Gunny's Thread on Religion

[AllieBaba]

In the sad event that someone decides to quote that later and use it as evidence that I approve sexual relations between 3 y.o. kids...it's not.

 

[logical4u]

I'm of course an apostate and an atheist, but I don't believe most secular individuals have an interest in interfering with the personal beliefs of the religious if they merely ...
They would not believe today's Christians are being treated as second class citizens for wanting to bow their heads and give thanks to their Lord in public. It is a matter of FREEDOM.

Intelligent design or Creationism is NOT a Science and THIS is why it does not belong side of the Theory of Evolution in a Science class. Simple as that....

And I happen to believe in God and that He is our Creator, but never in my life have I ever thought that this needs to be taught in school along side of Science...and YOU shouldn't either. Creationism is based on belief and Faith, NOT Science.... Science may prove this belief some day...but creationism can't prove itself, it is not meant to...

science is NOT the enemy, it is NOT a vs. situation and should NEVER be put on that level imo.



Care

Macro evolution is not a science. There is no proof that species morfed into another species. It is a belief. (There is proof of micro-evolution or selective breeding)
If schools are teaching people where they came from, what right do they have to teach liberal "science" (a belief) over what was taught in the Bible: a Being that has power over the entire universe created all life as we know it (also a belief)?

I agree, science is not the enemy, but those of us that believe are frustrated waiting for science to prove what we already believe. In the OT book Jerimiah, it was written that in the covenant, that the Lord would be written onto every man's (person's) heart. Within the last few years, science is all excited with the find that we are genetically programmed for spirituality, now it is acceptable to "say" we are spiritual? There are many more examples of this. Why don't Christians have the same rights to have their "beliefs" taught, along side liberal scientists "beliefs" and let the individual decide?

 

[iagainsti]

Macro evolution is not a science. There is no proof that species morfed into another species. It is a belief.

You're right, there is no proof, and there probably never will be. In science, there are only theories. The THEORY of evolution is just that. There is no "proof," but there is strong evidence that supports the theory of evolution. If ever we were to find evidence that DISPROVES the theory of evolution, it would be made invalid. That's how science works. No one has claimed the theory of evolution to be anything other than a theory, which is supported by evidence but not proven to be true.

If schools are teaching people where they came from, what right do they have to teach liberal "science" (a belief) over what was taught in the Bible: a Being that has power over the entire universe created all life as we know it (also a belief)?

If you can, please explain why you are under the impression that the theory of evolution is a belief rather than a scientific theory supported by evidence. But until you explain, I'll say this: since evolution IS a scientific theory and NOT a faith-based belief, it belongs in a science curriculum, while the creation story taught in the Bible, being a faith-based belief (of which there are hundreds, if not thousands, of others which would have to be inserted into science curriculum as well if Christian creationism were to be) does not.

I agree, science is not the enemy, but those of us that believe are frustrated waiting for science to prove what we already believe.

How can the existence or nonexistence of God be proven by science?

Why don't Christians have the same rights to have their "beliefs" taught, along side liberal scientists "beliefs" and let the individual decide?

Because we're talking about these "beliefs" being taught in a science class. Nowhere in your post did you explain why you don't consider the theory of evolution to be science. But anyway, Christian children sitting in science class already know what their parents believe about the creation of the universe and the origin of man. They are simply being provided with an alternate, scientific possibility, and they ARE allowed to decide for themselves what to believe. The reason why people don't want the alternative, "intelligent design," taught in a science class is for the simple fact that it has nothing to do with science, but with religious belief, which children can easily be exposed to outside of the classroom.

 

[AllieBaba]

I think pi and the genetics code is absolute proof of the existence of God myself. I love learning that stuff. I don't believe the THEORIES which exclude the existence of God...but I LOVE the true science because it ALL supports the existence of God.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

I think pi and the genetics code is absolute proof of the existence of God myself. I love learning that stuff. I don't believe the THEORIES which exclude the existence of God...but I LOVE the true science because it ALL supports the existence of God.

How is the number that pi represents or the genetic code absolute proof of God? Why you're God? Why not Allah?

Which theories exclude the existence of God?

So if science supports the existence of God, in your opinion, then it is TRUE science? What science supports the existence of God and how does it do that?

 

[iagainsti]

I think pi and the genetics code is absolute proof of the existence of God myself. I love learning that stuff. I don't believe the THEORIES which exclude the existence of God...but I LOVE the true science because it ALL supports the existence of God.

So any scientific theory that excludes the existence of God must not be "true science"? What an open-minded way to pursue knowledge.

 

[froggy]

most other religions are knock offs of christianity allah,mormon,catholic,sda,all manmade

 

[goldcatt]

most other religions are knock offs of christianity allah,mormon,catholic,sda,all manmade

Judaism?

 

[JakeStarkey]

A man I know wrote, "Of course scientists have biases. They're human, after all. Recent neuroscience and cognitive psychology research has demonstrated people rarely ever are capable of shedding their preconceptions voluntarily and without a huge struggle -- we all tend to look for confirmatory evidence for our personal beliefs. However, Science has this wonderful anti-bias mechanism called 'peer review'! Scientists might try to hold onto their biases for a long time, but the strain of incoming research and new data will, sooner or later, overwhelm them -- or at the very least, those around them, enough for a paradigm shift."

Religious paradigm shifts occur also, and the social conservatives in the U.S. are becoming smaller a percentage of our population every year. Their influence will fade inevitably.

 

[JBeukema]

Which explains why arranged marriages between 3 y.o.s is acceptable.

I dunno, I'm for it. I'm all for parents deciding who their kids marry.

After they're adults, of course.

Just so long as they're cut so their cocks look good and they can tell them apart from the livestock, right?

 

[JBeukema]

I think pi and the genetics code is absolute proof of the existence of God myself. I love learning that stuff. I don't believe the THEORIES which exclude the existence of God...but I LOVE the true science because it ALL supports the existence of God.

Were you always a fucking retard or were you shaken as a baby?

Pi is proof that there are too many fucking numbers and RNA is proof of self-replicating molecules

 

[WhiteLion]

I think pi and the genetics code is absolute proof of the existence of God myself. I love learning that stuff. I don't believe the THEORIES which exclude the existence of God...but I LOVE the true science because it ALL supports the existence of God.

GODs DNA RNA You Say??
Chains and links, links and chains, copy cat, copy cat, copy this copy cat, chains of copy imagine that, time and time Spiral down chains of copy all around, i see a chain a copy how the chains of life run a mile, i see a mirror darkly now of chain an copys, copys wow, from far i seeth my wretched blog of chains and copys mirror GOD, So dont disclaim and lay the blame of tattered hearts lay a flame, of Spiral copy mirror trod a Spiral copy image GOD. Moving out all about, from time and spaces copy race, come and gone at timeless place copy mirror, mirror trace, Spiral this Spiral rods, a carbon source, a shadow GOD.. -whitelion

 

[logical4u]

Macro evolution is not a science. There is no proof that species morfed into another species. It is a belief.

You're right, there is no proof, and there probably never will be. In science, there are only theories. The THEORY of evolution is just that. There is no "proof," but there is strong evidence that supports the theory of evolution. If ever we were to find evidence that DISPROVES the theory of evolution, it would be made invalid. That's how science works. No one has claimed the theory of evolution to be anything other than a theory, which is supported by evidence but not proven to be true.

If schools are teaching people where they came from, what right do they have to teach liberal "science" (a belief) over what was taught in the Bible: a Being that has power over the entire universe created all life as we know it (also a belief)?

If you can, please explain why you are under the impression that the theory of evolution is a belief rather than a scientific theory supported by evidence. But until you explain, I'll say this: since evolution IS a scientific theory and NOT a faith-based belief, it belongs in a science curriculum, while the creation story taught in the Bible, being a faith-based belief (of which there are hundreds, if not thousands, of others which would have to be inserted into science curriculum as well if Christian creationism were to be) does not.

I agree, science is not the enemy, but those of us that believe are frustrated waiting for science to prove what we already believe.

How can the existence or nonexistence of God be proven by science?

Why don't Christians have the same rights to have their "beliefs" taught, along side liberal scientists "beliefs" and let the individual decide?

Because we're talking about these "beliefs" being taught in a science class. Nowhere in your post did you explain why you don't consider the theory of evolution to be science. But anyway, Christian children sitting in science class already know what their parents believe about the creation of the universe and the origin of man. They are simply being provided with an alternate, scientific possibility, and they ARE allowed to decide for themselves what to believe. The reason why people don't want the alternative, "intelligent design," taught in a science class is for the simple fact that it has nothing to do with science, but with religious belief, which children can easily be exposed to outside of the classroom.

This "Being", in His own words described the ordering of the universe and the creation of life on this world. If He was the one, that made the physical laws and could also break them (as His son demonstrated), I would say that He, is, the source for your science and should therefore been taught as an alternate theory (belief).

If evolution is a "scientific theory" (a belief), does that mean we should teach anything we generally term as science that has NO evidence to even show a possibility of being fact?

I am simply pointing out that both are theories of how life came to be. Evolutionists pretend that something magic (but they will not propose any theories as to what this magic is) shifted and scrambled everything and some how, some way, life started, and then some more magic happened (no evidence of the transformation), and one celled animals "evolved" into other forms of life.
Creationists call this "magic": G*d. We don't pretend to understand why or how he chose the life forms, we just accept that someone out there is a LOT smarter than us, has chosen to show us the way through Biblical writings, and if we ask, and pray, and try to live according to His words, we will be at peace.

 

[JBeukema]

Why do people assume ~600 fairy tales are 'true' or meaningful because they're old yet ignore the original stories from ~2000 before that?

Because they have no interest in reality or truth and are dishonest at their core.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

If evolution is a "scientific theory" (a belief), does that mean we should teach anything we generally term as science that has NO evidence to even show a possibility of being fact?

Evolution is not a scientific theory. This is a common misconception. Evolution is a scientific fact. We see it everyday, from the mutation of viruses and therefore new innoculations, to the genetically modified vegetables you buy, to cancer, to the infinite variation within a species (i.e. each individual human being is different from every other, even identical twins are not 100% identical) and many other examples. Evolution Through Natural Selection is one theory to explain evolution, which is a fact. Like The General Theory of Relativity is a theory to explain gravity, a fact. And there is MUCH evidence to support the theories of evolution. In fact, there is so much evidence that were you to force biologists, medical doctors, anthropologists, and many other scientific disciplines to NOT use an evolutionary framework in their studies, research, and investigations, what they have learned about life on planet Earth wouldn't make sense. It would be nonsense.

I am simply pointing out that both are theories of how life came to be. Evolutionists pretend that something magic (but they will not propose any theories as to what this magic is)

Actually they have proposed many, albiet similar, theories as to how life orginated and have much evidence to support those theories. The problem is that life didn't just happen to appear one day from the "primordial goo", it took hundreds of thousands, maybe tens of millions of years for self-replicating rna and dna to form, then to mutate shells that better protect themselves (viruses), and then to mutate into whatever it is they mutated into next. Maybe bacteria. The thing is, that there is evidence that this is exactly what happened. There are fossilized strata of bacteria from the precambrian period. Not very magical at all.

shifted and scrambled everything and some how, some way, life started, and then some more magic happened (no evidence of the transformation), and one celled animals "evolved" into other forms of life.

Once again, there is no magic at all. Random mutation occurs naturally. What do you think cancer is or why you never become immune to the common cold? Because random mutations in the genetic code. Now, how do those random mutations occur? Many factors, but a really well known one is radiation. We know radiation causes cancer, just look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors, or soldiers who were part of the tests conducted with atomic bomb before its official use. Just look at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. The offspring off the survivors of radioactive disasters might have three arms or no arms. That's the thing, most mutations result in the organism being less fit to survive. But every once in a very long while, say, ten thousand years, the mutation is beneficial to the organism's survival and voila! A new subspecies. Now if mutation can occur intraspecially, why would it stop there. Why wouldn't those mutations stack up cumulatively over time and result in what we would categorize as a new species?

Creationists call this "magic": G*d. We don't pretend to understand why or how he chose the life forms, we just accept that someone out there is a LOT smarter than us, has chosen to show us the way through Biblical writings, and if we ask, and pray, and try to live according to His words, we will be at peace.

Well, its great that you feel at peace. Something tells me that isn't entirely true for all Christians considering the vehemence of the sermons of many preachers and pastors and religious ideologues and fringe radical fundamentalists. And when I look back at history and see the strife caused by religious intolerance.

I think that not attempting to understand why or how God works is caused by an inherent fear of learning or knowledge. God might exist, there is no proof He doesn't. On the other hand, there is no proof He does, and from my standpoint, the fact that there is no proof He exists is what stops me from believing in Him, among many other reasons, such as not knowing in which of the many gods: God, Allah, Yahweh, Sri Krsna, Quetzlcoatl, etc., to believe. "All of'em, any of'em?"

Instead, like the pious little empiricist that I am, I will not make up my mind before having all the information. And if I never have all of the information, then I will never make up my mind and have to live out my life in this uncomfortable limbo of not knowing. Scary, isn't it? Not really. Exciting is more like it.

I recommend taking some science classes. And a logic class, too. If only to better know God's creation.

 

[JBeukema]

Science doesn't know what that ''magic' is?

The Spooky World Of Quantum Biology | h+ Magazine Quantum Biology Is Quantum Mechanics Controlling Your Thoughts? | Subatomic Particles | DISCOVER Magazine Introduction to Quantum Biology arNQ Eprints Subjects - Theory of Brain Function, Quantum Mechanics and Sup The Quantum Basis of Natural Intelligence? How can quantum mechanics of material evolution be...[Biosystems. 1985] - P ScienceDirect - Biosystems : Molecular quantum computer of neuron ScienceDirect - Biosystems : Molecular quantum computer of neuron Pentagon Explores Quantum Biology | Danger Room | Wired.com Quantum Biology: Powerful Computer Models Reveal Key Biological Mechanism The evolution conspiracy - A quantum leap into the New Age - Google Video [0906.4279] Quantum information processing at the cellular level. Euclidean approach

Reality is a lot more interesting than your fairy tales

 

[WhiteLion]

I wonder how Socrates wouldve applied the "Socratic Method" to some on these forums =)
Is Socrates fiction or fantasy, fact of the matter Socrates was around long before the BIBLE was in its final canonized and translated form 1611(William Tyndale/King James) or about 300 years after the time of the Dead Sea Scrolls were written 150 BCE to 70 CE, that were discovered later between 1947 and 1956. Also the Bible is a historic archive dating back to the origins of mankind an not just bound by the ideas of religious theism or fairy tales as some would have you to believe?. Would we discount our history archives in Washington DC which are better than 300 years old?? surely not!(however there are some that are trying to change it) Then why discount your spiritual and historical document guide, it would be like tearing down all the landmarks and road signs that lead us from point A to point B?? Or is it that you'd have me flying in the BLIND??? Im sure someone here will flame me and its all good, but your not going to change my mind no more than i could change yours. People post these long strung out observations of quotes from än-tē'-khrē-stos types(like the one below) that carry no more weight than a nasty ole blow fly and amount to the same. Another way of putting it the more you entertain the ideas of fundamental human secularism(humanistic religion of science and Evolution) the more you lose what you believe, if you lose what you beleive, then youv'e lost yourself and you have no guides or archieves to bare on spiritually nor scientifically and basically leaves one in a state.. of, well a mindless jellyfish meandering around in a pool of blob.. Socrates knew more than most on these post would like to give him credit.......even more so than Plato and Aristotle combined and Socrate was their mentor? I left some links of interest below to those with open minds????

Socrates
Dead Sea scrolls - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The canonization of the bible
http://www.williamtyndale.com/0biblehistory.htm

 

[Care4all]

Intelligent design or Creationism is NOT a Science and THIS is why it does not belong side of the Theory of Evolution in a Science class. Simple as that....

And I happen to believe in God and that He is our Creator, but never in my life have I ever thought that this needs to be taught in school along side of Science...and YOU shouldn't either. Creationism is based on belief and Faith, NOT Science.... Science may prove this belief some day...but creationism can't prove itself, it is not meant to...

science is NOT the enemy, it is NOT a vs. situation and should NEVER be put on that level imo.



Care

Macro evolution is not a science. There is no proof that species morfed into another species. It is a belief. (There is proof of micro-evolution or selective breeding)
If schools are teaching people where they came from, what right do they have to teach liberal "science" (a belief) over what was taught in the Bible: a Being that has power over the entire universe created all life as we know it (also a belief)?

I agree, science is not the enemy, but those of us that believe are frustrated waiting for science to prove what we already believe. In the OT book Jerimiah, it was written that in the covenant, that the Lord would be written onto every man's (person's) heart. Within the last few years, science is all excited with the find that we are genetically programmed for spirituality, now it is acceptable to "say" we are spiritual? There are many more examples of this. Why don't Christians have the same rights to have their "beliefs" taught, along side liberal scientists "beliefs" and let the individual decide?

Hey logical...I just caught that you answered this post of mine...

Here is where I am at on ALL of this...rereading Genesis 1, I do not believe there is a single thing in this text that prohibits us from believing in evolution.

the precise order in which Genesis 1 describes our creation is precisely what Science has proven over time....

(taking out the 1-6 day thing, not knowing what a day meant or was in God's time)

I have been watching a series on the History Channel called, The Universe, which has been very helpful in me forming the stance I take now on all of this...they had a show on it last night as well!

Genesis 1
The Beginning
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
I take this as just truth, but something created the heavens and the Earth.(the Big Bang)...even science agrees.

2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
we were formless and empty and darkess was over us, we were still in the forming stage of our Galaxy...Science says this as well.

3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
Our galaxy was formed with our sun, though still in the bombardment Period of our forming....so, we had light and we on earth had darkness... However we were orbiting around the sun and whatever axis we were on and how the other forming planets affected us with gravitational pulls, according to science, gave us both of these things

6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
this I am uncertain of, but I saw a Universe show that said early on that the water began rising from beneath the earth on to the surface and mist arose from this which began our rain....so this too could be what all this means biblically and scientifically.

9 And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.
Again, this is precisely how Science has now said it happened. The ground rose up and separated the waters from the Land. We still did not have our moon, so tides were incredible...moving inland 100 miles and then pulling out the 100 miles...saw this last night on this show....

this moving of huge violent tides in and out of the land actually helped with the beginnings of life on earth and without them we or all life as far as animals, fish, birds, reptiles, us.... probably would not have formed in the manner that it did....is what Scientists said on this show. ALL OF THIS in the bible matches up with the technical Scientific explanation.


11 Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.
This is PRECISELY what Science says happened, life begins on the soil The galaxy and the earth was still in a tumultuous state

14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
this again, matches up with Science in time line. This is a description of when the Bombardment period in the forming of our galaxy and planets ended. At this point Science says that the debris that formed our galaxy is subsiding, planets and the stars FINALLY settled in to the positions they are now in with all gravitational pulls on one another set. Science says a huge protoplanet hit the Earth, tore off most of it's mantel, killed most all of the vegetation/life that was formning, and the body that hit it as well was sent in to orbit around us, which eventually coalesced in to our Moon and our tilt, our 22 degree tilt that we have, giving us our 24 hour days now, was SET from this hit by the protoplanet that formed our moon.. IT WAS SET, there were 2 lights guiding us, and the stars and other planets were fixed where they were, giving us a guide to use for our seasons, which is what humans eventually did, use the fixed stars for time, callendars, growing crops, building pyramids, traveling across seas etc etc etc....The moon's gravitational pull set us in our position to the sun and made our tides more managable.

20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.
Science also says that first we had life/creatures in the sea and then in the sky, so there is no differing with science on this, NONE.

24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Again this is what Science says happened. Animals/creatures on earth were next to form.

26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
OK, here is where atheist and the religious believe it gets dicey.

If man was formed out of another animal through evolution, such as an ape, like Neanderthal man, and then on to us....I have no problem with such and do not believe the Bible and something like such, could not coexist. If all else in genesis came to pass, as Science has proven, then man being formed out of the dust of the earth, and evolving in to man, does not conflict either, it simply is the will of God, coming in to fruition.

Why I say this is that I see the formation of the earth and life on it as something not of happenstance, and as what the Bible says, God is who did this...including allowing evolution or what we labeled evolution over time, as merely the work of God stated in the simplest of terms in Genesis 1

Ok, now let me tell you about another hypothesis of mine on this....based on the evidence shown us so far, that we did not evolve or morph from apes and there is no missing link that will ever be found. this is still opened for science to prove or disprove in my opinion....

but NOTE, this would REFUTE the Bible part that tells us we were made from the DUST OF THE EARTH, and I am probably wrong on this and the Bible and Science is right.

Though it could be that Adam and Eve, before they ate the apple from the tree of knowledge and Evil were "neanderthal man"... and Homo Sapiens are the proverbial Adam and Eve, AFTER gaining knowledge....

we do know that neanderthal and others had a much smaller brain cavity than modern man...modern man also began agriculture, which the Bible also STATES is what happened when adam and eve were kicked out of the garden...
Footnotes:

1. Genesis 1:2 Or possibly became
2. Genesis 1:26 Hebrew; Syriac all the wild animals

So, I still do NOT agree for Creationism to be taught along science because the Bible was never meant to be a Science.

And I believe the arrogance of man, the religious man, who shoots down evolution completely because they have NOT ALLOWED themselves to think in bigger terms than themselves, and realize that Evolution IS WHAT GOD TOLD US HAPPENED in the Bible...

He succinctly told us the evolution of the earth and life on it....Genesis 1 was not one passage/paragraph encompassing with the twinkling of an eye all things that came to pass, as one single moment and then, wa la! we were here!

God passed this knowledge on to people 5000 years ago, that were clueless on what we know today with our technology, yet these people wrote down what they understood being told them, and it turns out that Science NOW is proving the succession and events of Genesis 1 is the precise way it happened, is beyond amazement, to me!

Care

 

[WhiteLion]

Macro evolution is not a science. There is no proof that species morfed into another species. It is a belief. (There is proof of micro-evolution or selective breeding)
If schools are teaching people where they came from, what right do they have to teach liberal "science" (a belief) over what was taught in the Bible: a Being that has power over the entire universe created all life as we know it (also a belief)?

I agree, science is not the enemy, but those of us that believe are frustrated waiting for science to prove what we already believe. In the OT book Jerimiah, it was written that in the covenant, that the Lord would be written onto every man's (person's) heart. Within the last few years, science is all excited with the find that we are genetically programmed for spirituality, now it is acceptable to "say" we are spiritual? There are many more examples of this. Why don't Christians have the same rights to have their "beliefs" taught, along side liberal scientists "beliefs" and let the individual decide?

Hey logical...I just caught that you answered this post of mine...

Here is where I am at on ALL of this...rereading Genesis 1, I do not believe there is a single thing in this text that prohibits us from believing in evolution.

the precise order in which Genesis 1 describes our creation is precisely what Science has proven over time....

(taking out the 1-6 day thing, not knowing what a day meant or was in God's time)

I have been watching a series on the History Channel called, The Universe, which has been very helpful in me forming the stance I take now on all of this...they had a show on it last night as well!

Genesis 1
The Beginning
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
I take this as just truth, but something created the heavens and the Earth.(the Big Bang)...even science agrees.

2 Now the earth was [a] formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
we were formless and empty and darkess was over us, we were still in the forming stage of our Galaxy...Science says this as well.

3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
Our galaxy was formed with our sun, though still in the bombardment Period of our forming....so, we had light and we on earth had darkness... However we were orbiting around the sun and whatever axis we were on and how the other forming planets affected us with gravitational pulls, according to science, gave us both of these things

6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
this I am uncertain of, but I saw a Universe show that said early on that the water began rising from beneath the earth on to the surface and mist arose from this which began our rain....so this too could be what all this means biblically and scientifically.

9 And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters he called "seas." And God saw that it was good.
Again, this is precisely how Science has now said it happened. The ground rose up and separated the waters from the Land. We still did not have our moon, so tides were incredible...moving inland 100 miles and then pulling out the 100 miles...saw this last night on this show....

this moving of huge violent tides in and out of the land actually helped with the beginnings of life on earth and without them we or all life as far as animals, fish, birds, reptiles, us.... probably would not have formed in the manner that it did....is what Scientists said on this show. ALL OF THIS in the bible matches up with the technical Scientific explanation.


11 Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.
This is PRECISELY what Science says happened, life begins on the soil The galaxy and the earth was still in a tumultuous state

14 And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
this again, matches up with Science in time line. This is a description of when the Bombardment period in the forming of our galaxy and planets ended. At this point Science says that the debris that formed our galaxy is subsiding, planets and the stars FINALLY settled in to the positions they are now in with all gravitational pulls on one another set. Science says a huge protoplanet hit the Earth, tore off most of it's mantel, killed most all of the vegetation/life that was formning, and the body that hit it as well was sent in to orbit around us, which eventually coalesced in to our Moon and our tilt, our 22 degree tilt that we have, giving us our 24 hour days now, was SET from this hit by the protoplanet that formed our moon.. IT WAS SET, there were 2 lights guiding us, and the stars and other planets were fixed where they were, giving us a guide to use for our seasons, which is what humans eventually did, use the fixed stars for time, callendars, growing crops, building pyramids, traveling across seas etc etc etc....The moon's gravitational pull set us in our position to the sun and made our tides more managable.

20 And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.
Science also says that first we had life/creatures in the sea and then in the sky, so there is no differing with science on this, NONE.

24 And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: livestock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Again this is what Science says happened. Animals/creatures on earth were next to form.

26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
OK, here is where atheist and the religious believe it gets dicey.

If man was formed out of another animal through evolution, such as an ape, like Neanderthal man, and then on to us....I have no problem with such and do not believe the Bible and something like such, could not coexist. If all else in genesis came to pass, as Science has proven, then man being formed out of the dust of the earth, and evolving in to man, does not conflict either, it simply is the will of God, coming in to fruition.

Why I say this is that I see the formation of the earth and life on it as something not of happenstance, and as what the Bible says, God is who did this...including allowing evolution or what we labeled evolution over time, as merely the work of God stated in the simplest of terms in Genesis 1

Ok, now let me tell you about another hypothesis of mine on this....based on the evidence shown us so far, that we did not evolve or morph from apes and there is no missing link that will ever be found. this is still opened for science to prove or disprove in my opinion....

but NOTE, this would REFUTE the Bible part that tells us we were made from the DUST OF THE EARTH, and I am probably wrong on this and the Bible and Science is right.

Though it could be that Adam and Eve, before they ate the apple from the tree of knowledge and Evil were "neanderthal man"... and Homo Sapiens are the proverbial Adam and Eve, AFTER gaining knowledge....

we do know that neanderthal and others had a much smaller brain cavity than modern man...modern man also began agriculture, which the Bible also STATES is what happened when adam and eve were kicked out of the garden...
Footnotes:

1. Genesis 1:2 Or possibly became
2. Genesis 1:26 Hebrew; Syriac all the wild animals

So, I still do NOT agree for Creationism to be taught along science because the Bible was never meant to be a Science.

And I believe the arrogance of man, the religious man, who shoots down evolution completely because they have NOT ALLOWED themselves to think in bigger terms than themselves, and realize that Evolution IS WHAT GOD TOLD US HAPPENED in the Bible...

He succinctly told us the evolution of the earth and life on it....Genesis 1 was not one passage/paragraph encompassing with the twinkling of an eye all things that came to pass, as one single moment and then, wa la! we were here!

God passed this knowledge on to people 5000 years ago, that were clueless on what we know today with our technology, yet these people wrote down what they understood being told them, and it turns out that Science NOW is proving the succession and events of Genesis 1 is the precise way it happened, is beyond amazement, to me!

Care

Well Evolution stated once upon a time that man evolved from apes, uh until they figuared out it was a paradox thru co-existance so evolutionist changed that quikly, ive never seen that one in the Bible in either testament new or old??
See the WORD (GOD BREATHED/THE BIBLE) been around many millenniums long before we were seaching and seeking out donkey jaw bones that supposively belong to some neanderthal??? science you say?? see reveling against the Bible and what others believe in doesnt make it anyless true or non science nor change ones mind, if anything draws them closer as The famous observation of Tertullian that, “the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church,”
Also you can hide the truth for a while but sooner or later maybe 200 years later? (GOD is time so 200 or 2000 years is of no avail to him)truth will ring forth..... Anybody can write a show, mix a little truth in there throw it on TV and wallop a sucker is born? lol im starting to sound like Elijah... Best of wishes with you alls humanistic practices =)

Care4all to your question on how GOD looks at time is below:
2 Peter 3:8 - But do not let this one {fact} escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. I would imagine that 7 day creation was about 6-7 thousand years cause he rested on the 7th?


http://www.geocities.com/newearthcs/studies/LongestDay.html

 

[JBeukema]

I wonder how Socrates wouldve applied the "Socratic Method" to some on these forums =)

He would've been banned. Whenever I apply it, people get pissed as soon as I point out the contradictions


The bible is a racist rehash of the Sumerian records