[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…how widespread is this phenomenon?
[/quote]
It’s not very common so what’s your point? There have been many bat shit crazy athiests in the world. Do they reflect you?
What the hell do you care what people discuss in there own homes? [/quote]
Pat, you seem like a reasonable guy, and if all Christians were like you we could all pretty much live in peace. As a libertarian, I don’t care if people home school their kids or what they discuss in their homes. However, the Dillahunty atheist site (yes, I’ve been their, not because I’m an atheist but because I consider myself an agnostic willing to look for answers) posted a video of a session of Congress where a representative stated that he didn’t believe in global warming based on the quote from the Bible that, after the flood, God promised that he would never attempt to destroy the earth again. The representative stated that he believed that the Bible was the literal and inerrant word of God. Based on the passage, the representative plainly stated that global warming was a non-issue because of the “promise” to never destroy the earth again. Now, I don’t want to turn this into a debate on environmental issues, and FWIW, I’m not 100% sold on the idea that global warming presents and immediate danger so don’t anyone go accusing me of being a leftist eco-terrorist. I raise this example only to show that a bat shit crazy fundamentalist was able to make it to Congress and he is apparently making policy based on a literal reading of the Old Testament. This concerns me, and unless you are a bat shit crazy fundamentalist, which from your posts you are clearly not, you should be concerned, too. [/quote]
Correction: God promised he would never destroy the earth by a flood. - See Genesis 9:11. The politician was wrong.
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
It’s not very common so what’s your point? There have been many bat shit crazy athiests in the world. Do they reflect you?
What the hell do you care what people discuss in there own homes? [/quote]
Pat, you seem like a reasonable guy, and if all Christians were like you we could all pretty much live in peace. As a libertarian, I don’t care if people home school their kids or what they discuss in their homes. However, the Dillahunty atheist site (yes, I’ve been their, not because I’m an atheist but because I consider myself an agnostic willing to look for answers) posted a video of a session of Congress where a representative stated that he didn’t believe in global warming based on the quote from the Bible that, after the flood, God promised that he would never attempt to destroy the earth again. The representative stated that he believed that the Bible was the literal and inerrant word of God. Based on the passage, the representative plainly stated that global warming was a non-issue because of the “promise” to never destroy the earth again. Now, I don’t want to turn this into a debate on environmental issues, and FWIW, I’m not 100% sold on the idea that global warming presents and immediate danger so don’t anyone go accusing me of being a leftist eco-terrorist. I raise this example only to show that a bat shit crazy fundamentalist was able to make it to Congress and he is apparently making policy based on a literal reading of the Old Testament. This concerns me, and unless you are a bat shit crazy fundamentalist, which from your posts you are clearly not, you should be concerned, too. [/quote]
Hey, there are many complete unadulterated morons in congress, like Nasty Pelosi and obviously this guy. There is plenty of contradictory scientific evidence to debunk global warming he never even had to bring up religion. Me thinks he just wanted to “evangelize”. Bible literalists drive me nuts. First, there is no such thing because it is impossible; the bible contradicts itself to many times. So some where along the lines this and every other bible literalist is forced to accept that something in there is metaphorical when challenged with contradictory points. Jesus used parables all the time to get his point across, why wouldn’t he have used them in the OT as well to make points?
Fundamentalism is just nuts, in the gospels, Jesus spent an inordinate amount of time bitching out the Pharisees about that very thing. That it’s the heart and not the letter of the law that counts. You’d think they’d get that point seeing as to how much text was dedicated to that very thing in the very thing they claim to take literally.
[quote]its_just_me wrote:
[quote]MikeTheBear wrote:
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]kneedragger79 wrote:
Who is the one crying like a little brat, screaming and insulting people?
[quote]Makavali wrote:
This God of yours must not like you very much. Not only did he make you a retard, he put you in a coma.[/quote]
[/quote]
I’m not crying or screaming here. And as far as insults go, I’m merely pointing out the obvious and enhancing how stupid you are. Not hard really.[/quote]
The question I would ask is why God put you in a coma in the first place? This is the problem I have with these so-called miracle recovery stories. If God cured a person’s cancer, why did allow that person to get cancer in the first place? It’s an honest question - I’m not trying to start a fight here.
[/quote]
These sort of experiences are personal and dear to ones like this, and in that sense, I don’t like to dismiss their experiences completely.
But, there is a danger to peoples spirituality if they start going down this route (expecting miraculous intervention etc). You can easily become stumbled. As I have said before, bad things happen to good people. Think of all the things that Jacob in the bible had to put up with, despite him having God’s blessing:
-he worked for an unfair boss who didn’t pay him for what he’d earned
-his daughter was raped
-his sons mass murdered
-he was always “on the run”, he had to move to unfamiliar and dangerous territory
-he had a rival brother (who had the potential to kill him)
-he had extreme responsibility and pressure/stress
There could have been times where Jacob said, “why God, why? I thought that you cared?”. But as Ecclesiastes 9:11 says:
“Here is something else I have learned: The fastest runners and the greatest heroes don’t always win races and battles. Wisdom, intelligence, and skill don’t always make you healthy, rich, or popular. We each have our share of ‘bad luck’.”
Take for example, someone who thinks that God has selected them personally and is “communicating” with them. What if that person gets that involved and builds his “faith” purely on these “happenings” or belief…and THEN, he starts to QUESTION this? Then, he begins to realise that maybe God was NOT talking to him, or sending him signals. What do you think is likely going to happen to that person when this begins to happen (despite him doing many great and good things in Christianity)? Chances are, that person will feel discouraged, lack faith in anything now, and feel stupid/deceived…and good chances are, that person will give up belief/good works in the name of that belief. This is exactly what Satan (Gods enemy) wants to happen to people.
There is no need to believe, or depend on the notion, that God miraculously intervenes in every present day affair (unless it’s to further His future grand scheme of things)…in order to be a Christian. You can do good, preach, help others etc without having this dependence. Sure, pray for help, wisdom, the strength to cope etc, but don’t expect outright miracles.[/quote]
It sure ain’t easy, but it has some brilliant moments.
[quote]pat wrote:
It sure ain’t easy, but it has some brilliant moments.
[/quote]
Can’t argue with that 
To be fair though, I did leave out the good things that Jacob experienced, which no doubt made things bearable lol
Life-like evolution in a test tube
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/3325/life-evolution-a-test-tube
Religion now appears so early in civilized life, if Schmidt is correct, that some think it may be less a product of culture than a cause of it, less a revelation than a genetic inheritance. The archeologist Jacques Cauvin once posited that “the beginning of the gods was the beginning of agriculture,” and Göbekli may prove his case.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Life-like evolution in a test tube
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/3325/life-evolution-a-test-tube
[/quote]
Thank you for sharing. I read the article and have my own questions and concerns, but first off, what do you feel they have accomplished and what this means.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Religion now appears so early in civilized life, if Schmidt is correct, that some think it may be less a product of culture than a cause of it, less a revelation than a genetic inheritance. The archeologist Jacques Cauvin once posited that “the beginning of the gods was the beginning of agriculture,” and GÃ?¶bekli may prove his case.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/233844/page/1[/quote]
Thank you. I just read this. So is this in support of God or Evolution?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Life-like evolution in a test tube
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/3325/life-evolution-a-test-tube[/quote]
What is your resultant assertion from posting this, or is thir merely informational?
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Religion now appears so early in civilized life, if Schmidt is correct, that some think it may be less a product of culture than a cause of it, less a revelation than a genetic inheritance. The archeologist Jacques Cauvin once posited that “the beginning of the gods was the beginning of agriculture,” and GÃ??Ã?¶bekli may prove his case.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/233844/page/1[/quote]
Thank you. I just read this. So is this in support of God or Evolution?[/quote]
Or both?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
Religion now appears so early in civilized life, if Schmidt is correct, that some think it may be less a product of culture than a cause of it, less a revelation than a genetic inheritance. The archeologist Jacques Cauvin once posited that “the beginning of the gods was the beginning of agriculture,” and GÃ?¶bekli may prove his case.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/233844/page/1[/quote]
Interesting read!
Here’s a question for everyone:
Say they discovered definitive proof that God was the product of mankind and, as a result, put him in the same fictional categories as other gods (Zeus, Apollo, etc). Scientists show how life is a naturally occurring process that sometimes produces multi-cellular organisms, but rarely produces beings smart enough to question the cosmos.
How would this effect you personally? Would you see life as something more or less valuable? Would you be in awe of our species journey thus far?
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Here’s a question for everyone:
Say they discovered definitive proof that God was the product of mankind and, as a result, put him in the same fictional categories as other gods (Zeus, Apollo, etc). Scientists show how life is a naturally occurring process that sometimes produces multi-cellular organisms, but rarely produces beings smart enough to question the cosmos.
How would this effect you personally? Would you see life as something more or less valuable? Would you be in awe of our species journey thus far?[/quote]
What is your objective in asking this question? If I may ask.
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Here’s a question for everyone:
Say they discovered definitive proof that God was the product of mankind and, as a result, put him in the same fictional categories as other gods (Zeus, Apollo, etc). Scientists show how life is a naturally occurring process that sometimes produces multi-cellular organisms, but rarely produces beings smart enough to question the cosmos.
How would this effect you personally? Would you see life as something more or less valuable? Would you be in awe of our species journey thus far?[/quote]
If they, or you can prove, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that God does not exist, I’d believe it. Why wouldn’t I?
They can’t and they won’t because he does, though.
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Here’s a question for everyone:
Say they discovered definitive proof that God was the product of mankind and, as a result, put him in the same fictional categories as other gods (Zeus, Apollo, etc). Scientists show how life is a naturally occurring process that sometimes produces multi-cellular organisms, but rarely produces beings smart enough to question the cosmos.
How would this effect you personally? Would you see life as something more or less valuable? Would you be in awe of our species journey thus far?[/quote]
What is your objective in asking this question? If I may ask.[/quote]
I’m curious on how it would change your beliefs and how you live your life. I don’t have secret motives, nor am I trying to turn anyone into an atheist. I’m just curious.
[quote]pat wrote:
They can’t and they won’t because he does, though.[/quote]
I knew that was going to come up
But say they somehow did, completely and utterly. Would you be a different person? Would you have different morals? Would you pursue a different life?
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
They can’t and they won’t because he does, though.[/quote]
I knew that was going to come up
But say they somehow did, completely and utterly. Would you be a different person? Would you have different morals? Would you pursue a different life?[/quote]
HYPOTHETICALLY, of course I would be a different person. and, personally, a much less happy person. knowing why we are here, why we are they way we are, why we see the violence around us, makes me much happier.
I am sure i wouldn’t have the strict morals that i have now, and i am sure my relationships with other humans would be much different.
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
They can’t and they won’t because he does, though.[/quote]
I knew that was going to come up
But say they somehow did, completely and utterly. Would you be a different person? Would you have different morals? Would you pursue a different life?[/quote]
HYPOTHETICALLY, of course I would be a different person. and, personally, a much less happy person. knowing why we are here, why we are they way we are, why we see the violence around us, makes me much happier.
I am sure i wouldn’t have the strict morals that i have now, and i am sure my relationships with other humans would be much different.[/quote]
Why would your morals and relationships be that much different? I don’t believe the only reason you live a moral life is out of fear of judgment.
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
[quote]honest_lifter wrote:
[quote]BackInAction wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
They can’t and they won’t because he does, though.[/quote]
I knew that was going to come up
But say they somehow did, completely and utterly. Would you be a different person? Would you have different morals? Would you pursue a different life?[/quote]
HYPOTHETICALLY, of course I would be a different person. and, personally, a much less happy person. knowing why we are here, why we are they way we are, why we see the violence around us, makes me much happier.
I am sure i wouldn’t have the strict morals that i have now, and i am sure my relationships with other humans would be much different.[/quote]
Why would your morals and relationships be that much different? I don’t believe the only reason you live a moral life is out of fear of judgment.[/quote]
Even Paul mentioned that we have to lead our bodies around like a slave. - see 1 cor 9:24. The way I lead my life is not easy. It is much easier to give into our wicked tendencies than it is to keep fighting against them. That is not to say that I don’t love my life. I live my life the way I do because of love of and for God.
Example: Currently, I wake up at 5:30 5 days out of the week to workout. Do I always enjoy it? Of course not. But sometimes I just have to force myself to do it. Because ultimately it is a passion of mine.