God gave man free will, the United States was founded on free will, therefore the United States was founded on Christianity. That’s quite a leap. No one has all the answers, we are all right and wrong. Except you state that God gave free will to man as if it were a fact. I guess you have the answers. Symphony X backs his statements with refences and he is huffing and puffing. Would he be huffing and puffing if he agreed with you? Somehwow I think not. Like it or not, facts matter, they are not something to be thrown around like opinions.
Shitdisturber - First of all my opinion of this type of debate is based on the ‘pissing contests’ that invariably start. Name calling, insulting people, and wild claims and accusations that are founded on nothing. There are some people who state their opinions and act like adults, there are others who act like snotty children. (I’m just talking attitudes here, not specific people.) I’m all for heated debate, laugh I’ve started a ‘few’ myself! Heated debate does not need to get nasty though, and this particular topic usually does.
What I meant when I said 'it is out of our hands' is that somone is right. I, as a Chrisitan, may be right, the Muslims may be right, the Athiests might be, the Buddists... etc. The point is, someone is right and the rest are wrong. It may be me, and I hope it is, BUT it may be you, and that will be too bad for me. The people who believe we evolved from a primordial ooze and when we die we just simply cease to exist may also be right, and in that case I have spent a lot of my life trying to be a better person and living up to a moral code of ethics for no other reward than I am a better person for it.
Tolerance, to me, is respect of other's beliefs. I will not stuff my beliefs down your throat, nor do I expect the return. Sure, I may think your beliefs are wrong and you may think mine are... that opens the doors to discussion.
As for the 'bad things happening'; a Catholic priest who breaks his vows is a sinner, just like the rest of us. (Unfortunately the Catholic Church chose to protect the pedophiles in its ranks.) God gave us free will, those priests chose their path, do you expect God to strike down any priest who sins? According to the Bible, all sins are equal - murder is as bad as a lie - so there would be NO church leaders since all people sin.
In regards to proper punishment for the offending priests.. I think the punishment should fit the crime. Yours sounds good. A church leader needs to be held to a higher standard than the rest of us, sure they will make mistakes, but pedofilia is not exactly the same as scarfing someone else's dessert out of the fridge at lunch. The Catholic church royally fucked up and I think they should be held 150% responsible.
Thanks for the encouragement, no job yet, and no real prospects... I'm trying to find freelance work in the mean time... anyone need a website?
since when do christians swear like truckers
SAK, the things you say about Koresh, they said the same things about Jesus in his time…Wake up…those with beliefs are doomed to see things through a constricted lens…open up your third eye, my friends…
Michelle, thank you for your resonable, well spoken response. Agree to disagree is my point as well. The name calling and snottiness is not acceptable for sure. Unfortunately as you can see most of the name calling has been directed at me. Again, best of luck with the job search. I will gladly send any possible clients your way, as I’m sure anyone here will.
Shitdisturber - no problem. I think I have a ‘reputation’ as somewhat of a hot head, but I’m really not. Sure, I get caught up in name calling, but I can honestly say I very rarely start it. I look forward to heated discussions on the forum, as dumb as that may sound, I enjoy them quite a bit. At the same time, I really hate the ones that turn into stupid name calling. The discussions that stay at an adult level can get extremely frusterating, but can be quite interesting also…
ok, I think it's time to go to bed... *grin*
It took me while to respond, so I hope you get this Mr. Shitpusher or Disturber or what ever your name is. First off I am not your pal. Seconf I am not intolerant to other religions, but I am intolerant to Pricks, asses, and dickheads in general. I am not a practicing Christian, but I beleive in doing right, and I will always stand up for right. If that makes me intolerant then…Oh Well…
Your idea of right is kicking whole groups of people that don’t agree with you out of the U.S. But you’re not intolerant, nooo. If you’re not tolerant of pricks and dickheads then I guess your friends and family must be.
One more thing…I guess that you want everybody to be “tolerant” and get along, and have a rosy happy liberal life together. I want peace as much as the next guy, but before you bash me for being intolerant, I have a question…Why should I be tolerant to people who show their asses to my kids who go to college? I realize I am probably older than 90% of the people on this site, but the one thing that age has taught me, is that I dont want to live in YOUR world…I dont want a world where your afraid to insult someones ideas, or one that is so Damn politically correct that I have to walk on eggshells lest I insult the poor santanist! So again, call me “intolerant” but realize this…You show your ass to me or anyone like me, and you will be pulling you head out of it!!!
I’m not a touchy feely Liberal. If anything I lean to the right. I just have a problem with people telling others to live their way or else. Am I tolerant of bigots racists and the like? Not by a long shot. I think the Taliban and other groups that would like to impose their idea of right on others should be wiped out. Hate the haters I say. Age does not automaticly confer wisdom Mongo. I happen to be in my late thirties, not that that means anything. The guy showing his ass is probably saying “why should I be tolerant of poeple condeming me”.
Is there a painting without a painter? Is there a house without a carpenter? Is there a mom without a daughter? The answer to these questions are no. Therefore there cannot be creation without and ultimate creator. Something cannot come from nothing. You have to have energy behind something in order to create it. Ive heard people say that they believe in a higher being, they just dont believe in God. Why rule out the possibility of there being a God? I workout and im in great shape I live my life to the fullest, but even if you dont believe in God dont completley rule him out check out the facts on creation vs. evolution. The facts on creation heavily out way the theories on evolution.
Good point Brock. While I do not believe, that does not mean god does not exist. No more than believing makes it so. Because we cannot measure something, may mean nothing more than we are useing the wrong tools. So far we have found no sign of “life” elsewhere in our very limited view of the cosmos. Does that mean none exists? I think we sometimes expect to find things that fit are definitons of life. Could there be a god? Certainly, I for one do not believe thats all. I would challenge your creation facts though. Could you perhaps give me some as I am ignorant in that area. Thanks
Although there is plenty of evidence for adaptive changes in species (microevolution), we do not in recorded history see one species becoming an entirely different, more highly evolved organism. For example, we have no examples in recorded history of a fish becoming an amphibian or even a bacteria evolving into anything other than a bacteria. The fossil record does not show the gradual changes that Darwin predicted. There can be errors in carbon dating and other methods that are used to determine the age of fossils and the Earth itself. DNA and RNA comparisons between similar and dissimilar species at times confirm evolution, but in other circumstances are inconsistent.
Laboratory experiments to demonstrate evolution have failed. Fruit fly experiments have failed to produce anything other than a fruit fly. The fossil record shows that evolution has not taken place. All scientific data can be interpreted just as well or better in support of creation. Complex things require a designer, intelligence, and a plan. Evolution has no designer, no intelligence, no plan. Theres plenty of more but it would take me all day long again creation facts outway the theories of evolution.
Why rule out the possibility that your God planned out evolution?
VERY good point Brock. You took the words outta my mouth. Most evolutionists I know absolutely refuse to discuss creation v evolution on an objective, science-based look at the evidence. Kinda backwards, coming form the “scientists”. They simply refuse to accept scientific evidence supporting creation.
If anyone has interest, there are some wonderful books on the subject; Darwin’s Black Box by Michael Behe, a biochemist from Penn State, excellent book, but its for the science/bio major.Philip Johnson, a law professor from Stanford, has several good books, coming from a creationists viewpoint though; Defeating Darwinism, and Darwin on Trial
Im not ruling out that God didnt create evolution I just dont think he did it in the way that the evolutionist explain.
Throughout history people have invented gods for things they don’t understand. Then science figures it out and the gods get put back in the storybooks, except for a few flat earthers. We haven’t figured out the origin of the universe yet, so it must be a god’s doing, right? (Wrong.)
“Faith means not wanting to know the truth.” FN
Is there a painting without a painter? Is there a house without a carpenter? Is there a mom without a daughter? The answer to these questions are no. Therefore there cannot be creation without and ultimate creator.***** Then who created your creator, Brock? Your analogies are fallacious. Go to the beach and check out the rocks on the beach. You’ll find a distinct order among the rocks, with them arranged in neat rows with the smaller rocks and broken small shells up higher on the beach and the larger rocks down lower. Did someone arrange it this way? According to your reasoning, someone must have. But no one did. The “blind” laws of physics, interacting with the mass of the rocks, arranged them this way.Something cannot come from nothing.**** This is a strawman. Evolutionary theory does not dictate that something came from nothing. Evolutionary theory dictates that all life arose from a common ancestor. This is not “nothing”. Even theories of abiogenesis do not dictate that something came from nothing. Matter, atoms, molecules…those are something. If something can’t come from nothing, where did your creator come from? What is more plausible…a complex universe that always existed, or an infinitely more complex creator that created that universe?
Brock, it appears to me you get your information on evolution from creationist literature rather than from evolutionist literature. This is evident to me because your beating up a strawman caricature of evolution.Although there is plenty of evidence for adaptive changes in species (microevolution), we do not in recorded history see one species becoming an entirely different, more highly evolved organism. For example, we have no examples in recorded history of a fish becoming an amphibian or even a bacteria evolving into anything other than a bacteria. The fossil record does not show the gradual changes that Darwin predicted.******** This is completely wrong, Brock. The fossil record is full of transitional forms. I’ll list the reptile-mammal transitional forms here, but there are numerous other examples. Paleothyris (early Pennsylvanian) Protoclepsydrops haplous (early Pennsylvanian) Clepsydrops (early Pennsylvanian) Archaeothyris (early-mid Pennsylvanian) Varanops (early Permian) Haptodus (late Pennsylvanian) Dimetrodon, Sphenacodon or a similar sphenacodont (late Pennsylvanian to early Permian, 270 Ma) Biarmosuchia (late Permian) Procynosuchus (latest Permian) Dvinia [also “Permocynodon”] (latest Permian) Thrinaxodon (early Triassic) Cynognathus (early Triassic, 240 Ma; suspected to have existed even earlier) Diademodon (early Triassic, 240 Ma; same strata as Cynognathus) Probelesodon (mid-Triassic; South America) Probainognathus (mid-Triassic, 239-235 Ma, Argentina) Exaeretodon (mid-late Triassic, 239Ma, South America) Oligokyphus, Kayentatherium (early Jurassic, 208 Ma) Pachygenelus, Diarthrognathus (earliest Jurassic, 209 Ma) Adelobasileus cromptoni (late Triassic; 225 Ma, west Texas) Sinoconodon (early Jurassic, 208 Ma) Kuehneotherium (early Jurassic, about 205 Ma) Eozostrodon, Morganucodon, Haldanodon (early Jurassic, ~205 Ma) Peramus (late Jurassic, about 155 Ma) Endotherium (very latest Jurassic, 147 Ma) Kielantherium and Aegialodon (early Cretaceous) Steropodon galmani (early Cretaceous) Vincelestes neuquenianus (early Cretaceous, 135 Ma) Pariadens kirklandi (late Cretaceous, about 95 Ma) Kennalestes and Asioryctes (late Cretaceous, Mongolia) Cimolestes, Procerberus, Gypsonictops (very late Cretaceous) – Primitive North American placentals with same basic tooth pattern. So, by the late Cretaceous the three groups of modern mammals were in place: monotremes, marsupials, and placentals.
There can be errors in carbon dating and other methods that are used to determine the age of fossils and the Earth itself.** Decay rates for dating rocks are within +/-2% error range. Whether a rock is 100 million years or 102 million years old does not make a great deal of difference.
*DNA and RNA comparisons between similar and dissimilar species at times confirm evolution, but in other circumstances are inconsistent. Explain the presence of endogenous retroviruses in chimps and humans as being the result of anything OTHER than evolution.