Support NeoGAF

[ghst]

the fact stands that there is more resemblance between a frog and a monkey than between monkey and man.

the fact stands that there is more resemblance between a frog and a monkey than between monkey and man.

the fact stands that there is more resemblance between a frog and a monkey than between monkey and man.

THE FACT STANDS

 

[Gorgon]

Very good question. I agree, it is definitely a complicated matter. I don't personally think it should be relegated to what "point" it becomes murder, because that's an impossible subject to come to resolution with. In all honesty, the "point" at which you're killing a human being doesn't exist, because without that direct intervention, that fetus was going to become a human being. Regardless of what it could have been classified as at that point.

As to the subject of rape and incest, that is also a complicated matter. What I'm saying is that it's not so easy to say that in every single situation abortion should be prohibited. It's also not as simple as saying that in any case of rape or incest that abortion would be fine. It doesn't automatically justify an abortion. In all honesty, in those situations would an adoption be a better alternative to an abortion? Very possibly.

I don't know where exactly to "draw the line" when it comes to rape and incest. But I certainly can't judge those that choose it in a situation such as that.

Thank you for your answer. It is a honest one.

However, my perception of it is that it really throws the whole argument of abortion as "killing babies" out of the window. It basically undermines the whole church argument.

Not an easy topic, no.

And how in the world the idea of the Earth being the center of the universe is worse than the idea of the Sun being the center of the universe??? Are you crazy?? If you must put a center of the universe anywhere, obviously it is the Earth, which is thousands of times more important than the Sun. The Sun is just 1 from an infinite number of stars, there is nothing relevant or especial about the Sun, except the fact that the Earth circles around it (or you could say the Sun circles the Earth, both are equally valid, just changing a point of reference). The Earth, is a planet full of life that homes the most intelligent beings of the universe, that is a fact, thus, the Earth is FAR more important than the Sun

The universe has no center. Therefore the earth can't be it's center. And Galileo proved that the earth orbited around the sun, not that the sun was the center of the universe.

Galileus didn't do the 3rd step, because at the time he couldn't, it was impossible for him. So he said that even though he couldn't prove it, what he said was science. Result: EVERYTHING Galileus said was wrong, and none of his theories are valid today.

He did prove his theory. In fact, most of them are correct. For example, he wrote the thory of the basic principle of relativity, which formed the basic framework for Newton's laws of motion and was later incorporated into the special theory of relativity of Einstein.

Stop saying shit you don't know or understand.

 

[DUFFMCWALIN]

Checking in. I've fallen out in the last few years but I really want to start building a stronger connection with God again. There is some great discussions in here, especially reading threenote's and viakado's post who I don't think are Christian (correct me if I'm wrong) but have a lot of information and are level headed.

Some of you don't understand who this thread is for and why it exists. If there was decent moderating on the OT side this thread wouldn't be the way it is now. I've never understood why people on GAF go out of their way to harass and annoy people that believe in a religion. Its immature and makes you look like a condescending prick. If you don't like the thread then leave, not stay and post some vomit that is just basically trolling and that would get you banned anywhere but here. I thought liberal atheists were supposed to believe in equal freedom for all, but you always come into religion threads and shit them up for the rest of us??


Also there hasn't been one mod post in this thread. Hell they probably haven't even looked at it.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

dp

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

More correct is not a very intelligent phrase. The church was correct, Galileo was wrong, end of story. If you want to discuss ancient laws, then it is a whole other subject.

Ugh. This is why so many laugh at those who claim to be Christians.

 

[Sh1ner]

The origin of man is also something completely unproven. We may share 99% of our DNA with a Gorilla (or chimpanzee, choose your favorite monkey), but the fact stands that there is more resemblance between a frog and a monkey than between monkey and man. We are a whole universe superior to monkeys. You can pick any monkey you want, train it, try to instruct him, but he would get stuck to the knowledge of a 3 year old boy. And still, there's that damn missing link that can't be found. It is really hard for me to accept that man evolves from a monkey, because of how radically different we are from them. No 3rd step, hence, it's only a theory.

If I had to bold any of it, I would have to bold all of your post.

Are you aware gorillas, orangutans have been taught sign language? They can communicate how they feel, if they want to talk, if they are going to sleep and such? That is clearly smarter than a 3 year old child.
Btw a quick youtube search:
Chimps can read and write too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=266FV--FmGo&feature=fvwrel
I know the video only shows reading.

The rest of your post is so nuts I ain't even going there.

 

[Angry Fork]

Checking in. I've fallen out in the last few years but I really want to start building a stronger connection with God again. There is some great discussions in here, especially reading threenote's and viakado's post who I don't think are Christian (correct me if I'm wrong) but have a lot of information and are level headed.

Some of you don't understand who this thread is for and why it exists. If there was decent moderating on the OT side this thread wouldn't be the way it is now. I've never understood why people on GAF go out of their way to harass and annoy people that believe in a religion. Its immature and makes you look like a condescending prick. If you don't like the thread then leave, not stay and post some vomit that is just basically trolling and that would get you banned anywhere but here. I thought liberal atheists were supposed to believe in equal freedom for all, but you always come into religion threads and shit them up for the rest of us??


Also there hasn't been one mod post in this thread. Hell they probably haven't even looked at it.

People like to shit on religion because it promotes ignorance and apathy. It hinders human potential and provides an easy excuse to individuals unable to accept truth, common sense and their own fallibility.

Although people believing in God/religion on their own time is fine (and I don't care if they do), it's worth noting a substantial amount of people don't just do it on their own time. They push it on everyone else and it eventually seeps into television, film, culture, etc. and most importantly our education and law/judicial system.

This thread is like icing on the cake. America and the world in general have an overwhelming majority belief in religion/God, so to act like religious people need some kind of safe haven from ridicule and so on is ridiculous. Athiests have a large stock on the internet because the internet is one of the few places they can voice themselves without being cast out of their community and/or family or whatever and looked at differently. This doesn't happen in big cities but i'm sure it does in the midwest and small towns. If you announce you're an athiest to your family they all look at you like ooh hmm we have to save him/her etc. how could you think that and so on, but if you announce you're christian it's just a normal everyday thing. Logical, reasonable people see enough lunatic garbage on the TV and in real life enough as it is, they don't want to see it on the forum they go on as well.

I'd like to note this doesn't mean I think we should ban religion from the internet or forums or whatever, I don't think we should only because debating them is so much fun, but I was just explaining why people are hostile and go into topics with pitchforks.

 

[KtSlime]

A lot of these are overgeneralizations, stereotypes, or just plain untrue. I see where you're coming from, but I would like to respond to these.

1. Personally, I think "creationism" is a pretty faulty science. I don't believe we'll be able to "prove" the existence if God. Doing so misses the point. I'm open to schools teaching different views, but not in teaching creationism as it stands right now.

2. I don't call evolution a lie. I understand that it's a theory, and an incomplete one that doesn't fully explain the existence of life. I'm open to the possibility that God works through evolution. In no way does the theory of evolution refute the existence of God.

3. What 2000 year old cosmological understanding are you referring to?

4. I am Christian, and strongly disagree with those who persecute homosexuals. But I also strongly believe in God's law of chastity, which prohibits sexual relations excelt between a married man and woman. I don't fully understand why that is, but I do believe it's from God. I harbor no ill feelings towards homosexuals, and I do not believe they are sinners because of their sexual attractions. But I also believe the law of chastity is real.

5. I personally believe that in cases of rape, incest, and times when the mother's and child's life are at a large risk, that abortion is a viable option. In those situations it's up to the woman, and I do not think it would be wrong if they chose an abortion. In any other situation, I believe that it is a terrible, terrible thing.

7. Untrue. My church, for instance, has a huge humanitarian program that assits third world countries and areas struck by disasters. Providing aid to our fellow humans is a huge part if being a Christian, and we don't "force" our beliefs on anybody in order to give them aid. Honestly, this point shows a huge misunderstanding of religion in general.

9. I don't believe that at all. I don't personally know any Christians that do.

10. What evidence do you have to back that up? The Christians I know use love and compassion to raise their children. You're taking a few fringe examples and using them to overgeneralize all of Christianity.

11. People are always killing. And in the name of a lot of things. They'll find a reason to kill, no matter what. It doesn't mean that reason is true, or that they are an example fir that entire group.

12. Again, what evidence do you have to lay this claim on all of Christianity?

I would be willing to hear your responses to these.

They were purposely broad to cover many different "Christians". I think mostly your and my ideas are similar - I however don't think that there is a god doling out laws and judgements with a prescribed morality, and I don't know to what extent you believe there to be. I think chastity is a noble act, to me it says that a person wants to save certain actions, of the sexual variety, for meaningful relationships and encounters - I see nothing wrong with this, however I think it is something decided by the individual, not a decree from God. As for homosexuality, it is cool that you think people should be allowed be - but how do you reconcile the general stance, one that seems to be affecting US policy, and what do you believe God's conditions for forgiveness of homosexuality is? Does s/he have to repent for their sexual transgressions, state that they were wrong for loving who they loved?

I have nothing against people that take a modern, very liberal, approach to the Bible, but to do this you have to disregard large segments of the text. At what point comes the point where you no longer consider yourself Christian? Why identify yourself as one, when there are people that DO follow all of the points I listed and also call themselves Christian. I think Christian is TOO broad a term, and it allows people with a completely messed up view of reality to go around unnoticed. I could answer all those points with possibly what you might consider to be fringe examples, I am not sure if that is important - but they exist, and the US is being affected by them. I don't think secularism and people with these particular beliefs can co-exist.

I think it would be better if people currently calling themselves Christians were to say they are deists that follow many of the lessons taught by Jesus.

I am an atheist that follows many of the lessons taught by Jesus, and some from Buddha, and Socrates, and other wise philosophers - I don't have to think any of them as God to see value in their words, or to apply it to my life and thought.

 

[Gorgon]

2. I don't call evolution a lie. I understand that it's a theory, and an incomplete one that doesn't fully explain the existence of life. I'm open to the possibility that God works through evolution. In no way does the theory of evolution refute the existence of God.

Many scientists are christians, no problem with the view that God works through it if that is the way you see it.

However, evolution is NOT a theory, it's a fact. The "theory of evolution" is the theory that tries to explain that fact through science.

 

[Speevy]

So how many pages of this thread consist of people completely ignoring its purpose?

 

[Dice]

Wow, this really turned into a bitchfest. Maybe I'll make my reply a PM.

 

[teruterubozu]

So how many pages of this thread consist of people completely ignoring its purpose?

And your contribution is?

 

[abcderik]

I see I have received some criticism regarding my intentions to my question about God and the killing of first born children in Egypt. Well, first of all, that question was not meant as a "quick jab" at Christians - I am genuinely interested to hear what Christians think about this matter. If you are a Christian, because of the extreme nature of this incident, then you must (well, at least you should) somehow accept what your God did, and I can't help but think how on earth is that possible?

A Christian, I think, would say those children would be given the grace of God and were too young to have understood sin in any capacity. Beyond that, god is fair and just and the reward of Heaven is greater than anything on earth anyway, and while their lives were taken from them god would see them not held accountable for something they had no part in.

I hope no one thinks like that, but perhaps that's how some do? It shows contempt of life on earth, and that one should be happy when loved ones die, since they will be "rewarded" with life in Heaven. This is just too bizarre for me, but perhaps it makes sense if one genuinely believes that he/she will go to Heaven and live there for all eternity.

 

[Drkirby]

So how many pages of this thread consist of people completely ignoring its purpose?

I am surprised it last as long as it did before going this route.

 

[Morn]

I see I have received some criticism regarding my intentions to my question about God and the killing of first born children in Egypt. Well, first of all, that question was not meant as a "quick jab" at Christians - I am genuinely interested to hear what Christians think about this matter. If you are a Christian, because of the extreme nature of this incident, then you must (well, at least you should) somehow accept what your God did, and I can't help but think how on earth is that possible?

It's actually common for the God of the Old Testament to act like that. If you read the books of Moses, God on multiple occasions gets so pissed off at the Israelites sin and actions that he's like "Fuck it, you all are going to die" and Moses has to actually talk him down from wiping out all of humanity.

 

[Velti]

Follower of Christ, checking in! Non-denominational, study Bible.

It looks like this thread was already derailed. :\ Pity. Maybe split it into a "questions about Christianity" thread? And there's already a thread discussing evolution, with a pretty reasonable OP.

I'm a fifth year senior, and I've been going to Campus Christian Fellowship for a couple years now in lieu of church. They've really been my church family away from home, and since meeting all the wonderful people there I've really grown both spiritually and emotionally. The girls in my small group basically retaught me what it was like to have friends who give a darn about you.

This year we're studying "community" as it's described in Acts 2:42-47, and going through Acts in general. It's been really interesting! Some of my friends are taking a course called Perspectives, and studying a book called Perspectives on the World Christian Movement. I went to one of the lectures and it was SERIOUSLY eye-opening. In very short sum, it discussed God's plan and purpose for global mission and about how God is the ultimate source and "HQ" of the mission, not the West or the USA. Without that view you get a lot of culture-centric mission work that steam rolls the locals and a poor demonstration of God's love.

Alright, I've got to go, but so great to see this thread!

 

[Sh1ner]

I am surprised it last as long as it did before going this route.

Any religious/pro atheist thread brings in the opposition. Debate is more interesting than an all in agreement. Especially when we all bloody learn something.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

I see I have received some criticism regarding my intentions to my question about God and the killing of first born children in Egypt. Well, first of all, that question was not meant as a "quick jab" at Christians - I am genuinely interested to hear what Christians think about this matter. If you are a Christian, because of the extreme nature of this incident, then you must (well, at least you should) somehow accept what your God did, and I can't help but think how on earth is that possible?



I hope no one thinks like that, but perhaps that's how some do? It shows contempt of life on earth, and that one should be happy when loved ones die, since they will be "rewarded" with life in Heaven. This is just too bizarre for me, but perhaps it makes sense if one genuinely believes that he/she will go to Heaven and live there for all eternity.

I can relate to the Egypt situation more than some here. My wife and I lost our first child due to her being still born at 7 months. At the time I was in my 3rd year at Fuller Theological Seminary for my Masters of divinity. It was like a sledge hammer to my chest, not to mention my faith. Christian platitudes didn't work then and are still offensive to me today.

A Christian, I think, would say those children would be given the grace of God and were too young to have understood sin in any capacity. Beyond that, god is fair and just and the reward of Heaven is greater than anything on earth anyway, and while their lives were taken from them god would see them not held accountable for something they had no part in.

This mindset is absolutely repugnant imo. The notion that heaven is better than earth and therefore all of the suffering that takes place here is perfectly acceptable at the hands of a just and moral God is extremely disheartening and concerning. Salvation wasn't mean to be a way to ignore the plights and sufferings of here and now just because heaven is there at the end. Suffering happens here to both Christian and non Christian alike and simply offering them a chance at what may or may not exist in the hereafter doesn't excuse the suffering that people have to endure and no justification or spiritualization of such situations can change that.

Is God is all powerful, all mighty, all knowing? If so then he could have stopped the earthquake from happening and the tsunami from taking place and killing the thousands that have been wiped off of this planet. Lets not go ahead and think that just because some of these individuals may or may not be in heaven that its acceptable what took place.

So often Christians way of coming to the aide of those in suffering is to spiritualize their experience. Dad was killed in a car accident? Well, God wanted him there in heaven. Baby girl has cancer? She was meant to be with the angels. Son died of a drug overdose and was gay? He wasn't strong enough and didn't let God change him. Bull shit.

Crap happens to Christians and non Christians alike. The difference in many situations is that the non Christian doesn't give God the credit in the good times and therefore doesn't blame him in the bad. For the Christian they give God the credit for a new job but when something happens they give God a get out of jail free card. Why? Because he is perfectly just? Because it makes them uncomfortable to challenge their view of a perfect moral deity? The Tanakh is filled with examples of men and women of God who during suffering throw their anger at God and don't just act as though he had no part in the matter. If God is God then he is big enough to handle our anger and questions. Unfortunately many Christians don't understand this.

 

[Baraka in the White House]

That's why I always laugh at people being mad when creacionists say they want to teach their children the history from the Bible's perspective. We just don't know the truth, we must accept that; it's impossible to prove today the theory of evolution, the origin of man, the beginning of life, etc. Maybe 500 years down the road we will be able to do that, just like we were able to disprove Galileo's theories.

That's kind of the whole point of a scientific theory, just because it can't be proven true (and therefore no longer a theory, but a law) doesn't mean there exists enough counter evidence to reject it. You don't prove theories 100% right, but you can get pretty damned close in your supporting evidence so that you simply fail to reject the theory on any significant way.

That being said, I support the original purpose of this thread. Organized religion of any kind just isn't for me, but I've known many who truly use it (Christianity in particular) as a means of becoming better people and enriching the lives of others. I really can't hate on that; there aren't enough decent people in the world to be picky about why they choose not to be selfish asshats.

 

[manueldelalas]

If I had to bold any of it, I would have to bold all of your post.

Are you aware gorillas, orangutans have been taught sign language? They can communicate how they feel, if they want to talk, if they are going to sleep and such? That is clearly smarter than a 3 year old child.
Btw a quick youtube search:
Chimps can read and write too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=266FV--FmGo&feature=fvwrel
I know the video only shows reading.

The rest of your post is so nuts I ain't even going there.

AHAHAHA. No. You know nothing about children. I have right here with me a 2 years old specimen (my daughter) that does all of the above and much more (a lot more than a gorilla), and is certainly thousands of times more capable then the monkey in the video.

Done.

If you want more proof here are some transcripts from the Inquisition minutes: http://web.archive.org/web/20070930...e/ess362/resources/finocchiaro.html#conreport

That does not prove anything of what I wrote. Also, you could look in places a little more neutral on the matter.

THE FACT STANDS

English is clearly not my first language, sorry for that.

There would be no earth without the Sun, therefore the Sun is more important than it. The fact that earth has life doesn't automatically mean it's the most super duper coolest most important thing ever. The sun has more value because it provides more to this solar system than our life does.

The thing here is relativity. If there is no center of the universe, you can say any point is the center, it's the same. Right now, the only known living species on the universe are on Earth, and if one had to choose a center for the universe, it would be Earth, as it is the most important for us, relatively to all the rest of the universe.

To say the sun is more important is to loose focus. For humans, Earth is clearly more important than the sun. That's the point. That's why heliocentric theory can't be better than the geocentric theory. The only thing it adds, is easiness in mathematic equations, which in this time is completely irrelevant (was relevant in Galileus's time).

That's kind of the whole point of a scientific theory, just because it can't be proven true (and therefore no longer a theory, but a law) doesn't mean there exists enough counter evidence to reject it. You don't prove theories 100% right, but you can get pretty damned close in your supporting evidence so that you simply fail to reject the theory on any significant way.

I've stated numerous times ITT that I don't agree with Creationist's point of view, but you can't impose an unproven theory to everyone, because it is... unproved. If you can prove it, then we can say it is correct and then I would support teaching proven things to children.

As it stands now, while there is no proven facts, it doesn't really matter what children believe in.

 

[Laurentius]

Thank you for your answer. It is a honest one.

However, my perception of it is that it really throws the whole argument of abortion as "killing babies" out of the window. It basically undermines the whole church argument.

Not an easy topic, no.

That's a good point. For me, it really comes down to the commandment "thou shalt not kill". However it's put, I believe that abortion is indeed taking a life. In a very real sense it's breaking that commandment. But...once again, it's not so simple. Does that commandment prohibit the taking of life in any and all situations? I don't believe so.

The ten commandments, including "thou shalt not kill" are in Exodus 20. But in the very next chapter, chapter 21, God gives various laws in regards to the death penalty! In one chapter, he says don't kill, but in the very next he gives examples of when a person's life should be taken. (We have to of course remember that the context and the needs of the children of Israel at this time were very different, as was the covenant they were under. I'm not saying God changes, but the needs of people change over time.) Is this a contradiction, or do we just not understand fully what God was saying here?

I believe that life is sacred, and should not be taken. But I also believe that there are times when taking a life is justified. For instance, if somebody had to take a life in order to protect his family, I think he would be justified before God. For the greater good, sometimes a life needs to be taken.

What I'm getting at here, is the fact that there's often a lot more to it then just the prohibition of taking a life. People in this topic mentioned the deaths of the first born of the Egyptians. Was this a terrible, vengeful thing from a wrathful God? I don't think so. God sees life in death in a bigger perspective than we can. I don't pretend to know the mind of God, but it was done for the greater good of the people.

How does this relate to abortion? Obviously, it's a terrible thing to take a life. Taking a life through an abortion is a terrible thing. But are there specific circumstances when the greater good would be served by allowing it? I believe that these instance are few and far between, but that they do exist. With that being said, I don't pretend to understand all of this. I need to think about it a lot more. Thanks for your comments.

They were purposely broad to cover many different "Christians". I think mostly your and my ideas are similar - I however don't think that there is a god doling out laws and judgements with a prescribed morality, and I don't know to what extent you believe there to be. I think chastity is a noble act, to me it says that a person wants to save certain actions, of the sexual variety, for meaningful relationships and encounters - I see nothing wrong with this, however I think it is something decided by the individual, not a decree from God. As for homosexuality, it is cool that you think people should be allowed be - but how do you reconcile the general stance, one that seems to be affecting US policy, and what do you believe God's conditions for forgiveness of homosexuality is? Does s/he have to repent for their sexual transgressions, state that they were wrong for loving who they loved?

I have nothing against people that take a modern, very liberal, approach to the Bible, but to do this you have to disregard large segments of the text. At what point comes the point where you no longer consider yourself Christian? Why identify yourself as one, when there are people that DO follow all of the points I listed and also call themselves Christian. I think Christian is TOO broad a term, and it allows people with a completely messed up view of reality to go around unnoticed. I could answer all those points with possibly what you might consider to be fringe examples, I am not sure if that is important - but they exist, and the US is being affected by them. I don't think secularism and people with these particular beliefs can co-exist.

I think it would be better if people currently calling themselves Christians were to say they are deists that follow many of the lessons taught by Jesus.

I am an atheist that follows many of the lessons taught by Jesus, and some from Buddha, and Socrates, and other wise philosophers - I don't have to think any of them as God to see value in their words, or to apply it to my life and thought.

The definition of Christian certainly can be a difficult one. Many argue about the specifics of "what makes a Christian". Many people regard my particular faith -- I'm a Mormon -- as being non-Christian. I disagree with that, but I bring it up to show that there is indeed dissenting opinions within Christianity itself as to what constitutes a Christian. I think the most basic definition would be someone who believes that Jesus Christ is the son of God and the savior of the world.

In terms of homosexuality, this is another difficult (and painful) subject, and one that I've struggled with in terms of how to see it. Like I said in regards to the abortion topic, I wouldn't say I fully understand it at all. But here's a general overview:

God loves everyone, without exception. God has a plan for us, and a reason for our being on this earth. He's given us specific challenges, as well as commandments intended for both our temporal and eternal happiness. God is omniscient, and knows so much more than my limited understanding of life and eternity -- thus, I don't understand all of the commandments he has given us. But I truly believe through my own experiences and feelings that he does love us, and the commandments are there for a reason.

I don't believe that being homosexual is a sin: I don't believe it states as such anywhere in the scriptures. But I believe that acting on homosexual desires is a sin. Just the same as if acting on my heterosexual desires outside of marriage is a sin. I don't understand fully why, but like I said above I do understand that God loves me and that there is a reason.

I don't think that the process of repentance involves a homosexual person trying to "cure" themselves from being homosexual. In no way do I think they need to try and be forgiven for loving someone. Loving someone is not a sin.

It's a very touch subject, and a difficult one. These are just some of my beliefs. I concede that some of them may be wrong, and in no way are they meant to represent Christianity as a whole.

 

[Morn]

I can relate to the Egypt situation more than some here. My wife and I lost our first child due to her being still born at 7 months. At the time I was in my 3rd year at Fuller Theological Seminary for my Masters of divinity. It was like a sledge hammer to my chest, not to mention my faith. Christian platitudes didn't work then and are still offensive to me today.



This mindset is absolutely repugnant imo. The notion that heaven is better than earth and therefore all of the suffering that takes place here is perfectly acceptable at the hands of a just and moral God is extremely disheartening and concerning. Salvation wasn't mean to be a way to ignore the plights and sufferings of here and now just because heaven is there at the end. Suffering happens here to both Christian and non Christian alike and simply offering them a chance at what may or may not exist in the hereafter doesn't excuse the suffering that people have to endure and no justification or spiritualization of such situations can change that.

Is God is all powerful, all mighty, all knowing? If so then he could have stopped the earthquake from happening and the tsunami from taking place and killing the thousands that have been wiped off of this planet. Lets not go ahead and think that just because some of these individuals may or may not be in heaven that its acceptable what took place.

So often Christians way of coming to the aide of those in suffering is to spiritualize their experience. Dad was killed in a car accident? Well, God wanted him there in heaven. Baby girl has cancer? She was meant to be with the angels. Son died of a drug overdose and was gay? He wasn't strong enough and didn't let God change him. Bull shit.

Crap happens to Christians and non Christians alike. The difference in many situations is that the non Christian doesn't give God the credit in the good times and therefore doesn't blame him in the bad. For the Christian they give God the credit for a new job but when something happens they give God a get out of jail free card. Why? Because he is perfectly just? Because it makes them uncomfortable to challenge their view of a perfect moral deity? The Tanakh is filled with examples of men and women of God who during suffering throw their anger at God and don't just act as though he had no part in the matter. If God is God then he is big enough to handle our anger and questions. Unfortunately many Christians don't understand this.

http://www.christadelphia.org/pamphlet/sufferng.htm

 

[threenote]

More correct is not a very intelligent phrase. The church was correct, Galileo was wrong, end of story. If you want to discuss ancient laws, then it is a whole other subject.

Holy shit. Did you fall on your head as a child? It could explain a few things.

 

[threenote]

I can relate to the Egypt situation more than some here. My wife and I lost our first child due to her being still born at 7 months. At the time I was in my 3rd year at Fuller Theological Seminary for my Masters of divinity. It was like a sledge hammer to my chest, not to mention my faith. Christian platitudes didn't work then and are still offensive to me today.



This mindset is absolutely repugnant imo. The notion that heaven is better than earth and therefore all of the suffering that takes place here is perfectly acceptable at the hands of a just and moral God is extremely disheartening and concerning. Salvation wasn't mean to be a way to ignore the plights and sufferings of here and now just because heaven is there at the end. Suffering happens here to both Christian and non Christian alike and simply offering them a chance at what may or may not exist in the hereafter doesn't excuse the suffering that people have to endure and no justification or spiritualization of such situations can change that.

Is God is all powerful, all mighty, all knowing? If so then he could have stopped the earthquake from happening and the tsunami from taking place and killing the thousands that have been wiped off of this planet. Lets not go ahead and think that just because some of these individuals may or may not be in heaven that its acceptable what took place.

So often Christians way of coming to the aide of those in suffering is to spiritualize their experience. Dad was killed in a car accident? Well, God wanted him there in heaven. Baby girl has cancer? She was meant to be with the angels. Son died of a drug overdose and was gay? He wasn't strong enough and didn't let God change him. Bull shit.

Crap happens to Christians and non Christians alike. The difference in many situations is that the non Christian doesn't give God the credit in the good times and therefore doesn't blame him in the bad. For the Christian they give God the credit for a new job but when something happens they give God a get out of jail free card. Why? Because he is perfectly just? Because it makes them uncomfortable to challenge their view of a perfect moral deity? The Tanakh is filled with examples of men and women of God who during suffering throw their anger at God and don't just act as though he had no part in the matter. If God is God then he is big enough to handle our anger and questions. Unfortunately many Christians don't understand this.

Best post in this thread.

I love you, man.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

http://www.christadelphia.org/pamphlet/sufferng.htm

Thank you for the link but I am well aware of the interpretations, reasoning's, and what I'd say the excuses. Point of the matter is that not everything is black and white and I believe Christians would do themselves a favor if they'd be more open to the gray.

Best post in this thread.

I love you, man.

Thanks man.

 

[Morn]

Thank you for the link but I am well aware of the interpretations, reasoning's, and what I'd say the excuses. Point of the matter is that not everything is black and white and I believe Christians would do themselves a favor if they'd be more open to the gray.

Read Job.

 

[bonesmccoy]

Wow, a Christianity thread, and we have arm-chair historians telling us *what really* the faith is about because of 500 year old scientific and theological disputes.

 

[The Technomancer]

Read Job.

I'm...not sure how effective just "reading Job" will be for a person who was going for their Masters in Divinity

 

[manueldelalas]

Holy shit. Did you fall on your head as a child? It could explain a few things.

Yes, i know that when one has no answers and can't disprove the other, it often comes to personal insults. Let's try to leave that out of the thread. I know that some things I say strikes many of you as strange, probably because you never thought of that, but please read what I posted, and then think it or try giving some argument.

Thanks.

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

Read Job.

I have. Perhaps you should read his and God's response to Job's friends.

 

[bonesmccoy]

Thank you for the link but I am well aware of the interpretations, reasoning's, and what I'd say the excuses. Point of the matter is that not everything is black and white and I believe Christians would do themselves a favor if they'd be more open to the gray.

I'm curious: Given the loss you experienced, what is your understanding of the Pasche/Passion? What do you think about the loss experienced by Mary?

 

[Morn]

I'm...not sure how effective just "reading Job" will be for a person who was going for their Masters in Divinity

I've seen plenty of people with a Masters in Divinity now know even the simplest things. Ian Punnett, who hosts Coast to Coast AM on the weekends has a Masters in Divinity and still makes the most facepalm-inducing claims about the Bible on a regular basis.

 

[krypt0nian]

Yes, i know that when one has no answers and can't disprove the other, it often comes to personal insults. Let's try to leave that out of the thread. I know that some things I say strikes many of you as strange, probably because you never thought of that, but please read what I posted, and then think it or try giving some argument.

Thanks.

Keep posting. You are endlessly entertaining, and make this thread a thread that keeps giving.

 

[manueldelalas]

Keep posting. You are endlessly entertaining, and make this thread a thread that keeps giving.

Thanks for the kudos =P

 

[Gorgon]

The thing here is relativity. If there is no center of the universe, you can say any point is the center, it's the same. Right now, the only known living species on the universe are on Earth, and if one had to choose a center for the universe, it would be Earth, as it is the most important for us, relatively to all the rest of the universe. To say the sun is more important is to loose focus. For humans, Earth is clearly more important than the sun. That's the point. That's why heliocentric theory can't be better than the geocentric theory. The only thing it adds, is easiness in mathematic equations, which in this time is completely irrelevant (was relevant in Galileus's time).

The problem is that if you use the earth as the center of reference (you can), the sun will still not orbit around the earth. It only looks so apparently because the earth revolves around itself. Thus, the Heliocentric view is correct while geocentrism is factually incorrect. What Galileo proved was earth's orbit around the sun, not that the sun was the center of the universe.

I've stated numerous times ITT that I don't agree with Creationist's point of view, but you can't impose an unproven theory to everyone, because it is... unproved. If you can prove it, then we can say it is correct and then I would support teaching proven things to children.
As it stands now, while there is no proven facts, it doesn't really matter what children believe in.

Evolution is not an unproven theory. Evolution is a fact, and you conyinously ignore it. The "Theory of Evolution" is a theory that aims to explaining it.

 

[Ivan A Nguyen]

Several people have bought up the negative views Christians can have on homosexuality. I have heard people quote from the bible where it talks about men not laying together as they would their wives. For me, this falls under the information in the bible that was written as a sign of the times. There were several practices in the bible that were meant to promote good health. The jews of the old testament had a habit of washing hands and feet on a regular basis. These days most people bathe regularly, it's no longer a crap shoot when eating pork, and a man does not need to be cut at birth to stay clean.

Now look at the idea of man love back in the day. It is commonly accepted that the idea of loving another man is not the problem, but the act of expressing it like a man would with a woman. This is because the butt is a dirty place, and I can only imagine the kinds of disease that might have been spread before proper health precautions became the norm.

The bible should not be used in the persecution of others. It is the good news, and it allows us to learn from the past. It is no more a call to arms than the Qur'an.

 

[threenote]

Yes, i know that when one has no answers and can't disprove the other, it often comes to personal insults. Let's try to leave that out of the thread. I know that some things I say strikes many of you as strange, probably because you never thought of that, but please read what I posted, and then think it or try giving some argument.

Thanks.

Do you have an extra chromosome?

 

[Laurentius]

I can relate to the Egypt situation more than some here. My wife and I lost our first child due to her being still born at 7 months. At the time I was in my 3rd year at Fuller Theological Seminary for my Masters of divinity. It was like a sledge hammer to my chest, not to mention my faith. Christian platitudes didn't work then and are still offensive to me today.



This mindset is absolutely repugnant imo. The notion that heaven is better than earth and therefore all of the suffering that takes place here is perfectly acceptable at the hands of a just and moral God is extremely disheartening and concerning. Salvation wasn't mean to be a way to ignore the plights and sufferings of here and now just because heaven is there at the end. Suffering happens here to both Christian and non Christian alike and simply offering them a chance at what may or may not exist in the hereafter doesn't excuse the suffering that people have to endure and no justification or spiritualization of such situations can change that.

Is God is all powerful, all mighty, all knowing? If so then he could have stopped the earthquake from happening and the tsunami from taking place and killing the thousands that have been wiped off of this planet. Lets not go ahead and think that just because some of these individuals may or may not be in heaven that its acceptable what took place.

So often Christians way of coming to the aide of those in suffering is to spiritualize their experience. Dad was killed in a car accident? Well, God wanted him there in heaven. Baby girl has cancer? She was meant to be with the angels. Son died of a drug overdose and was gay? He wasn't strong enough and didn't let God change him. Bull shit.

Crap happens to Christians and non Christians alike. The difference in many situations is that the non Christian doesn't give God the credit in the good times and therefore doesn't blame him in the bad. For the Christian they give God the credit for a new job but when something happens they give God a get out of jail free card. Why? Because he is perfectly just? Because it makes them uncomfortable to challenge their view of a perfect moral deity? The Tanakh is filled with examples of men and women of God who during suffering throw their anger at God and don't just act as though he had no part in the matter. If God is God then he is big enough to handle our anger and questions. Unfortunately many Christians don't understand this.

There's no way I can relate to this, as I've never had to go through something like that. I can see how the general responses that people give to someone suffering something like that could seem hollow and contrived. I'm sorry for your loss.

 

[KtSlime]

More correct is not a very intelligent phrase.

It is a perfectly reasonable phrase, and I will explain to you why.

If you had a jar, and the contents of the jar were 122 marbles, and you had people guess as to the quantity some answers would be more correct than others.

Person A guesses 16 marbles
Person B guesses 908 marbles
Person C guesses 110 marbles
Person D guesses 80 marbles

Some answers are more correct than others, I can even place them in order of accuracy from most to least accurate.

C, D, A, and B

None of them are correct, but some are better guesses, or more correct than the others - if you don't understand this simple principle I can understand how science can be confusing for you and you might seek answers from an authority such as the Bible.

SenseiJinx: Thank you for your candidness. I think we can both agree we don't know all the answers, and I think that is a good starting point for anyone.

 

[Gorgon]

Thanks for your comments.

No problem, you're welcome.

 

[Haly]

That does not prove anything of what I wrote. Also, you could look in places a little more neutral on the matter.

Yes, why consider official statements from the church to determine's the church's stance? Obviously there is a clear bias in favor of what the church believes.

He was not correct, end of story. The Church didn't have a single position at the time, they said repeatedly to Galileo that he must prove his theory. If he had proven it, the church would have accepted it, as it accepts all PROVEN science.

You do realize the church eventually apologized to Galileo yes?

On 31 October 1992, Pope John Paul II expressed regret for how the Galileo affair was handled, and issued a declaration acknowledging the errors committed by the Catholic Church tribunal that judged the scientific positions of Galileo Galilei, as the result of a study conducted by the Pontifical Council for Culture.[129][130] In March 2008 the Vatican proposed to complete its rehabilitation of Galileo by erecting a statue of him inside the Vatican walls.[131] In December of the same year, during events to mark the 400th anniversary of Galileo's earliest telescopic observations, Pope Benedict XVI praised his contributions to astronomy.[132]

It took the church 400 years to accept Galileo's findings despite overwhelming physical evidence against the Church's complete lack of evidence (unless you wish to consider doctrine as evidence).

 

[manueldelalas]

The problem is that if you use the earth as the center of reference (you can), the sun will still not orbit around the earth. It only looks so apparently because the earth revolves around itself. Thus, the Heliocentric view is correct while geocentrism is factually incorrect. What Galileo proved was earth's orbit around the sun, not that the sun was the center of the universe.



Evolution is not an unproven theory. Evolution is a fact, and you conyinously ignore it. The "Theory of Evolution" is a theory that aims to explaining it.

Your first assessment doesn't make sense, the orbit of the sun around the Earth is exactly the same as the orbit of the Earth around the Sun. If you model the Solar system, and "pin" the Sun, you get the Earth orbiting around it. In the same model, you can pin the Earth and voilà!. Magic!.

Evolution from monkey to man is unproven theory.

Yes, why consider official statements from the church to determine's the church's stance? Obviously there is a clear bias in favor of what the church believes.

The official stance from the church was that the case was going to be revised. It was (very recently), guess the result.

 

[KtSlime]

Evolution from monkey to man is unproven theory.

It's because no scientist worth his salt is claiming such a thing, you have no understanding of evolution, you have made that abundantly clear.

 

[Gorgon]

Yes, i know that when one has no answers and can't disprove the other, it often comes to personal insults. Let's try to leave that out of the thread. I know that some things I say strikes many of you as strange, probably because you never thought of that, but please read what I posted, and then think it or try giving some argument.

Thanks.

This commentary is interesting, coming from someone who clearly knows nothing about biology, physics, or what Galileo did, has been proven countless times incorrect in its statements, and still comes out claiming that people didn't understand him. I really miss my smilies.

You sir, are a shame to the christians in this thread.

 

[Haly]

The official stance from the church was that the case was going to be revised. It was (very recently), guess the result.

Are you claiming that the church as it is now is the same church that existed during Galileo's times? That an apology 400 years after the trial and arrest of Galileo absolves, in any way shape or form, the actions and decision of the Inquisition?

 

[PoliceCop]

I've seen plenty of people with a Masters in Divinity now know even the simplest things.

I am shocked. Shocked, I say.

 

[racooon]

Thread instructions taken from the OP. 11 pages and this thread has hit the dust already. Now that's pathetic. Face it, those of you who aren't Theists/whatever - some people are just going to believe things you find weird.

Take your white knight bullshit and shove it.

Christianity is ruining people who would have otherwise sought and found Christ. People come hungry, looking for promises of spiritual bread to eat only to find empty cupboards. You can only fool people so many times...then they'll start assuming that everyone is lying about having "bread".

Yeah, I get it. Christians like to pretend that their God isn't a raving, genocidal psychopath and get upset whe they're confronted with what their God did and does (according to their religious text).

 

[ClovingWestbrook]

Your first assessment doesn't make sense, the orbit of the sun around the Earth is exactly the same as the orbit of the Earth around the Sun. If you model the Solar system, and "pin" the Sun, you get the Earth orbiting around it. In the same model, you can pin the Earth and voilà!. Magic!.

Evolution from monkey to man is unproven theory.

The official stance from the church was that the case was going to be revised. It was (very recently), guess the result.

Umm evolution doesnt say man evolved from monkeys but that both share a common ancestor.

 

[JCRedeems]

If you're a true Bible believing Christian, then you shouldn't be surprised to see such opposition, derision, scoffers, doubters etc. on this thread or anywhere else in the world. The Bible says the anti-christ spirit is already in the world- the world is an enmity with God and his word (its really evident in Hollywood movies and the music industry). Jesus and his words are an offense to the world because it exposes their sins. Satan blinds them from truth and the light, which is Jesus Christ. There is only one person of whom one can have the free gift of salvation and that is through Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God. And if you're not with him you're against. As you can see many are against him.

I mean think about it... there can be a thread about Buddhism, Wicca, New Age, Hinduism or even Islam on any secular forum and you'll see very minimal "trolling." But make a Christianity thread you got to duck for cover from the shots fired. Just more evidence for me the Bible is the true Word of God.

 

[manueldelalas]

This commentary is interesting, coming from someone who clearly knows nothing about biology, physics, or what Galileo did, has been proven countless times incorrect in its statements, and still comes out claiming that people didn't understand him. I really miss my smilies.

You sir, are a shame to the christians in this thread.

I have not been proved wrong once in this thread in anything that isn't grammar. I've seen people here defend heliocentrism (really, XXI century???), not understanding the scientific method, considering theories as proven facts numerous times, saying Galileo made a relativism theory (what?), etc. And insulting me personally.

Umm evolution doesnt say man evolved from monkeys but that both share a common ancestor.

A common monkey ancestor, I'm speaking of the family of the monkeys here, which includes apes. Sorry if that wasn't clear.