, etc.

[Guest Kurgan]

Technically there are at least two chapters in today's Bible that deal with creation, Genesis 1, and Genesis 2.

 

Of course the second mainly deals with the creation of living things, and 1 deals with everything (living, and the cosmos).

 

Yes, the Biblical creation story literally says that the world (earth, our Sun, our moon, and "the stars" that we see) was created in about a week, out of "water" and "light."

 

Also, if you take the Biblical stories of creation absolutely literally, you get two creations (one in each chapter). That the earth (w/ Sun, moon, and stars) was created in six literal, 24 hour days (how does one measure time with no celestial bodies or rotation of the earth) raises many scientific problems.

 

I think that one either has to accept that fact that we were dealing with a pre-scientific society writing what they felt to be the truth based on what they knew (that still does not diminish the point, which is that they had faith in their God), or try to interpret it symbolically.

 

Symbolically, we see God's perfect hand, and the image of man/God (a builder of great things), a fall from grace (man's failure to live up to God's perfect standards), and a well ordered universe out of chaos (and way to explain the origin of the seven day week, and why we rest on the seventh day).

 

So, technically, even taking that literally, there could have been other stuff before that, and it doesn't say anything about other planets, etc.

 

Most scientists don't doubt that evolution happens, they just disagree about HOW it happens, and maybe WHY it happens. Darwin's theories are not perfect, and many have disputed and revised his theories (on natural selection for example) over the years since his writings were published.

 

As to a round earth, most people believe in a spherical globe, except maybe a few like the Flat Earth Society. As to the shape of the universe I don't know. I just assumed it had no shape, as it is all we know (unless there are other universes, then I figured they'd be superimposed on top of one another).

 

I have no trouble believing that the universe as we know it was created at one point in time, and that a deity was responsible. However, dismissing all scientific theories of evolution (notice I said theories), and taking the Biblical account hyper-literally, I think is a mistake.

 

It does not diminish God's power, in my perception, if God used natural processes and created the universe over billions of years. Sure he could have just zapped it all into existence, instantly even, but then why fool us by leaving fake clues everywhere? Is he just playing games with our scientists? I think not (I hope not!).

 

Kurgan

[Guest Matt_Skywalker]

HAY im a christian too

 

im glad to see that someone on the internet believes in the truly on and only JOBA!

 

 

 

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

SkYwAlKeR

[Guest Jedi Kanigget]

Originally posted by Kurgan:

Sure he could have just zapped it all into existence, instantly even, but then why fool us by leaving fake clues everywhere? Is he just playing games with our scientists? I think not (I hope not!).

 

Kurgan

 

I haven't posted on this topic in awhile, and I don't intend on posting much, if any, more. Here's my point: Kurgan obviously, from his post, believes that the earth was not created in the literal six days. I do.

 

"Then God said, 'Let the earth sprout vegitation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit after their kind'...and it was so...And there as evening and there was morining, the third day." Genesis 1:11-13

 

and

 

"Then God said, 'Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the night and the day'...And God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light to the earth...And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day" Genesis 1: 14, 17, 19.

 

Take a look. Plants were created the thrid day, light (IE sunlight) was created the fourth day. If creation did happen as Kurgan believes it did, evolving over millions of years, don't you think the plants would have died? If God was keeping them alive until the next "day", what's the point? Why not just create the sun and get it over with?

 

I was going to comment on the quote I have from Kurgan's post, but i have to go. I'll finish later.

 

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

 

Darth Wart's Strategy Guide in a friendly, easy to use form!(Sorry, that was bad.)

http://JediPowerBattlesGuide.homestead.com/JPB.html

[Guest Darth Zero]

Can anyone else see the error in this, If your God was all knowing wouldn't he have realised that the majority of plants rely on photosynthesis(sorry if its mispelled)and so logically making the "light" after the "plants" causes a major flaw. Mind you, there's bound to be some error considering the bible was written about 500yrs after the birth of your Jesus and was a way of controlling the people baring in mind it started of as a sex cult!! But we'll all disregard that shall we!!!!!

Sorry to rant but a few among you, not everyone a must add, seem to have been born into Christianity and have just accepted it for what you have been told in church and at home.

Again Sorry to rant

 

 

Darth Zero

 

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

"now youg Skywalker...... you shall die!"

[Guest wizzywig]

Weasel--

 

(and Jedi Kanigget, for that matter)

 

To: wizzywig

Just sort of skimmed through your posts so you might have this already.

- Take a look at the first landing on the moon, etc....

 

I have no problem with anyone who believes in six-day creationism. I affirm you and applaud you both for being so upfront with your views on this forum.

 

Personally, I do not believe the universe can only be 6,000 to 10,000 years old, or else we would only be able to see stars within a 6,000 to 10,000 LY radius of the Earth. Clearly, we can see stars that are hundreds of thousands and millions of LY away, which indicates to me a very old universe.

 

Still, I am convinced that the universe is the artifact of an intelligent Creator, and I believe that the moment of the Big Bang is the event described when the Bible says, "In the beginning, God created..."

 

I do not consider the "how" of creation as important as the "who" and the "why."

 

--wiz

 

 

[Guest wizzywig]

Darth Zero--

 

Mind you, there's bound to be some error considering the bible was written about 500yrs after the birth of your Jesus and was a way of controlling the people baring in mind it started of as a sex cult!! But we'll all disregard that shall we!!!!!

 

This is total nonsense. You should check your facts before posting anything that is so easily refuted.

 

The entire Old Testament has been dated with utter reliability as existing 300 years before Christ, because that's when the Septuagint translation (from Hebrew to Greek) was made. Secular historians date parts of the O.T., such as Job, to at least 2,000 B.C. Secular historians reliably date the entire New Testament as being complete well before 150 AD. The idea that the entire Bible was written in 500 AD to justify a "sex cult" is simply psychotic (that is, out of touch with reality).

 

--wiz

 

 

 

[Guest Jedi Kanigget]

Originally posted by wizzywig:

Personally, I do not believe the universe can only be 6,000 to 10,000 years old, or else we would only be able to see stars within a 6,000 to 10,000 LY radius of the Earth. Clearly, we can see stars that are hundreds of thousands and millions of LY away, which indicates to me a very old universe.

 

 

--wiz

 

 

 

Just a side note, scientists recently were able to accelerate light particles to three times faster than the speed of light (I think it was three times. Doesn't matter, the light particles went faster than light normally travels). If scientists can do this, why can't God? Take a look in those passages I put up in the last post. God put light there, why let it take millions of years to get here when He could just do it in an instant?

 

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

 

Darth Wart's Strategy Guide in a friendly, easy to use form!(Sorry, that was bad.)

http://JediPowerBattlesGuide.homestead.com/JPB.html

[Jedi Calypso]

You tell him Wizz!

[Guest Conor]

Nobody is saying God couldn't make a young Universe appear like an old one. I think it is probably sacreligious to consider God a prankster that plays with our minds for no reason though.

 

As for use of the word day...I read something not to long ago how the word used for day in Genesis and a number of other parts of the Bible is used to mean any period of time. When we look at creation, we are looking at both a literal and metaphoric account of the real creation.

 

The Bible was written for the ancient Hebrews just as much as for us, and He knew that if He got Moses to write complex physics equations and laws as well as a modern account of creation the Isrealites would certainly have tossed him in the desert alone or imprisoned him for a madman.

 

The Bible carries the truth about creation and God, but in a way that peoples of any time can understand.

 

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

"To believe anything at all is to believe it true. To believe something true is to believe that whatever is incompatible with it must be false. And to believe somebody else's belief false is implicitly intolerant. Therefore, if intolerance is an evil, belief itself-in anything-is an evil. So the only way we can get rid of intolerance is to prohibit belief. Which, of course, would be very intolerant indeed."

-Ted Byfield

[Guest Kurgan]

This is the order of creation:

 

Genesis Chapter 1 (RSV):

 

1:3-5 "And God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day."

 

So we have "light" and day and night, but no mention of a Sun.

 

How about this, rather than me quoting the entire first two chapters of Genesis, grab a Bible (or see one online <a href="http://www.hti.umich.edu/relig/">from this site</a> just don't use a children's bible like the "Good News" version).

 

 

Genesis 1:

 

Day one:

1) Light

2) Day and Night

 

Day two:

1) Firmament between waters of "Heaven" and waters beneath (sounds like the sky vs. the ocean)

 

Day three:

1) Dry land "Earth"

2) vegetation: seed plants, fruit trees

 

Day Four:

1) Sun, Moon, Stars in the "heavens" (sky)

 

Day Five:

1) water creatures (including sea monsters), winged birds

 

Day Six:

1) land animals (including cattle and creeping things)

2) Humans (male and female)

 

Genesis 2:

 

Day Seven:

God finishes His work and rests

1) Sabbath created (Seventh Day blessed and made holy)

 

Now Genesis 2 recaps what we heard before, but in a different manner. This chapter makes a big deal about referring to "the dust of the ground" being the stuff that things are made from.

 

The earth is there, but the plants have not sprouted yet, because of lack of rain.

 

1) God creates Man (after the earth, but before plants)

 

2) God creates Eden with its bodies of flowing water

 

3) God creates the animals (land animals and birds) and brings them to Man to name them.

 

4) God creates Woman, from a piece of the Man's body.

 

And there you have the two stories of creation, within one book. Many critical scholars put forth the theory that the two stories were both so well used that they couldn't decide which was better, so both were included, as a sort of compromise.

 

Also, each story has a different type of message.

 

The point of Genesis 1 seems to be that "In the beginning, God created the world and everything in it, and it was good, and he even created humans in his image meaning we were good too." It shows humans dominance (given by God) over the rest of creation on the earth.

 

Genesis 2 gives an explanation why there is a seven day week and why people rest on the Sabbath (the seventh day). It also shows man's possible dominance over woman (depends on who you ask of course). ; ) It finally reemphasizes the God-given dominance of humans over the rest of creation on the earth.

 

"Dominance" has a somewhat negative connotation for many people. I think it can be argued that this is merely stewardship. That is, God places responsibility for taking care of something in the hands of another. It is not a bad thing, but a thing of responsibility. Humans are put in charge of the earth, to use it the best way they can, but it is originally a gift from God, and uncorrupted.

 

Later on, we see Mankind's disobedience, and the serpent's trickery lead to things startnig to become corrupted.

 

Kurgan

 

[Guest 84Elan]

Kurgan I find your time line interesting in your last post the only problem I have with it is where are the Dinasours in this time line? There is substantial proof of their existance and science has made the point that man did not live in the time of the dinasours so the days as we know them now could not be the same incurment of time as that of the bible. I realize that this has most certainly been brought up aready and I apologize for being lazy nad not reading everyones post but 12 pages.

 

I went to Christian Church school for 8 of my 12 years of lowwer education. I have been a student of the bible for some time yet I must say that I am not completely sold on the idea of one all mighty god contolling everything. For as much control and as perfect the Lord is he/she seems to let a lot of stuff fall out of his/hers control. Man and woman's disobeying him/her, the creation of the devil from one of his fallen ranks, in the OT the Lord seemed to kill and bring pleage to punish ie the great flood at will, passing judgment on his children and dispencing justice as he/she sees fit.

 

Now he/she is a kinder gentler omnipitant machince gun hand. And all of us his children should follow his example.

 

It just does not sit right with me.

[Jedi Calypso]

I too have thought about the point you brought up about where the dinosaurs fit in. I mean, I am a Christian, and i believe whole heartedly in GOD and the Bible and everything it teaches, and i dont mean to sound like the antithesis of that, but, my 6-year old nephew is nuts about dinosaurs, and the other week after Sunday school he asked me the same question. it seemed like an innocent enough question at the time, but its plauged me for awhile now.

 

Hey, Wizz,you're good with these things, you have an answer to where the dinosaurs fit in?

 

Thanx, GOD bless,

-Calypso

 

P.S.- Hey Wizz, hows that book coming along?

 

[Guest wizzywig]

Jedi Kanigget--

 

Just a side note, scientists recently were able to accelerate light particles to three times faster than the speed of light (I think it was three times. Doesn't matter, the light particles went faster than light normally travels). If scientists can do this, why can't God? Take a look in those passages I put up in the last post. God put light there, why let it take millions of years to get here when He could just do it in an instant?

 

My brother mentioned he had seen the story you refer to on CBS news. I tried to track it down and have been unable. Do you have a source I could go to? I'm intrigued because it sounds so bogus (light traveling 3X the speed of light? whoa! TV news has a poor track record in getting science stories right, IMO, so I'm skeptical).

 

I'd like to know more, if you could point me in the right direction.

 

--wiz

 

 

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

 

 

[Guest wizzywig]

I agree with Conor, btw, that the idea of God creating a young universe that appears old would make God out to be a prankster, if not a fibber. In fact, I agree with his entire post.

 

Calypso--

 

I'm on the last chapter of the book (yay!). That's one reason I've been away from this forum so much lately.

 

Thanks for asking.

 

Btw, I accept the picture of the Mesozoic age that is embraced by mainstream science. I believe the universe appears old because it is old.

 

I notice my new sig didn't come up in my last post. We'll see what happens this time...

 

--wiz

 

 

 

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

We cannot live for ourselves alone. Our lives are connected by a thousand invisible threads, and along these sympathetic fibers, our actions run as causes and return to us as results.

--Herman Melville

[Guest Saesee Tom]

My goodness, what a lot of replies!

[Guest Kurgan]

If you want to fit the Dinosaurs into the literal body of creation, then you could fit them with the sea monsters, the land animals and the flying creatures. They're just more animals.

 

Of course the trouble starts when you begin taking Genesis hyper-literally and such.

 

Groups like the Institute for Creation Research (who take the Genesis stories hyper-literally) put forth many theories, including ones such as that the Dinosaurs were wiped out in the flood, or they survived but were later hunted to extinction later on (or perhaps they, like the "Sons of God" disobeyed God and were destroyed?).

 

However the problem lies in that most of the fossil record does not fit into a "single flood extinction" happening less than 6,000 years ago (or even 10,000 years ago). Also, how would one reconcile Dinosaurs and humans living together? It doesn't make ecological sense.

 

I think if we pay attention to modern science, the Dinosaurs make perfect sense.

 

If you read Genesis, you are faced with a few possible conclusions:

 

1) God is a prankster that put in fake Dinosaur fossils to fool us into thinking the world was older than it really is.

 

2) Dinosaurs lived more or less as science tells us and the writers of Genesis simply didn't know about them.

 

Just because Dinosaurs aren't mentioned in Genesis doesn't mean they never existed, and it doesn't mean that Genesis is invalid or has no meaning. It just means that it wasn't that important enough to God to tell us that, or else the writers just (honestly) coulnd't imagine Dinosaurs and so didn't write about them.

 

Kurgan

[Guest Ben_Kenobi]

You see that is my whole problem with the bible it is nothing more than a story told by men for man. It leaves so many things out due to the fact that they where not known to man at the time. The bible is a book thatis a blueprint for man to live his life. Don't kill, don't steel,treat others as you would have them treat you and so on.

 

Every religion has a God, some more than one but they have had them due to the fact that it is the only thing that can not be proven to be real or not. The roll of a God is also used to rule people by the fear and that if they do not do as a God commands they will be punished forever in a type of Hell. What better way to make a God very powerful than to make him responsible for the creation of everything you see. The bible was not ment to be used as a history book of the origin of the world it was ment to keep man from desending into the relm of hedenisum.

 

Even today the bible can not be proved or disproved by science or anyone it is a matter of faith. Yet it still instills the moral value and code for any civilized society. The bible is a way of life not a explination for it.

 

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

The force will be with you ...always

[Guest wizzywig]

We don't have to take Genesis literally to believe it to be true. I agree with Conor's description of the Genesis creation story. Genesis 1 is a prescientific version (or vision) delivered to prescientific people but accurate in outline even today.

 

In Art and Physics, Leonard Shlain writes that the Big Bang, according to the physicists' cosmological model, was "a hyper-expanding fireball containing light, space, time, energy, and matter. [The physicists'] simulation bears an uncanny similarity to the biblical story of Genesis. The creation of light was God's first act. Then He divided night from day (time). Then He separated the firmament from the waters and land (space). He then made the 'things' in the world (matter) and finally set them in motion (energy). The computer-generated beginnings of the universe mirror the Bible's cosmology."

 

--wiz

 

 

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

We cannot live for ourselves alone. Our lives are connected by a thousand invisible threads, and along these sympathetic fibers, our actions run as causes and return to us as results.

--Herman Melville

 

[This message has been edited by wizzywig (edited July 15, 2000).]